Welcome to another development diary about Europa Universalis IV. This time we talk about something that will be in the next major patch we do.

One of the parts of the game that has not changed much since eu1 is the concept of technology groups and technological development around the world. We’ve added concepts like westernising, and tweaked that one, but in the end Europe has a huge advantage from day 1, and lots of fun gameplay options are limited the further away you are.

So this is what will happen in 1.18, when it is released this autumn..

A nation’s technology group no longer affect technology research.

There is now a concept called Institutions, which will affect your technology research. There are seven different institutions that appear over the game, and if you don’t get them to spread into your country and then get embraced by your government, your technology costs will slowly rise.

Each institution will appear in a province fullfilling certain factors, and then slowly spread around the world. The nation owning that province will gain prestige and monarch power.

Every year the penalty for not having embraced an institution will grow by 1%, so there is a gradual process.

When an institution has spread to at least 10% of your development, you can embrace it in your government, removing the penalty permanently, and also giving a bonus to your nation. The cost to embrace depends on the amount of development in your nation without the institution.

All institutions spread over borders (including 1 seazone away), if relations are positive, and the spread is based on development in the province getting it. There are also lots of other factors related to the spread.

So which are the the seven institutions then?

Feudalism
This is present from the start in almost all the world, except among the hordes, new world and sub-saharan africa. It will slowly spread into neighboring lands, but it is not quick.
Bonus: Gives 1 extra free leader.
Penalty: 50%


Renaissance
This appears in Italy after 1450, in either a capital or a 20+ development province. It will spread quickly through high development in europe, particularly through italy, but can only spread into provinces that have feudalism already.
Bonus: 5% Cheaper Development & 5% Cheaper Buildings
Penalty: 20%


Colonialism
Appears after 1500 in a port province in Europe, who’s owner has the Quest of the New World idea, and have discovered the new world. And will spread very quickly through any port in countries with colonies.
Bonus: +10% Provincial Trade Power
Penalty: 20%


Printing Press
This arrives after 1550, most likely in germany, but can happen in any protestant or reformed province. It will spread quickly in Protestant and Reformed territory, but also into capitals with dip tech 15.
Bonus: 5& Cheaper Stability
Penalty: 20%


Global Trade
This arrives after 1600, in a center of trade in the highest value trade node, and will spread quicker into provinces with trade buildings.
Bonus: +1 Merchant
Penalty: 20%

Manufactories
This arrives after 1650 in a province with 30 development and a manufactory, and will spread quicker into provinces with manufactories.
Bonus: +10% Goods Produced
Penalty: 20%

Enlightenment
Arrives after 1700 in a province that either is a seat of a parliament, or is a province in europe owned by a monarch with at least 5 in all stats. Universities & Parliament Seats spread this institution.
Bonus: 25% Cheaper Culture Conversion
Penalty: 30%
​

What does this mean?


The progress of Europe is not guaranteed, but most importantly, a nation in Asia or Africa is no longer crippled from day 1, and forced to avoid spending power on ideas and development.

------

We’re constantly tweaking the spread factors, but here are some screenshots from mid 18th century in a hands-off game from this morning.

This is the institutions mapmode, where green are provinces that have all the enabled institutions, and yellow are don’t have them all.

And here is the technology mapmode, of the same game.

Some other aspects that has changed include the following
- New World Native Reforming will give you all institutions that the one you reform from has.
- Trade Companies are available to all technology groups.
- Lots and lots of triggers on western techgroups have been changed to check for specific relevant institutions.

 

[crowdemon]

Autumn is a long time away for just a patch.

Well, if that much time is going to pass, then I sure how it is indeed a meaty expansion.

So we're only looking at two expansions per year for EU4 now? I'd be okay with that as long as they were very large expansions.

Not only that, high quality content.

 

[jockedahl]

So Malabar is far more advanced than Great Britain in 1750? Another patch I'm not going to play then.

This game has lost all sense of direcion in its development.

Why don't you just remove all tags from Europe instead and make it a colonizable region for ROTW countries. So we can be done with this fantasy history.

 

[SignedName]

3) Lastly, why does the printing press spawn in Protestant/Reformed territory? To my knowledge, it was the printing press that helped spread Protestantism, not the other way around. Perhaps we could (FINALLY) get a rework of the Reformation? It would make sense to have the printing press spawn somewhere in the HRE, then have Protestant/Reformed religion spread faster into provinces with the Printing Press institution. Perhaps even limit CoRs to only provinces/nations with the printing press.

Thank you for taking the time to read my questions and other player's questions. This is why Paradox has so many loyal fans willing to buy each new DLC.

Mass literacy was encouraged by the translation of the Bible into the vernacular, and the doctrine of sola scriptura encouraged individuals to read and find their own truths in the Bible, rather than rely on priests to interpret it for them.

 

[artemis667]

This is me reading this dev diary with an excited expression on my face and going 'wow wow wow wow wow wow wow wow wow wow wow wow wow wow wow etc'.

Think this is going to be amazing to play with

 

[SignedName]

I don't know are we? Because I'm looking at the technology map and the countries farthest ahead are the Austria, Hungary, the Balkan countries, Venice, Tunis, and Korea. Eastern Europe with the exception of Muscovy seems to better in tech than Western Europe. England and Scotland are on par with most of the Asian countries. There are countries in Africa that are on par with Europe. There are only a few countries in the entire world that are actually far behind in tech. So I'll ask again, are we looking at the same screenshot? Because I'm not seeing something that represents the historical situation of the 18th century at all.


Very good points

England is likely behind in tech because it is overextended in Africa and is thus less capable of easily embracing new institutions. As you can see from the screenshot, Britain owns the southern half of Africa, which would be pretty much impossible to govern. Blobbing actually having consequences is a good thing.

 

[SignedName]

Oh, a question: do institutions get added to territories, or just states? If it is the latter, it would be a great way to simulate how neglected parts of an empire can become backwards.

 

[PierreTroodoo]

Everyone seems really happy about this, which is great, but I think perhaps there are two different groups of players of EU4. One group loves the game as a sandbox, world conquering game with no thought towards historically accuracy (which is fine!) and the other likes the game as a semi-plausible historical simulator. I fall into the second category.

With that in mind, I'm a bit concerned about this change, and more specifically what they've shown in the screenshots. I like that it's a bit less 'railroaded' (though I had no problem with the current system), and a bit more dynamic. However, I'm worried that we'll see some incredibly ahistorical outcomes, such as a super powerful, technologically advanced Tunis dominating the Mediterranean, or Ottomans in 1800 with technological parity with the leading European states. However, these are still somewhat plausible, but in the screenshots posted, it seems like there isn't any real variation in tech level across the world. Europe and the Mediterranean are green, along with Korea and India, while pretty much everything else is the exact same colour. By 1750 Europe was far ahead the ROTW in technology, with the exception of the Orient and maybe some parts of India. However, this looks like an equalizer, everything is brought towards the median. I hate to say it but if the game still pretends to model history at all uncolonized Africa and Central Asia should be far, far behind Europe by 1750.

In addition, it doesn't look like tech advancement is that correlated to the adoption of institutions. North Africa and the Ottomans seem to be equal in tech to Europe, despite not having adopted all the institutions. Meanwhile England lags far behind, seeming to be at the same level as India (???) and pretty much all of Central Asia. It doesn't really make much sense and seems to be shoehorning a Civilization-esque, equal start sandbox philosophy into EU4, which I personally dislike.

 

[SignedName]

Actually, if you play a game until the late-game in observer mode, pretty much the same tech distribution happens- just that everyone Westernizes first.

 

[Twoflower]

England is likely behind in tech because it is overextended in Africa and is thus less capable of easily embracing new institutions. As you can see from the screenshot, Britain owns the southern half of Africa, which would be pretty much impossible to govern. Blobbing actually having consequences is a good thing.

If that is the case, it would be quite imperative to teach the AI not to take territory that it cannot afford to take.

On the other hand, it might be interesting to know if:
1. Trade company provinces count towards the cost for adapting institutions and
2. the English AI in that handsoff game has assigned all those South African provinces in trade companies

IMO, 1 should be no and 2 should be yes, and in that case, it would indeed be hard to explain why England has fallen behind.

 

[WeissRaben]

Everyone seems really happy about this, which is great, but I think perhaps there are two different groups of players of EU4. One group loves the game as a sandbox, world conquering game with no thought towards historically accuracy (which is fine!) and the other likes the game as a semi-plausible historical simulator. I fall into the second category.

And here comes the generalization train! I fall into the third category. I have a vague idea of how history worked, I know that "Westernization" was anything but a given for all of Europe at game start (Spain industrialized later than Japan did!), I want the game to reflect that. I dislike DHE, I dislike National Ideas, I dislike everything that tries to shoehorn history in a certain direction for no specific reason, instead of simulating why something happened, and how. So, for me, this is a great change; but I would as much like the introduction of solid, entertaining peacetime mechanics, and the increase of costs of war and expansion.

 

[Praetorian44]

Honestly, we only got a screenshot from one game. It's hard to say if that's the norm or not based on our known sample size (one).

That isn't what I originally said. I said that I believed that this tech system is going to result in very historically inaccurate tech advancement across the world. I believe this based on the mechanic and how it has been explained, not based on the screenshot. The screenshot only helps confirm my belief.

England is likely behind in tech because it is overextended in Africa and is thus less capable of easily embracing new institutions. As you can see from the screenshot, Britain owns the southern half of Africa, which would be pretty much impossible to govern. Blobbing actually having consequences is a good thing.

Someone just replied to my post with basically the same thing so I'll just post what I replied to them

"Yes I don't see anything wrong with England being way behind in tech in a particular game where they have major issues. But I'm not just seeing one or two historical inaccuracies, which would be perfectly fine considering that the game becomes alternative history once you press play. What I'm seeing is an entire world where the tech levels are off, or at least an excessive amount of issues with it. I listed a multitude of issues with the tech levels in that screenshot, you can't just point to one and then reason how that one thing is plausible. You must look at the whole picture, where you'll see a world that looks nothing like history and doesn't seem even close to plausible.

This is really just a difference in philosophy. I, like many other players, would like to see a world that actually somewhat resembles history most of the time. Many other players would prefer a more sandbox world, and that's fine. It's a difference in philosophy and how we want EU IV to be. I'm simply stating that I really don't like that EU IV continues to move further into the sandbox philosophy, as I expect historical grand strategy games from Paradox. I would really hesitate to call EU IV a historical strategy game, as it increasingly resembles fantasy now IMO."

 

[SignedName]

If that is the case, it would be quite imperative to teach the AI not to take territory that it cannot afford to take.

On the other hand, it might be interesting to know if:
1. Trade company provinces count towards the cost for adapting institutions and
2. the English AI in that handsoff game has assigned all those South African provinces in trade companies

IMO, 1 should be no and 2 should be yes, and in that case, it would indeed be hard to explain why England has fallen behind.

As for 2, England in the screenshot has expanded deep into Central Africa, down to the Great Lakes, which is not part of a trade company region.

 

[Twoflower]

As for 2, England in the screenshot has expanded deep into Central Africa, down to the Great Lakes, which is not part of a trade company region.

True. So - if this is the reason why England lags behind in tech in that game, which we do not really know for sure - it might be a problem of teaching the AI not to do this. Not as railroading, but because it actually isn't a smart thing to do for actual ingame reasons.
Adding actual, plausible ingame advantages to not "blobbing" and "playing tall" would not be a bad thing IMO. There is a decent argument to be made that huge empires had trouble adapting their society to new societal developments during the EU4 timespan and that this is a reason why the Ottomans, the Mughals and Spain eventually fell behind more homogenuous countries like England, the Netherlands and Brandenburg-Prussia (or also France, for that matter).

But then, a necessary second step would be to teach the AI not to blob

 

[Dark Kain]

Awesome, this level of game support is why a love you guys at Paradox.

 

[artemis667]

One idea, and I don't know if anyone's even going to see this suggestion or there are already plans to incorporate it, would be to have very significant maluses to spread an institution to a province in a few cases:

1) less than 20% of the dev value of that culture has adopted it
2) less than 60% of the dev value of that culture has adopted it

1) less than 20% of the dev value of the culture group has adopted it
2) less than 60% of the dev value of the culture group has adopted it

1) less than 20% of the dev value of that religion has adopted it
2) less than 60% of the dev value of that religion has adopted it

1) less than 20% of the dev value on that continent has adopted it
2) less than 60% of the dev value on that continent has adopted it

That's a hell of a lot of calculations whether you're doing them yearly or something else, so I don't know if it's feasible but I reckon it would solve the problem of 'everywhere is the same' and isn't unrealistic.There might be more optimal ways to achieve a historically plausible result.

 

[vonHassenstein]

Love it, looking very much forward to this!

 

[raikaria]

I'm gonna point out the way the new tech system works means nations get power spikes through the game. Also the 'power spikes' for certain tech groups having particular units evens out a lot more. Western won't win simply because they are ahead of tech; and western units are not that good until endgame. Also tech group is literally just Unit Type now.

Feudalism
This is present from the start in almost all the world, except among the hordes, new world and sub-saharan africa. It will slowly spread into neighboring lands, but it is not quick.
Bonus: Gives 1 extra free leader.
Penalty: 50%

Finally; you can have a General and a Admiral without suffering from Day 1. Unless you're really low tech. Also; it is worth mentioning that since the penalties climb at 1% per year; New World natives should actually tech up pretty darn quickly to start. Also wonder how that will interact with 'primitives can't into boats'. It takes 50 years for them to have a -50% tech penalty. Compared to their current 150%~250%. Even assumeing Europe shows up ~1500; New World will only have a 70% penalty; less than half of what they have now. Remember; they can autoreform at 18 total tech. Or 6/6/6. Natives will have done that by the time Europe shows up.

Natives are getting an absolutely gigantic buff.

Renaissance
This appears in Italy after 1450, in either a capital or a 20+ development province. It will spread quickly through high development in europe, particularly through italy, but can only spread into provinces that have feudalism already.
Bonus: 5% Cheaper Development & 5% Cheaper Buildings
Penalty: 20%

Seems alright. Means Italy's slightly advantaged in this time period.

Colonialism
Appears after 1500 in a port province in Europe, who’s owner has the Quest of the New World idea, and have discovered the new world. And will spread very quickly through any port in countries with colonies.
Bonus: +10% Provincial Trade Power
Penalty: 20%

So Spain/Portugal/England get a bonus during this time ahead of everyone else.

Printing Press
This arrives after 1550, most likely in germany, but can happen in any protestant or reformed province. It will spread quickly in Protestant and Reformed territory, but also into capitals with dip tech 15.
Bonus: 5& Cheaper Stability
Penalty: 20%

One less reason to stay Catholic. Also poor Orthodox countries. Also level your diplo tech!

Global Trade
This arrives after 1600, in a center of trade in the highest value trade node, and will spread quicker into provinces with trade buildings.
Bonus: +1 Merchant
Penalty: 20%

So England probobly at this point of the game gets a 2nd powerspike.

Manufactories
This arrives after 1650 in a province with 30 development and a manufactory, and will spread quicker into provinces with manufactories.
Bonus: +10% Goods Produced
Penalty: 20%

Due to how development works; this could actually pop up anywhere. It's entirely reasonable that China gets [They do start with 2 30+ provinces...] this and thus it actually spreads to Europe slowly.

Enlightenment
Arrives after 1700 in a province that either is a seat of a parliament, or is a province in europe owned by a monarch with at least 5 in all stats. Universities & Parliament Seats spread this institution.
Bonus: 25% Cheaper Culture Conversion
Penalty: 30%

So... England again because who else would be parliamentary? Good to see a lategame buff to Culture Conversion. Also what happens if GB/England dosen't exist? A 5/5/5 + isn't exactly common.


Also; the new worst tech penalty in the game is -180%. So South/North American at the absolute worst [No institutions by 1730] still are getting a +70% tech buff.
===

But here's a legitimate question: what happens to Westernisation? Westernisation dosen't change your unit types; and tech group = unit types now... so what's the point.

Edit: Found Johan saying Westernisation is gone, but that begs the question of things such as 'Can Ming lose Celestial Empire at all now?' and 'When can Primitives build Boats?'

 

[Chief of Staff]

All institutions spread over borders (including 1 seazone away), if relations are positive, and the spread is based on development in the province getting it. There are also lots of other factors related to the spread.

<snip>

We’re constantly tweaking the spread factors, but here are some screenshots from mid 18th century in a hands-off game from this morning.

May I suggest another factor in spread of institutions? Trade and trade protection.

Think about it... what is one powerful factor, among many causes (to emphasize it not being a single cause), behind Great Britain industrializing first in the actual world history? Having the world's most powerful blue navy capable of projecting power around the world as well having the largest mercantile fleet in the world was definitely a huge factor in their favor towards being first country to industrialize. Without trade and the necessary protections, it's hard to see how information and technologies can more easily diffuse into your country from elsewhere. And even if Britain was cut off from rest of the Europe by a hostile neighbor in the form of its "hereditary enemy" France, if they do have the naval superiority and has the most extensive trading fleets around the world, that should suffice to negate the effect against the spread of institutions from negative relations with its closest neighbor across the Channel.

Institutions should accordingly not only just spread simply across the borders or 1 sea zones but also through trade routes as long as trade routes are well protected. This should also make navy a lot more important as well if you wish to keep your country sufficiently ahead in tech.

To add more interesting mix to this, I would also like to suggest that if a nation owned manufactories for textiles in its home provinces while it has loads of cottons and dyes, this should provide another spread factor for Manufactories institution.

Manufactories probably should be placed after Enlightenment, though, and may or may not be renamed Industrialization (think the name is fine as it is). By placing enlightenment before industrialization, it might be possible to cover the period that included the Scientific Revolution whose personalities such as Sir Isaac Newton and Rene Descartes were part of. Alternatively, create a new institution called Scientific Revolution and place it between Global Trade and Enlightenment while still moving Manufactories to the bookend. Without Scientific Revolution, it would seem unlikely that Enlightenment and Industrial Revolution would've taken place or at least be inspired.

Speaking of which, another possible spread factor... idea groups. For example, if you have Innovative group, would that not increase the spread factor for the institutions? On the other hand, having aristocracy might reduce spread factor for certain factor (they might be resistant to innovations, particularly those that threatened their position in the society) but that can be somewhat negated by having trade group. The British aristocracy were well known for intermarrying into wealthy merchant families and investing their wealth into trade and factories while Spanish and French aristocracies were not so much invested in them and were a rather rigid caste.

Another possible spread factor is having certain factions or estates. I think it's highly unlikely that Chinese factions would be receptive to institutions that might threaten their position in the society. I would also suggest adding Merchant faction to Celestial Empire form of government while removing trade bonus from Eunuch faction to them. Meanwhile, Merchant faction should be more difficult to employ because of the entrenched interests of all three existing factions that has much to lose from innovations in favor of mercantile faction. Meanwhile, having estates could also have different impact. If burgher estate is stronger than both noble and clergy estates, then it should provide positive spread factor for certain institutions like printing press and global trade.

Finally, may I remind everyone that Johan made it clear that spread factors are being constantly tweaked, which means all information detailed in his original post are not final so we don't know how it will exactly turn out until the public release of this patch and the accompanying DLC. One thing is clear, though, was that he made it clear that this new system will be in the free patch and not in the accompanying DLC.

 

[Heindrich]

As somebody who is mostly interested in playing in East Asia, I am not sure that I like this change...

On the one hand the current Westernization process is far from ideal, both from a gaming and realism perspective, on the other hand the new system (unless I've misunderstood it) seems extremely random and gives players far from Europe little or no ability to manipulate their development of institutions.

Fundamentally I believe that EUIV should remain "historically plausible", so that given no human interference, the rise of the West is more or less pre-determined, and the only question is which western powers dominates and where, the Ottomans should be a major threat to Europe in the early and mid-game, but gradually fade in importance due to institutional, military and political stagnation, the Ming Empire should collapse in most games in the 1600s due to a more punishing famine event than is currently represented ingame.

However, if a human player takes over a nation, then he/she should have greater freedom to influence the fate of that nation without doing cheesy things. As Ming I should not have to build the cheesy "finger of knowledge" to Europe in order to Westernize asap. Perhaps I could undergo internal reforms to strengthen the Civil Service, or send scholars abroad to study European ideas and technology, or make "gold-for-technology" deals with more advanced Western nations... etc I shouldn't be constrained by waiting around for fangled new European ideas like Printing Press (lol invented in China) to travel all the way to East Asia by random osmosis.

 

[DazZzyGuy]

Any chance you are going to include revolution as a institution which will be seperate from the revolutionary target modifiers e.g. Revolutionary French enforcing revolution institution in Spain through war. And either way won't revolution disable feudalism in a country?