• 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 - 6th of August 2019

Good day and welcome to another Development Diary for EU4's upcoming European Update + Expansion. After enjoying a plethora of maps, missions and other content work from our esteemed content designers, I'm here to turn our attention towards the mechanical changes and additions we can look forward to in said European update.

We're going to start with Mercenaries. Not too long ago, I penned a dev diary outlining our ambitions with mercenaries

I'll take this moment to draw attention to the fact that the UI and numbers are far from final

6th Aud DD macro.jpg


In the upcoming Euro update, the old method of recruiting mercenary units one by one in individual provinces is replaced by the action of hiring Mercenary Companies. Mercenary Companies are complete armies of pure mercenaries, as such will not consume from your manpower pool. They can be recruited in any of your core provinces, where they spawn at full strength, but with low morale.

Mercenary Companies come in two flavours: Local Mercenaries and Foreign Mercenaries.

All nations have three bands of local mercenaries available for recruitment, ranging in size from small to large, capped at a minimum of 2 units and a maximum of 40, depending on the development of your nation. Other than the fact that all nations will have local mercenaries available for hire, there is nothing special about them.

6th Aud DD company available.jpg


Things get a little more interesting with foreign mercenaries. Across the world, there will be foreign mercenary companies, tied to a province of origin; the Free Swiss Guard from Bern, the Flemish Company from Vlaanderen, the Raiders from Navajo etc. These companies come with their own General who is loyal to that unit and that unit only. They also can have different costs and modifiers on the unit, depending on which company you hire from. These companies can spawn and despawn over the course of the grand campaign, but no matter how much you want any particular mercenary company, you can only recruit Mercenary Companies within your trade range. So while you may feel confident invading a colonial Portugal, know that they may well have a far larger pool of Mercenary Companies to draw upon.

6th Aud DD Frisians.jpg


So let's take a closer look at the mercenary units themselves. They are typically more expensive than your standard nation's armies, although those costs compared to the current 1.28 mercenaries are likely to be reduced. This is largely due to how Mercenaries will no longer have unlimited manpower, able to feed themselves with coins and bandage wounds with solid gold. No, from the upcoming European update and going forward, Mercenaries will have their own local manpower, unique for their army

6th Aud DD local manpower.jpg


Not to belabour the point, but UI and numbers shown and discussed here are far from final

Once you hire, for example, this Cossack Host, they will replenish any lost souls from their own unique manpower pool until, eventually, they will be completely exhausted and no longer able fight at full strength, leaving them liable to be wiped out in battle. Our intention here is for mercenary companies to be the muscle you flex in times of war and conflict, rather than the go-to permanent standing army for all nations. To this effect:

Make mercenaries always stay at 100% maintenance

We added this and are quite happy with the results. If a nation chooses to rely heavily or exclusively on mercenaries at all times, they will certainly be footing the bill for them.

As for when you terminate your deal with any Mercenary Company, they will leave your nation and your command like all other units, but will not be available to hire by your nation for 10 years. If, in time of great war, you may find yourself at a disadvantage if you have exhausted your access of mercenaries against a foe who has many other companies at their disposal.

You may notice that the Local Manpower for a mercenary army replaces certain actions in the UI. While mercenary regiments can still be consolidated, they fight as a single unit under their leader. They will not accept being lead by another leader or army and cannot be split, nor merged with another. In the event that their leader dies, they shall elect a new leader from within.

6th Aud DD dead leader.jpg


In playtesting, this has lead to it feeling rather chunky, when manoeuvring multiple stacks which cannot be merged together, as they can have different arrival times and movement paths. We are looking into a better way to manage such stacks of armies, and as inconsistent arrival times has been a bugbear for some time, it seems a fitting moment to address it.

Some other points about Mercenaries which warrant bringing up here:
  • Hiring a Mercenary Company won't prevent another nation from hiring from that company too. We didn't want to create a situation where the player who clicks fastest gets those juicy Swiss mercs.
  • Mercenaries will use your nation's military stats, then apply any of their own modifiers on top of that. We did not want to echo the situation in EU3, where mercenaries would end up clearly spending all your money on booze because they were too drunk to fight well.
  • Mercenaries will be hired through the macro builder rather than through the provinces. This should help reduce click fatigue, but also necessitates some work on the Macro Builder, which we'll address in a future DD.
  • With Mercenaries no longer being a bottomless source of manpower, base manpower is likely to increase for all nations, likely by increasing the base amount development gives and/or boosting the value of manpower buildings.
  • Mercenaries are to use unit models fitting for their origin.
  • All changes above are going to be part of the free update.

This is a major change to system that has been largely untouched since EU3, and it won't be until 2020 that this update hits the shelves. The system is likely to get some refinement based on playtesting and feedback. Early results show a lot more involvement with Mercenary Companies, especially in multiplayer. Hearing "Oh bollocks he hired the Swiss" down the microphone certainly evokes much glee, but we shall continue refining the system. We shall be back with more about Mercenaries, as well as the content that goes hand in hand with the system, as development continues.

As ever, comments and feedback are welcome in the thread. Next week we'll be tackling another large change coming in the European Update.
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Tbh I don't see how comparing this to DLCs works
DLCs are paid hence, obviously, the players who buy them have a right to expect that no matter what combination of DLCs they have the game will work just fine for them
...they pay for that specific combination, after all
If 'custom game rules' came to be, and they featured, say, 30 different gameplay options, of which one would happen to make the game unstable or something then
well, there are still 29 options left. It's fully up to player if he wants to use a certain permutation of game rules, or even if he wants to follow game rules at all.
Custom game rules is something that you COULD use but would never be forced to, and it'd be merely an addition on top of the set of rules that QA would test the game for
True, but I feel that allowing too many permutations of the game rules makes development harder then necessary. It's ok for small contained systems (like societies in CK2), but anything broader in scope creates unintended consequences.

Grand strategies are delicate works where even small changes have great impact. I'm not a balance is everything multiplayer type, but one single design is almost always going to be cleaner than one which must make allowances for a number of unpredictably utilised options. Simplicity is elegant.
 
Agreed. I'd be fine with, say, local mercenaries using your own bonuses, but foreign mercenaries should not use your own bonuses but rather whatever their own modifiers are.

Eh, not really sure on that. From a historical perspective it can go either way. Let’s say, for example, the Spanish +1 to artillery fire modifier is because Spanish curllturally promotes its use and therefore had better leaders and made more effective use of artillery, this would equally apply to maercenaries under their command. However, if it was because they have better iron ore allowing for better guns to be built, the cannons brought by Italian mercenaries should not have the bonus.

From a gameplay perspective, the inability to control your formation means having large disparities in combat abilities would be frustrating.
 
We are all players of EUIV, with different backgrounds, game styles,... but we all like the game.

The belittling of other game styles stops here and now.
 
Of course DDR, you don't even patch anything that basically the whole community doesnt want. Get rid of territorial corruption for gods sakes listen to your community.
That wouldn't be worth spending a DD on, because the only reasonable approach to the problem is the blunt-force approach: remove the mechanic.

Now, balance changes to TCs, that would be worth spending a DD on, because there's several different ways to approach the problem.
And this stupid 50% dev to change capital to Europe is ridiculous.
The only ridiculous thing about it is that there's such a ludicrously compelling reason to move your Asian empire's capital to Europe in the first place.

If TCs weren't brokenly OP, moving your capital to Europe wouldn't be worth your while in the first place unless you had the plurality of your dev there.
 
That wouldn't be worth spending a DD on, because the only reasonable approach to the problem is the blunt-force approach: remove the mechanic.

Now, balance changes to TCs, that would be worth spending a DD on, because there's several different ways to approach the problem.

The only ridiculous thing about it is that there's such a ludicrously compelling reason to move your Asian empire's capital to Europe in the first place.

If TCs weren't brokenly OP, moving your capital to Europe wouldn't be worth your while in the first place unless you had the plurality of your dev there.
unintentionally or not, this change might nerf TCs, since they provide money and FL but are still substantially worse than states for manpower (even with the TC investment).

With quantity + investment + training fields you hit about 200% manpower eff~ with TCs.

With nobility + training fields + quantity, its about 270%, and you can edict for more, and its slightly more point efficient to develop states vs TC.

And bankrupting doesn't destroy your buildings if you do it right, but it does destroy your investments..
 
Disappointed that you didn't use this as a chance to institute territorial manpower, tbh. Instead of having 200k manpower from across a three continent empire somehow all be recruited in the Greater Paris Area, it would integrate really well if manpower was done by territory (province would be too narrow, imo) and the mercs just replenish based on the local manpower. And highly contested regions are just devoid and thus hard to replenish in.

This is something, but...less than I'd hoped. But I'll at least keep reading until we see what's happening with estates, which will be to me the make or break diary.
 
well to his defense if lets say a non colonial france wants to walk all the way to china all you need to have is military access and you can just march up there no problem. in reality such army would lose men on the way and would not be able to get any reinforcement like the game suggest as teleportation magic does not exist.
Well, I did say you might justify linking replacement rate to own territory distance, for just this scenario, but would it really be a big issue? As far as history goes, replacements might be a problem, but with good commissary work and husbanding of troops via careful routing there was no reason a march to China couldn't have been done. In the middle ages, troops marched from all over Europe to Byzantium for the First Crusade, just as an example. And Mongol armies marched from one end of the steppes to the other - and then into Arabia and Eastern Europe...
 
well to his defense if lets say a non colonial france wants to walk all the way to china all you need to have is military access and you can just march up there no problem. in reality such army would lose men on the way and would not be able to get any reinforcement like the game suggest as teleportation magic does not exist.
Well, they can teleport generals...
 
Quick question; do mercenary companies share a manpower pool for all players? For example, I'm Spain and I'm rich, I notice fance has hired the swiss to fight austria and I want austria to win, can I also hire the swiss and park them on a mountain so they die of attrition and have no manpower to help the French? Or does each player get their own manpower pool?

Ok, so it was a long question
 
Quick question; do mercenary companies share a manpower pool for all players? For example, I'm Spain and I'm rich, I notice fance has hired the swiss to fight austria and I want austria to win, can I also hire the swiss and park them on a mountain so they die of attrition and have no manpower to help the French? Or does each player get their own manpower pool?

Ok, so it was a long question

Their own is what I've heard.
 
Brilliant changes to mercs. They have been too op for a very long time, and I love that you can now wage war with mercenaries while lowering spending on your national army, so you can grow manpower while at war.
 
@DDRJake
Just add option for merc armies to attach to your own regular armies (but use move speed of the slower army to calculate speed of both stacks!) and disable option for merging them.
This will remove many problems and exploits if you just disable ways for merc to be merged into one stack, and there will be cool option and flexibility for you....

^This please. Also extend this to your own army for allow for easier stack management (and conserving unique army name).
 
Interesting way to change the meta. At the very least, it seems like quantity becomes more important (again). What happens with ideas that increase the amount of available mercenaries? Will they have more companies to choose from?

Will the composition of available mercenaries change over the ages? As in, less/no cavalry in the later stages of the game.

Yeah like what would replace that? Possibly something like reduced mercenary maintence, tho i hope the modifiers from the mercenaries arnt something too strong, like 10% discipline, and im wondering how this will work with the Black Army of Hungary
 
Improve base manpower, or make it tied to mil/adm tech, or tied to the amount of military ideas or professionalism/tradition; weaken quantity ideas so they don't become too powerful= very decent system. At least that's how i'd do it. You guys know what you're doing though. ;)
 
Seeing the recent reform of the Austrian mission tree, will there be a mission to bring the Germanic crusader states in the Baltics under the yoke of the Holy Roman Emperor? Will there be the possible inclusion of a modified German Unification decision to reflect an Austrian dominated Imperial Confederation that will help facilitate forming the HRE? Perhaps if Austria has revoked the Privilegia, they could enact the decision to gain cores and ownership of the required cities from their subjects if they weren't already owned, with them then gaining claims over Germany? Will forming the HRE actually be made worthwhile in which it has its own national ideas and government perks, such as perhaps having a cross between Prussian and Austrian ideas and the special government reforms of each nation (Perhaps even to include extra states)?

Will you fix the accuracy of Spain's map and actually bring detail to Iberia which was expected of Golden Century but never fully realized, with suggestions from "Common Proposal" by@navaluiki and @Mingmung's "Iberian Map proposal" as inspiration.
The cost reduction that the Spanish government reform "The Council of the Indies" gives to expelling minorities makes no since, and has no historical basis as Spain and Portugal extensively prevented minorities from migrating to their colonies. It would make since to instead change this to reducing Liberty Desire in your Colonial nations or giving you and your colonies additional colonial growth in the Americas. Expelling minorities would make since to give to England, France, or even the Netherlands instead.

Are you ever going to focus on developing the Americas, such as drawing inspiration from @BuchiTiton's proposal for map changes in Latin America? Work could also be done to represent the colonial development of Brazil under Portugal. Also, overwhelmingly the Caribbean was more directly ruled by their Eurpoean mother countries rather than being apart of a new world captaincy or governorship as a colonial nation, especially under Spain. Would it be possible to include the disabling of that Colonial Region through a Spanish Mission?
 
Just a thought:
big blobs will have larger trade range, especially colonial empires, will have more money => will have more mercs;

And I thought that devs tried to limit blobbing ...