• 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 - 4th of December 2018

Good day all and welcome to another EUIV Dev diary. We're wrapping up with Golden Century ready for it's launch next week, so there's not much meat to today's diary, but we are going to reveal the 10 new achievements, which will bring the total number to a staggering 295. I've heard that anyone who completes all of them gets their wishes granted, but I cannot comment to its authenticity.


trophy_hunter.jpg

Trophy Hunter - Capture an enemy flagship

you_get_a_new_home.jpg

You get a new home, and you get a new home - Expel 5 different minorities to your colonies

why_is_the_rum_gone.jpg

Why is the Rûm gone!? - As Asturias, establish an Order in Rum

the_league_of_mayapan.jpg

The League of Mayapan - Starting as Huastec, form Maya

yarr_harr_a_pirates_life_for_me.jpg

Yarr Harr a Pirate’s life for me - Choose to play as New Providence and conquer all of Caribbeans.

forever_golden.jpg

Forever Golden - Complete the Spanish Mission Tree

spanish_fly.jpg

Spanish Fly - Starting as Offaly, secure a Personal Union over an Iberian nation.

where_am_i.jpg

Where Am I? - As a New World native with Random New World active, explore the entire New World.

basque_in_glory.jpg

Basque in Glory - Starting as Navarra, ensure that most of Iberia is Basque culture before the Age of Absolutism

an_unlikely_candidate.jpg

An Unlikely Candidate - Starting as Mzab, Touggourt or Djerid, reform Al-Andalus


These Achievements will be available for hunters from Golden Century's release on 11th December. While some shouldn't cause sleepless nights for most players, best of luck to those who try their hand at Basque in Glory. Navarra's start is full of danger, but also massive opportunity.


Now, stepping aside from today's topic of Achievements, I'd like to take a moment to address some of the feedback we've been getting during the dev diaries for Golden Century. There have been plenty of concerns raised, indeed very fair ones, regarding Golden Century and the 1.28 Spain Update not matching up with expectations, not having community input taken into account and development generally not being in line with what the community is wanting. There are many other points that have been raised, but I want to draw light to these.

These are very fair points to bring up, and one comment in particular resonated with me, and that is that our plans and what we are developing are often shared so late in development with the community that feedback and suggestions they want to give can't or won't be able to be integrated. This has lead to a lot of people voicing suggestions for features or changes and getting very understandably frustrated when what is delivered does not take it into account.

So after Golden Century launches, we're going to talk a lot more about future plans and what we have in store for EU4 in 2019, sharing our vision of what we want to do with the game and what we want to bring to you, the player. I'll be talking about this at length in the Development Diary following Golden Century, so on the 18th December. Fittingly, it will be the last Dev Diary of 2018, before we take off for Christmas Break. Our ambition is to get our community a lot more linked in with what we are planning, and can give their feedback and suggestions accordingly and within plenty of time to implement. We have also been asked for how exactly we use suggestions from the forums and how to write a good suggestion thread, which is a great idea, and will be part of said 18th Dec Dev diary.

So while the feedback especially last week makes for some humbling reading for us, it's still important, and this is one of the things we're doing about it. There are far more plans in the pipeline, but, well, for that tune in on the 18th.

As for next week, we'll be having an early DD on the 10th, with Patchnotes. See you then!
 
Listening to feedback in the future is nice and all, but what about the problems facing THIS DLC?...

I think it's great future regions and DLC will have more input, but I can't be alone in fearing that Iberia won't be touched again in a long time, which kinda sucks since the changes we did get are awful.

Will you retroactively add things to this DLC or just drop the price in future? It is very empty and not worth the price. I mean seriously, no new meaningful events?

What about units for the Iberian majors? I think it is terrible that players have to buy a whole bunch of unit packs to get all the units and the Catholic Majors (wrongly titled Evangelical Majors if memory serves) is not even available.

At least fix the map changes and NI's before touching another area and abandoning Iberia.
 
Last edited:
They did revisit russia (third rome..) with missions for example.. so its possible you portugal lovers could get some things you wanted.

They did “revisit” Third Rome = they added only Mission Trees to an ImPak because it fitted with the “Immersion Pack” vision. Without Missions, for example, GC is somewhat worthless. Since Portugal has the biggest Mission Tree in Vanilla and now also with full-DLC, they will not add anything extra. They didn’t add any new events/mechanics for Third Rome.

By the way, they did not add any Mission Tree for CoC and MoH and such (when will be China or Japan or the Middle East revisited?)
 
Listening to feedback in the future is nice and all, but what about the problems facing THIS DLC?...

I think it's great future regions and DLC will have more input, but I can't be alone in fearing that Iberia won't be touched again in a long time, which kinda sucks since the changes we did get are awful.

Will you retroactively add things to this DLC or just drop the price in future? It is very empty and not worth the price. I mean seriously, no new meaningful events?

What about units for the Iberian majors? I think it is terrible that players have to buy a whole bunch of unit packs to get all the units and the Catholic Majors (wrongly titled Evangelical Majors if memory serves) is not even available.

At least fix the map changes and NI's before touching abandoning Iberia.

Wise words, my lad. Wise words.
 
That is just, pardon me, fake news.
Didn't they adopt one of the most frequent suggestions and give religious ideas the ability to convert in territories? Saying they "straight up ignored complaints" is objectively wrong.
No, they announced the change, then there was a month of people saying they don't want it and presenting alternatives, the change went live and after (I think) 2 weeks it was changed into basically one of the earliest suggestions. By straight up ignoring I mean not only keeping the change in the form it was announced in, but also just not saying a single sentence addressing the issue for a month, when it was the most important topic on the forum. They even didn't answer questions about it.

Link to a thread about that. The explanation given on 15th have some insight into reasons behind the change, but was still met with "I agree about the issue, but the solution is still bad and the problems will be solved much better by XYZ.".
 
Last edited:
They already have two.

Indeed, but "have a colony in Brazil and in Africa" and "get owned provinces in Africa, India and Indonesia before 1500" is neither challenging nor rewarding achievements for the second most important country in this immersion pack, it's actually just lacklustering.
 
Thanks for the DD. I believe you nailed the main point: communication and development cycles are not aligned in a way that allows for feedback for the community to be properly heard and integrated. I am very happy to hear you guys plan to correct this. The forum experience as been a painful one as of late. I sincerely hope things will improve. Cheers
 
I think a bit more provinces for Castile and Portugal (free patch) plus the ability to tell your Colonial Nations how to expand (restrict within colonial region for nice colonial borders) for Golden Century might have swung people to be more neutral about the immersion pack than negative.
 
I think a bit more provinces for Castile and Portugal (free patch) plus the ability to tell your Colonial Nations how to expand (restrict within colonial region for nice colonial borders) for Golden Century might have swung people to be more neutral about the immersion pack than negative.

Well, the free patch map was actually the spark that ignited the flame.
 
No, they announced the change, then there was a month of people saying they don't want it and presenting alternatives, the change went live and after (I think) 2 weeks it was changed into basically one of the earliest suggestions. By straight up ignoring I mean not only keeping the change in the form it was announced in, but also just not saying a single sentence addressing the issue for a month, when it was the most important topic on the forum. They even didn't answer questions about it.
I for one think it is wise for them not to react immediately to that kind of complaints, simply because the discussion in this subforum has become so unbearably aggressive, negative and toxic and because who shouts the loudest isn't necessarily right nor does he represent a majority.
There is just no winning in that kind of atmosphere - had they reacted directly to that negative feedback by saying "oh my, you dislike it, gosh, well then we shouldn't do this, we guess" they would probably have been called indecisive and spineless.
Therefore, considering the feedback and, after some internal discussion and testing, implementing a reasonable idea that in my opinion is quite a good compromise, was a very good way of dealing with the feedback.
 
I think a bit more provinces for Castile and Portugal (free patch) plus the ability to tell your Colonial Nations how to expand (restrict within colonial region for nice colonial borders) for Golden Century might have swung people to be more neutral about the immersion pack than negative.

What I would have liked are:
Unique government for Spain - it was pretty uique historically with all its casa's.
To somehow represent the military juggernaut that Spain was in the 16th century.

2 things nothing done about in a Spain update. Things even i now about who isnt specifically interested in Spain.
 
I for one think it is wise for them not to react immediately to that kind of complaints, simply because the discussion in this subforum has become so unbearably aggressive, negative and toxic and because who shouts the loudest isn't necessarily right nor does he represent a majority.
There is just no winning in that kind of atmosphere - had they reacted directly to that negative feedback by saying "oh my, you dislike it, gosh, well then we shouldn't do this, we guess" they would probably have been called indecisive and spineless.
Therefore, considering the feedback and, after some internal discussion and testing, implementing a reasonable idea that in my opinion is quite a good compromise, was a very good way of dealing with the feedback.
How is ignoring feedback and after quite a long time of few weeks implementing an early suggestion like "Oh, we value your feedback and see you don't like it" better, than just rethinking the idea. After all that DDRJake said, that the argument that it is a Nerf to religions ideas and not to expansion really convinced him to change the change. The problem was the argument was a month old at that point. It was one of the early posts in the "Why the missionary change?".
 
Last edited:
But why Asturias and why an Holy Order?

For the Holy Order, I guess it's because of that old "drunk monk meme". Not sure about Asturias.
 
I for one think it is wise for them not to react immediately to that kind of complaints, simply because the discussion in this subforum has become so unbearably aggressive, negative and toxic and because who shouts the loudest isn't necessarily right nor does he represent a majority.
There is just no winning in that kind of atmosphere - had they reacted directly to that negative feedback by saying "oh my, you dislike it, gosh, well then we shouldn't do this, we guess" they would probably have been called indecisive and spineless.
Therefore, considering the feedback and, after some internal discussion and testing, implementing a reasonable idea that in my opinion is quite a good compromise, was a very good way of dealing with the feedback.

I’m sorry, but the discussions are not toxic or not constructive. Some people seem to not understand this simple concept. Countless suggestion have been made, none of them were even listened to. I did not say “implemented”, I said “listened to”. “Carefully considering a suggestion” was used to hide the fact that the feedback was basically ignored in the last months. Just think about the Missionary changes, the Corruption from territories, even the map of Spain in the free patch. Many forum items have banded together and made a clear and nice map rework, with extensive discussions and various versions that were tuned thanks to the feedback of the community itself. In the meanwhile, the devs renamed some provinces. And this happened on the first week or so of the development. Nothing has bee heard since, except promises for the future. And this is only one example. Many suggestions like this have been made. Paradox gave us Pirates.

We are somewhat distrustful, but some of us are angry. You cannot blame them.
 
It's funny read that Paradox talks now about "hear the community" when they decided not accept the suggestion to delay Golden Century to make a good DLC that had really anything about Spain and Portugal, so ¿what does that mean? ¿Does that mean they would dont pay attention again to us or only is the final insult to the spanish customers begining to pay attention after release "our" DLC?
 
Missionary change idea has good origins.. (well total non-conversion was bad) - like corruption is not bad idea in general. But game implementations were weird.. blind, shortsighted or smth.

Like you get good realistic idea.. coversion is too easy too cheap in this game, lets change that. But change was to stop completely conversion in territories.. (super weird?!?!) then to ignore effect on balance.. What about religious and humanist groups?.. It feels like tunnel vision a bit.. we'll change this one system in game but we don't want to touch anything else because it could break... And thats going bad in practice and with players ofc. Al least you acted on this.. a bit late.. but better than never.

Corruption change.. - same thing - put corruption everywhere to slow blobbing. But tie it to territories.. not dev ?!.. not that it would be much better i guess. But then you can't really reduce corruption - since its super expensive and there's cap. Thats disabling players from playing.. what was the idea, to make players wait?
They said they wanted us to use vassals - but tunnel vision here - people don't use vassals for a reason at the moment. Why not fix that?
Another corruption thing change - streamlining game to trade companies for wide play. How's that supposed to be good idea?
So far, unfortunately no act on this? Some players are currently finally realizing that this change was bad. Its more of late-game change so people don't notice it that quickly.

Not to mention what happens to poor players without DLCs..i guess at this point, with so many DLCs.. devs said wth vanilla game is like a demo.

Anyway.. lots of questionable changes lately. Feedback was there actually.. but mostly was rejected/late?/ignored.