• 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 20th of December 2022 - Unit Pips Rebalance

Hello and welcome to another EUIV DD!

Today we will be talking about the rebalance of the Unit Pips we're working on for the upcoming 1.35 update. This task has been led by our QA Team, which was reinforced throughout the year, and that has been key to the release of Lions of the North, as the new members that have joined the Team credit over 5,000 hours of gameplay on EUIV. But apart from testing the game, they are also involved in the game design process, a classic at Paradox, which usually relies on close cooperation between the different teams. Therefore, this is the proposal we'll be testing in the following weeks, taking also into account the feedback we receive in this DD, of course!



Hello everyone, I'm @Pintu , one of the Embedded QA’s working at Tinto.

I want to show you the rework we are doing on the Unit Pips of the different Techgroups, one of the Systems that saw very few changes since the Release of EU4. As we implemented changes to the Combat calculations in the 1.34 update, we think now it’s a good moment to address this rebalance.

First I want to quickly outline what the Unit Pips do in what parts of combat they matter, for those not as experienced in the game. In each combat phase, Strength Damage is dealt depending on the Offensive Damage Pips of the Units, while Morale Damage is dealt based on Offensive Damage and Offensive Morale Pips. Defending works the same way with the Defensive Pips of the Unit, but half of the Defensive Pips (rounded down) of the Backrow Units is added on top of that. That means that over the course of the game, the priority of pips shifts from having a strong Shock Phase to a strong Fire Phase with a focus on defensive Pips, especially for Infantry.

With this rebalance of Unit Pips we mainly want to focus on Infantry Units that are clear strong or weak outliers on their Tech level and the introduction of more choices in Artillery Units beyond the first Technologies when they become available. As always, these are by no means final numbers and will be under close observation during our Testing, apart from the feedback we are receiving in this DD, so there are good chances these will change until the release of the patch.

One of the swiftly explained changes is that related to Aboriginal and Polynesian Units: both got their total amount of pips reduced, to be in line with the American and African Unit Groups. These changes make them preserve some of their strengths, while not being an outlier over other units.

1AboriginalBefore.png
1AboriginalAfter.png
2PolynesianBefore.png
2PolynesianAfter.png

Now onwards to a change that influences other groups as well, which means they have to get adjusted together. The Anatolian group has a very big advantage with their early Units with their Offensive Moral Damage. We decided to tune that down a little in their Unit Options on technologies 5 and 9. Unfortunately, this affects Muslim Unit groups, which should not have an advantage over Anatolians at that point, which in turn affects Indian Units. That's why we had to tune them down as well.

The Anatolian Group will keep one of their big Spikes in Pips on Tech 12, which will let them be a threat to the groups around them. This is also partly because their Unit will stay around until Tech 18, significantly later than other groups get new units.

3AnatolianBefore.png
3AnatolianAfter.png
4IndianBefore.png
4IndianAfter.png

Speaking of the Muslims, let's take a look at the changes the group got independently from other groups. The Muslim Unit on Tech 23 suffered from both very poor Offensive and Defensive Fire Pips. They do have great Morale and Shock Pips to make up for it, but with the importance of Fire Phase in the later stages of the game, we decided to help them out a little by buffing their defensive Fire on the cost of their defensive Shock.

5MuslimBefore.png
5MuslimAfter.png

The Chinese Group has one outlier in their Unit selection, which is situated on Tech 19, with both 3 offensive and 3 defensive Fire Pips, in addition to 3 Offensive Morale. The one drawback with that Unit is that its successor becomes available only on Tech 25, later than most other groups. Since they have an edge with that against most of their neighboring groups, the solution for this is that they lose one offensive Morale.

6ChineseBefore.png
6ChineseAfter.png

On the same Techlevel, the Nomadic Group has a very solid, while not great, Infantry Unit, that would do with a small Nerf to fit their theme of military decline more.

7NomadBefore.png
7NomadAfter.png

The African Groups (this includes Central, East, and West African), got a small reshuffle of Pips, to make their Last Unit on Tech 30 an actual upgrade over the previous version.

8AfricanBefore.png
8AfricanAfter.png

Last but not least a small change to the High American Group, where their Unit from Tech 18 gets a small bump in Pips. Before this Unit had the same amount of total Pips as the previous unit level.

9HighAmericanBefore.png
9HighAmericanAfter.png

Let's now move on to the Changes to Artillery. These mainly focus on the Introduction of one new Alternative per Unit, which focuses more on a defensive style, where Artillery is used to push half of their defensive Pips towards the frontline while sacrificing their damage output with lower Offensive Fire and Morale Pips. There will also be a small Adjustment on Tech 13, with making one of the Options a defensive one.

10ArtyBefore.png
10ArtyAfterHalf1.png
10ArtyAfterHalf2.png

You may notice that for the new types of Artillery we've just named them the 'Defensive' version of each level. This is not definitive, as it's mainly a placeholder; so, we will accept suggestions for naming each of the unit types.

And this will conclude the Dev Diary for this week and this year. Just like the Idea Group rebalance of last week, we are very eager to read your feedback and suggestions on this topic to improve it as much as possible.

See you at the next DD, on January 10th!
 

Attachments

  • 1AboriginalAfter.png
    1AboriginalAfter.png
    236,6 KB · Views: 0
  • 2PolynesianBefore.png
    2PolynesianBefore.png
    178,6 KB · Views: 0
  • 10ArtyAfterHalf1.png
    10ArtyAfterHalf1.png
    245,3 KB · Views: 0
  • 10ArtyAfterHalf1.png
    10ArtyAfterHalf1.png
    245,3 KB · Views: 0
  • 60Like
  • 12
  • 9Love
  • 8
  • 1
Reactions:
Hello there everybody! Quick update: today there won't be a new Dev Diary, we will come back to them next Tuesday, January 17th.

I'll come back later today or maybe tomorrow to this DD, and reply to the comments, as this is something pending for a few weeks.

For those curious, the reason for these delays is basically the Christmas break, and now the catch-up phase after it; we decided to be extra sure about the quality of the new content to present before starting the new DD cycle (which will last a few months).
it better be something big or i will be




very sad :(
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I think it would be interesting to add more optional variations in infantry based on government type and an individual player's tatics, such as:

"Minutemen" or "Militiamen" to Republics that have higher defensive morale and defensive shock.

"Templars" or "Mujahideen" to Christian Theocracies and Cleric States giving offensive morale and offensive shock.

"Foot Guards" to Monarchies with a higher offensive morale and defensive shock.

"Grenadiers" to all governments with a higher offensive fire and offensive shock.

"Skirmishers" or "light infantry" to all governments with a higher offensive fire and offensive morale

Tbh I just really want to role play with Coldstream Guards, Fusilers or Grenadiers. (Gernadier regiments were equipped by almost every nation with gunpowder (i.e. Venice, Hesse, Prussia, Swiss, Portugal, Sweden, Ottomans, Austria, UK etc...).
 
  • 7Like
  • 1Love
  • 1
Reactions:
Hello there everybody! Quick update: today there won't be a new Dev Diary, we will come back to them next Tuesday, January 17th.

I'll come back later today or maybe tomorrow to this DD, and reply to the comments, as this is something pending for a few weeks.

For those curious, the reason for these delays is basically the Christmas break, and now the catch-up phase after it; we decided to be extra sure about the quality of the new content to present before starting the new DD cycle (which will last a few months).
Ah, gotcha! Do you guys have any thoughts on the discussion about terrain further affecting combat width that’s been going on in the comments? Maybe it’d be tricky to get the AI to understand it, but it’d make land warfare so much more interesting, and I’ll bet the AI would be better able to handle it now than it was when the feature was axed years ago.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I think it would be interesting to add more optional variations in infantry based on government type and an individual player's tatics, such as:

"Minutemen" or "Militiamen" to Republics that have higher defensive morale and defensive shock.

"Templars" or "Mujahideen" to Christian Theocracies and Cleric States giving offensive morale and offensive shock.

"Foot Guards" to Monarchies with a higher offensive morale and defensive shock.

"Grenadiers" to all governments with a higher offensive fire and offensive shock.

"Skirmishers" or "light infantry" to all governments with a higher offensive fire and offensive morale

Tbh I just really want to role play with Coldstream Guards, Fusilers or Grenadiers. (Gernadier regiments were equipped by almost every nation with gunpowder (i.e. Venice, Hesse, Prussia, Swiss, Portugal, Sweden, Ottomans, Austria, UK etc...).
I had a similar proposal to unlock Military Orders for Portugal like Order of Christ and Santiago and it would buff the generals and admirals that for the most part were involved in the India Armadas, with for example a Nobility Estate choice.

I'm always up for more role play choices, and different infantry choices would be great aswell.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Hello there! Thanks for your feedback during these weeks, we've gone through it, and we're currently working on changes according to it.

This is definitely a bug and not intentional. A quick review of the history of this change:

In 1.34 zombie regiments were removed. I spotted that this leads to 2:1 overruns not working in a lot of cases. The reason for this is that now regiments can retreat before 12 days have passed. And what happens, if all regiments retreat before day 12? This actually depends on the order of calculations. Does the overrun condition get checked first or the retreat condition. If you check the retreat condition first, the army will just retreat without getting stack wiped even though the 2:1 conditions are fulfilled. Therefore, I advised to be cautious about the order of checks, as this is a new problem due to the fix to zombie regiments.

Unfortunately there seems to be an error in the new implementation. While the idea was to check whether one has a factor of 2:1 and the whole enemy army is out of morale( and therefore has no reinforcements), somehow only the first row seems to be taken into account.

Therefore, this should be just a bug in the implementation, which can happen but should clearly be fixed as soon as possible.
I will give a more detailed explanation of the interaction between 2:1 overruns and zombie regiments, as there seems to be a lot of speculation regarding this.

One of the conditions for the 2:1 rule is that the average morale is zero. The crucial point is the definition of average morale here. I.e. over which set of units is the average actually taken.

Prior to 1.34 all units in combat where taken into account. They can be divided into 5 distinct subsets:
(i) Units in the front row
(ii) Units in the back row
(iii) Units in reserve
(iv) Units which already retreated from battle
(v) Units which were never deployed, as they started the battle with zero strength.

Note that Zombie regiments guaranteed that subset (iv) is always empty while 2:1 overruns are still possible.

Further note that one cannot damage regiments in subset (v). Therefore, they completely prevent overruns. This is a very old problem, but was a major issue in 1.33, as the AI learned to shift-consolidate. This led to subset (v) often containing regiments.

I talked to @Gnivom about removing (v) to fix the bug and I learned about the plan to remove zombie regiments. Therefore, I argued that (iv) also needs to be removed from the calculation. And further the order of checks suddenly becomes relevant, as described in an earlier post.

Therefore, only (i)-(iii) should remain.

According to quite a few posts here it seems that unfortunately (ii) and (iii) have also been removed and only (i) remains, which is problematic.
Thanks a lot for helping us identify this very specific problem issue!
I think its pretty evident that the issue regarding armies getting stackwiped is because of a bug and not because of an intentional design decision.

Cant speak for everyone obviously but I assume their frustration is that we are having a conversation about unit pips for the purpose of combat balance while a major bug that flattens the mechanic of combat had yet to even be acknowledged, let alone hotfixed.
And it isnt just ~multiplayer meta~, this bug trivializes single player experience as well

Not to say the work behind rebalancing pips is unappreciated (I like it), it would just be confidence inspiring to have led the diary with something like "we are aware of the issues regarding stackwipes and are working to hotfix"
Well, now we're working on fixing it. Having identified the very specific problem causing it, our QA team going to monitor that the fix works correctly, and that no further side issues appear (which will take some time, but it's going to be fixed in the 1.35 patch for sure).
All in all I'd wager this is bad change to the game (besides for me liking the nerf to Anatolian because I have unreasonable hatred to the Ottomans), what this change primarily does is widen the gap between Europe and rest of world. I understand tech groups exist to emulate trends within history, that being of European military might, along other things like decline of nomadic powers.

But tech groups are imo really bad way of emulate it, it does not matter how well you are doing as Asian power for example, whether that be up to tech Mughal Empire or Japanese empire, your army will simply be worse then Europeans for no fault of your own. Even if you go military ideas, even if your nation is drilled/built for war, even if you are same if not higher tech then Europeans, if its not unit pip tech it does not matter, you will be behind for no fault of your own.

Sacrificing Muslim tech group for sake of keeping gap between Anatolian and Muslim is so bizarre to me, Morocco already has hell of journey to go on, and now their gap with Western Castile/Aragon/Portugal is even wider?

Further defensive pips for artillery are more or less always better then offensive pips, so what is the point of adding defensive artillery? It's an automatic pick. If anything this is nerf to the AI who won't automatically pick defensive, and buff to players of certain skill/knowledge who will always know to take defensive artillery from now on.

I like the idea of tinkering with tech groups/unit pips, but this to me just seems like nerf to Polynesian/Aboriginal/Anatolian/Muslim/Indian/Chinese and Nomadic, and buff to High American and artillery.
The early fire pips of Anatolian, Muslim and Indian tech groups were meant to represent the earlier adoption of gunpowder by the armies of Ottomans, Safavids and Mughals (the so called "Gunpowder Empires") and lategame these tech groups fall behind compared to Western and Eastern by 2 and 1 pips respectively as they should. For cavalry, Western and Eastern lategame units has 21 and 20 pips respectively, compared to most of the other groups' 18 pips. Muslim and chinese groups fare a little better, having maximum value of 19. So the devs are keeping the lategame western edge while nerfing early game advantages other tech groups possessed, disregarding history when it doesn't suit Europe.

Also, Chinese tech group is one of the better ones barring Western/Eastern, they have 19 pip cavalry (most tech groups have 18) and their best infantry unlocks at tech 26 compared to others' tech 30.

Also why are the aboriginal and polynesian lategame pips so high, compared to technologically superior african/native american nations, anything goes I guess.
From @Pintu : The first time when Western units become clearly better (2 pips difference) than their European and Asian competitors is on Tech 28, which is available without the ahead-of-time penalty in 1775 (so at best this advantage is present for 60 years of the game, and that is only with taking it significantly ahead of time). They equalize their disadvantage around Tech 12-15 and start pulling ahead slightly on Tech 19, all while Unit Pips are less of a "king-maker" the more other different combat modifiers pour in.

Although that said, I share the concerns for North African Nations and their struggle against Iberian expansion. This is something we will think about addressing, as one of our priorities for 1.35 is to keep (and improve, if possible) a good balance between different countries and regions.
@Pintu I decided to have a go at naming these. Most of these cannons were developed in the 15th century, so I had be very liberal with coupling the name to the approximate time the tech level is reached. Sometimes the 'defense' cannon is just another name for something very similar to the 'offensive' cannon.

I also decided just having two choices at each artillery level is too boring for my taste, so I mixed it up slightly ;) For two levels I changed the amount of available choices. For mil level 10 I have three types to choose from, to represent the expansion of artillery use in the 15th century (and because ingame, this is the about level where I care most about the choice :) ). For level 25 I decided that this tech uniquely should keep a single option, since tech 25 is called 'Royal Mortar' I think it is fitting all cannons get upgraded to 'Royal Mortar' here.

My suggested list is:
7Houfnice
Large Cast Bronze Mortar
10Culverin
Falconet
Basilisk
13Small Cast Iron Cannon
Large Cast Iron Cannon
16Chambered Demi-cannon
Demi-culverin
18Leather Cannon
Three Pounder
20Swifel Cannon
Peterero
22Coehorn Mortar
Horse Artillery
25Royal Mortar
29Flying Battery
Grande Battery
Thanks a lot for this feedback, it's going to be quite useful for us!
What is the point of the defensive cannons? As implemented many are a false choice due to having an odd number of defensive pips and therefore having fewer effective pips overall, but even if that were corrected what do they actually add to gameplay? I don't see much added if anything at all.
As already pointed out by other people, giving a bit more diversity to the decisions of the players, even if it's not a game-breaking one.
 
  • 3
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
don't nurf Asian 19 pipe the group is weak already no need.
My suggestion is to add more unit up grades in between the current ones so that there is more short term mil advantages/disadvantages. so players can find more tech windows to plan around. this kind of longer term campaign planing make the game more rewarding
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
When is version 1.35 coming out, please?
Pavia said yesterday that we can expect at least a few months of DDs so I guess there is lots to be expected and we won't get date now
This year. :cool:

Now seriously speaking, we have already set the date for the update internally, but it's obviously too early to reveal it; you will know when we're at the end of the DD cycle, as usual.
 
  • 9Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
The first time when Western units become clearly better (2 pips difference) than their European and Asian competitors is on Tech 28, which is available without the ahead-of-time penalty in 1775 (so at best this advantage is present for 60 years of the game, and that is only with taking it significantly ahead of time). They equalize their disadvantage around Tech 12-15 and start pulling ahead slightly on Tech 19, all while Unit Pips are less of a "king-maker" the more other different combat modifiers pour in.
Western pips only being superior in the very late game is historical considering the British lost the Anglo-Mughal war (1686), first Anglo-Mysore war (1757), first Anglo-Maratha war (1775). There was no need to rebalance pips, it was a good system (except absurdly high Polinesian/Australian pips). What is needed is a rebalancing of cavalry pips/fire,shock values/combat abilities/cost so it becomes worthwhile to use cavalry for most nations. Please don't fix what wasn't broken.
 
  • 5Like
  • 3
Reactions:
where's next dev diary?
Where diary

Hello there everybody! Quick update: today there won't be a new Dev Diary, we will come back to them next Tuesday, January 17th.

I'll come back later today or maybe tomorrow to this DD, and reply to the comments, as this is something pending for a few weeks.

For those curious, the reason for these delays is basically the Christmas break, and now the catch-up phase after it; we decided to be extra sure about the quality of the new content to present before starting the new DD cycle (which will last a few months).
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Any plans to build a new mission tree for the Ottomans and Mamluks? Because let admit, they are the worst among Great Powers!!!!
laughs in Ming. but yes very much needed also Persians aztecs mayans and incans and probably with that mission trees are in no need of change. some older could be improved but being honest id be happy with just those
 
laughs in Ming. but yes very much needed also Persians aztecs mayans and incans and probably with that mission trees are in no need of change. some older could be improved but being honest id be happy with just those
Any plans to build a new mission tree for the Ottomans and Mamluks? Because let admit, they are the worst among Great Powers!!!!
Today we'll get the 1st dev diary for the next Immersion pack. It will either cover the Middle East or South (and Central) America.
 
  • 1
Reactions: