• 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 1st of February 2022

Hello everyone, and welcome to another EUIV Dev Diary! Today we’ll be talking about more changes we’ve been doing for the 1.33 ‘France’ patch, one new concept that we’ve implemented called ‘Script Debt’, and the workflow behind bugfixing. So let's get started with my colleague @Ogele talking about the balance changes!

Greetings everyone!

As you all are aware we have no precise, official “regional focus” for this patch unlike the other free patches such as 1.29 “Manchuria Update” or 1.27 “Poland Update”. While it means we haven’t created mission trees for a region, this at least allows us to concentrate on balancing existing content, adding Quality of Life changes and fine tuning some other areas of the world.

Starting with China, we received your feedback and implemented some changes which makes the unification of China a less tedious process for the non-horde Chinese tags. One of them is the addition of the following government reform for every Confucian Chinese which gets released by the Celestial Empire:

chinese_kingdom.png


One huge problem with the released countries in China was that they tend to create hugboxes around them which prevented them from actually unifying China. In order to prevent this all the Chinese Kingdoms have a -100 Opinion penalty for fellow Confucian countries. At the same time, they also gain access to the Unify China casus belli, which received a substantial buff:

unify_china_cb.png


We were experimenting with giving every Chinese tag cores over the whole region, but this resulted in really awkward situations where a province had cores of like 8 different tags + these cores were too much of a freebie. By gaining the cores through occupation the process of conquering China feels more natural.

Here are some of the nightly results:

image (3).png


image (4).png

A natural occurring Qing, which we wanted to see too, sadly did not happen yet. However, we are pleased to see that a unified China is now more likely to happen.

Even if it happens through means we did not expect…

image (2).png

Apparently, in this timeline there was a Bengali dynasty in China…

Other changes we introduced is the inability for the Celestial Empire AI to make countries their tributaries, which have their capital in China, as it felt very immersion breaking to us when the Celestial Emperor blocked themselves in such a fashion.

We also made a small change to Korea too:

1. The Gyeongbok Palace no longer gives tech cost reduction. Instead, it now has the following modifiers:

gyeongbok_palace.png


2 .Their national idea “The Hangeul Alphabet” now gives -10% Tech Cost instead of -5%

3. The estate privilege “Inwards Perfection” gives now the following penalties / benefits:

inwards_perfection.png


It also ensures that the Korean AI is a diplomat or an administrator unless another nation holds one of their cores. This way you have an AI Korea which actually plays tall instead of blobbing into Manchuria, which wasn’t really liked by the community.

While we’re at the estate privileges: all privileges, which have modifiers scaling with the Crownland owned by the estate, now exempt the estate from the “Seize Land” action. This change allows you to have a little more control over who you seize the Crownland + makes these estate privileges a little bit more useful. Also, the “Increased Levies' ' estate privilege has been slightly buffed, giving now 33% increased Manpower Modifier at 100% Crownland instead of 25%.

One final balance change I want to address are the “Expand Infrastructure” and “Centralize State” features from Leviathan. Their goals were to enhance playing tall. While the idea was neat, we felt like these two buttons didn’t have the punch needed to be worth the attention. The issue with “Expand Infrastructure” was the relation of governing cost and manufactory slots: manufactories are useful in low dev provinces as they give a flat bonus, but a governing cost increase means a province is more expensive to hold which is why you don’t waste it for a benefit which could be accomplished by holding one additional 3 dev province with a manufactory. So the times where you would use this button would be if you want a province to have something like a rampart, which is a very niche situation at best. Because of that we have decided to give “Expand Infrastructure” some more power, which makes their cost worthwhile:

expand_infrastructure.png

I want to point out that this is NOT the final version. We will take the Beta feedback into consideration for adjusting this feature.

Next point is the “Centralize State” button, which has one big issue: it competes with much more useful and global “Expand Administration” button from the government tab. To make “Centralize State” more viable, we have decided to change its identity a little bit by changing the governing cost from a flat reduction to a percentage reduction. We also added some other bonuses to the centralized state:

centralize_state.png


Here are a few other balance changes we have done for 1.33:
  • Winter Palace’s modifiers have been reworked as they didn’t feel right for Russia and the seat of Peter the Great. Now it gives at level 3 the following modifiers:
  • winter_palace.png
  • Tibetan (just like Vietnamese and Korean) can now sinicize their culture and adopt a culture of the Chinese culture group. It should be noted here: we are using the Manchu way of doing this as the engine is way too outdated for dynamic culture groups unfortunately.
  • Syncretic religions now give the bonuses of the monuments of the secondary faith. Example: Oirat which has Sunni as Syncretic religion will be able to benefit from the Hagia Sophia.
  • Feudal Theocracies have access to the Divine Ideas Group instead of the Aristocracy ideas.
  • Muslim subjects will no longer enact “Guaranteed Dhimmi Autonomy” if their Muslim overlord has religious ideas.
  • Roman Empire’s ideas have been buffed to bring them on par with the ideas of the HRE.
  • Selling Crownland now requires you to actually have the 10% to sell.
  • Manpower, Sailors and Forcelimit granted by colonies are reduced by 25%.
That was all from my side! I wish you a nice week, and we will see you in the next DD!

Alright, now @Pavía again in charge, into the workflow for this patch. When tackling 1.33 fixes, we obviously gave priority to bugs being reported after the 1.32.2 patch was released, and those that didn’t make the cut owing to not being implemented in time. In the Content Design Team we also addressed and discussed some balance changes we wanted to make for this patch, specifically for the Eastern Asia regions, as @Ogele has just pointed out. But we found that as the bugfixing process was going well, as the ‘Songhai’ patch had been much less troubling than the previous ‘Majapahit’ one, we had some development time at our disposal to go back, and try to fix even older script-related issues.

That is what we called ‘Script Debt’, following the ‘Tech Debt’ concept that was also addressed in older versions of EUIV (for 1.30 patch there were a lot of issues addressed this way, if you recall). So we focused for a few weeks on cleaning up all these older issues that for one or other reason hadn’t been solved yet, and trying to have as few remaining legacy problems from older versions as possible. We also cleaned and simplified some scripts that were a bit convoluted, something that we’ll continue doing in future versions when possible (because for the next patch we’ll be more focused on creating new content, as previously said).

What are the actual results of this work? So we've solved around 40 older script issues for this patch. And regarding all the bug fixes done, I’ll show you some pictures and metrics, as they may speak better of it than I:

Bugs.png

progress.png

Here you can see that we’ve solved over 400 reported bugs, reducing the total count by at least 100 bugs and issues for this patch alone, which puts the EUIV bug-count lower than any GSG game has been in the last decade, according to our metrics (yay!).

So, what can you expect from the team in the next months regarding this topic? Apart from developing new content, we’ll continue addressing Tech Debt, Script Debt, and QoL improvements; you can help us by posting this kind of problems in the Bug Reports subforum, as we keep a regular track of it. And if you have any suggestions for improving the state of the game that are not bugs, we will continue tracking the Suggestions subforum in that regard. Listening to the voices of players is important for the Tinto Team at this point of the development of EUIV, as we’re trying to polish the game as much as possible.

To finish, when can you expect the 1.33 patch to be released? Well, the good news is that we’re pushing it as an open beta this evening! We’ll keep it open for a couple weeks, and then we will release the full patch later in Q1, after the testing is done, and we’re sure that we’ve solved all the issues appearing in the open beta.

By the way, we noticed that we have an issue regarding the Linux version of the game that we’re already trying to fix, so those users should NOT opt-in into this open beta.

You’ll be able to take a look on the changelog along with the release of the open beta. See you, and we will be answering issues raised in this thread during the week!
 
  • 123Like
  • 43Love
  • 11
  • 3
Reactions:
One thing you might whant to look into is Ethopia turining sunni in the last patches when winning against adal in my last few games this happend 2 out of ten times, wich should be 0 out of ten. I do think this comes from a fast expansion and then sunni rebels take over, I might be wrong though, has someone else seen this?
And here I was thinking that my games were just cursed as hell haha
Sure, I take a look at it and see if there is something which makes Ethiopia more than happy to change its religion to Sunni.
Maybe Sunni becomes the dominant religion and the itinerant capital moved to a Sunni provinces which enables the decision Adopt Islam as the State Religion(trade_propagation_convert_to_islam)
 
  • 6
Reactions:
@Pavía

Imho ye have made the Centralize State button even trashier now.

The 10% State Maintenance and 0.1 prosperity progress are irrelevant in the greater scheme of things (tiny contributions to overall wealth).

I would see a -20 unit governing capacity cost as comparatively much more useful than -10%.
Like, how many 200 development [the development # at which the old and new mechanic would be comparable] states do you observe even in 1821.

Of course both new and old options are complete trash becasue the 100 Reform Progress cost is absurdly high.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
I think this one is pretty straight forward. There is always money lying around: There are national bank loans, burgher loans and you can take money in any war you enter. Mana is much rarer and more desirable.
Not always. I'm mainly thinking of Byzantium starts - which need an overhaul anyway now that we can't rely on fort sniping - who need to build up a force to deal with the Ottomans pronto, and need cash to do it.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Not always. I'm mainly thinking of Byzantium starts - which need an overhaul anyway now that we can't rely on fort sniping - who need to build up a force to deal with the Ottomans pronto, and need cash to do it.

I have previously never taken the money as Byzantium but that was mostly because the fort sniping (Thessaloniki for free, and Gallipoli with a naval barrage) was so reliable.

Now I dread the day when this patch comes out.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Fantastic work, Tinto team! And do some of these changes, regarding script debt and tech debt, help the game run better?

And as we're speaking of QoL improvements, I would like to reinstate my recommendation for making the "This information is hidden in multiplayer" optional (mainly in the war menu, regarding total army counts and casualties), in multiplayer games. This would radically make multiplayer games more fun. My friends and I talk about it all the time (we mostly do coop games). Please!

And as for improvements, I believe there is some thinking to have regarding transport ships. Both Imperator and CK3 managed the transport land troops over sea differently. Transport ships seems like a waste. I discussed it here: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...ps-make-other-ships-transport-troops.1156081/
And I am sure you can find other ideas to make it more interesting to play.

Cheers!
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
What are the devs opinions on some mission claims going against good gameplay to extreme extents?

Scotland for instance has a starting mission to conquer 2 provinces from England and as a reward gets claims on 2 more. Obviously, this isn't a situation that should ever happen, as Scotland has to go into debt and fight a huge first war with a stronger England and taking just 2 provinces after all that trouble just to get claims on 2 more is horribly sub optimal.
 
Last edited:
As a general question since more explicit and implicit development cost reductions are being added with these changes: is there any concern about development cost being too cheap now overall? In my recent EU4 games, I've been able to easily double my average province development as most great powers and OPMs (especially free cities) are still getting to 30+ or 40+ development relatively early in the game.

It seems that development cost went from being relatively low with few sources of cost reduction when it was introduced to being far too cheap now thanks to myriad, often passively obtained sources of cost reduction. To my eye, the obvious solution is increasing the base cost for developing provinces and ensuring that "tall" countries have more and greater sources of cost reduction than "wide" countries.
Increased dev costs would hurt tall players, like me.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
with all the changes in east asia, maybe a meiji restoration type event could be added for japan? i could see it being a disaster or tie in with shinto incidents if a european great power has a certain amount of trade power in asia? i really want to be able to play as japan under the house of yamato. that being said this is looking like a great update and it seems like china will actually be fun to play in now! im super excited
 
  • 2Love
  • 1
Reactions:
Thank you for your input on the lubeck issue. While I think more should be done, like the trade republic mecanics being outdated. I know there is only so much I should ask that is out of scope for the next patch. Which is why I specificly targeted that mission and nothing else.
Sure I would love The Hansa to be getting more love in general, it is my fav nation/ group of city to play in CK2 (hopefully CK3 one day) and I love playing them in eu4.

Thank you for your time and I have high hope for my grevance being resolved!
 
Increased dev costs would hurt tall players, like me.
Unless colonization counts as playing wide, I also think of myself as a tall player. The idea was to hurt all nations, but to hurt wide nations more.

Development cost modifiers are percentages, so their effects are amplified proportionate to any increase in base development cost. The changes to AI management of estates and advisors in this patch will probably exacerbate the long-term reduction of effective development cost. That will actually decrease the relative power of tall nations by making it easy for wide nations to keep pace with them in average province development.

In the last patch, the only countries that seemed consistently able to increase provincial development were those that consistently had monarch points in excess of the cap: mine, and rich OPMs that didn't spend monarch points on expansion. Since developing provinces is usually just a sink for monarch points with no other use, it makes sense to me to make it relatively expensive except for countries that go out of their way to accumulate development cost reductions. (Developing for institutions might be the lone exception here, but since I also think institutions spread too quickly, I'll admit I see that as a positive effect.)
 
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Looks great, I agree with what some others have said though - negative opinion of culture would be a better modifier for the Chinese kingdoms. I would assume that otherwise, they're likely to become hostile to Korea and try to conquer it (something which seems borne out by the nightlies) when ideally we'd want them to make Korea a tributary.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
You should set a "price" for pressing the infrastructure expansion button, because in this form it will have to be poked with each increase in the development of the province for an additional discount.
At least 5 administrative points or cooldown 1 year.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Has there been a fix to the regnal numbers for England, Poland, and Hungary? Specifically, getting an Edward I rather than an Edward IV in England, Casimir Jagiellon instead of Casimir IV for Poland, and Ladislaus Posthumous rather than Ladislaus V Posthumous for Hungary.

I'd also like to see the Netherlands form (and be able to colonize) more often.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Will there be a mission tree for the chinese successor states like the Shun? It would be great if there was some missions to further insentivize you both during and after the unification wars! I also think Ming should have a better mission tree even if it mostly focuses on internal affairs and then the other Chinese tags could gain it as a reward for seizing the Mandate.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
* When the tengri religion chooses a secondary religion, it loses 25% of its cavalry rate. This religion alone is not enough. The apparently weakest of all the pagan religions. I'm very curious what you will do about it. I'm sorry that playing muslim horde or buddhist horde is more attractive to me than playing tengri. Tengri is not attractive.

* The piety bar of Muslims is in constant motion. It's ridiculous that it's +100 when it's -100 with events that happened 1 year later. There must be a religion under player control. To put it simply, waging war should not affect the level of piety.

* It is extremely annoying that there are conditions for using some special units. Numerical limitations should be removed as before. Estates shouldn't decide how much of it we hire. ( Rajputs, Cossacks etc )

* The effect of trading companies on the overall autonomy of the country has an extremely negative effect on gaining reform points. This situation is an unbearable ordeal, especially in economically weak regions, which has a negative impact on expansion. In my opinion, management reform points are very effective in gameplay.

* Steppe nomads lag far behind other goverment in estates. As technology advances, monarchy points earned from raze fall further. At least the privileges of tribal estates could have been a little more enriched.

* While the tribal federations reached the steppe nomads level with the CoC expansion pack. With the expansion packs that came later, tribal federations were officially paralyzed. restore them. (Give back cavalry ratio).

* Clumping in some idea groups should be avoided. For example, the admin idea is more like a mercenary idea. The economic idea should affect the building construction times. The development level of the regions should also affect the building construction time. The aristocratic idea lags behind its counterparts in other forms of government.

* Ramparts, Impressment offices, State house, Soldier's households should be removed from factory status. It is obvious that these are not factories.
 
  • 6
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I have previously never taken the money as Byzantium but that was mostly because the fort sniping (Thessaloniki for free, and Gallipoli with a naval barrage) was so reliable.

Now I dread the day when this patch comes out.
I'm holding out hope that the AI will think Byzantium is so weak that they don't bother with maintaining their forts. We'll see, though.
 
  • 5Haha
Reactions: