• 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:
Thanks for the update, but for me the DD is confusing, I seem to lack some crucial background-information, which i can't find in any of the links provided. (This is unusual - the DD from 2 weeks ago about Germany was very clear and comprehensive commenting on all of the changes instead of just hinting at some (e.g. Padua) and ignoring many others (e.g. Bergamo). Please consider clarifications

Some of the questions left open for me:

1) No comment on the other new Milan province? Has the development of Milan been lowered?
2) Is the centre of trade now in Verona (I guess it was more important), or Padua (coastal city).
3) Has the Papal state a core/claim on Bologna? Currently it couldn't reach it, which makes it difficult to exert its influence.
4) What is the name of the new Napels province split of Abruzzi and the Papal province split of Roma? They are indiciated but not named in the old map, and I can't read them in the new.
5) Has Piedmont simple been renamed into Torino or is Piedmont now a new mountain province between Torino and Savoy (Caligula Caesar mentioned the new pass). Is there no connection to Wallis anymore?
6) What is the relationship between Trent and Austria - a vassal? as far as I can see Habsburg influence over it was very high, despite it being a prince-bishopric in the HRE). I hope the Shadow Kingdom event also properly keeps it in the HRE despite being in Italy. (edit: question answered as it is part of the Tyrol area)

All in all nice changes, nothing dramatic, but Italy was already quite detailed and its impossible to put all details into the game. My favourite is that Triest has been split of Görz as the new port of Austria, for me it was always confusing that it didn't exist although it has been the principal port of Austria until 1918 and Görz was not as important at least in the later part of the EU4 timeline.

As an Austrian I am also looking forward to the Austrian map (I hoped for it for this week, but maybe you will make me happy in 2 weeks), especially to see more of the changes to the alps.

PS: My first post on this forum but I've been following the Dev Diaries nearly every Tuesday! I love them! Great work guys!
 
Last edited:
While it took Battle Pope Julius II getting militarily involved for Bologna to really come back into the Papal fold, Popes Sixtus IV, Innocent VIII and others were already repeatedly intervening in Perugian politics on their own.

Will there be an event where the Pope has the option to send an assassin to murder the ruler of Bologna, provided it isn't after 1500, to emulate the Assassination of Hannibal I Bentivoglio by Papal conspiracy?
Also, will Milan have a core on Bologna, representing the Milanese control of the city from 1401-1442?

Also, will the Venetians have a mission to secure the Pentapolis, giving them claims on Urbino and Ancona, representing one of the Papacy's reasons for the League of Cambrai?
 
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
Yikes, Abruzzi being part of a state not in De Jure Naples is making my skin crawl. Any chance to revise that?
 
Will there be an event where the Pope has the option to send an assassin to murder the ruler of Bologna, provided it isn't after 1500, to emulate the Assassination of Hannibal I Bentivoglio by Papal conspiracy?

The conspiracy to kill Annibale Bentivoglio was already under way in November 1444. He was killed the year after so an event would be practical and add flavor and should be done. It should not be a timed mechanic. An early game event which has to occur at maximum a year after the start of the game is enough to represent the situation imo.
 
Which of the new provinces are in the HRE?
 
The conspiracy to kill Annibale Bentivoglio was already under way in November 1444. He was killed the year after so an event would be practical and add flavor and should be done. It should not be a timed mechanic. An early game event which has to occur at maximum a year after the start of the game is enough to represent the situation imo.
Another reason why it should be a disloyal vassal instead.
 
Really? So the Two Sicilies can be formed by a Naples that takes back Sicily in 1444, theoretically? @Ofaloaf Why can't the real Sicily be reunited? If it was brought back together by Naples during the 1400s, I doubt they would name themselves Two Sicilies, even in a couple decades. Did you see my earlier suggestion, incidentally?
 
Another reason why it should be a disloyal vassal instead.
I feel like it shouldn't, though. Bologna managed to break free of Milanese control just two years prior, and it would take a Papal invasion in reassert the Pope's authority in not just Bologna, but other cities-states of the Romagna, which were at best Papal vassals in name only. There would be no polite reintegration. The Pope having a core on it should be enough; the state had established itself as independent, and remained so until 1506, when Julius II used French troops to retake it.
 
Another reason why it should be a disloyal vassal instead.

There are plenty of reasons.

You want another one?
Annibale’s successor actually had to contract with the Pope for more autonomy. The so-called independent Bologna!
 
Map updates are a nice addition. They change up gameplay and usually require one to change things that they always may, or may not due, in a playthrough of their favorite part of the map. I do have one concern though. The update to the British Isles was pretty good, before that we had India and the Middle East. The latter 2 updates compared to Iberia and, so far, Central Europe, seem to be mediocre. Just as an example, why a dozen-ish new provinces in Italy, 1 in Portugal, a decent amount in Germany, but the "Central Indian Culture" nations have MANY additions? I hope I am wrong, but did they cut your funding after Dharma? The detail in the Mid-East and especially India is absolutely amazing. I, for one, can't stop playing from Sindh to Taungoo because of the detail to missions, the map, and the drama that comes along with so many nations/details.
 
This was discussed in a thread time ago. As Trent in the reworked map has now its own province separated from the rest of Tirol proper (they made post WW2 Trentino and Sud Tirol basically) and we don't have a Tirolean culture group (or a Ladin group) it's not wrong to have an Italian language group to summarize the state of the new province. Venetian is the closest linguistically to the Trent city language and so it has a point. Imho if the "focus" of province culture was put on people customs and traditions instead of their language the culture should had definitely been Austrian, but that is not the case. Southern Tirolean valleys spoke (and still speak) many languages, some derived from old Bavarian, but overall ladin languages always were the majority and ladin communities naturally converge on Italian (Graubunden is the exception, but it's on the other side of the alps).
What I find arbitrary is putting that province in Italy region. Trent became legally part of the Germanic kingdom since 952 along with Verona, before it was made a Bishopric. But as opposed to the latter it remained part of the "Germanic kingdom" until the events in 1918. The devs should know the events that brought it in Bavaria since I remember a "claim Tirol" mission for the new Bavarian mission tree which should be based on these events.
I think you misunderstood what i meant: I was not objecting to the province culture being Venetian (although probably lombard would be more fitting since the central part of the province only recently became more "venetian like" languagewise and some of the eastern valleys are controlled by Venice and not by Trent), I was objecting to the tag's primary culture being austrian for no reason (I explained why in my first comment and from what you said I believe you actually agree with me).
 
I feel like it shouldn't, though. Bologna managed to break free of Milanese control just two years prior, and it would take a Papal invasion in reassert the Pope's authority in not just Bologna, but other cities-states of the Romagna, which were at best Papal vassals in name only. There would be no polite reintegration. The Pope having a core on it should be enough; the state had established itself as independent, and remained so until 1506, when Julius II used French troops to retake it.

The Papal Invasion resulted in the direct control of Bologna. But the Bologna was a subject of the Pope, a rebellious one. In fact, most of the subjects of the Pope were quite rebellious and disloyal. So Bologna is not a particular case. It’s the norm.

Bologna and Perugia were conquered in the same year. But one exist and is ahistorically Independent and the other ahistorically does not exist.
 
But Sante also allied with the Venetians, the Sforza, and the Medici to ensure political independence.

Like a disloyal vassal can do with Support Independence. The exact same thing, with a mechanic that already exists.
 
Sounds like Castille/Spain gets a boost from this indirectly. A lot of those lands will be part of the Iberian Wedding after all. I doubt most people here would complain considering the feedback from GC.
The people who were mad at GC were not angry because Spain wasn't powerfull enough, Spain definitely is powerful enough. They were angry because all that power (but mostly flavour) was poorly distributed and basically only added to Aragon, making it on pair with Castille (who should be the dominant hegemon in Iberia) and the most fleshed out region. While Castille still has huge provinces like Badajoz and Extremadura, and Portugal as well (Bragança and Beira).
People were mad because of the poor flavour choice, Aragon got the tiny, irrelevant island of Ibiza added, meanwhile Portugal still doesn't have the Minho province, which is among its most historically important provinces (its the craddle of the nation, it was even the capital once), and most densily populated regions (in the middle-ages it had 125% the average populational density of France, and 400% of the density in Iberia), as well as being in a very important strategic location, serving as a buffer zone to the rich Porto province (as it historically was the home of several battles when Portugal was invaded from the North), as well as a different terrain and climate compared to the province is currently part of. Speaking of terrain and climate, coastal areas like Coruña and Cantabria having mild winters (or even severe winters in Girona's case) while the inland highlands like Bragança, Léon, Burgos, Sorja and Teruel have no-winters is surreal.

So indirectly buffing Spain by adding flavour to Aragonese Italy will not do much to fix the Golden Century's mess.
 
Last edited:
The Papal Invasion resulted in the direct control of Bologna. But the Bologna was a subject of the Pope, a rebellious one. In fact, most of the subjects of the Pope were quite rebellious and disloyal. So Bologna is not a particular case. It’s the norm.

Bologna and Perugia were conquered in the same year. But one exist and is ahistorically Independent and the other ahistorically does not exist.

EU4 often depicts rebellious subjects as independent. Most prominent example is probably Muscovy who historically were still a tributary (or even vassal?) of the Great Horde at the beginning of the game, but for gameplay reasons are indpenend. Don't forget that an EU4-vassal is severely restricted in its diplomacy (it can only ally other vassals or ask for support of independence).
 
EU4 often depicts rebellious subjects as independent. Most prominent example is probably Muscovy who historically were still a tributary (or even vassal?) of the Great Horde at the beginning of the game, but for gameplay reasons are indpenend. Don't forget that an EU4-vassal is severely restricted in its diplomacy (it can only ally other vassals or ask for support of independence).

Then why is Urbino a vassal?
Why is Perugia non-existent and already intregrated?
 
EU4 often depicts rebellious subjects as independent. Most prominent example is probably Muscovy who historically were still a tributary (or even vassal?) of the Great Horde at the beginning of the game, but for gameplay reasons are indpenend. Don't forget that an EU4-vassal is severely restricted in its diplomacy (it can only ally other vassals or ask for support of independence).
Tributary states aren't comparable to vassals.

The Holy Roman Empire, Muscovy and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth regularly paid tribute to the Ottomans. Were they vassals by EU4's standards? Absolutely not.

The Pope's people had big influence in Bologna, still. While the Tatars didn't influence Muscovite domestic politics anymore, but the other way around.