Europa Universalis IV - Development Diary 18th of January 2022

[DasHeat]

In the last patches we're following a design philosophy regarding CB's, as we want to enforce their specificity. This is for two reasons: to stop players using cheap CBs to take land, so now they have to choose wisely which CB and War Objective to pick for each war.

What about unjustified demands though? Isn't that the mechanic that controls how 'cheap' taking land is? Was increasing the cost of this considered instead? And doesn't this change also devalue any unjustified demands modifiers? And has the resulting devaluing of Influence ideas been taken into consideration with this change?

Although I don't agree, I take the point regarding the Force Tributary CB, but how is Force/Restoration of Union CB or Subjugation CB a 'cheap CB'?

I don't understand the purpose of these hard blocks for war demands. Isn't there a mechanic for taking things your CB isn't about taking? Unjustified demands.
I feel like this opens a slippery slope for things like no cb (can't take anything), conquest (can only take claims), reconquest, etc.

Surely the above is the end point of this design philosophy?

 

[TheCrookedYoung]

Can we PLEASE have colonial AI prioritise colonising their own colonial region before trying to colonise in other regions? Or have some kind of toggle for it in subject interactions?

 

[Mindel]

But there's only so much we can do without ripping up huge parts of army and navy AI, which unfortunately we won't likely ever do for EU4.

That makes me really sad

 

[Xetfield]

@Pavía and @Gnivom senpais, please do see my comment on Russian NIs in this thread

 

[Jarvin]

Thanks for telling us!
I would argue that there was actually a problem with the imbalance between regiment types. Players who know the meta get a significant advantage over AIs, and players who don't will arbitrarily have a different experience based on their uninformed choices.
You are right that this will benefit early-game Ottomans, which is a pity but not a huge one. Early-game Ottomans are supposed to be really strong.
As for complexity, I agree, but I think it is worth it.

I want to point out that unit pips are nearly completely irrelevant compared to things like AI being absolutely dogshit at picking army compositions. That's where experienced players are actually going to have an edge over AIs.

Teaching AIs how to make armies that are at least somewhat close to optimal would go a very long way in making them more competitive against the players(they don't need to be perfect, just.. not as insanely bad as they are currently)

Still, I really appreciate you guys even wanting to look into it.

 

[Maykievic]

Spoiler

View attachment 795819

Is that ottoman italy? I know they are supposed to be blobbing but i hope they won't be expanding to this extent every time. It really makes the main objective of the run to defeat them, whatever nation in the vicinity you choose, and this îs incredibly boring and frustrating în my opinion!

Still nice to see some variability, especially GB performing so well some times

 

[RMS Oceanic]

In the last patches we're following a design philosophy regarding CB's, as we want to enforce their specificity. This is for two reasons: to stop players using cheap CBs to take land, so now they have to choose wisely which CB and War Objective to pick for each war.

PU/Subjugation aren't cheap conquest CBs by any means, and they already had costs for throwing land in along with the primary goal, namely Unjustified Demands and full Aggressive Expansion. In the case of the Aztecs for example it's important to take some extra provinces while fighting your wars so you can acquire fresh targets, because if you only subjugate with your wars you'll quickly get truce locked. Having to choose between subjugation or conquest can seriously slow down gameplay in a region where time is of the essence, and tip it over the edge from challenging to frustrating.

Also philosophically, I just don't like hard blocks, especially when they didn't exist previously. It's the same with my objection to how Religious Zeal works, a hard block on conversion the player can do nothing about but wait for 30 years. In general I think "Yes, but..." is a better answer to "Can I do X?" than just "No." Deltarune of all games had a really good example of "Yes, but..." implementation recently. Discouraging double dipping with increased costs is perhaps something I can see.

 

[Abcerit]

I think this would be fine, but I'd go one step further and add japanese as well for a daimyo or emperor conquering it as there is a historical basis for that. (A major one in japanese history in fact)

Being a peasant, the highest Hideyoshi Toyotomi could rise was Regent, not shogun or emperor. In China, however, peasants became emperors all the time, Toyotomi could rule a country that way. He asked Korea for military access, Korea said no, so he invaded Korea as a precursor to invading China.

I don't think he intended to stay in Japan, but I think he would have had to pick between China or Japan quickly if he did. So maybe if The Japanese Emperor does conquer Japan, they could get an event that allows you to choose to either stay as Japan, or play as a Sinicized Japanese Primary culture China that's a personal union/tributary/March/ally to japan that can eventually break free? Or just have it be a regular endgame-tag formable.

Hideyoshi was planning to give some land in China to the nobles that came with him. Reasonably, many of the new nobles would be Japanese as he would need to reward those who helped him win, but the Japanese emperor would have no absolute rule over Toyotomi's China given their equal rank, which is why having them be allies or tributaries or personal unions at first that can eventually break away seem more realistic to me than a vassal.

Toyotomi and the Japanese nobles that remained in China would probably assimilate to some extent I would imagine, and given the cultural similarities it would probably be easier than it was for the nomads unless they insist on keeping themselves culturally separate from the Han people they ruled. If he didn't try to maintain power in Japan, than I also think he could probably assimilate pretty easily, assuming his dynasty holds steady. The ideas would probably be more naval-focussed than the land focussed Qing.

This would be very cool I would like this yes



Glad to see the devs add Tibetan cultures and Altaic/mongol for Yuan aswell!

 

[Vulkandrache]

In the last patches we're following a design philosophy regarding CB's, as we want to enforce their specificity. This is for two reasons: to stop players using cheap CBs to take land, so now they have to choose wisely which CB and War Objective to pick for each war.

CB's have been in decline for many patches now, years infact, with Exploration/Expansion finishers among the first victims.
The idea of "Having to choose" which cb to use is not very applicable considering you rarely have more than one CB on one nation
and on many you dont even have one.
Claim fabrication is still among the least entertaining things to do in this game and doing it every time you want to go to war
against someone is a chore at best, certainly past the first few years.
Even for nations with more extensive permaclaims that still hold true because especialy older trees expect ultra specific conquests
with zero variation allowed and no thought given to how the truce timer will work out.
The Ottoman missions are among the worst examples here. Absolutely horrendous to play out.

If you want CBs to feel special then dont just give strangling restrictions to the few that exist.
Make new ones. Many of them.
"State completion" CB.
"I want to take CoTs" CB.
"I conquer provinces in my religious group held by heathens" CB.

One example of an exiting but rare and powerful CB is "Border conflict", sometimes given to neighbors because of the Cosacks estate.


Finaly, if you decide to just go with the hardblock while adding nothing to compensate then i hope this will be modable.
I for one am close to just putting DV back at the start of Rel Ideas.

 

[Kacpur]

"- Force Tributary CB (along with other CB’s with a specific purpose, as Restoration
of Union and Subjugation) don’t allow taking of provinces any more."

Just a suggestion, but maybe it should allow reconquest of cores?

 

[Mindel]

In the last patches we're following a design philosophy regarding CB's, as we want to enforce their specificity. This is for two reasons: to stop players using cheap CBs to take land, so now they have to choose wisely which CB and War Objective to pick for each war.

Just to confirm: if you choose a CB which forbids taking land, then you will not be able to promise land to allies for joining?

(I want to catch this bug before it spawns)

 

[Romanix90]

Also u have another suggestion and it's about Colonial nations and other subjects.

In my opinion CN should be restricted to colonize its own colonial region. This means that for example colonial Brazil won't go to colonize let's say Florida. Also perhaps some extra options in creation menu when CN is created, like to choose capital or even historical flag for that CN.

As for other subjects (also CN) ability to move their capital like your own would be nice. Perhaps even to choose which ideas your subject should pick up. Also perhaps the ability to culture convert their main culture, basicaly to spread their culture in their land.

 

[grommile]

In my opinion CN should be restricted to colonize its own colonial region.

This should require the use of a subject interaction with a massive LD penalty attached to it.

(British refusal to allow further westward colonization into Native lands was one of the grievances underlying the American War of Independence.)

 

[currylambchop]

Please add option to merge the colonial nations in the same colonial region that you get when you annex a vassal.

 

[Romanix90]

This should require the use of a subject interaction with a massive LD penalty attached to it.

(British refusal to allow further westward colonization into Native lands was one of the grievances underlying the American War of Independence.)

Yeah why not. Everything should come at price.

 

[Wixelt]

That's disappointing.

Like, it really does feel like I'm being strongarmed into buying MoH if I want to have a fun game as anyone near China that isn't Ming.

(And so MoH joins Mare Nostrum, Rule Britannia, and Golden Century on the "not even at 90% off" list.)

What is the problem with those 3 DLCs?

 

[Nicolas-]

Did Austria need more nerfs? With the ae increase, it already became hard for austria to get its pu. And now it can't take the gold provinces anymore?

If you're going to do that, maybe at least have a game setting that adjusts ae or cbs or something.

 

[Romanix90]

Regarding these, what we've already done is expanding the Manchu decision to Sinicize to Vietnam and Korea. And after this comments, we think it's also a good idea to do it for Tibetan culture tags, and also when Yuan is formed so that will cover both Mongol and Altaic tags, and will be coherent with their mission trees).

Hell yeah. Just do it guys. It would be more than welcome.

 

[grommile]

What is the problem with those 3 DLCs?

MN: adds extra harassment mechanics of the "useless to the player, but insufferable in the hands of the AI" category.

RN: Anglicanism is exceptionalist pandering to Britaboos – Protestant with the divorces and bishops options is a perfectly cromulent representation of the CoE. Innovativeness is just another way to win harder, and the late-game stuff is pointless because for it to matter, I would have to deliberately not win the game before it comes online.

GC: was a dismal mess at release thanks to the hilariously badly designed religious expulsion mechanic, and nerfing the mechanic merely raises the value of the DLC to zero from its previous negative position. (Portugal and Castile->Spain are probably first and third respectively on the "boring Westeurope countries" list.)

 

[ArtFart]

Hmmm, Otto AI seems REALLY powerful judging by those screenshots. Could they be a bit more balanced please? I don't want to spend half my Spain game trying to protect Poland and Hungary from an Otto death stack while they wipe out all of east Africa.