• 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 24th of January 2023

Merhaba ve hoşgeldin!

I am excited to showcase the new content for the Ottomans. But before we get to that, I want to comment on some lessons we have learned from the development process of Lions of the North, even if we are quite happy with the final result and its release state:
  • Branching missions are like seasoning: a few of them can add some interesting paths to your country. Too much and they ruin the mission tree as they are clunky to use, generate walls of text and are in general not pretty to look at.
    They are also prone to script-related bugs and are too painful to maintain. Because of that, we will not have any case akin to the Teutonic Order in the future where half of the mission tree is covered in branching missions.
  • Customizable government reforms like the ones of Livonia were a fun experiment, but from a script perspective a nightmare to create. It also requires the player to have Wikipedia open in order to get the government reform they desire, which is not optimal.
    We liked the idea that you can customize your government reform in such a fashion, but for the future, we will instead utilize the different government tiers instead of having 15 different Tier 1 reforms for a single country.
  • The new generic government reforms and tiers were exceptionally well received. Even though some reforms are still standing out as the most optimal choice, we like the diversity we see from the player base in their choice of government reforms.
    For 1.35, we want to expand this aspect of the game a bit further.
  • Too many “starting points” of the mission tree can be quite overwhelming for the player - especially if they are far down. While this is inevitable to happen due to the rigid structure of mission trees (and a whole new redesign of how mission trees are built would be like opening Pandora’s Box), we try to at least keep the amount of starting points to a minimum.
  • The focus of previous Immersion Packs was too much on mission trees alone. While mission trees are highly popular, we think that we were investing too much time and focus on the mission tree part of a country and neglecting other parts of the gameplay experience. In 1.35, we still make sure to have interesting mission trees for the countries in focus which encourage unique playstyles, but we will also diversify from this part of the content and expand other parts of the country such as tag unique government reforms, flavor events, and even mechanics.
  • Finally, mission trees and the content from Lions of the North make the content outside of the region of focus feel very outdated - even if the region’s specific update was not that long ago. The new DLC and the 1.35 update aim to change this and we try to go beyond our scope to expand the countries and regions which are not the focus of the former DLC.
With that being said, let us dive into the content for one of the most anticipated countries in EU4: the Ottoman Empire.

No country in EU4 splits the community like the Ottomans. Some say they are too easy to beat and don’t have this “final boss feeling” they desire from the game. Others claim that the Ottomans are absurdly overpowered and ruining the fun of the game.

But everyone can agree on one thing about them: despite its number of flavor events, unique mechanics and even unique special units, the Ottomans feel rather bland compared to all the other major powers of EU4, as it’s been a while since the last update on their content. 1.35 will change this.

Starting with the most obvious addition, the Ottoman mission tree:
Ottoman Mission Tree.png

Be aware that all the content you see here is still very much work in progress. Nothing here is final.

EU4 starts one day after the Ottoman victory in the battle of Varna. From there onwards, they rose to become one of the most prominent great powers that shaped the world during the game's time frame. As you start your campaign, you will be greeted with the following event:
tur_events.1.png

Not long after you will get another event which steers you to a path of greatness:
tur_events.2.png

Hiring Urban allows you to complete the mission “The Guns of Urban”:
urban.png
Note: As you get these artillery units before tech 7 they will not be able to do any damage. So take good care of them. Of course, there is also an alternative requirement to this mission if you do not hire Urban.

With these two events and their respective missions completed, the “City of World’s Desire” will be your next target:
tur_events.3.png

From there on your missions will branch into five different directions.
The most left ones are about your push into Europe and claiming the true Roman title with “A True Roman Empire”:
tur_events.4.png

tur_events.5.png

devleti_rum.png
You might have noticed that the event was mentioning “Eyalets”. They are part of the new mechanics added for the Ottomans, but more to it later.

The second mission row from the left is about the Ottoman consolidation of the Balkans and the conquest of North Africa. A highlight of this row is the access to a new naval doctrine for the Ottomans if you have any subject nation in the Maghreb region:
maghrebi_corsairs.png

The middle row concerns itself with the development of Constantinople as the jewel of your empire, the conquest of the Mamluks, and your push into African land.

For this part, I am returning to the previously mentioned eyalets. With the Ottoman Government, you are able to hold a new subject type called “Eyalet”. While historically, they were like provinces to the Ottoman government, I took the creative liberty to design them as a special subject type that does not take any diplomatic relations and governs the land for you.

As you go on your path of conquest, the game will trigger events for you where you can release an eyalet as one of your subjects:
turn_events.6.png

eyalet.png
Note: all of these events have an option where you can decline the creation of an eyalet. You are not forced to have a single eyalet during your whole campaign.

Eyalets are not called into your wars automatically - be it from the offensive or defensive side. Instead, you have to call them by using favors (or an opinion hit if you do not have favors unlocked due to a missing DLC). Unlike other subject types, you can have favors with your subjects. It costs 20 favors to call them into an offensive war, but only 10 when you are in a defensive war.
eyalet_cta.png

eyalet_cta_dip.png

Before you can integrate an eyalet you need to reign in it first:
eyalet_reign.png

eyalet_reign_diplo.png

You might now wonder why you would want to have eyalets around instead of just coring the conquered provinces yourself. The answer to this question are the passive benefits you gain from eyalets. Not only do they pay you vassal tax, but also provide you with 20% of their manpower and sailor pool as well as force limit. They are designed to give roughly the same amount of manpower and force limit as if you would own the provinces for yourself.

While there are roughly 8 pre-defined and scripted Eyalets you can create from events, you are still able to make your own eyalets through a special casus belli which you can fabricate in neighboring countries:
justify_invasion.png

eyalet_po.png

eyalet_wal.png
Note: eyalets you create through the fabricated CB will not have a unique Eyalet name. But other than that they act exactly like normal eyalets.

With that excursion out of the way, let us return to the war with the Mamluks. The mission “Defeat the Mamluks” will require you to conquer 6 provinces of the Mashriq part of the Mamluks:
mamluk_mission.png

mamluk_cb.png

After winning the siege of the capital of the Mamluks, the following event fires:
tur_events.6.png

And for the Mamluks:
tur_events.7.png

After holding their capital for three years, you get the following event:
tur_events.8.png
egyptian_eyalet.png


Your new Egyptian eyalet will not be as efficient as other eyalets though due to their Mamluk administration. With the mission “The Fate of the Mamluks” you can remove this modifier from your subject.

The fourth row is about the religious path of your country. As you seize Egypt for yourself, you will also seize the Caliphate which is housed there, as well. As such, the branching missions are about going on a path of legalism or a path of mysticism. No matter which path you choose, either ending of the branching missions will be required for the “Second Islamic Golden Age”. If you manage to Unify Islam you will be able to complete this mission and gain a reward that is not only useful to you, but to every remaining Muslim country (those who were lucky enough to not hold any of the important sites).
tur_events.9.png

Finally, the last row of the tree shall be a motivation to push into Persia and secure the ancient silk road. A highlight here is the reward from the mission “Imperial Fabrics”:
tur_events.10.png

As the finisher of the mission tree, you get a permanent +5% Administrative Efficiency from the mission “Pax Ottomana”. Its requirements are a bit more challenging, but they play very much into the gameplay loop of the Ottomans.
pax_ottomana.png


That was it for the mission tree, but we are not done yet with the content for the Ottomans. With the DLC, the Ottomans gain access to two new features (next to the previously mentioned Eyalets): the Janissary Estate and Decadence.

Starting with the Janissaries:
janissaries_estate.png

The icon is a placeholder. Their unique icon is a work in progress.

The Janissary estate is one you will love in the early game and learn to dislike in the later phases of the game. Their initial “privileges” are more of a set of edicts you can give to them. Here is the full list of them:
good_privileges.png
good_privileges.png
Keep in mind that none of these numbers are final. For example: the 10% Discipline for the Janissaries here are definitely on the chopping block when we come to the polishing and balancing phase of the development process.

These privileges are designed to be very powerful. However, they come at a price later on: the Janissaries themselves want their own privileges and can turn these edicts into a negative version of it or demand new privileges entirely:
tur_events.11.png

tur_events.12.png
Refusing to give privileges will result in Janissary revolts which are more dangerous than normal rebels. As such, refusing them to grant these privileges can lead to your country breaking to the Janissaries.

Of course a new estate also means new agendas. The Janissaries have their own set of agendas which are inspired by the Rajput or Maratha's agendas:
agenda_event.png

Note: with 1.35 you will be able to choose the agenda from up to 6 estates present in your country.

Now we come to a different part of the Ottomans: the Decadence mechanic:

decadence_bar.png

Note: the UI here is very much a work in progress.

A big wish from the player base was that big empires have a way to break apart. As the Ottomans are the Number 1 subject of contention, I have decided to create a prototype of internal cohesion for the Ottomans first. Depending on how well it is received and how the game plays out with it, it might be expanded in the future.

Now, what exactly does the funny bar do? Decadence is basically a new type of measurement to get an idea of how cohesive and stable your empire is. You gain decadence from negative stability, from being bankrupt, from negative legitimacy, from Corruption, from being over Governing Capacity, from losing a war, and from a pulse event which triggers if you have over 100 Overextension.

Positive legitimacy and stability on the other hand reduce decadence, but to a slower degree.
At 100 Decadence you have to live with the following modifiers:
decadence.png

Note: these numbers are NOT final.

Historically, the power of the Ottoman Empire began to wane around 1600, its swan song being the siege of Vienna in 1683, followed by a slow decline until the Victorian period. However, for the sake of gameplay and the ability to be able to break down the Ottomans later on, they have received a set of special disasters which get unlocked when they reach 100 Decadence:
internal_power_struggle.png

disaster_event.png

disasters.png

While most players (and the AI without player intervention most of the time) will avoid the disasters altogether, those who seek challenge and pain can trigger the Decadence disaster on purpose in order to unlock the missions which are about handling the many challenges of your empire.
disaster_missions.png

During the Internal Power Struggle disaster, you have four disasters to deal with (or five if you are at the Age of Revolutions, the fifth one would be the normal Revolution disaster itself): “Janissary Coup”, “Eyalet Rebellion”, “Pasha Decadence” and “Plot of the Harem”.

To give a quick rundown of the disasters and their themes: the Eyalet Rebellion is, as the name suggests, about your Eyalets becoming rebellious against their overlord. This is especially the case for your Egyptian, Andalusian and Persian eyalet, which are of the opinion that their distance from Constantinople gives them every right to break away from you.
eyalet_disaster.png
eyalet_disaster_events.png


Pasha Decadence is the disaster that is the most straightforward: your provinces are getting decadent and refuse to pay you and you eliminate their rebellions. Especially the Balkans will try to break away from you.
pasha_disaster.png
pasha_disaster_events.png


Plot of the Harem is a bit trickier as this disaster is about the internal power struggle between the Harem and the Sultan. Unlike the other disasters, this one is on an internal level.
plot_of_the_harem.png
plot_of_the_harem_events.png


Finally, the last disaster which is by far the most impactful one: the Janissary Coup. The original disaster has received quite the overhaul as it is now part of the disaster set you have with the Decadence.
janissary_coup.png

The Janissary Coup will immediately add three new privileges to your estate. This means you will have up to 9 privileges active for the Janissaries eventually.
With the mission “Handle the Janissaries” you unlock two different ways of overcoming this disaster.
disaster_decisions.png


You either negotiate with the Janissaries and revoke one of their privileges or you bring the fight to them and defeat them in combat. At this point I should mention that the Janissaries are more dangerous than normal rebels and have significantly more morale than your troops. Additionally, they spawn with artillery rows which means they are actually potent rebels.

Because of their strength, I have decided that you should be able to spawn the rebels on command with the “Face the Janissaries” decision instead of forcing you to engage them through a random event.
janissary_event.png
Right now, the number of rebels you get is inflated. It will be tuned down in the coming weeks.

If you finish the disaster by slaughtering them to the last man then you can complete the mission “Mansure Army” and you get the following event:
mansure_army.png
Alternatively, you get the following mission if you complete the disaster by revoking all of the privileges:
janissary_compromise.png

After completing all the disaster-related missions, the “Internal Power Struggle” disaster will end and you get the following rewards for all the pain you had to deal with:
end_of_internal_struggle_event.png
Note: modifiers are currently mirroring the normal Ottoman Government. The main feature of this reform is the lack of Decadence.

And you gain the following reward from the mission:
end_of_internal_struggle_mission.png


Now let us take a look at the last bit of Ottoman content: events and reforms. First thing first: the Devshirme System has been moved from being a decision to become its very own reform in Tier 2:
devshirme_system.png
Note: the influence color should be yellow.

With this government reform you unlock the following mechanics:
devshirme_buttons.png


And yes, you see it right. The three-button reforms are back as we want to give the nations in our scope features and mechanics which prevail for the country long after you are done with your mission tree already.

The tier 3 reform:
provincial_government_system.png

And a few flavor events which you will encounter during your campaign:
tur_events.13.png

tur_events.14.png

tur_events.15.png

tur_events.16.png

tur_events.17.png

millet_system.png

tur_events.18.png

tur_events.19.png

tur_events.20.png

At last, some quick notes about the other states in Anatolia. Due to how Decadence works, I have decided to add a unique government reform for Rûm which does not have the Decadence mechanic.
sultanate_of_rum.png


Turkish minor states now also start with the Beylik government reform:
beylik.png


And a unique naval doctrine for all Turkish nations:
naval_doctrine.png


That was it for today. I thank you all for your attention! Next week we will return to Far East Asia with @PDX Big Boss as we take a closer look at the content for Japan!

image__1_.png
 

Attachments

  • end_harem_disaster.png
    end_harem_disaster.png
    121,5 KB · Views: 0
  • 110Love
  • 86Like
  • 14
  • 9
  • 6Haha
  • 3
Reactions:
The Janissary estate is one you will love in the early game and learn to dislike in the later phases of the game. Their initial “privileges” are more of a set of edicts you can give to them. Here is the full list of them:

(...)​

These privileges are designed to be very powerful. However, they come at a price later on: the Janissaries themselves want their own privileges and can turn these edicts into a negative version of it or demand new privileges entirely:

Thats something I hope gets changed. The Janissary are a modern standing army. They are like the roman army of the 15. century.
While historically the Janissary where a big problem for the Ottoman, they were also the closest to a modernized army.

The fact that you are forced to abolish a modern army to prevent corruption and destability seems kind of counterproductive. Shouldn't there be reforms to change the Janissary system and modernize it even more?
For example allowing muslim janissary, reducing their political power etc. This can happen at the cost of revolts, higher upkeep, increased unrest or even a result of the Janissary Disaster.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
The "Turkish threat advances" event should lead to the creation of a mega alliance against the Ottomans, the alliance could use the same mechanics as the Religious league alliances, all Christian countries with a capital in Europe could choose to join the alliance or not and the leader would get a special casus belli against the Ottomans.
It seems really strange that the game has no real equivalent to the Holy League, even before the Siege of Vienna Europeans didn't just stand there and watch the Ottomans advance in Europe so if Vienna falls there should be a pretty massive reaction from most Europeans countries, it would also create a proper "boss" for the Ottomans.
 
  • 11
  • 5Like
Reactions:
Is decadence going to be something you plan to apply to large empires in general, or will this be restricted to only a few select nations?



What I don't like about this decadence mechanic in its current form is that it brings nothing new to the table.

By which I mean this: all of the things which increase it, such as negative stab, low legitimacy, bankruptcy, corruption, etc. are things that you would want to prevent anyway, and in any case are not any harder to prevent as a great power than they are as a small nation.

So in effect all that decadence does is dole out additional punishment for letting known bad things run unchecked. But that's not any more likely to cause big empires to fall than they were before. Only governing capacity has anything to do with size, but the penalties for going over are already quite severe on their own and in any case, everyone, player and AI, is careful about managing GC and I've never seen any country brought down by it alone.







I think a more interesting implementation for decadence would be something like over-expenditure on various things which would ordinarily be desirable for nations, but grow to absurd degrees for huge nations.

For instance, if military expenses for your nation in peacetime exceed say 300 ducats/month and at the same time over 80% of your income, then this might raise decadence in the sense that your society is under-prioritizing its domestic needs in favor of military adventures abroad and literally spending vast fortunes to do so.

Or say spending over 40 ducats/month on your court advisors should similarly raise decadence. Your court favorites are essentially being paid many times the GDP of a small nation. How would the general populace react to this kind of spending?

Another possibility would be having ultra-developed core provinces in one part of your nation while at the same time having very low-development cores. This might generate decadence resulting from the tensions caused by massive wealth inequalities between the citizens of your empire. This one could potentially trip up large nations a lot, as large and small nations both generate monarch points at roughly the same rate, but large nations have more provinces.

In short, I think the decadence mechanic should have to do with decadence: luxuries available only to the super-powerful which become so lavish that they corrupt the society. And given that, in an ordinary game, you might want to spend so much on the military or on fancy advisors, this kind of mechanic would add a new constraint to huge powers different from what existed before, and not faced by smaller nations (who don't have this kind of money).

The idea is that you can flex your huge piles of money and influence as a great power, but if you flex it too much in the wrong way, then you incur decadence. It's a failure to live in moderation. Too much of a good thing is no longer good.






Oh, and one more simple thing which would help big empires fall: scale down the effects of revanchism once you start to grow past a certain size, say 1000 development. It's harder to imagine everyone in a huge multi-continental empire getting so mad about losing provinces in one part of it when there are so many cultures inside. Sure, the people in that region might care, but the imperial citizens on the other side of the world probably wouldn't. This is something that comes with being huge.
Looks amazing!!!
Out of curiosity, was I the inspiration of the mamluk-related line of events? It's exactly as I suggested a while back :p
 
The "Turkish threat advances" event should lead to the creation of a mega alliance against the Ottomans, the alliance could use the same mechanics as the Religious league alliances, all Christian countries with a capital in Europe could choose to join the alliance or not and the leader would get a special casus belli against the Ottomans.
It seems really strange that the game has no real equivalent to the Holy League, even before the Siege of Vienna Europeans didn't just stand there and watch the Ottomans advance in Europe so if Vienna falls there should be a pretty massive reaction from most Europeans countries, it would also create a proper "boss" for the Ottomans.

I don't think this needs to be done so artificially or via event. Just give the Ottomans 30% (or some other number) AE gain against catholic / protestant / reformed christians once Hungary is conquered and any further moves will create such an alliance naturally.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I don't think this needs to be done so artificially or via event. Just give the Ottomans 30% (or some other number) AE gain against catholic / protestant / reformed christians once Hungary is conquered and
It does, in fact, need to be done artificially if you want the alliance to happen when the human is not the Ottomans.

The AI, generally speaking, tries to avoid triggering coalitions in the first place.

(Also, on default game settings, the Ottomans are Lucky if the AI is playing them, which gives them an AE Impact reduction bonus. The results of this get particularly silly on Very Hard...)
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
In defiance of all the whiners who demand to nerf the Ottoman Empire again and again for several years! Please accept my sincere respect :cool:

However, you should also pay attention to the Mamluks, because if they do not receive changes, then it will look somehow ... grotesque :eek:
 
  • 4
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Is decadence going to be something you plan to apply to large empires in general, or will this be restricted to only a few select nations?



What I don't like about this decadence mechanic in its current form is that it brings nothing new to the table.

By which I mean this: all of the things which increase it, such as negative stab, low legitimacy, bankruptcy, corruption, etc. are things that you would want to prevent anyway, and in any case are not any harder to prevent as a great power than they are as a small nation.

So in effect all that decadence does is dole out additional punishment for letting known bad things run unchecked. But that's not any more likely to cause big empires to fall than they were before. Only governing capacity has anything to do with size, but the penalties for going over are already quite severe on their own and in any case, everyone, player and AI, is careful about managing GC and I've never seen any country brought down by it alone.







I think a more interesting implementation for decadence would be something like over-expenditure on various things which would ordinarily be desirable for nations, but grow to absurd degrees for huge nations.

For instance, if military expenses for your nation in peacetime exceed say 300 ducats/month and at the same time over 80% of your income, then this might raise decadence in the sense that your society is under-prioritizing its domestic needs in favor of military adventures abroad and literally spending vast fortunes to do so.

Or say spending over 40 ducats/month on your court advisors should similarly raise decadence. Your court favorites are essentially being paid many times the GDP of a small nation. How would the general populace react to this kind of spending?

Another possibility would be having ultra-developed core provinces in one part of your nation while at the same time having very low-development cores. This might generate decadence resulting from the tensions caused by massive wealth inequalities between the citizens of your empire. This one could potentially trip up large nations a lot, as large and small nations both generate monarch points at roughly the same rate, but large nations have more provinces.

In short, I think the decadence mechanic should have to do with decadence: luxuries available only to the super-powerful which become so lavish that they corrupt the society. And given that, in an ordinary game, you might want to spend so much on the military or on fancy advisors, this kind of mechanic would add a new constraint to huge powers different from what existed before, and not faced by smaller nations (who don't have this kind of money).

The idea is that you can flex your huge piles of money and influence as a great power, but if you flex it too much in the wrong way, then you incur decadence. It's a failure to live in moderation. Too much of a good thing is no longer good.






Oh, and one more simple thing which would help big empires fall: scale down the effects of revanchism once you start to grow past a certain size, say 1000 development. It's harder to imagine everyone in a huge multi-continental empire getting so mad about losing provinces in one part of it when there are so many cultures inside. Sure, the people in that region might care, but the imperial citizens on the other side of the world probably wouldn't. This is something that comes with being huge.
So I do like a lot of your ideas, but I have a simpler one- being a great power itself causes decadence. The higher your rank, the more it causes. A power hanging out in the 6th-8th power rank will be able to handle the affects of the slowly increasing decadence fairly well- it takes a long time to get high, and even when it starts to cause problems, those aren't too bad or too often. But being 1-3rd rank causes decadence to build up quickly. While a lower rank power might gradually fade due to decadence, settling into a position as a regional power outside of the GP rankings. a rank 1 world power that has skyrocketing decadence that they can't control could implode in civil wars, making them easy prey for neighbors
 
  • 5Like
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Can I say right up that I'm excited to see major powers like the Ottomans get a rework. Even if I don't agree with every detail (and with the amount of detail you have here I'm unlikely to) I'm excited. I think its a really good trend to pick countries that get played often (and that haven't recently been reworked) and to invest time and effort into improving the experience.

  • Finally, mission trees and the content from Lions of the North make the content outside of the region of focus feel very outdated - even if the region’s specific update was not that long ago. The new DLC and the 1.35 update aim to change this and we try to go beyond our scope to expand the countries and regions which are not the focus of the former DLC.
I feel this may be the wrong conclusion to draw. There was a bit too much content in LotN which was overpowered and made the rest of the world underpowered rather than just outdated (eg. the bonuses for playing tall as Riga were much stronger than for any other OPM). Trying to rebalance all the old parts of the world every expansion to deal with inflation like that would be a balancing nightmare and consume lots of time which could better be spent elsewhere. Instead I'd recommend trying to set the new content to be balanced in line with the old content. For many of us new content doesn't need to be stronger than old content to be fun to play, it just needs to present new challenges and new mechanics. After a decade of playing the game the real enemy of the next EU4 game is that it will be too similar to the last 5 games I played.
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I feel this may be the wrong conclusion to draw. There was a bit too much content in LotN which was overpowered and made the rest of the world underpowered rather than just outdated (eg. the bonuses for playing tall as Riga were much stronger than for any other OPM). Trying to rebalance all the old parts of the world every expansion to deal with inflation like that would be a balancing nightmare and consume lots of time which could better be spent elsewhere. Instead I'd recommend trying to set the new content to be balanced in line with the old content. For many of us new content doesn't need to be stronger than old content to be fun to play, it just needs to present new challenges and new mechanics. After a decade of playing the game the real enemy of the next EU4 game is that it will be too similar to the last 5 games I played.
I second this. I also urge the Devs (if reading this) to consider drawing some insights on this thread about mission trees as well. here
 
If you finish the disaster by slaughtering them to the last man then you can complete the mission “Mansure Army” and you get the following event:
If the Ottomans change their tech group to a western one, how about adding that for other non-western powers as well? For example, the reforms of Peter the Great in Russia, which brought the country closer to Europe and created European-style Russian troops.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Agreed, a straight-out Religious League against an extremely powerful Ottomans may be a fair balancing
The "Turkish threat advances" event should lead to the creation of a mega alliance against the Ottomans, the alliance could use the same mechanics as the Religious league alliances, all Christian countries with a capital in Europe could choose to join the alliance or not and the leader would get a special casus belli against the Ottomans.
It seems really strange that the game has no real equivalent to the Holy League, even before the Siege of Vienna Europeans didn't just stand there and watch the Ottomans advance in Europe so if Vienna falls there should be a pretty massive reaction from most Europeans countries, it would also create a proper "boss" for the Ottomans.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Please make the mission screen bigger (pop up window?) and add some QoL features such as a search bar, zoom in/out, filters?

Something like in HoI4 focus trees.

Bigger trees are just a huge pain to navigate (like you noted in the post.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
When the title of Devlet-i Rum is taken, the ruler should also take the title of 'Kayser', this word means 'Cesare' in Italian language, it was used for the first time by conqueror Mehmet
 
  • 2
Reactions:
This is great! I'm glad you've seemed to take a lot of inspiration from mods like Flavor Universalis. My only question is: will you give Byzantium some extra flavor? They work really well in the previously mentioned mod too.
 
Is decadence going to be something you plan to apply to large empires in general, or will this be restricted to only a few select nations?



What I don't like about this decadence mechanic in its current form is that it brings nothing new to the table.

By which I mean this: all of the things which increase it, such as negative stab, low legitimacy, bankruptcy, corruption, etc. are things that you would want to prevent anyway, and in any case are not any harder to prevent as a great power than they are as a small nation.

So in effect all that decadence does is dole out additional punishment for letting known bad things run unchecked. But that's not any more likely to cause big empires to fall than they were before. Only governing capacity has anything to do with size, but the penalties for going over are already quite severe on their own and in any case, everyone, player and AI, is careful about managing GC and I've never seen any country brought down by it alone.







I think a more interesting implementation for decadence would be something like over-expenditure on various things which would ordinarily be desirable for nations, but grow to absurd degrees for huge nations.

For instance, if military expenses for your nation in peacetime exceed say 300 ducats/month and at the same time over 80% of your income, then this might raise decadence in the sense that your society is under-prioritizing its domestic needs in favor of military adventures abroad and literally spending vast fortunes to do so.

Or say spending over 40 ducats/month on your court advisors should similarly raise decadence. Your court favorites are essentially being paid many times the GDP of a small nation. How would the general populace react to this kind of spending?

Another possibility would be having ultra-developed core provinces in one part of your nation while at the same time having very low-development cores. This might generate decadence resulting from the tensions caused by massive wealth inequalities between the citizens of your empire. This one could potentially trip up large nations a lot, as large and small nations both generate monarch points at roughly the same rate, but large nations have more provinces.

In short, I think the decadence mechanic should have to do with decadence: luxuries available only to the super-powerful which become so lavish that they corrupt the society. And given that, in an ordinary game, you might want to spend so much on the military or on fancy advisors, this kind of mechanic would add a new constraint to huge powers different from what existed before, and not faced by smaller nations (who don't have this kind of money).

The idea is that you can flex your huge piles of money and influence as a great power, but if you flex it too much in the wrong way, then you incur decadence. It's a failure to live in moderation. Too much of a good thing is no longer good.






Oh, and one more simple thing which would help big empires fall: scale down the effects of revanchism once you start to grow past a certain size, say 1000 development. It's harder to imagine everyone in a huge multi-continental empire getting so mad about losing provinces in one part of it when there are so many cultures inside. Sure, the people in that region might care, but the imperial citizens on the other side of the world probably wouldn't. This is something that comes with being huge.
I 100% agree.
I had the exact same criticism of what corruption is, but i did not have any (good) ideas on what it should be. But i believe your suggestions absolutely nailed it.


I'm going to try one of my ideas and risk the ire of the blobbing community and say that having high Absolutism when you have very high development should cause decadence. (Say it would only trigger after 1500 development and start giving decadence at over 50 Absolutism)
I know Absolutism was basically created in order to make blobing more efficient, but hear me out:

A single monarch having absolute power over his territory can sure lead to the administration being faster and more decisive in acting coordinated against their immediate rivals. But once you are born into having absolute power and control of an unrivaled superpower, there is both no incentive to take risks and "excell" as you are already Top Dog in a super favourable position and didnt have to lift a finger to achieve that (Perhaps high decadence should cause -1 Monarch skill in a random category). It is far easier and more appealing to use all that power and wealth in grandiose inefficient public works and displays of wealth (Increase the ducat price of all costs, like inflation), as well as indulging yourself and your inner group in the most lavish and decadent past-times immaginable. (Increase corruption)

There is also the real logistical problem of having a single person singlehandedly administer a significant portion of the world.
With pre-industrial technology it would be logistically impossible for an empire to grow too large without having to delegate power significantly.
By the time the supreme leader in Instanbul got word that the savages in Manchuria had invaded Ottoman Siberia and assembled an army from across the empire, the entierty of Siberia would already be occupied and/or razed to the ground. (Reduced unit reinforce rate)

Also, as you grow larger and occupy more and more lands, under the ruthless iron fist of the supreme leader without any sort of local representation would be completely unnaceptable for the many occupied cultures and it would also completely break social cohesion. (Very big unrest)

This would also add a new layer of internal management to absolutism.
Instead of simply trying to max absolutism asap as of right now, the player would have to play the mini-game of knowing when to centralize and when to decentralize.
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions: