• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

EU4 - Development Diary - 21st of May 2019

Hey folks, it's time for another EU4 dev diary! My name's Mike, and like my good colleague @Caligula Caesar I've been part of the EU4 Content Design team since December. We've been working on a solid chunk of Europe, and it's time to start showcasing some of this work. As @neondt has mentioned before, we've had a lot of suggestions and feedback from the community, and through further earnest exchanges we've refined the map further.

But, before we get to the end, let's talk about the process quickly, because I know that's what you truly crave.


image1_smol.png


This image is what was used to pitch the idea of what would end up becoming the revised province layout in northern Italy. As you'll see in a moment, it differs from what we ended up with in a couple of ways- Como was added later, along with a split in another North Italian province. Province 5 was originally conceived as a separate Aquileia province (since the country still exists as a releasable in Friuli, it was tempting to see what could be done with it) but that idea was eventually discarded in favor of a new Trieste province.


image2_smol.png


Southern Italy developed much closer to what the original draft envisioned. The southern half of the Italian Peninsula has only a few additions, Avellino being the one that probably sticks out the most. The island of Sicily received a bit more attention, with the island's three provinces turning into five instead. Its new divisions were guided a little bit more by game design priorities than historical divisions, as historical divisions like Sicily's real province of Trapani had sizes and shapes that would have really stuck out like a sore thumb in EU4.

Unlike the northern Italian proposal, the southern Italian one was nearly implemented as-is. The biggest difference is that “Agrigento” had its name changed to “Girgenti”, which seemed more accurate for the period. Conversely, several proposed name changes to pre-existing provinces were not implemented, as they just didn't seem necessary upon review.


“Show us the new map already!” I can hear you guys politely demanding. Fine, fine!


italy_whole.png


Three new countries were added to the map as independent states. In the far north is the Prince-Bishopric of Trent, an Austrian country in control of an Italian province. To the west lies Saluzzo, nervously wedged between Savoy and France. In Romagna, Bologna is now an independent republic coveted by its neighbors.

Alongside these three countries are a couple new potential revolters. Padua and Verona now have cores on their respective provinces and can break away from Venice if the stars align, and Spoleto now exists as a core in Spoleto province, in case the Papal State's control of Central Italy ever starts to fall apart.

If we zoom in a little, more details reveal themselves.


northern italy.png


As the conversation linked at the start of this post highlights, Como originally was not considered, but after some discussion it became apparent that the inclusion of it (or at least something north of Milan) was called for. Thus, Como's complete contours now complement the comprehensive composition of that corner.

The creation of a separate Bologna province also prompted a revision of the remnant of old Romagna province; the old province's capital is now Ravenna, and Ravenna was taken by Venice in 1440 or 1441, so Romagna now starts off under Venetian rather than Papal control, although the Papacy does retain its core on the province. I'm sure this is fine and will definitely not be a source of tension between the two countries.


southern italy.png


Southern Italy was implemented essentially as described above. Sardinia received some attention and now includes Arborea as its own province on the west side of the island, but other Sardinian giudicati were not included primarily for the sake of balance- Sassari province in northern Sardinia has only 3/3/2 development as it is, and splitting that in two would create provinces with as little development as an Uzbek province in the Steppes.

Aside from the obvious mapwork, there is one other thing we added to southern Italy:

two_sicilies.png



And there you have it! Next week, we'll be talking about missions.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
What would you suggest instead?
il Tricolore. It was used in 1798 by the Cisalpine Republic, but due to its use by modern Italy, it is free of the connotation of only being used by a French Puppet state. Its later use by modern Italy means it it associated with the actual Italian people, not just the Northern regions ruled by Napoleon under personal union.
 
In terms of game play, the Papal States does, or should, have a core on Bologna, since it has not been 100 years since 1376. Or maybe the mission of Reclaiming the Romagna, to give them a claim on Bologna. So the fact the Papal States does not border Bologna isn't an issue.

So you’re saying that this isn’t not a problem because you can pay to make it easier?

Furthermore, the last Ruling Legate, as I can see, was Cardinal Gil Álvarez Carrillo de Albornoz, who was ousted when Bologna revolted in 1376. The ruler of Bologna in 1444 was not the Legate, but the Bentivoglio family.

I never said that the Legate in Bologna ruled over Bologna. That would be stupid. And I would have said that Bologna should have been a province of the Papal States.

As for the Borgia situation, as Bologna was never captured by Cesare Borgia, it is not as though the city just popped into sudden independence after Pope Alexander kicked the bucket. It was still ruled by the Bentivoglio family when Pope Julius II came knocking, ostensibly to "remove the despot from power", helped by a popular revolt. The Palazzo was destroyed in 1507, *after* Julius II took the city.

As for your three facts, they are opinions.
• You think Perugia should exist in-game. That's not something I have ever disputed, and I think most people would be in favor of it.
• You think Bologna should be an unruly vassal. I think it being independent is more accurate to the history of the region, at least in 1444, but I welcome new vassal mechanics.
• You think the developer's choice is arbitrary and ahistorical. I have shown that Bologna, though technically under the Papacy, was independent enough that being a "Disloyal Vassal" should not apply. Burgundy was also technically a vassal of the French King, should we make them a disloyal vassal as well? But perhaps the choice between Perugia and Bologna was arbitrary. But maybe make some arguments for Perugia, rather than trying to crab-bucket Bologna into an ahistorical situation as well.

I have never said that Cesare Borgia conquered Bologna. I have said that he conquered most of the Romagnan lands killing their lords. We he was exiled, the power vacuum was the perfect chance for the Pope to “centralize” the States under his grip and so he pushed on to reclaim full sovereignty of Perugia and Bologna, and later Rimini and Ravenna through a massive coalition against Venice.

• The logic behind Perugia non being in the game is not logic. It’s arbitrary negation of history that goes against a part of the Community (I hope as big as possible) that wants justice.

• An unruly vassal is the most accurate thing, but please continue to say otherwise. And why would you argue Bologna to be a vassal, since in 1444 is not right for you?

• I have made plenty of arguments for Perugia, but I am talking to a wall (not you of course) so I am not worrying. You have not shown any “deeper truth” about Bologna. There are some facts that cherrypicked make Bologna seem like an independent “nation”. Because by you’re logic even a powerful daymio could be better as an independent nation rather than an unruly vassal. Even the HRE nations would be better off as independent rather than unruly vassals. That shows the need for a special mechanic. A special mechanic that we will not have, since the developers said Bologna would be independent. I worry about this. A “map rework” without new mechanics is only wool in the eyes. I am asking either for deeper mechanics or to represent things as they were. You think that the Papal STates ere strong and big but they were not. The Pope has very few soldiers and could not subdue his unruly subjects, that in turn were granted privileges but never actual independence. I do not have the time to enter in a great detailed debate, but you have to trust me. Or either to let go of this discussion, since no one is gonna read it.
 
il Tricolore. It was used in 1798 by the Cisalpine Republic, but due to its use by modern Italy, it is free of the connotation of only being used by a French Puppet state. Its later use by modern Italy means it it associated with the actual Italian people, not just the Northern regions ruled by Napoleon under personal union.

I’m sorry but the Cisapline Republic was a client of Napoleon. So you are swapping a Napoleonic flag for another. I prefer the actual one, since (big surprise) is used still today in the high government buildings.

The tricolor means the we relate to he value a of the Revolution. But you cannot predate the Revolution with an ahistorical revolutionary flag.

So a big no from an appassionate Italian.
 
Istria.png



I understand that Venice is an island for gameplay reasons. But something is STILL wrong around Trieste...
 
Can we not have a flame war over all of this? Imperator already had one post launch, EUIV does not need this. Stop taking things so personally, its literally places on a map in a computer game. Perugia and Bologna do not change the game regardless of their status. Stop putting words in the mouth the "Community." And yes this is coming with an Expansion lined up to be EUIV's Holy Fury moment, so we are not just getting "wool in eyes." Finally this isn't an Italian Immersion Pack, this all all of Continental Europe, on a world map, so expect generalizations.
 
Italy is much smaller than the HRE. You can only fit so many provinces in a given part of the map before it turns into a nightmare.

Italy - 301.000 km2 area, 56 provinces.
Average size of province - 5.300 km2

Germany 357.000 km2, ~97 provinces (lost the number while counting)
Average size of province - 3.800 km2

German map already is a nightmare..
Average German province is even smaller than that of Low Countries..
Historical Germany (incl. Prussia, Silesia, Posen etc.) have more provinces than France and Italy combined, yet was poorer country than any of those.
Does it make any sense?
 
I’m sorry but the Cisapline Republic was a client of Napoleon. So you are swapping a Napoleonic flag for another. I prefer the actual one, since (big surprise) is used still today in the high government buildings.

The tricolor means the we relate to he value a of the Revolution. But you cannot predate the Revolution with an ahistorical revolutionary flag.

So a big no from an appassionate Italian.
Is there not an late medieval coat of arms for the Kingdom of Italy, in the HRE? Maybe that could work.
 
Is there not an late medieval coat of arms for the Kingdom of Italy, in the HRE? Maybe that could work.
I don’t think so. The earliest coat of arms I can find is the Napoleonic one. I believe it’s because prior the Kingdom of Italy always fell under the HRE and was thus assumed to be part of the imperial coat of arms. After Napoleon the flag used the di Savoie CoA as they were the ones who united Italy. So without some sort of dynamic flag (which can’t really be put into the game the way it has been set up), the current flag is your best option.
 
Can we not have a flame war over all of this? Imperator already had one post launch, EUIV does not need this. Stop taking things so personally, its literally places on a map in a computer game. Perugia and Bologna do not change the game regardless of their status. Stop putting words in the mouth the "Community." And yes this is coming with an Expansion lined up to be EUIV's Holy Fury moment, so we are not just getting "wool in eyes." Finally this isn't an Italian Immersion Pack, this all all of Continental Europe, on a world map, so expect generalizations.

It’s not a flame war. Not for me at least. I am extremely dissatisfied with Central Italy. Nothing personal, since I stopped playing the game when Golden Century DD came out. I have only quoted the termo community, but I was not the first to suggest the idea the some part of the Community may agree (or not) with someone (and that is not a crime, is it?).
This Expansion is the wannabe Holy Fury of EU4. Yes. But will it be? I have not forgotten Golden Century and I do not want a Golden Century style DLC for Europe, not for the quantity of content but for the quality).

I am judging from what I have seen: two maps and three mission trees. I was told by German friend that the Germany map was not the best, but I am in no position to judge. The mission trees are not even full ones, but I have seen only three. For now there are four mission trees in the HRE. Four. If for you is a great victory then you are more hopeless than me.

The only thing I could judge is the map of Italy:
•The north I am good with except some things, for example the horizontal split of Lombardy and the fact that Montferrat would continue to be a Vassal of Savoy until integration.
• The South is mostly fine. I hate two-states Sicily with the extract same provinces as CK2 but ok, apart from Abruzzi which should be bigger it’s fine.
•Central Italy is a mess. Tuscany is exactly the same. If they left Brandenburg the same all fans would have cried. Papal States appears as the power they never were. Nations got different treatments based on sentiments. Abruzzi is in a State with Ancona and Urbino which is terrible. Ravenna is called Romagna and Perugia is called Umbria because reasons. Spoleto as a releasable is a bad joke, but nevermind. I guess putting the Kingdom of Wessex in England as a releasable would have been outrageous.

And that’s it. We have had months of empty Dev Diaries and now they have to make us see what they did in the meantime. That’s really it. I cannot judge as good something that I have not seen. Not after Golden Century I’m sorry.
 
So you’re saying that this isn’t not a problem because you can pay to make it easier?

I never said that the Legate in Bologna ruled over Bologna. That would be stupid. And I would have said that Bologna should have been a province of the Papal States.

I have never said that Cesare Borgia conquered Bologna. I have said that he conquered most of the Romagnan lands killing their lords. We he was exiled, the power vacuum was the perfect chance for the Pope to “centralize” the States under his grip and so he pushed on to reclaim full sovereignty of Perugia and Bologna, and later Rimini and Ravenna through a massive coalition against Venice.

• The logic behind Perugia non being in the game is not logic. It’s arbitrary negation of history that goes against a part of the Community (I hope as big as possible) that wants justice.

• An unruly vassal is the most accurate thing, but please continue to say otherwise. And why would you argue Bologna to be a vassal, since in 1444 is not right for you?

• I have made plenty of arguments for Perugia, but I am talking to a wall (not you of course) so I am not worrying. You have not shown any “deeper truth” about Bologna. There are some facts that cherrypicked make Bologna seem like an independent “nation”. Because by you’re logic even a powerful daymio could be better as an independent nation rather than an unruly vassal. Even the HRE nations would be better off as independent rather than unruly vassals. That shows the need for a special mechanic. A special mechanic that we will not have, since the developers said Bologna would be independent. I worry about this. A “map rework” without new mechanics is only wool in the eyes. I am asking either for deeper mechanics or to represent things as they were. You think that the Papal STates ere strong and big but they were not. The Pope has very few soldiers and could not subdue his unruly subjects, that in turn were granted privileges but never actual independence. I do not have the time to enter in a great detailed debate, but you have to trust me. Or either to let go of this discussion, since no one is gonna read it.

Alright. I have argued history on this enough that I feel that my point about Bologna being independent but with a Papal core is the best way to emulate the 1444 political situation. I am not arguing for or against Perugia. I am arguing against using Perugia as an argument against Bologna. I will sum up my points one final time:

• Bologna was only nominally a vassal of the Papacy, and only paid lipservice to the Pope to maintain independence.
• There is no reason for Bologna the be a vassal, as it has just revolted away from Milan two years prior, and had been politically free of the Papacy since 1376 until Milan invaded in 1401.
• The Papacy had very little to with the governance of the city, which was ruled by the Bentivoglio family as an oligarchic republic.
• The Papal States were too weak in 1444 to risk reincorporating Bologna. Mechanically speaking, a disloyal vassal can be reined in by paying it money, or gluing a diplomat to it for a few decades to improve relations. This would not have been enough to bring Bologna to heel, as they enjoyed their independence. As such, it being a disloyal vassal would not properly represent the political reality, unless new mechanics were introduced.
• Perugia has nothing to do with Bologna being playable in the game.

I have stated my case. You, likewise, have Cherry picked certain points to support your argument. I will continue to argue for Bologna's independence, but as it stands it is up to the Developers to choose how they want their game to run. I know I have a few disagreements with the political situation on the map (such as how Cologne wasn't technically part of the Electorate of Cologne), but I still feel that making Bologna a vassal is not the correct way to emulate the 1444 Italian Political Situation. If they add new mechanics, cool, make Bologna a vassal. Until they do, I think it makes the most sense for it to be independent.
 
Is there not an late medieval coat of arms for the Kingdom of Italy, in the HRE? Maybe that could work.

There is the Napoleonic Kingdom's Italian Arms.
413px-Coat_of_Arms_of_the_Kingdom_of_Italy_(1805-1814).svg.png

I think just focusing on the Iron Crown of Lombardi would work pretty well. It was the crown that represented Italy in the HRE, as I recall, so using it might be better than the Napoleonic Eagle.
 
• Bologna was only nominally a vassal of the Papacy, and only paid lipservice to the Pope to maintain independence.
• There is no reason for Bologna the be a vassal, as it has just revolted away from Milan two years prior, and had been politically free of the Papacy since 1376 until Milan invaded in 1401.
• The Papacy had very little to with the governance of the city, which was ruled by the Bentivoglio family as an oligarchic republic.
• The Papal States were too weak in 1444 to risk reincorporating Bologna. Mechanically speaking, a disloyal vassal can be reined in by paying it money, or gluing a diplomat to it for a few decades to improve relations. This would not have been enough to bring Bologna to heel, as they enjoyed their independence. As such, it being a disloyal vassal would not properly represent the political reality, unless new mechanics were introduced.
• Perugia has nothing to do with Bologna being playable in the game.

I have stated my case.

First of all, the Papal States were not as simple as: the Pope did not directly rule the city so it was independent. Every vassal nation is not ruled directly by the Overlord, so there is no point here really. It was not really an Oligarchic Republic, if not nominally. But this nominal thing is now the best thing to do?

A disloyal vassal can be reined in by paying money and other things. Yes. But two, three, ten, a dozen? Did you know how many subjects did the Pope have to quell?
Even three OPM vassals in EU4 are hard to rein in for the Papal States. And if they are at high liberty desire they may ally one another (as some did) or with neighboring powers that wanted to contrast the Pope (most subjects did this). But these Lord did this not to protect their independence (who cared, since being a Papal subject had its benefits). They wanted to protect their power. If the Pope guaranteed the power of the Bentivoglio on Bologna, that would be fine. If the Pope wanted to oust them, then many other States would have helped them against the Pope. It was like this. A game of power. Not a game of “independence”.

If it really was for Independence why many invaders were welcome in Italy? Because they guaranteed the power of some families which in ten helped them. This is the fact. “Nationalism” did not exist. The notion of “nation” did not exist. They were Lords of lands they wanted to rule on. It’s the basest of reasons? Maybe. But it worked for quite some time.

I rest my case.
 
Italy - 301.000 km2 area, 56 provinces.
Average size of province - 5.300 km2

Germany 357.000 km2, ~97 provinces (lost the number while counting)
Average size of province - 3.800 km2

German map already is a nightmare..
Average German province is even smaller than that of Low Countries..
Historical Germany (incl. Prussia, Silesia, Posen etc.) have more provinces than France and Italy combined, yet was poorer country than any of those.
Does it make any sense?
I didn't really mean averages across area that huge, but that's I see your point. Germany is slightly overrepresented for sure, but the provinces @LucaF. was asking would make Ibiza look like a whale in comparison.
One thing you should keep in mind is that the pixels in the Germany area don't represent the same area as they do in the Italy area. If you use the size of the provinces in pixels instead of km², you get this (using Victoria II borders to determine the size of Italy and Germany):
Italy: 9779 px / 56 provinces = 174.6 px/province
Germany: 14435 px / 93 provinces = 155.2 px/province
It's still below Germany, but not by as much as when you're using km², which doesn't really work on a map with a projection that isn't equal-area. To get to Germany's level, Italy would need 7 more provinces. Actually, they might only need 6, as EUIV Italy has a huge part of it missing to make space for the giant Venice island.
Italy also has the unfortunate disadvantage of having a very peculiar shape, which sort of locks you into some province shapes in certain parts of it. Germany is a lot more square, so you have more freedom to do whatever you want to the map there. Overall, it's not that bad. They're very comparable.
 
Last edited:
I am judging from what I have seen: two maps and three mission trees. I was told by German friend that the Germany map was not the best, but I am in no position to judge. The mission trees are not even full ones, but I have seen only three. For now there are four mission trees in the HRE. Four. If for you is a great victory then you are more hopeless than me.

Surely, you didn't expect the map change to be the brunt of the work, right? They're the playfield, so they can't be endlessly refined, some level of balance has to be tracked, etc. I think this was done in good faith, I agree with your contradictor. Even though it's quite apparent it's not perfect, calling it a disgrace is a gross exaggeration. Likewise MT, while fun (they do make for fun times in campaigns, imo) aren't the alpha and omega of a big revamp since they're locked to a single tag (or they're crude).

The meat should come with mechanic revamps, QOL work, AI improvement, and such. We'll be fixed then. Maps and MT are just easier to present so they come first.
 
It's still below Germany, but not by as much as when you're using km², which doesn't really work on a map with a projection that isn't equal-area. To get to Germany's level, Italy would need 7 more provinces. Actually, they might only need 6, as EUIV Italy has a huge part of it missing to make space for the giant Venice island.

His points that Germany was poorer than either Italy or France and is grossly over represented still stands, though. It is purely for *game purposes* (fans, politically interesting gameplay) that it is the case, not for historical accuracy.
 
True enough. The meat of the Expansion for me will be the Catholicism rework, and how that comes out. When you talk about things that are high impact and worth spending time on? Pretty much every major power in the game barring Ming either is under Catholicism at start, or will spend most of its game interacting with Catholicism in some way (as the Reformation, border states, etc).

It's the chance for them to really make the big impact and improve a lot of things in one fell swoop, more so than map changes or mission trees/decisions. For me, that'll probably be the make or break on the European Update. How the church plays out, and how it interacts with powers both major and minor in Europe and beyond.
 
Concerning the flag issue:
the addition of the Lombard League as a formable tag might be helpful:
- not having any flag influenced by Napoleon
- not needing Rome as to be formed

- it might be ahistorical, but so are a lot of formable tags and it has a reasonable historical grounding, given the whole Italian resistance against the Imperials.

No idea how politically charged that thing is, but probably better than Austrian Lombardo-Veneto.
 
We will surely be adding new ideas to them. More details on that another time.

Someone mentioned Italy's areas. Actually, the result of adding more provinces was that areas ended up looking much nicer now than in 1.28 (even if the colours generated for all of them seem to be conspiring to make it not look so at the moment):

View attachment 482542

I like that Roma and Napoli have been split into separate states, but why the change to Abruzzi into Centraly Italy? Am I wrong in thinking that Abruzzi has, since the Norman Invasions, been closer tied to Sicily than to Central and Northern italy? From a gameplay point of view, it forces Naples to move North to make the most of that State or the Papal States to move South to make the most of its state. Without adding or removing provinces it seems fixable. There are 6 provinces in Central Italy under Papal dominion. Instead of a 4 province state from the former Roma and Umbria provinces, take one of those provinces and move it to the Eastern state and make Eastern Naples a five province state.

Also somebody in the thread was talking about Istria. I think Istria being part of Carniola is fine. It was historically such, and it seems to work better from a gameplay point of view than does hamfisting it into the Italy region somehow.

While I understand some may be disappointed with this map change, I do want to point out that even prior to this patch, Europe is still far more detailed than anywhere else in the world. Could you imagine if Khmer, and Champa had roughly the same province density as Germany?
 
Concerning the flag issue:
the addition of the Lombard League as a formable tag might be helpful:
- not having any flag influenced by Napoleon
- not needing Rome as to be formed

- it might be ahistorical, but so are a lot of formable tags and it has a reasonable historical grounding, given the whole Italian resistance against the Imperials.

No idea how politically charged that thing is, but probably better than Austrian Lombardo-Veneto.

Sure, let a League of Cities that was literally a Coalition against the Emperor in 1176 be a formable Nation for a game spanning from 1444 to 1821. Very funny. Why not make the League of Cambrai as a formable, or the Holy League even. Come on
 
His points that Germany was poorer than either Italy or France and is grossly over represented still stands, though. It is purely for *game purposes* (fans, politically interesting gameplay) that it is the case, not for historical accuracy.
Right. Yes, France and Italy was richer than Germany. I'm all for adding more provinces in France, but Italy is basically at the limit of what's reasonable now. Italy should have higher average development than Germany to make up for the gameplay limitation on province sizes. I'm not sure how having many provinces in Germany is a gameplay thing and not for historical accuracy, though. Having many provinces in a rich area does not really make it more historically accurate. That's what development is for. Like the Low Countries; which I think will see an even lower increase than Italy (relative to the number of provinces already there) because it already has a very high province density.