Europa Universalis IV - Development Diary 23rd of May 2023 - 1.35.3 known issues and the road to 1.35.4

[Rossarness]

Is there a plan tô create a auto missionary?
Maybe how autonomous siege or how diplomatic relations.

I will add it to QoL proposals but it´s not as trivial

Are generals going to get back their old sorting order (instead of the new change that displays siege first)?

I believe it is on our list of things to be fixed

I don’t think this will work because the event "Fall of the Mamluk Sultanate" needs a +90 warscore and other conditions. With a +90 warscore, the AI will ask for peace, preventing the event from firing. Probably the easiest way to fix this without major changes is to add a path only for the AI with easier conditions.

We want to avoid AI-only paths as they create a lot of tech debt in the future

 

[Monkhound_]

Any chance you'll be fixing two annoying bugs that either 1) makes a fleet wait indefinitely for additional transport ships that don't exist, and 2) breaks off transport completely halfway through transporting a split stack of units? These are very intrusive when you play naval empires

 

[wobarch]

While you at it, a small addition would be nice: In my Lucy Lucca run i stumbled over the mission

The Italian League

After I formed tuscany late (as I could not before because of the achievement), so no other country besides me was still left in italy. I could not press the mission button as I needed 2 allies with the capital in the italien region. (no one was left), so the rest of the mission path was locked. Would be great to have the small addition to complete the mission also if there are less then 2 other countries with their capital left in Italy. Thank you!


Also: That you can't sort for diplo cost in the peace deal anymore (its broken) is really frustrating, please fix this as well

 

[AngelRay]

anoher thing which was already asked: can we have tooltips which are fully readable? some tooltips have become so long it's impossible to have all the text in a full (height) column.

 

[FreeSoc]

So, just to be clear - it's now over a month after release, and yet it'll still be weeks at least until you fix all the things this DLC broke and/or didn't implement properly?

 

[NoXeno]

Some missions, MTTH events, reforms, and branching conditions are not work as intended. For instance, Russia can get some really weird result with all the serfdom, parliament, and mission reworded reform. Not just the patched "pick them all" serfdom and free peasant privileges. Some can soft lock you to get repeated event fire or not able to continue the mission tree.

 

[Stein14]

1. Issues with missing Expand Empire Casus Belli

Wait a minute, it's not my fault that I couldn't use the reason for war to bring Italy home to the Empire?

 

[AFKaiser]

We want to avoid AI-only paths as they create a lot of tech debt in the future

But forcing the AI to follow the non-Eyalet path is precisely an AI-only path: The AI will never "see" the advantages of staying longer in the war for the event, so instead of tweaking how AI behaves or the requirements of the event (for example eliminating the WS requirement, or the 3 years), you are only letting AI follow a path that leads to the same outcome in every playthrough: the egypt eyalet is never formed

 

[Cassilda]

I would also think that Ottoman decline should be influenced by the empire size, if it doesn't become as big as it was in history, the decadence mechanic for me it shouldn't trigger.

 

[MrMess85]

Could we fix colonization so that all of America isn't colonized by 1550?

Would it be crazy to reduce the number of new colonists ?

 

[AngelRay]

Is there a plan tô create a auto missionary?
Maybe how autonomous siege or how diplomatic relations.

This is so much needed for long games when they are idle and you want to use them, and do, and do, and do...

 

[nobodyinparticular]

Besides the ideas I think the most important change that Siam needs are its formation requirements. Tags like Lan Xang had an advantage over Ayutthaya by being able to form it earlier, so instead of adjusting the requirement for Ayutthaya, everyone gets punished and it was moved back to admin tech 20. No one likes late formables! Just make it tech 10 for everyone? Other parts of Asia have powerhouse formables like Mughals, Yuan, Qing, Japan. As for the ideas...

- Diplomatic reputation is somewhat redundant. You already get +2 from Theravada, +2 from Trading in Ivory and +2 from Influence ideas (which you're likely to pick)
- Frontload the morale and idea cost. They're good modifiers but not when you get them last.
- Bring back the cavalry CA, just make it 15% with +0.5 cavalry fire
- Bring back yearly absolutism, as the ambition

 

[SebasR]

I notice you didn't mention a major bug: Aragon firing the event "Sindicat Remença" while it is a Castillian UP. This makes you lose the UP instantly. This can be very frustrating.


I was playing a game with Castille. I decided to rush the Aragon union with the restored union CB from the Infantes disaster mission. I received ~75 AE, and 30 seconds later the event "Sindicat Remença" fire occurred, and I was forced to restore the union again. After i finish the war. My king died, breaking the UP because of the negative relations, and when I restored the union for the third time, and finally got a coalition with half of Europe.
It was really frustrating.

 

[IndigoRage]

Besides the ideas I think the most important change that Siam needs are its formation requirements. Tags like Lan Xang had an advantage over Ayutthaya by being able to form it earlier, so instead of adjusting the requirement for Ayutthaya, everyone gets punished and it was moved back to admin tech 20. No one likes late formables! Just make it tech 10 for everyone? Other parts of Asia have powerhouse formables like Mughals, Yuan, Qing, Japan. As for the ideas...

- Diplomatic reputation is somewhat redundant. You already get +2 from Theravada, +2 from Trading in Ivory and +2 from Influence ideas (which you're likely to pick)
- Frontload the morale and idea cost. They're good modifiers but not when you get them last.
- Bring back the cavalry CA, just make it 15% with +0.5 cavalry fire
- Bring back yearly absolutism, as the ambition

I don't understand the complaint w/r/t tech 20. At the time it was added Siam was as powerful as some endgame formables and was a big trendsetter for national ideas that give two bonuses per idea. I do understand the complaint about the nerfs, but it makes perfect sense to raise the formation req. if you want to buff them back to pre-nerf levels. I wouldn't complain if any formable in the game were pushed back to tech 20 (as long as it doesn't push it back to averaging being formed at a date later than they were irl), let alone one as powerful as Siam. The Siam formable represents a period in Thai history that is fairly late in the game's timeframe anyway.

(yes I know they've added much more powerful early formable tags than Siam over time, but that's just power creep and I don't personally like that it's been going that route))

 

[ValhallArchitect]

I understand that bugfix and polishing is no easy task. It requires time, and I wish to thank the team for their continuous efforts to improve this amazing game and communication with the community. However, knowing that I'll at least have to wait another week to FINALLY get access to a stable version of 1.35 is soul-crushing. Especially for someone who has followed most of the dev diaries and pre-ordered the game without hesitation. Should I have known I couldn't play any proper HRE, Castile or China campaign, I will not buy it. I will think about whether I will support the next dlc if the hotfix comes in such efficiency.

True. I understand hotfixes are necessary as not all bugs can be tracked down, obviously. But hotfixes which take a month (actually 2 if you coubt the 3 weeks already after release) to fix some features of the DLC is not right

It looks more and more like base DLC features are not properly beta tested. Sadly, it has become kind of a habit since a few patches.
Please don’t take the road of bad quality-serviced companies like EA (everyone remembers the failed releases of games like Star Wars Battlefront II, which went completely off and seriously damaged the reputation of the company in the long term)

If you have to release more DLC, you should make sure they are properly tested, and the necessary team is not disbanded right after launch to address issues.
Otherwise, if there is no adequate team, it’s time to stop releasing DLC and start developing the next version of the franchise.

 

[SebasR]

I don't understand the complaint w/r/t tech 20. At the time it was added Siam was as powerful as some endgame formables and was a big trendsetter for national ideas that give two bonuses per idea. I do understand the complaint about the nerfs, but it makes perfect sense to raise the formation req. if you want to buff them back to pre-nerf levels. I wouldn't complain if any formable in the game were pushed back to tech 20 (as long as it doesn't push it back to averaging being formed at a date later than they were irl), let alone one as powerful as Siam. The Siam formable represents a period in Thai history that is fairly late in the game's timeframe anyway.

(yes I know they've added much more powerful early formable tags than Siam over time, but that's just power creep and I don't personally like that it's been going that route))

This is my opinion, but I think the complaint comes mainly from the Multi-player community because it is a tag that is especially good for military purposes. It is not especially good for WC or other single-player metas. So you need to see the complaints from the MP perspective to understand them.


If you want to understand the MP perspective, you need to compare Siam with the countries surrounding it and what makes them special:
China has "free cores" in all of China (if you dont start as Ming) and a lot of good land for deving. Also, the China player may be a horde. You can play with the mandate of heaven if you want and you have good trade nodes.
Japan has infinite dev cost a lot of different ideas you can choose from (depending on which dymeo you pick). Also, it starts with one of the best religions for MP, Shinto. and a very safe position as an island nation.
India has insanely good trade goods, you can form good military tags like Nepal and you have some extra estates with some powerful privileges and government reforms.
Indonesia has powerful naval nations that can be pirates and one of the richest trade nodes in the game, with nice trade goods and your navy, you can defend yourself even if there are strong countries on the mainland.

So, what makes Siam special? You have normal estates, half of your provinces are grain and jungle with tropical and you start in one of the worst trade nodes in the game. The only thing that makes you special is the powerful cavalry ideas and that specific cavalry build you can make around them.
Finally, MP games rarely reach technology 20. So if you add that requirement, you are essentially banning the country from MP.


As a solution, I think Siam should definitely be a tech 10 formable. and it should have good cavalry ideas. One possible way to balance it is to reduce the cavalry ratio or add another twist.

 

[Nconstruct]

I'd like to see the peace deal option: When you fight a rival with the humlilat rival CB, and make another rival another main war target you should be able to show strength on both.

 

[Humlepung]

I haven't tested it myself, but I have heard several reports of AI Prussia spending all its sword mana on miltarization.

 

[Hurricane0708]

I would also think that Ottoman decline should be influenced by the empire size, if it doesn't become as big as it was in history, the decadence mechanic for me it shouldn't trigger.

It would really need a very low province count to be triggered then because I already see paths to counter it, aka release vassals as eyalets to be <X provinces and no decadence for the rest of the game while still being powerful. Generally speaking, I do not think it is a good idea, even though I see the logic behind it, to implement a size limit to decadence

 

[Cassilda]

It would really need a very low province count to be triggered then because I already see paths to counter it, aka release vassals as eyalets to be <X provinces and no decadence for the rest of the game while still being powerful. Generally speaking, I do not think it is a good idea, even though I see the logic behind it, to implement a size limit to decadence

In my opinion the major problem is that when the disaster triggers, if the player for some reason didn't manage to "expand enough" in the rise of the Ottomans period, gets stuck with an almost impossible objective (I couldn't imagine, for example, how to end the "Eyalets rebellion" if the necessary lands have not all been conquered). I'm sure competitive gamers can overcome that, but casual players or the IA I'm not sure and that would make the Ottomans stuck in and endless disaster. Of course after X years the disaster could end by itself or the condition can be make easier over time.