• 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 - Development Diary 13th of December 2022 - Roadmap to 1.35

Hello and welcome back to another Europa Universalis IV Dev Diary!

It’s been a while since the last one, back in September. The main reason for this is that the Team has been quite busy during these months. In October we released the 1.34.4 update, that fixed most of the issues we wanted to cover after Lions of the North, and participated in the last edition of the Grandest Lan, which could be organized again at Moszna Castle (and that you can watch at the Paradox Grand Strategy YouTube channel!). In November, the team focused on launching EUIV on a new platform, GOG, with the 1.34.5 update; this is the fourth platform in which the game can be played, after Steam, Microsoft Store, and Epic Games.

So now comes December, and we feel it’s the proper time to give you an insight into what we’re working on and share with you a roadmap to the 1.35 update (as we won’t be releasing more patches for the 1.34 version).

First and foremost, and although we’ve already said this, we want to thank all the players that have bought and played EUIV: Lions of the North, making it one of the most successful releases in the history of this game. We think that a non-trivial part of this has been the quality of the 1.34 ‘Sweden’ free update, and we are very happy about the fact of having to patch it only two times, as we deem this version quite stable.

So, what are our plans for the future? Well, not surprisingly, we want to keep focused on continuing to reduce the bug count as much as possible; in the last couple of years, the Team has fixed between 2,000 and 3,000 backlog bugs, and we think that the state of the game is much better after this effort. However, we still have hundreds of issues in our backlog, so more effort needs to be put into it.

The good news is that now we have some extra room to rework some game mechanics. Don’t expect anything very ambitious, but some more changes that are on the line with the fixes for the AI and the new government reforms we implemented for 1.34, fleshing out features of the game that haven’t received any update in a while. We will cover two of these topics today and next week.

And when is new content going to be shown? We will get started with that in January after the Team comes back from the Christmas Holidays. We’re very excited about it, but you will have to wait a bit more to take the first look at it. And with no further words to say, let's go with the first ideas we want to share with you!



Idea Group Additions and Rebalance

Hey everyone, here @PDX Big Boss ! We decided to add a few new idea groups to the game as well as a lot of new policies and new events, to accompany a general rebalance of the existing idea groups.

First things first, we wish to introduce 3 new idea groups:
  • Infrastructure Ideas for the Admin Category
  • Court Ideas for the Dip Category
  • Mercenary Ideas for the Mil Category
A few notes we should mention here! This by no means reflects which will be the released version of the changes. Lions introduced a very high bar of quality and our intention is - at the very least - to meet this bar. So please keep in mind that what you see here is far from finalized, in fact, this is hot code. Having said that, I would genuinely like to encourage you all to give feedback, especially on stuff you don’t like and help shape this beautiful game together. The intention behind these new groups is not to introduce a new powerful single-line meta, but rather to spruce up the game and maybe offer more options for the player, in the interest of making your games more fun and enjoyable. Enough with the boring stuff, onto the Ideas!

The goal behind Infrastructure ideas is to give you the ability to build up your nation, by granting you the tools to speed up construction, reduce its costs, autonomy levels, and more. Let’s take a look:

1.png

For the purpose of creating this new group, we chose to separate it from Economic Ideas, which now focus exclusively on the money-making aspect of the game, directly. More on that later, when we tackle existing idea groups.

image (73).png

Infrastructure Ideas offer great bonuses such as construction cost and time reduction, a merchant, autonomy decay, and development cost. Let’s take a look at the Diplomatic Policies for it:

2.png

3.png

Note: Years for Personal Union Integration: -10

And a quick peek at the Policy Combination of Infrastructure + any Military Idea Group except Aristo/Plutocratic/Horde/Theocratic:

4.png


Infrastructure and Aristocratic:
5.png


Infrastructure and Plutocratic:
6.png


Infrastructure and Horde:
7.png


Infrastructure and Divine:
8.png

Note: the prestige gain here is 0.5 per Development Point

Moving to the next set of new Ideas, the goal behind Court ideas is to introduce some internal flavor, maneuverability in regards to estate manipulation, and more. Let’s take a look:

9.png

We took the decision to make some room for the Prestige here, by moving it over from Religious ideas, more on that later!

10.png
Note: an idea we’ve had is to add a unique modifier here ‘max_privilege_slots = 1’ somewhere in this set

Court Ideas + any Admin idea group policy:

11.png


Court + any Mil idea group policy:

12.png

Note: hmmm this 0.5 Yearly Army Professionalism looks a bit too strong hmm…

Court and Aristocratic:
13.png


Court and Plutocratic:
14.png


Court and Horde:
15.png


Court and Divine:
16.png


Finally, let’s look into the new Mercenary Ideas. This one is a bit deeper of a rework because one of our plans is to accompany this new Idea Group with somewhat of a rework on how Mercenaries are distributed, so as to make them a tad bit more interesting at certain points during the game.

17.png


18.png

Mercenary Ideas + any Admin Group Policies:

19.png


Mercenary Ideas + any Dip Group Policies:

20.png


Moving on, we have made some tweaks to existing idea groups, let’s look into them:

Religious Ideas
  • Removed Stability Cost Modifier and replaced with Religious Unity
Humanist
  • Removed Religious Unity and replaced with Max. Tolerance of Heathens and Heretics
Administrative Ideas
  • Removed Merc Cost and replaced with Admin Advisor Cost
  • Removed Merc Maintenance and replaced with Max Promoted Cultures and Promote Culture Cost
  • Removed Interest and replaced with Religious' Stability Cost modifier
  • Removed Merc Manpower and replaced with States Governing Cost
Economic Ideas
  • Removed Construction Cost and replaced with -25% Monthly Gold Inflation and -25% Gold Depletion Chance reduction (This is a niche change, we would would welcome feedback on this)
  • Increased Interest to 1 instead of 0.5 due to 0.5 being removed from Admin Ideas (this will probably get nerfed and the other half will be reintroduced elsewhere)
  • Removed Monthly Autonomy and replaced with -25% Reduce Inflation Cost and -33% Autonomy Chance Cool down
  • Removed Development Cost and replaced with +10% Goods Produced Modifier
The goal of this rework is to breathe some new life into the Idea Groups that were introduced nearly 10 years ago. On top of that, many existing groups will potentially receive new modifiers such as Humanist’s Heretic Opinion of Us (name TBD) which would increase Heretics’ opinion of your nation, due to your humanist approach towards their people.

21.png


22.png


23.png
Note: most of these Improve Relations Modifiers are Placeholders for relations with own religion/culture group and similar modifiers.

We also aim at revisiting more existing idea groups in the Diplomatic and Military Groups as well as the Events from all idea groups. Furthermore, here’s a little event you may get if your ruler has poor diplomatic skills while Court Ideas are active:

24.png


25.png

Note: shameful display!

And that’s all for today! We’ll be glad to receive your feedback regarding these changes, as we really wanted to tackle them as early as possible with the community, so we have enough time to change/rebalance the different issues that could arise from discussing them with the community.

Next week there will be another Dev Diary focused on another aspect of the game that we are working on rebalancing: Unit Pips. See you then!
 

Attachments

  • 3.png
    3.png
    29,3 KB · Views: 0
  • 113Like
  • 48Love
  • 11
  • 5
  • 3
Reactions:
Why not tying the opinion of countries with a different religion to your tolerance of heretics and pagans ?
(+10 opinion* tolerance) would make a range of +30/-30 opinion from other countries.

It could be the same with tolerance of true faith but since it’s not capped you could end with +bazilion opinion, and a tolerant country of religion A might not be seen in good terms by a zealous country of religion A.
But there’s probably some magical mathematical formula to deal with this.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1Love
  • 1
Reactions:
Does it matter? If one is using Custom Ideas balance is always going to be out of whack because of possibility of super synergies. A real max is 2.
This. Plus, one of the bonuses lasts only as long as the Age of Discovery, so your window to even stack two in a normal game will be very small.
 
Infra ideas seem very strong and policies are great too.

I'd like to add my voice that econ looks to be nerfed too much. I struggle to see its use now without construction cost and dev cost reductions.
Yeah. I’d maybe bump the tax and production modifiers up from 10% to 20%. Maybe the goods produced modifier, too. That’d make it a strong group, but not too strong now that the dev cost is gone.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
This is a genuinely interesting suggestion, let's address it.
We could definitely take another look at advisor bonuses if time allows for it (looking at you, -10% stab cost guy) and try to bring them up a step, so all of them are as closely balanced as possible. It's very difficult to add new advisors due to the amount of portraits each one needs.
Awesome! It might be worth looking at the way Imperium Universalis reworked advisors— that was always my favorite mod when it came to them.
 
If you're revisiting older idea groups, what are the odds we'll see a buff to defensive ideas? I feel like they should be the key to smaller nations surviving against larger neighbors, but forts only slow them down and your armies are just too weak.
Amen. Maybe one of the ideas could remove the attrition cap for hostile armies on your territory? That’d be super fun.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
global_allowed_num_of_buildings modifier in idea group seems like a horrible idea. It's yet another game mechanic that makes owning a lot of low-populated provinces in the middle of nowhere more advantageous than owning important trade or culture centers.

Case #1: province 1/1/1 with Arctic climate. Normally, you have 1 building slot, and with this idea, you get 2 slots, meaning you can build workshop and manufactory in it. For example, Siberia can now become an industrial powerhouse.

Case #2: province 1/1/1 with other climate and non-farmlands terrain. Normally, you have 2 buildings slots, now you get 3, which means you can build manufactory, workshop, and one of marketplace, regimental camp, or shipyard. It waters down difference. So, by owning a lot of crappy lands country can hugely boost its force limits, while tall country owning "good" lands can struggle with it, given that you can only have one instance of each building in a province (cannot get +2 flat land limit, etc.), and you cannot get +50% force limit from Quantity anymore. Also, this makes trade companies in such crappy lands even more powerful, especially in areas with 5 or 6 provinces. You can make investments for both trade power and production efficiency, and then build workshop, manufactory, and marketplace, getting best from both worlds (as well as +0.5 for naval limit even for inland provinces, which is not affected by autonomy). No more choice between trade power and direct profit.
Yeah, the extra building slot does seem pretty insanely overpowered— one of the most overpowered ideas in any idea group. Maybe it could be a policy between Infrastructure and Trade or something like that? Only having to finish one set of ideas for it seems too easy.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
To be honest, I really don't care about portraits and ability alignment. I'd double the amount of ablities, group the images you have, and have all advisors that affect e.g. a religious modifier take a random image from the religious advisor portrait group. Art assets shouldn't be a roadblock to innovating the game.

... But that's just me.


Another thing that could be done to rework advisors is giving them all decisions like the Theologian does. It would be a cool place to add tradeoff ruler modifiers for more extreme policies that such an advisor would present.
I do kinda like having distinct portraits for each advisor, but absolutely seconded on the decisions idea. Sounds like a great (and relatively easy) way to give them more depth.
 
With your current ideas, Infrastructure would just completely invalidate economic. Economic is already in a middling spot ever since the nerf in 1.34, your new changes would make it even more niche, to the point I would only take it if I was an African horn gold nation.

Edit: Religious unity is also completely useless on the religious idea. The entire point of the idea is for you to convert things easier, religious unity is the exact opposite of that.
Yeah, I’d replace that with improved relations with tags of the same religion as a nice counterpoint to Humanist.
 
I definitely think economic ideas need to be heavily disincentivised for the AI to take with this update. AI loves them, but now Econ is ONLY useful for its policies, which makes it a much lesser idea set in terms of utility early on. No one is taking econ one or two anymore.
 
AHAHAHAHAHA

Sure, take an already S-tier idea set and BUFF it.
Yeah, the states governing cost on top of the existing governance cap increase is kinda a lot. Maybe switch it out for state maintenance, and also drop the CCR by 5%?
 
Religious' Stability Cost ?

Whats that ? I know what stability cost is - but will now religious tolerance be like stability - that you bump up sometimes ?
 
Case #1: province 1/1/1 with Arctic climate. Normally, you have 1 building slot, and with this idea, you get 2 slots, meaning you can build workshop and manufactory in it. For example, Siberia can now become an industrial powerhouse.
what about the conscription center + Soldier's households? 2 FL and 750 manpower from 3 dev province, with the right trade goods 1500 manpower. Late game economy is strong anyway but with this you can have huge armies too. 10 provinces like that and it's 20 FL 7500 manpower for the same GC as one 30 dev province.
 
I am very intrigued by this new Possible Condottieri bonus. How will it interact with the Mercenaries Available bonus? Or to get to the point: will it be possible to dispatch a full 40/40 stack as a Condottieri unit in the endgame?

Perhaps I've misinterpreted and it actually means being able to field 3 units of Condottieri, each at the maximum as dictated by the Mercenaries Available bonus?
 
Why not tying the opinion of countries with a different religion to your tolerance of heretics and pagans ?
(+10 opinion* tolerance) would make a range of +30/-30 opinion from other countries.

It could be the same with tolerance of true faith but since it’s not capped you could end with +bazilion opinion, and a tolerant country of religion A might not be seen in good terms by a zealous country of religion A.
But there’s probably some magical mathematical formula to deal with this.

I really like this idea, making the tolerance mechanic diplomatically meaningful would also give more reasons to increase it if you already have the "no penalty from heretic and heathen provinces" or the "-100% local religious unity contribution" modifiers.
 
I like the new idea groups, but there are 8 idea groups to choose from. This limit should be increased further, otherwise there would be no point in increasing the number of idea groups. In my opinion, every two idea groups chosen should unlock one idea group. This open group of ideas should be independent of the technology level. In short, the player who completes 8 idea groups can access 4 extra idea group slots.
 
  • 4Like
  • 2
  • 1Love
Reactions:
Thanks for the great work! Since you asked for some feedback, I hope you don't mind me providing it. For context, I have a little under 3,000 hours in the game, of which maybe 100 is in single player and 500 is test my mod/doing save edits for mp games. I run my own MP server dedicated specifically to EU4, and for the last year or two I have made an idea mod specifically tailored to MP (I can link if you'd like). I'm not super well versed on single player strategies beyond studying some budgemonk and the like, but on the whole I believe anything that works for MP can work for SP, but the reverse in not the same.

Ok, so cringe self-aggrandizement out of the way:

1) Idea Groups should be made without a clear MP meta. If we want more people playing, and more people playing together (which we do), then people really need more variety that is also viable. In the current ideas proposed for mp I asked and most my discord server would pick infrastructure near every time, and humanist only in the most niche of cases. I would seriously recommend getting specific feedback on individual idea sets to make them more competitive. Find what the community thinks is the current meta, then balance the ideas around that. I would caution against power creep however, but with recent content being what it is that may be unavoidable.

2) The Mercenary system needs reworking, or mercenary ideas shouldn't be in mil (my mod has it in dip). Relying on mercenaries in mid to late game in current mp is usually an act of desperation when you run out of all other resources, because you cannot micro or control mercenary stacks nearly as well as normal stacks, so reinforcing with them sucks, and there is a finite number of stacks that are hugely expensive. The old system, where you can get essentially infinite manpower with enough money, is also flawed. I think if we want mercenary ideas to be a mil group, then a middle ground would be perfect - use the old system where they are individual regiments, but cap the # of regiments you can have to be a set number based on tech. You can then change mercenary manpower to raise/lower this cap, along with special unit modifier raising this cap. Finally mercenary ideas can give mercenary units bonus, like any cawa, hussar, banner, etc. Mercenaries are professional fighting forces that were used to supplement the main army rather than purely called upon in times of great duress (though of course they were as well). This can also let nations like genoa and venice field armies of mercenaries as they did in history which are individually very powerful (because merc unit modifiers), but the rest of the army is weak levies (i.e. because venice ideas have no land mil quality). Currently I would say people would take mercenary ideas largely in spite of the merc modifiers taking up slots, not because of them, since just getting more FL/Manpower/quality overall would be better. Again, exceptions exist.

3) Army Professionalism.... I dunno for certain but if you are changing it, I would love it immensely if you change the code for slacken so we modders can mess with what the rewards are, and not just be saddled with the manpower spam mechanic (reduced though it is). I'd like to for instance give things like mp recovery speed, land maintenance reduction, morale penalty, etc. instead of a flat one-time manpower boost.

4) Vassal Play - Vassal play is strong in the very early game but suffers longterm in mp currently due to keeping ai vassals reduced your FL and especially your manpower, and in order to keep up with your rivals' eco you essentially have to cripple your vassals' eco, negating their ability to expand. The primary bonus of having vassals is that more realms in a smaller area is more efficient, supposedly netting more mana, FL, and manpower overall. This is mitigated in large part because you cannot control your vassals' troops. I would like three things to be done in this regard, though I admit I'm not entirely sure how to go about it. A) Make vassals set to follow your armies actually go to follow your army (of course finishing any high progress sieges they are on) and B) have influence ideas give all vassals a bonus similar to how marches get bonuses (if under % dev), but purely economic. D) Give a flat scaling modifier increasing manpower and money of the overlord per non-tributary subject without taking from the vassal (similar to the emperor mechanics) that increases based on age (to keep up with player dev efficiency). This could be tied to influence ideas, a privilege (though I would caution against privilege since it limits who can get it), or just something always active. Encouraging vassal play will make it more viable and also help keep multiplayer games alive as it will incentivize people to vassalize others rather than outright kill them and reduce player count.

5) Tall play - Tall play is viable to a certain extent, but eventually you'll find yourself lagging behind others in terms of manpower and forcelimit as you'll just run out of provinces to efficiently dev. Playing a free city the entirety of a multiplayer is not viable, which is a real shame. Expand infrastructure has gone a HUGE way to help with this, but I would like to see something done to make free city play viable and other non-colonial super-tall play more competitive in the late game, without being broken in the early to early mid game. Not really sure how to do this without missions, but it would be nice to see.

6) Please, please, PLEASE!!!! Add more formables to SEA. It doesn't need a lot, but very few people want to play in that region because you are either forming Siam or Malaysia, and that means you have to kill other players. That region is large enough that 3-5 players could fit there with varying degrees of comfort, but ultimately the only two real formables drive them to eat everything else. Philippines being a formable makes as much sense as Filipino tags forming Malaysia. Leviathan was a great concept that had... a lot of issues, so a quick revisit to the region would be nice.

7) I would humbly also request something be done with china/the mandate. The mandate is too crippling to players so nobody takes it in multiplayer because you don't even have to fight the owner of the mandate to beat them, you just sit 200 ships on their coastline and wait for devestation to ruin their nation through mandate. And once the nation with the mandate loses a war, it's next to impossible to regain mandate and comeback. Reworking the mandate debuffs/buffs would be a big boon. Ming tributaries most their neighbors anyway, and still always suffers crisis of the ming as the ai, so I do not believe a change here would cause game-breaking issues. I also would like to see, however, some sort of commandery/decentralization system for Ming at the start of the game. That is a lot of land, and a lot of dev, that could have multiple people seeded into it while still nominally being the "Ming". It would be fun to scheme and commit shenanigans to try to usurp the mandate before another player does... but also not immediately implode after taking the mandate.

Thank you again for the hard work, and for taking time to read the suggestions I've posted here. I hope it's not too long or presumptuous of me to do this!

-Zael
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I disapprove of it ALL, it somehow buffs the Ottomans and that is completely.... kidding. Love it! New ways to play and getting rid of merc maint. for admin is so awesome, I'll rebuy the game just for that change.
 
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Generally really enthusiastic, admin ideas are much improved as people only pick it for 25% CCR and the gov capacity modifier.

One thing I would personally like to see gone completely or at least taken out of ideas, policies etc is really terrible, useless things like state maintenance and fort upkeep modifiers. They really do nothing to justify paying any amount of points to get them. If I have 100 level 8 forts, sure 10% fort maintenance will save a decent chunk of change but by the stage, you have 100 level 8 forts, money is extremely unlikely to make a difference. As for state maintenance, the only time I pay attention to that is when I remove edicts to save valuable cash early game.

Not a criticism at all, dev diary sounds really promising, new ideas look great. One thing I and probably everyone else is hoping for though, if mercenary changes are coming with this new idea, please fix how terrible mercs are atm. Merc companies are amazing as an idea, honestly, love that you can hire whole companies compared to the old way, but please, hire a manpower pool or let us split them. At the very least allow mercs to be transported in cogs even if you don't have enough cogs to fit them all in :)
 
  • 2Haha
Reactions: