• 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 - 9th of May 2017

Hello everyone and welcome to this developed diary on setup changes in the Greater Russian region!

For the upcoming 1.22 patch we’ve had another look at modern Russia and Belarus. This is a region that has received attention previously but we feel that it was not up to the level of detail we have become accustomed to in other parts of Europe and that it could not properly reflect the lay of the land in the region in 1444.

The Russian Principalities in 1444:

In 1444 Russia was still divided into a number of principalities, in many ways this is the result of the constant interference from the Golden Horde. The Khans had defeated and divided the early Russian principalities and have come to not only exact tribute from the remaining states here, but have also acted as king-makers and guarantors of princely power.
As the game opens however the Golden Horde is going through a rough couple of decades with external pressure and internal struggles, historically ending in its general breakup into a number of much weaker successor states.
The Great Horde in our start date is what remains of the core of the Golden Horde but others, such as Crimea, would in time come to conquer and attempt to usurp their role as the overlord of the Russian states.
What this means for the Russians is that while horde intervention is still a factor in local politics, they have now been given some time to grow and thrive. As one of the main collectors of tribute for the Khans, Muscovy is now in the process of building a strong power base and has already used a combination of bribes and coercion to secure control over land of the minor princes in the region.


eu4_30.jpg


As you can see, in 1.22 we have chosen to greatly expand the number of provinces in this region. This allows for a greater degree of detail in the warfare in this region both between the principalities themselves and between the Russians and the Tatar hordes.
We have also taken the opportunity once again to adjust the development of the Russian region a bit, increasing it slightly to allow the states here to better make their mark upon the world.
In 1.22 one of the things this means is that some of the states we know and love are no longer the same. Ryazan is now a 4 province state and Yarloslavl and Tver are now 2 and 3 provinces respectively.

Muscovy:
First of the Russian principalities we have Muscovy itself. In 1444 this is already the dominant native power and in 1.22 it is the overlord of no less than five smaller principalities. The expanded number of provinces ensures that all is not lost simply from one battle or one siege, there is now room to move around when Kazan, the Great Horde or Lithuania comes knocking.
The greater detail has also allowed us to better show a number of centers of regional importance, giving it more of the historical depth that we have come to expect of other regions where we have overhauled the map.

Among the changes to the setup for Muscovy is also a revision of their ideas. Muscovite Ideas are now separate from those you get for forming Russia and currently look like this:

Muscovite Ideas:

Traditions:
Diplomatic Relations +1
Shock Damage Dealt +10%

1. Gatherers of Tribute: National Tax Income Modifier: +10%
2. Legacy of Dmitriy Donskoi: Yearly Army Tradition: +0.5
3. Seat of Metropolitan Bishop: Missionary Strength +1%, Tolerance of True Faith +1
4. Pomestnoe Voisko: Land Morale +10%
5. Strength of the Boyars: Stability Cost Modifier -20%
6. Zasechnaya Cherta: Fort Maintenance -20%
7. Descendants of the Byzantine Emperors: Diplomatic Reputation +1

Ambition:
Land Force Limit Modifier +33%

The decision to form Russia will in turn give a new set of ideas should you choose to abandon your old Principality ideas.

Russian Ideas:

Traditions:
National Manpower Modifier: +33%
Core-Creation Cost: -10%

Land of the Rus: Aggressive Expansion Impact: -10%
Siberian Frontier: Colonists: +1
Russian Artillery Yard: Artillery Cost: -10%, Artillery Combat Ability +10%
Life-Long Conscription: Land Force Limit Modifier: +50%
Abolish the Mestnichestvo: Yearly Corruption: -0.1
The Table of Ranks: Yearly Army Tradition: +0.25, Advisor Cost: -10%
Broaden the Curriculum of the Cadet Corps: +5% Land Morale, 10% less fire damage received

Ambition:
Yearly Legitimacy: +1

New Playable Countries:
In EU in general and in Russia in particular there’s always a decision to be made of what is to be a province with high autonomy and, what should be a subject state or even independent. Our game enforces strict differences depending on what you pick but in reality it was quite possible in many cases to be somewhere in between.
In the case of Russia in 1444, Muscovy is in possession much land that really belongs to a minor principality that they have somehow acquired (often by simply buying the land from the princes in control of it) or that is ruled by a prince that has moved to the court in Moscow, allowing the Muscovite's to administrate it for him. In 1.22 we have taken another look at how we want the Muscovite lands to be portrayed and added two new vassal tags:

The first is the small state of Rostov, between Tver and Yaroslavl. This principality was in many ways quite firmly under Muscovite control ever since its princes had sold off half of the lands to Moscow, but Rostov would not be integrated entirely until 1474.
Rostov has a long and interesting history and would continue to play an important part in Russian politics every now and then, even as a part of a greater Russian state. We therefore thought it would be an interesting addition to the mix of states you can play in 1444.

Rostov Ideas:

Traditions:
Provincial Trade Power Modifier: +10%
Idea Cost: -10%

Re-Unification of Rostov: Goods Produced Modifier: +10%
Ancient Heritage: Aggressive Expansion Impact: -10%
Ecclesiastical Center: Tolerance of True Faith: +2
Entrepot of Russia: Trade Efficiency: +10%
Rostov Architecture: Construction Cost: -10%
Political Influence: Diplomats: +1
Rostov Enamel: Production Efficiency: +10%

Ambition:
Diplomatic Reputation: +1

The second new state we have added is one in the north, right at the border with Novgorod. The principality of Beloozero was never a metropolis and is long past its glory days in 1444. Ruled by Muscovite princes it would formally be incorporated directly into Muscovy in 1486 and its nobles would mostly make their mark upon the world within the frames of the Russian Empire. It's position is an interesting one however and our game history might unfold differently.

Beloozero Ideas:

Traditions:
Trade Efficiency: +10%
Infantry Combat Ability: +10%

Martial Heritage: Cavalry Cost: -10%
Monastic Traditions: Yearly Prestige: +1
Strengthen Local Lineages: Yearly Legitimacy: +1
Northern Trade: Domestic Trade Power: +25%
Officers of Beloozero: Yearly Army Tradition +0.5
Boreal Warfare: Attrition for Enemies: +1
Scientific Patronage: Technology Cost: -5%

Ambition:
Goods Produced Modifier +10%

Novgorod:

eu4_28.jpg


In the far north we have broken up some of Novgorod’s bigger provinces. Novgorod's domains always presented something of a difficulty to portray in that many of these locations had little in terms of population, yet contributed to the overall wealth of the Republic.
It also gives Novgorod some much needed strategic depth when fighting Muscovy to the south.

Lithuania:

eu4_31.jpg


Lithuania has long been a region in need of greater detail. In 1.22 we have broken up and reshaped many of their provinces, especially in the northeast. When adding new provinces we have tried to accommodate important regional centers, the internal administrative divisions of the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth as well as the gradual expansion of Muscovy and later Russia into Belarus and the Ukraine.
As this was a highly contested region for much of the period covered by the game this should should hopefully make the region a lot more interesting to play in. It should also allow for a more engaging conquest for strong neighboring states...

That was all for today!
Next week’s developer diary will be written by Johan and may or may not touch on more things that could impact the region...
 
Last edited:
Huh, I have really mixed feelings about this. Let's start with negatives:

The Russian ideas are awful. I'd suggest you change them before the release. Muscovite ideas are quite good, though I'd play some more with the numbers there.

There are still a few map changes needed:
  1. Mitau still does that horrible u-turn on the border with Lettgallen, instead of connecting with Braslaw. Daugava is there for a reason. ;)
  2. Samogitia still isn't connected to the Baltic... *SIGH*
  3. No Chełm province. Well, that's a bummer, Russia and Lithuania rehaul is a great moment to add it.
  4. Besides, there are still things to correct in Ruthenia overall; for instance, what @Dongerino has mentioned in this thread already.
I really hope it's not the final version of the map changes, and that we're gonna see some more in other regions. Besides that, I LOVE the changes - I really appreciate that Livonia got some love as well. And the new tags in Russia - cool! It's always nice to see new tags.

To be honest, I'm pretty hyped for this patch already, can't wait for the next DD. :D Please, don't let me down. ;)
 
If you are doing changes in the Russian region could you also have a look into "The Muscovy Trade Company" - event? It is quite irritating that it will last until end of the game, even if Muscovy/Russia loses that area and that you can't do anything about it.
 
Now that you are improving the Russian Region, are you planning to add some new Siberian tribes in western and central Siberia for the russians to deal with? Ie. Khanties, Mansis, Samoyeds, Tungus, and Yakuts? The Khanties and Mansies were often vassals to the Sibir Khanate and all of the tribes took years for the Russians to conquer and then subdue. It could make the region far more interesting. Additionally I feel the Chuchki should get unique ideas that match their uniqueness is being the only tribe to defeat the russians and hold onto their land until around the end date of eu4.
 
These new ideas are such lame. Just everyone in this thread noticed poorness of new Russian ideas, but Muscovy got totally 75% debaff of manpower. I have no idea, what type of government could fix that.

I'm sorry, Ivan, no expanding for Mother-Russia today.
грозный.gif
 
These new ideas are such lame. Just everyone in this thread noticed poorness of new Russian ideas, but Muscovy got totally 75% debaff of manpower. I have no idea, what type of government could fix that.

I'm sorry, Ivan, no expanding for Mother-Russia today.
View attachment 264135
I don't think people have an issue with the Muscovite ideas because they work well enough to get you set up for the early game. The crazy manpower/expansion/whatever that makes you better late game should be after you form Russian ideas, hence the issue with said ideas being lame.
 
I don't think people have an issue with the Muscovite ideas because they work well enough to get you set up for the early game. The crazy manpower/expansion/whatever that makes you better late game should be after you form Russian ideas, hence the issue with said ideas being lame.
Well, since you could choose to save old ideas, Muscovite ideas also could be all-Russian.
So there's no rule, that these ideas should be strongly oriented on early or early-mid game.
 
Assuming Genoa hasn't been ate alive by Crimea/Ottoman before you snake your way past PLC and Golden Horde and hundred of other problems. Like Novgorod invasion failing or some other such issues.

Not a really a viable solution for players. EVEN less so true for AI. You will get far MORE benefit from higher tax/good production/manpower pool in Moscow to force renaissance and maybe Neva for colonialism. Why neva? As muscovy or any other rus culture tag after forming Russia. You get a decision to move your capital to Neva and get 6+ tax so if Neva was already at 14 tax? *evil grin*

Alternative if you actually insist on going down to Genoa and wait for institution? You might get it or not at all. I like my method better. The biggest problem is "teaching" AI how to force institution when they are VERY far behind in everything.

You can just return their provinces or release them if Savoy or someone ate them. They will instantly like you, and after Shadow Kingdom will be very willing to be your vassal. Free institutions. A hell of a lot better than forcing institutions IMO when it's totally unnecessary.

It's perfectly viable for players and incredibly easy. I did it in my Novgorod run...let alone how easy it'd be for Muscovy.
 
- your spelling of Poland is weird.:rolleyes:

Err what?

Theres a fairly good shot poland gets stomped by Tuetonic Order/Denmark/Hungary Alliance.

I shouldnt even say 1/10 since the only time I have seen the AI Commonwealth live up/surpass its name was one game were I got a very quick start as Castile and was allies with Poland which disuaded Russia and the Ottomans from attacking them long enough that they actually started expanding but that wasnt untill the 1700s.

As far as historically, the Russians wouldnt beat up on the Ottomans untill the 1700s, they never ate up the PLC through conquest but by using internal politics against it, the beat the Swedes and French through attrition.

As of right now Muscovite has minimal internal politics to deal with (innacurate), easily rolls all of its neighbors including Poland.

From what I understand Russia wouldnt even move heavily eastward untill the tale end of the game.

As far as multiplayer a good Russian player should be able to create the Russian Empire at its zenith well before 1700.

I mean sure if its mp and people are playing as poland and sweden and allying against and ignoring each other it sucks, but thats a mp problem.
 
You can just return their provinces or release them if Savoy or someone ate them. They will instantly like you, and after Shadow Kingdom will be very willing to be your vassal. Free institutions. A hell of a lot better than forcing institutions IMO when it's totally unnecessary.

It's perfectly viable for players and incredibly easy. I did it in my Novgorod run...let alone how easy it'd be for Muscovy.

Having institution inside your vassal is still bounded by the same province by province spreading rules. Overlord grant institution benefit to their vassal not the other way around.

The only way I can see this being to advantage of you is if you maintain most of 1444 Genoa's border and gave them enough provinces to snake through your empire (not too many just enough to reach Moscow from Azov).

That is still sub-optimal compared to having complete first age objective a single province at 30 total development + force spawn institution + tons of tax/good/manpower what not.

I have a play through where as Japan I manage to force spawn all of institution for myself on Japan's main island and deny the benefit to rest of Asia mainland (mostly to hurt ming MP cost) and I didn't even go colonization whatsoever. I am so rich I can actually support a flimsy manchu get on their feet and start (Ming had ate all of the tribes and this was rebel spawned).
 
I'm pretty happy with the new Russian ideas. People are drawing comparisons to PLC and real life, but remember it took an apocalyptic Swedish invasion, a mass Cossack revolt, and deep-seated Constitutional problems in order to firmly establish Russia as the superior military power to Poland.

Poland was pretty strong and Russia was pretty weak for a lot of this period. Poland's key weaknesses at this point were institutional (while Peter the Great was busy radically transforming the Russian state), religious in the form of angry Orthodox Ukrainians (Russia's treatment of Islam stands out as the more successful policy here) and strategic (ie Poland was in the middle, Russia on the periphery). Two of these three are circumstantial and not questions of fundamental "balance". It should probably take PLC being in a weak position for Russia to have a good go at cracking the nut.

In any case, my view on the PLC overpowered debate can be found here - TL;DR the problem with PLC is the Ukrainians/Cossacks aren't strong enough.

In the early game you want:
  • Tatars and Cossacks should be militarily buffed in the early game relative to non-tribal states on the steppe (eg manpower boosts from escaped serfs for Cossacks and converts for Tatars, stronger cavalry).
  • Occupying and fighting on land for non-tribal states in the region (ie Ukraine) should be difficult, and vassalising the Cossacks as PLC/Russia etc is an important way to gain an edge over other powers in the region.
  • So they don't blob, the tribal states should find it extremely difficult to rule over provinces which don't have an accepted culture, and their list of accepted cultures should be very short.
  • Attempting to diploannex either Crimea or the Cossacks/any tribal-steppe state when they're vassalised should create a massive headache for everyone in the region. "Support independence" should be a very common kind of war in the region.
  • The steppe is poor so long as the tribal states exist, as a model for raiding. Migration occurs but is minimal.
  • Religion should be more and less important than it currently was - this was part of the world where Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and Islam all bordered each other, and the results were messy. For Cossacks to ally with the Turks or the Tatars was a big deal, but possible - for Poles to try to force them to convert to Catholicism was intolerable. At present, these things are the wrong way round, and the Cossacks/Ukrainians get converted while not allying with the Tatars or Turks (should Cossacks have a high heathen tolerance but a low heretic tolerance?)
And later in the game:
  • The military advantage the Cossacks/Tatars enjoy over the Poles, Russians, and Turks on the steppe should rapidly diminish in the late 1600s and be gone by 1730.
  • Securing all of Ruthenia as a non-tribal state (whether Polish, Russian, Turkish, or even Tatar or Ruthenia!) should begin a process of Ruthenia's development increasing rapidly due to events, particularly thanks to migration.
  • Switching to a non-tribal state for Cossacks and Tatars should be more difficult (and less desirable until later in the game) than it currently is - it shouldn't be possible in the mid-1500s.
  • Access to trade and an open Bosphorus is important for Ukraine's development.
The effects of all of this would be:
  • War is harder for everyone else and easier for the cossacks - diplomacy is more unpredictable, and death-spirals are weakened.
  • Ruthenia is poor for most of the game, and owning parts of Ruthenia is not a huge advantage, but it is a huge asset once it has been conquered and secured.
  • The Bosphorus becomes the next goal for any European power which takes Ruthenia - either to conquer it and open it up to ships, or to humiliate a weakened Turkey and force them to keep the Bosphorus open.
  • The game becomes much more fun for Cossack/Tartar players.
  • Balance is improved, not just between the different countries, but throughout the arc of the game in both Eastern Europe and Europe as a whole.
I think there's also a case that Poland/PLC and Netherlands deserve a financial buff thanks to agricultural productivity and the Baltic grain trade, and Poland is made strategically weaker (less manpower). But that would be a separate DLC!
 
Having institution inside your vassal is still bounded by the same province by province spreading rules. Overlord grant institution benefit to their vassal not the other way around.

The only way I can see this being to advantage of you is if you maintain most of 1444 Genoa's border and gave them enough provinces to snake through your empire (not too many just enough to reach Moscow from Azov).

That is still sub-optimal compared to having complete first age objective a single province at 30 total development + force spawn institution + tons of tax/good/manpower what not.

I have a play through where as Japan I manage to force spawn all of institution for myself on Japan's main island and deny the benefit to rest of Asia mainland (mostly to hurt ming MP cost) and I didn't even go colonization whatsoever. I am so rich I can actually support a flimsy manchu get on their feet and start (Ming had ate all of the tribes and this was rebel spawned).

Congrats, the game is easy. Suboptimal play still works because of this.

I personally wouldn't dump thousands of MP into an already-developed Moscow province to force-spawn an institution when I can just take clay instead and get the same result with more total dev.
 
Having institution inside your vassal is still bounded by the same province by province spreading rules. Overlord grant institution benefit to their vassal not the other way around.

The only way I can see this being to advantage of you is if you maintain most of 1444 Genoa's border and gave them enough provinces to snake through your empire (not too many just enough to reach Moscow from Azov).

That is still sub-optimal compared to having complete first age objective a single province at 30 total development + force spawn institution + tons of tax/good/manpower what not.

I have a play through where as Japan I manage to force spawn all of institution for myself on Japan's main island and deny the benefit to rest of Asia mainland (mostly to hurt ming MP cost) and I didn't even go colonization whatsoever. I am so rich I can actually support a flimsy manchu get on their feet and start (Ming had ate all of the tribes and this was rebel spawned).

Institution spread will happen quicker when Genoa owns the provinces (provided they have at least 1 province in Italy and have embraced the new Institution). This means that even if you leave their provinces as is, you get institution spread from just neighboring a friendly province and it's generally much faster than waiting for it to spread through Sweden or through Poland.
 
Congrats, the game is easy. Suboptimal play still works because of this.

I personally wouldn't dump thousands of MP into an already-developed Moscow province to force-spawn an institution when I can just take clay instead and get the same result with more total dev.

Except you don't get the same result. It can take decades of paying higher tech costs for institutions to spread enough from the periphery to hit 10% and allow acceptance. Also, you don't develop Moscow, you develop a nearby undeveloped province that's much cheaper per point.
 
Congrats, the game is easy. Suboptimal play still works because of this.

I personally wouldn't dump thousands of MP into an already-developed Moscow province to force-spawn an institution when I can just take clay instead and get the same result with more total dev.

I poor only enough MP to force spawn ONE institution per provinces so I end up with 5 super "Paris" like provinces especially right next to each if possible. This way 30% or so of your total development end up being easy to spread from and to. Then guess what? As soon ANY late-game institution get to one of those provinces. The cost drop dramatically to embrace the institution.

You also gain HUGE amount of ducat/manpower which you need to wage war with. It is pretty much a win-win proposal. Institution spread are really terribad in the Novgorod frozen northern trade game I have going on. I am pushing total ~115% institution spread modifier (prosperity + few idea group + polices) and I have 1k development total.

It take AGES (pun intended) for it to make an impact for the manufacturer institution. I had like maybe 20 manufacturer (filthy rich) built so it spread rather quickly. I had to delay tech so I could afford the !!! 2500 ducat to embrace it.

The problem is you have so many 3-10 provinces that the 115% modifier ending up saving you at most 20 year for every province (depending on total manufacturer and if province nearby already has it).

Tell me which give you better chance to win wars? More money/manpower or a single vassal entirely dedicated to spawn institution for you? Yeah I thought so.
 
Half of this thread is complaining about the lower manpower bonus from Russian national ideas. I'm honestly curious - are these complaints founded in flavor or gameplay complaints?

I'm currently playing ironman Russia - I don't even know what to do with all my manpower. I've drained my pool exactly once in the first 20 years of the game and never since. I own Scandinavia, PLC and half of India, so I haven't exactly stayed away from conflict. In the year 1600 my manpower pool is well over 200k without even taking Quantity or building more than 10 manpower buildings and I literally can't find a war big enough to spend it lower than 150k. I'm way more capped economically (army maintenance) than on manpower. I don't even use half my force limit and I'm still fielding the largest army in the world.

What am I missing? What do players of Russia use their manpower for, that these changes would hurt them so much? From my (somewhat limited) gameplay experience I couldn't care less.
 
Half of this thread is complaining about the lower manpower bonus from Russian national ideas. I'm honestly curious - are these complaints founded in flavor or gameplay complaints?

I'm currently playing ironman Russia - I don't even know what to do with all my manpower. I've drained my pool exactly once in the first 20 years of the game and never since. I own Scaninavia, PLC and half of India, so I haven't exactly stayed away from conflict. In the year 1600 my manpower pool is well over 200k without even taking Quantity or building more than 10 manpower buildings and I literally can't find a war big enough to spend it lower than 150k. I'm way more capped economically (army maintenance) than on manpower.

What am I missing? What do players of Russia use their manpower for, that these changes would hurt them so much? From my (somewhat limited) gameplay experience I couldn't care less.

Russia currently has 75% manpower total bonus (25% core NI + 50% finisher).

The new 1.22 Russia only have 33% core idea. So in effective your 200k become 152k manpool (divide by 1.75 and multiple by 1.33). You also lose 10% manpower recovery which affect how many manpower you gain each month. So you basically lose about 43% manpower with little else to make up for it.

I understand where they are going with manpower change but I feel it was smight too drastic and in return we still have bad ideas like institution spread.
 
I dont know if its the correct way or not but the way I see it is spending MP to spawn institutions also boosts your productivity were as trying to tech with institution penalities is "wasting" MP. And you might get behind in tech but you catch up fairly quickly anyhow.
 
Any chance 1.22 is going to fix the music triggers? I really miss thematic, regional, and time period music.

This. I've already reported this for, I think, version 1.19 or possibly 1.18 and no action had been taken on this, despite this being acknowledged by a Paradox employee. Kind of disappointed in this, but oh well what can you do.