Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries
Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Europa Universalis IV 82783 EUIV: Bug Reports 1355 EUIV: Suggestions 19383 EUIV: Technical Support 6899 EUIV: FAQ & Strategy Guides 241 EUIV: AAR's, Let's Plays, and Fan Fiction EU IV: Alternate History Short Story Contest Contr 30
Previous dev diary Next dev diary
Show only dev responses

EU4 - Development Diary - 28th January 2016

Hello everyone, today we’ll start talking about 1.16 and what it will contain. The development team is busy working on 1.15.1 at the same time, which we hope is out ASAP.

One of the fun part of working on the Europa Universalis series over the last decade has been the constant evolvement of the map. Today we’re proud to announce some of the map changes for 1.16, with a quick look of Europe.

Ireland in Crusader Kings II is known as tutorial island, as an entire game in itself. In EU so far, ireland have not been properly represented, and more been shown as poor as it became after a long time of english rule. Now Ireland is richer in 1444, and not just a quick conquest for England within 5 years. Ireland also have 9 provinces, where it had five before, and several new interesting nations to play.


1hwBi0H.jpg


We’ve also tweaked the map to better borders and provinces in Hungary, and I hope you’ll enjoy this setup.
d8RKV3E.jpg


We also made a complete overhaul of how cultures work to remove the ties to language, and tie them more together to similar cultures, to create more historically plausible countries and relations.

DxJVBOu.jpg


Now, for some community fun, try to find as many changes on the map compared to 1.15 in this screenshot and list below!

mEHgjG4.jpg


Next week I’m back talking about a new concept that is getting in the game for 1.15, which can be seen in the topbar on these screenshoys.
 
  • 149
  • 27
  • 26
Reactions:
Sort by date Sort by reaction score
Badgee said:
Why would that be an anti-magyar propaganda? In my opinion, the Finnish are far better than the Turks. And to correct your sentence: Finnish and Hungarian people don't have the same roots (at least, not sure they have), just their language. But if you think that the Hungarians are relatives to the Turks/Turkic people, one thing: linguistic affinity isn't depends on the common words, rather than the grammatic structure and the basic-words. It's because a language's vocabulary/words are can be replaced totally.
Click to expand...

I think you yourself have linguistic issues :"Isn't depends on" xDD The whole point of my rants is that Finns and Turks are NOT directly related to Hungarians and even less so are Vlachs and Slovaks .Read back over my comments and perhaps you'll become aware of the sarcasm in the topic .Oh and if your "not sure" about something then please don't bother flexing your fingers on the keyboard .Thank you :)
 
  • 2
Reactions:
The Serbian Ethnic Group continually gets smaller. Now Bulgarian is the ethnic Identify of Skopje? I only can see one solution and that is splitting the Skopje region in two down the Diagonal like this (\). In Fact the Vardar River already splits it in the game this would be an easy adjustment. The Upper region around Tetovo-Skopje at this time period was predominant Serbian and yes I do agree that South Eastern FYROM at this time was predominantly Bulgarian. Also when will the Orthodox world finally get a skin for a Priest? Its long overdue and it looks bizarre to have what appears to be a Franciscan Roman Catholic Monk converting people to Orthodoxy. Crusader Kings has a skin for Orthodox Priests cant you guys just bring it over.
 
I liked the revamp to northeastern Scandinavia, but southern Scandinavia is still lacking and is way to shallow. My tip would be to add the island of Öland as a province with a strait, which would increase the areas tactical depth in wartime, something that would be historical with examples like the Kalmar War (1611–1613). Its strange to have smaller islands represented in the Baltic Sea and not Öland, which addition wouldn't affect balance with it being a very poor province, but make maneuvering in southern Sweden more interesting and historical. For a Swedish developer to overlook this is strange.
 
I needed this Ireland update, if Ireland was able to win independence from England I.R.L, it should be able to stay independent when England is busy fight Scotland and France right? Well now it can. Though, a couple more would be nice, like say, 12? Ireland should be able to hold its own (if its unified).
 
Mokerak said:
I needed this Ireland update, if Ireland was able to win independence from England I.R.L, it should be able to stay independent when England is busy fight Scotland and France right? Well now it can. Though, a couple more would be nice, like say, 12? Ireland should be able to hold its own (if its unified).
Click to expand...
Yeah, 12 would be nice, but I'm afraid some provinces would probably be too tiny if that happened. And hey, with 8 provinces the (almost) united Ireland should be able to put up a good fight against the Anglos and conquer Meath with no problem, if handled correctly.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
is that Highlander culture I see? FINALLY! now if only Crusader kings would properly divide Scottish culture into Celtic Highlander and West Germanic Lowlander.
 
Well, Dear Paradox, Forum users and trolls, at first i would like to greet you all, and express my love of EU4. The best strategy game i've encountered so far.
Then, please take a look at the central-european cultures. As so many before me, i find it very inaccurate. Just a few example:

"As a Polish person I find it offensive that Hungarian is ''Carpathian'' which also represents Vlach culture. Outrageous!" - most hungarians agree.

"Also, as an East Slav, I find it disgusting that fellow Slavs are being considered relatives of Magyars" - most romanians agree

There's a long time rivalry and hatred between the two nations, please respect it. It won't get better nowadays, that's for sure.

The most accurate comment about the topic i found there:

"Well, I think, If (for example) Polish and Hungarian in one Culture Group it doesn't mean that they are relatives. Culture won't be about language, as the Developer said. I think culture was influenced by religion in that time, and Polish and Hungarian people were both Catholic. The two countries also had a long-lasting friendship. In my opinion, a Central-European Culture Group, including Polish, Hungarian, Slovakian, Czech (and maybe Croatian and Silesian) cultures would be better, but I don't want to offend anyone"

This guy should have won that oscar, not Leo...
Even now there's a political alliance inside the Union, called "Visegrádi Négyek" or "Four of Visegrad". It's Poland, Hungary, Slovakia and Czech Republic.
Silesia should be the part of that "Central-European Culture Group", but imo Croatia is rather South-slav, they were just under hungarian rule for nearly a millenium.

Romania is considered as a latin spin-off, but in the aspect of culture, geography and religion they should be the part of the East-slav, or rather the South-slav culture group.

Transylvanian culture is something that never really existed. It was a mix of the hungarian, saxonian, székely and romanian population.
There are arguements about the roots of the székely people, and probably in romania they teach something else, but they were an other hungarian tribe who settled there. When I. Szent István founded the Kingdom of Hungary, they joined, but they always had some kind of autonomy.

Oh, and that time there were no such thing "slovak". They were called "toth" or "tót" people, and they were northern slav, but they were completely absorbed by the hungarian population, maybe except along the Polish border.

I repeat i don't want to offend anyone, i think we all just agree on that this "carpathian" culture group is a big bad joke.
Dear Paradox, please change it to "Central-European" culture group.
 
Last edited:
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Entrone said:
Well, Dear Paradox, Forum users and trolls, at first i would like to greet you all, and express my love of EU4. The best strategy game i've encountered so far.
Then, please take a look at the central-european cultures. As so many before me, i find it very inaccurate. Just a few example:

"As a Polish person I find it offensive that Hungarian is ''Carpathian'' which also represents Vlach culture. Outrageous!" - most hungarians agree.

"Also, as an East Slav, I find it disgusting that fellow Slavs are being considered relatives of Magyars" - most romanians agree

There's a long time rivalry and hatred between the two nations, please respect it. It won't get better nowadays, that's for sure.

The most accurate comment about the topic i found there:

"Well, I think, If (for example) Polish and Hungarian in one Culture Group it doesn't mean that they are relatives. Culture won't be about language, as the Developer said. I think culture was influenced by religion in that time, and Polish and Hungarian people were both Catholic. The two countries also had a long-lasting friendship. In my opinion, a Central-European Culture Group, including Polish, Hungarian, Slovakian, Czech (and maybe Croatian and Silesian) cultures would be better, but I don't want to offend anyone"

This guy should have won that oscar, not Leo...
Even now there's a political alliance inside the Union, called "Visegrádi Négyek" or "Four of Visegrad". It's Poland, Hungary, Slovakia and Czech Republic.
Silesia should be the part of that "Central-European Culture Group", but imo Croatia is rather South-slav, they were just under hungarian rule for nearly a millenium.

Romania is considered as a latin spin-off, but in the aspect of culture, geography and religion they should be the part of the East-slav, or rather the South-slav culture group.

Transylvanian culture is something that never really existed. It was a mix of the hungarian, saxonian, székely and romanian population.
There are arguements about the roots of the székely people, and probably in romania they teach something else, but they were an other hungarian tribe who settled there. When I. Szent István founded the Kingdom of Hungary, they joined, but they always has some kind of autonomy.

Oh, and that time there were no such thing "slovak". They were called "toth" or "tót" people, and they were northern slav, but they were completely absorbed by the hungarian population, except the northern zones.

I repeat i don't want to offend anyone, i think we all just agree on that this "carpathian" culture group is a big bad joke.
Dear Paradox, please change it to "Central-European" culture group.
Click to expand...
I read your comment, and I agree with it. Since Paradox is being as stubborn as an a**se can get, I think a mod or an option to have cultures in linguistically/ethnically appropriate groups would satisfy every nationalist such as myself and the people who are in favour of this rather odd change.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Hello, just my two cents on the Irish map with which I have a few qualms. The Limerick area looks particularly erroneous, especially since it incorporates large segments of Kerry, which arguably should be merged with Cork and retitled as "Desmond" at the time period in question - 1444. Kerry had its unique areas and characteristics, and it would be particularly great to see them represented, rather than being lumped together with Limerick, which is not historically accurate.

A second point concerns the Leinster area, which maybe could be retitled as Mide or something similar, which could then change into "Leinster" after the 1600s? Just a suggestion for further looking into really.

For more information, as well as a map that should guide further development concerning Desmond, please see the following (apologies for it being Wikipedia). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Desmond#Principalities_and_Other_Septs

Also, if anyone has posted the same information, I do apologise, I am on a tight schedule and this only recently came to my attention.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Martin_Mortyry said:
Yeah, 12 would be nice, but I'm afraid some provinces would probably be too tiny if that happened. And hey, with 8 provinces the (almost) united Ireland should be able to put up a good fight against the Anglos and conquer Meath with no problem, if handled correctly.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback, I'm kinda of a Irish fanatic. CKII IReland is nice. I like unifying it. Had this one game where I got Scotland somehow, and since england was a heretic somehow I got lots of their land!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back