• 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 - 27th of October 2020

Hello everyone! Today we are going to talk about some improvements in some interfaces for how you deal with governing capacity and one new feature that uses a lot of governing capacity but also let you “keep growing” on the land you already own.

First to make it easier to manage your governing capacity we’ve been adding needed information in two places. First we have added so when a building affects governing capacity it will now show that so you can get a sense of where you will get most value out of it in your realm, helping players with larger empires.

1603787892909.png


This means buildings such as courthouses will now show how much governing capacity they will remove if built in that specific province.

Next is a little help to everyone who have been amassing a lot of vassals to hold land for them. Previously there was no way to see how much governing capacity a vassal had or how much was being used.

1603787978875.png


We’ve now added so that can be viewed under the subject interface when you go into the details window for that subject.


Now to the new feature, for the one that has extra governing capacity, a Switzerland hiding in the mountains wanting to play tall. So in a province that is at least 15 development you can expand its infrastructure to allow for another building and manufactory in it. This increases the governing cost of the province by a flat 200 which can not be reduced by province modifiers.

1603788042280.png


Then for every 15 development of the province and further 200 governing capacity you can expand the infrastructure more for more slots of buildings and manufactories.

Hope you’ve enjoyed today's development diary! Next week we’ll be back with a new diary which will be written by Johan!
 
  • 96Like
  • 35
  • 25Love
  • 18
  • 6
Reactions:
Hmmm. What about a based of 50GC and it scales up based on number of provinces owned or autonomy (and previous clicks, like the reform progress one)?
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
The intent is not to be capable of adding an expand infrastructure on every single province you own, but only be able to afford it for a select few. So when you reach towards mid towards end game and you have ~3 000 or more Governing Capacity, if you are an expansionist empire you are by design not capable of affording it.
 
  • 21
  • 14
  • 8Like
  • 2
Reactions:
You are overlooking a small thing here. A percentage is a bad idea, since that would allow you to gain extra manufactory slots for almost no price on low dev provinces. A flat value is the way to go
Very true, but an exponentially increasing cost is still a better way to go than linear in order to stop all manufactories being piled in one (super-fortified) place. Maybe a cost structure that goes 100 - 200 - 400 - 800... etc. (for multiples in a specific province)?
 
  • 4Like
Reactions:
Hmmm. What about a based of 50GC and it scales up based on number of provinces owned or autonomy (and previous clicks, like the reform progress one)?

Because of how things work then for every province you take, after you've upgraded a province, would become automatically more expensive. So if you do the click and it costs at that point 55GC, then in a few wars later it would cost maybe 100 GC. This is very obviously not the behavior we want so hence the flat value.
 
  • 6
  • 5Like
  • 3
  • 2
Reactions:
Personally I think a 100 would be maybe too low, the gov capacity reducing buildings can impact that hard based on what Groogy just said about how it is applied in addition to gov cap getting very high by mid-game as well as being a very soft cap. Edit: he said in the post province modifiers don't apply. I would suggest a 75-150 then.
 
Last edited:
  • 2
Reactions:
Very true, but an exponentially increasing cost is still a better way to go than linear in order to stop all manufactories being piled in one (super-fortified) place. Maybe a cost structure that goes 100 - 200 - 400 - 800... etc. (for multiples in a specific province)?

The dev requirements stops you from doing that anyway.
 
  • 13
  • 3
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:

I think most people can agree that for this reason a flat amount is needed, but 200 is indeed quite a lot. Especially when it can not be reduced by province modifiers(which I can also understand), this will make the usage of this feature quite small.

On the other side I am very positive about the addition of more data in the macro builder. How does this work for buildings with two effects like Town Halls? will we see two positive effects(one on state maintenance and one on GC?)
 
  • 5Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Whoa, yeah, I’ve gotta agree with everyone else in this thread. I love the idea— going tall is one of my favorite playstyles, so I’d like to use this feature often in my games going forward— but 200 GC seems waaaaaaay high. 25 GC seems fair to me. Maybe 50 GC, but even that would be really pushing it close to the point of “not worth it”. If you are set on having the GC cost so high (and even if you aren’t), would you consider adding dev cost reduction to the effects? That’d be another excellent way of using this feature to encourage tall play. If, say, you made the cost 100 GC but added a -20% dev cost to the province, I’d consider that a good balance that’d be a reasonable investment in some super-tall games, and if you did the same but with 50 GC (please this please this), it’d be a must-have in any tall campaign of mine.

Definetly not as that would be a feedback loop as more dev means you could stack even more dev cost in one province. So if you go for a standard meta play here you would end up with +20 dev provinces that costs 5 mana to dev.
 
  • 17
  • 4
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
  • 1
Reactions:
Will additional buildings be destroyed too?

Of course. Believe I made it so it will try and keep the oldest buildings first.
 
  • 10Like
  • 10
  • 1
Reactions:
The dev requirements stops you from doing that anyway.
To an extent, perhaps, but I'd expect to be pushing at least one province high when playing tall anyway, so I suspect that the extra "safety brake" might still be a useful feature. Diminishing returns are generally a better arrangement than linear in almost all cases.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
The intent is not to be capable of adding an expand infrastructure on every single province you own, but only be able to afford it for a select few. So when you reach towards mid towards end game and you have ~3 000 or more Governing Capacity, if you are an expansionist empire you are by design not capable of affording it.
Ahh, that makes sense. Even so, 200 still feels high to me. If I’m playing in the HRE and stuck as a duchy or trying to play tall with a government reform that lowers GC like Swiss Canton, Prussian Monarchy, et cetera, I can’t imagine 200 GC being worth it in any but the very most niche circumstances, and even then, rarely. I do realize that you’ve put infinitely more thought into this than me and have access to way more relevant data, so in the end, I’ll of course defer to you, but for my money, I’d vote 100 GC (especially if that gives some local dev cost reduction).
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Definetly not as that would be a feedback loop as more dev means you could stack even more dev cost in one province. So if you go for a standard meta play here you would end up with +20 dev provinces that costs 5 mana to dev.
Oof, good point. Maybe some other modifier to make it more worthwhile, then, like goods produced?
 
  • 2
Reactions:
200 is high too mutch for too low. If you wana make players truly "play tall" and dev provincesmake something like "for 25/50 GC you get -50% dev.cost" that will reduce penalty for deving high development province and make it sence. Like having 2-3 states with 40+ development in each province. That still is not OP but can be used. Your variant seems awful and useless
 
  • 4Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Maybe it's me, but something like a 200% governing would increase gov cost of a 15dev province by 15. For me that's not almost nothing. That's the cost of a 15dev province without giving you manpower, tax, production, trade, force limit. It also gives you less building slots than a 15 Dev province. Sure you can build more buildings in the same province, but the gain of buildings drops, if you can't build multiple of the same building.

This new ridiculously high increase in gov cap also seems to clash with governments that encourage you to stay small, like merchant republics and pirates. Both have increased government cost. For merchant republics it would be 250 government cap and for pirate republics even 350 government cap. You could annex entire countries for that government cap. If you grow by real Dev you get closer to ranking up to kingdom/empire and gain even more gov cap, meanwhile a small dutchy that invests in the new mechanic won't get closer to getting more gov cap by ranking up.
I would think you could let it cost mana to get the building slots, but then it seems like a worse way to deving and you most likely needed to spent mana anyway to get the province to Dev 15/30/45.
 
  • 4
  • 3Like
Reactions: