• 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 28th of February 2023 - Great Britain

Greetings! A new week, a new Dev Diary, and this time it is about our final big country of the DLC, England, and its follow-up nation of Great Britain. Similar to Russia, England and Great Britain received their content update with 1.25 which is now almost 5 years old. While the British mission tree was one of the most extensive in its time, it has become quite outdated and was in dire need of receiving an update in order to keep England on the same level as the other great powers which are seeing a liftover with 1.35.

So, let’s get started!
british_missions.png

These are all the missions you have available as England and as Great Britain. These missions are available to everyone who forms GB.

The mission tree is split into several themes:
- The internal affairs and issues of England, which were the War of the Roses, the English Reformation, and of course the English Civil War
- The classic conquest of the British Isles
- Trade Dominance in Europe
- Colonizing the New World
- The conquest of India
- Internal development

Starting with the classic missions, the British Isles conquest missions are what their name suggests: unifying the British Isles under your banner. The highlight of these missions is the ability to unlock the “Act of Union” which is a unique parliament issue to form Great Britain - more on it later. Also a ,QoL addition has been added to these conquest missions: if you conquer Scotland you can get the following event if Norway did not sell Orkney to Scotland yet.
flavor_gbr.2.png

The AI is very likely to accept as long as they don’t have any negative opinion of you.

The missions regarding colonizing the New World are also quite self-explanatory. However, these missions do have some unique rewards which make colonization a little bit more interesting. The mission “Found the Royal Navy” grants you +33% Colonial Range and the ability to recruit explorers and conquistadors for 25 years. It also unlocks a parliament issue that gives you the same modifiers once the mission reward runs out.

“Discover the Americas” unlocks another Parliament issue with a rather experimental and unique effect:
colonial_venture.png


As long this modifier is active and you fully colonize a colony you get the following event:
colonial_venture_event.png

You get a selection of trade goods to choose from. The province will then start producing the selected trade goods. The first option keeps the current trade good if you don’t want to select any new production.

Keep in mind that the trade goods you can choose from have the same requirements as they would normally have when you colonize a province. In other words: you cannot select every province in North America to be a gold province out of nowhere.

Speaking of gold: selecting a certain trade good to be produced has a price that is calculated by the following formula: (1 + <the times you selected the trade good>) * 5 * <base cost of trade good without any modifications from events>.

In this example, we decide to create our own Fish & Chips monopoly, so we choose fish for every colonized province:
colonial_venture_event_2.png


Some trade goods are inherently more valuable than others. If a trade good has a higher base cost than 2.5 then it will also have an Administrative cost in order to be produced:
colonial_venture_gems.png

Note: The admin cost will be rounded down to 7.

Again, the formula for this is also rather simple: (<base trade good price> - 2.5) * 25 * <the times you selected the trade good>.

Now of course I have to address the elephant in the room: Gold. In order to avoid a world where a Great Britain player would put a gold province in every single eligible province of the New World, I decided to give Gold an “estimated value” of 10 Ducats base cost. This is reflected in the price you have to pay for a Gold province in the new world:
colonial_venture_event_gold.png

The only limit for how many gold provinces you want in the end is not any hard block but your tolerance for pain in paying for the establishment of another gold province.

Of course there is a decision which toggles this off if you are not interested in micromanaging every single colony you create:
colonial_venture_toggle.png

The missions “Settle in America” and “Colonize the Caribbean” modify your colonial capabilities even further with more unlocked parliament actions:
taxation_vs_representation.png

gold_act.png

Note: You have access to a sugar and spice version of this Parliament Action in the mission tree.

Finally, the mission “Dominate the New World” gives a permanent modifier which also benefits your colonial subjects too.
new_world_domination.png

Note: The Trade Efficiency might look weird considering that you siphon the trade from the New World, but Tariffs in their current iteration are calculated from the production income + trade income. As such, this bonus is an indirect bonus to how much tariff you receive from your colonies.

Of course a British mission tree would not be complete without a trip to India. The mission “East India Company” gives you an early choice of how you want to manage your territory in India.
east_india_company_event.png
The first option will release a unique subject in the form of the East India Company and it gives all permanent claims you get in India to your subject. The second option lets you keep the claims, but you won’t have access to your new subject, while the third option is for the purpose of role-playing where you can play as the company yourself, which might be an interesting campaign for some people.

The East India Company starts with a unique version of the Merchant Republic:
trade_company_reform.png

And of course it has its own set of ideas:
Code:
EIC_ideas = {
    start = {
        global_prov_trade_power_modifier = 0.2
        tolerance_heathen = 3
    }

    bonus = {
        global_trade_power = 0.15
    }
   
    trigger = {
        tag = EIC
    }
    free = yes        #will be added at load.

    eic_governors_general = {
        global_unrest = -1
        governing_capacity_modifier = 0.1
    }
    eic_indian_trade = {
        global_trade_goods_size_modifier = 0.15
    }
    eic_chartered_merchants = {
        merchants = 1
        placed_merchant_power = 10
    }
    eic_presidency_armies = {
        global_manpower_modifier = 0.1
        global_sailors_modifier = 0.2
    }
    eic_intercontinental_trade = {
        trade_steering = 0.25
        trade_range_modifier = 0.1
    }
    eic_colonial_monopoly = {
        trade_efficiency = 0.1
    }
    eic_colonial_exploitation = {
        trade_company_investment_cost = -0.1
        build_cost = -0.1
    }
}

This trade company subject has some special properties which aim to make it competitive to the trade companies we already know and love. A trade company behaves in many ways like a colony, which means it is able to declare its own wars, it will pay tariffs to its overlord and you can use the “Modify Subject Relationship” on them (modifications for Self-Governing Colonies are applied here). However, when an external nation attacks your Trade Company you are called into war. There are also some additional subject interactions which are not available to normal colonies such as “Siphon Income” and “Fortify Subject” (in the past it was March, but it has been renamed now).

“Masters of India”, which requires you to own or have a subject own 200 provinces in India, gives an additional bonus to your trade company subject:
masters_of_india.png

These were the colonial missions. Now we move on to the internal missions.

The missions of the “War of the Roses” path are all about your religious internal affairs. Depending on what is your stance towards the clergy, you unlock one of the two government reforms for the 4th tier:
religious_reforms.png
The missions “Strengthen the Kingdom” and “Acts of the Parliament” play heavily into the conflict between the monarch and the parliament during the Age of Absolutism, which eventually led to the English Civil War.

Completing both missions give you access to both mutually exclusive government reforms:
more_reforms.png

Speaking of, in order to properly represent the struggle between crown and constitution, you will eventually receive the following event as you enter the Age of Absolutism:
strife_king_and_parliament.png

absolute_power.png

Note: Background UI is still work in progress. The Monarchists will start the civil war when it reaches -100, not 100. Not shown in the image: if the value drops below 0 the modifiers change to: +4 Global Unrest, -10 Years of Nationalism, -10% Idea Cost and -1 Yearly Absolutism.

Resetting Debates, letting debates fail and revoking parliament seats increase your Absolute Power while giving away seats and letting debates win decrease Absolute Power. There are two ways of handling the mechanic altogether: you either juggle with the Absolute Power until the Age of Revolution starts or you try to reach either direction as fast as possible in order to trigger the following event:
escalation_event.png


If this event fires then the conditions to fire the English Civil War change to the following:
new_disaster_conditions.png

The disaster itself has seen little change per se. Pretender rebels on the parliament side have been replaced with a new, Parliamentarian rebel type which are basically Pretenders, but republican versions of them. The big change for the disaster is the end reward when you go through them.

If you side with the Royalists and end the Civil War without breaking to rebels you get the following reform:
absolute_britain.png

Letting the Parliamentarian win and choosing to become a republic will unlock the following reform:
parliamentarian_republic.png

And finally, if you let the Parliamentarians win, but decide to become a monarchy after Cromwell’s death:
british_monarchy.png
If you complete the mission “The Three Kingdom Wars” (which really should have been called “Wars of the Three Kingdoms”, but there was no space for it) by going through the hassle of the English Civil War, you unlock the following reward:
english_civil_war_mission_reward.png
These parliament issues are unlocked as you also unlock your national ideas. You have up to three issues which negate one of your national ideas in order to introduce a new strength.
ideas_altering_issues.png
These issues are, however, limited to three national idea groups in total though - they do not cover you if you form a nation which would not be typical in your England run like, let’s say France or Spain.

Of course you can toggle them off with a decision in order to have the space of your parliament issues not be occupied with them anymore, and you can revoke all of the adjustments - though at a heavy cost:
toggle_off.png

Note: Forming a different country will automatically revoke these modifiers. I am also considering making this cost a lot less severe though in order to promote flexibility. Maybe 75 ADM cost per adjusted idea is more manageable.

While these were the internal disasters and issues, there is more to the mission tree. The mission “Issue the Royal Warrant” goes more into the economical direction of your country. While the mission itself can be completed rather early, its big reward is more something you will unlock later on as you get the following reform unlocked for tier 8:
royal_charters.png

trade_protectorate.png

Note: Numbers are not final, as usual.

As it is somewhat of a running theme with 1.35, another mechanic of the old EU4 has returned once again, though this time it is a little bit different. Trade Protectorates are a voluntary relationship between you and the target country, and some AIs might even request to become such a subject in order to be protected from foreign forces. The Trade Protectorate and the overlord are free to annul the treaty, though they have to pay with 1 Stability unless the liberty desire is 100.

Only countries whose capitals are within your trade range are eligible to become your protectorates.

I should also mention that these Protectorates are not Great Britain only as any country which “Confirms Thalassocracy” unlocks the following government reform, which is part of the free update:
thalassocracy.png

The missions following “A House Divided” (which is more a reference to how the “House of the Parliament” is split into the House of Common and the House of Lords) are more internally related missions. Highlights here are “Expand the Royal Navy” which unlocks the special unit of your country:
expand_royal_navy.png

man_of_war.png

Note: The color should be actually green as a reduced Engagement Width means more ships are in combat at the same time.
You have 20% of your Naval Force Limit available for constructing Man of War.

The mission “The Royal Marines” makes your marine units to be the “special land unit” of your country as it gives -10% Shock Damage Received and +5% Discipline while “The Redcoats” is a flat +10% Infantry Combat Ability until the end of the game.

Now that was the British Mission Tree. As you have seen, it is relying heavily on colonization and overseas ambitions. But not everyone might enjoy this kind of playstyle. Because of that there is a second path of the mission tree which is unlocked as soon as the Hundred Years’ War goes into its final phase. The mission “The Hundred Years’ War” fires an event which gives you the choice to play England in a new way which focuses a lot more on the continent:
angevin_path.png

This will of course update your mission tree accordingly:
angevin_missions.png

All of the colonial missions are replaced with missions which nudge you into conquering vast territories of Europe. Of course, your first target is France and securing the personal union over it. In order to complete the mission “Shatter French Nobility” you will have to enact a unique Parliament Action which might cause pain in the short run, but ensures France’s loyalty to the English throne:
curtailed_nobles.png

I mentioned earlier about the Acts of Union. For players, the Acts of Union will be an actual parliament issue which is available to you when you complete this mission “Unify the Isles” and have reached Administrative Technology 10.
acts_of_union_britain.png

gb.png

The AI will keep its decision though.

For the Angevin path we have something similar. The mission “The Angevin Kingdom” unlocks the English-French Acts of Union parliament issue which allows you to form a new tag:
acts_of_union_issue.png

angevin_kingdom.png

Note: Historically speaking, it would make more sense to have it as a name change as the “Angevin Empire” was mostly a name for the possessions of the Plantagenet dynasty and not a real political entity per se. For the sake of gameplay, however, I decided to make a new tag for it with unique ideas, colors and, most importantly, the flag.

angevin_flag.png
You might have noticed that the Angevin flag is already included in the already used English flag. We are aware that it can feel kinda weird when you form the Angevin Kingdom and your flag, which was previously a combination of the Angevin and the French flag, just returns to being the Angevin one.
Because of that we request your opinion on that matter, and want to know what you guys prefer:
  1. Keep the way it is presented here (same flag for England, three lions for the Angevin Kingdom).
  2. Give the Angevin Kingdom the current English flag and give England the three lions as starting flag.
  3. Give the Angevin Kingdom the current English flag and give England the St. George cross as flag.
  4. Other ideas / suggestions.
With that being said, let's take a look at the ideas:
Code:
AVE_ideas = {
    start = {
        global_manpower_modifier = 0.2
        improve_relation_modifier = 0.3
    }

    bonus = {
        years_of_nationalism = -5
    }
   
    trigger = {
        tag = AVE
    }
    free = yes        #will be added at load.

    angevin_decentralized_rule = {
        core_creation = -0.2
    }
    english_common_law = {
        global_tax_modifier = 0.15
        num_of_parliament_issues = 1
    }
    lessons_of_the_anglo_french_wars = {
        discipline = 0.05
    }
    the_many_thrones = {
        heir_chance = 0.5
        years_to_integrate_personal_union = -10
    }
    reformed_angevin_infantry = {
        infantry_power = 0.1
    }
    seneschal_of_france = {
        governing_capacity_modifier = 0.15
    }
    rule_of_the_plantagenet = {
        legitimacy = 1
        devotion = 1
        horde_unity = 1
        republican_tradition = 0.3
        meritocracy = 1
    }
}

Note: England and Great Britain too received a +1 Number of possible Parliament Issues. The Horde Unity and Meritocracy (as well as Devotion / Legitimacy / Republican Tradition) have been added to all ideas which give one of the 5 government measurements in order to promote more variety in campaigns where you can switch your governments without feeling at a disadvantage because of it.

From here on out your path is set to conquer Iberia and Italy, as well as pushing into the Lowlands and the HRE. Each of these regions unlocks a “Crown of <Region>” Parliament issue which lets you decide how to properly deal with your newly conquered territory:
the_three_crowns.png

îberian_crown.png

italian_crown.png

imperial_diet.png

Note: There will be a tooltip saying that you unlock HRE related parliament issues.

These issues will affect the HRE as a whole and not just your country.

Another highlight would be the ability to adapt the British culture group into the French culture group with the mission “The Angevin Culture”:
anglois.png


A final highlight would be “Claim the Empire Title” which gives your country a name fitting to your situation.
empire_name.png

republican_name.png

theocratic_name.png

And if you, somehow, manage to fall from grace…
sadge.png

That was it for mission tree content. However, there is still a lot more to talk about. As you might have noticed, the parliament plays a large role in the content. As such, it was only natural to improve the parliament mechanics in general and then to add something special to the parliament of England / GB / Angevin to make it stand out from the other parliaments.

So, let us take a look at the general improvements for the parliaments. First thing first, parliaments have now the ability to reset a debate.
reset.png
You can reset a debate only every 20 years and it brings some penalties with it. Still, it can be a nice QoL addition when you accidentally select the wrong debate.

Secondly, parliament bribes will no longer spawn for an issue which would give this resource as an effect when the issue gets passed. Example: the parliament issue “The Draft” which gives manpower scaled to the seats will never have any parliament bribe which requests you to pay with manpower.

Thirdly, the prices of bribes have been revisited and have been tuned down to a manageable number.

Fourthly, parliaments of a size of 40 seats unlock new bribes which have “National” in their name. These bribes are more expensive than their local version, but have the bundled effect to automatically flip all seats with this kind of bribe in favor of the bribe. This way parliaments of big nations with many seats are not as annoying anymore as they were in the past.
national_bribes.png
Finally, manually placing a parliament seat no longer reduces absolutism. Getting seats assigned automatically, on the other hand, does cost absolutism.

All of these parliament updates are available if you have Common Sense (the original DLC which unlocks Parliaments) or the new DLC (which unlocks Parliaments too in case you don’t have Common Sense).

Now back to England / GB which have a bit more refined version of their parliament. Most issues they have access to now scale in their effect power with the influence of one of their estates:
influence_scaling.png

Note: I consider to push this all one level up, so that the 100% of the normal effect would be achieved between 20% and 40% already.

This has not an effect on the modifiers from the issues themselves though, only on the instant effects, so keep this in mind.

Bribes, on the other hand, scale with the loyalty of the estate:
loyalty_scaling.png
If an estate is disloyal, the cost of the bribe increases by 100%. However, if the estate is loyal then the bribe gets reduced by 50%. This stacks with the government mechanic of halved parliament issue costs, so it is possible that a single bribe might be as cheap as 1 Monarch Power.

Now with that all being said, let’s end this dev diary with the additional events England / GB / Angevin receives:
flavor_gbr.3.png

flavor_gbr.4.png

flavor_gbr.5.png

flavor_gbr.6.png

flavor_gbr.9.png

flavor_gbr.7.png

Note: This event is the starting point of 8 events in total which depict the different ways of how the English monarchs handled the reformation. Each option leads to different events. The AI always picks the one option which fits their ruler’s religion - even if it is against their country’s religion.

flavor_gbr.8.png

flavor_gbr.10.png

Note: the conditions for this event to happen are similar to the ones for its Reformed equivalent.
flavor_gbr.11.png


chapel_ENG_DD.png

And that was it for this week. Next week @Pavía will present content for the minor Great Powers, unique government reforms and additional estate privileges.

Until then I wish you all a nice week!
 
  • 116Like
  • 44Love
  • 18
  • 9
  • 3
  • 2Haha
Reactions:
On the flag question, I'm fine with the current flag for England. It doesn't help that both Trier and Genoa have very similar flags so introducing a third European flag with it increases confusion.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Not to be critical on the glories of the UK, but you're right.
Spanish colonies in America started a century earlier and ended half a century later. And that's considering it also had to conquer other existing empires.
UK arrived late, fought Pocahontas or something and lost it early.
Maximum efficiency.
Ended half a century later? Spain lost its last possessions in the Americas Cuba after the Spanish-American War 1898, while e.g. Jamaica only became independent in 1962 and there are still multiple English overseas territories in that part of the world. Also it was not until the statute of Westminster in 1931 that the self-governing dominions such as Canada were raised to be largely sovereign nations.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
100%. “Angevin X” is an absurd name and possibly the worst historical blunder I’ve seen in EUIV. Obviously the existence of the tag is a pure abomination (England should just form France if it wins HYW) but if we have to have it, the name shouldn’t be something that sounds like it was dreamed up by a historically illiterate twelve year old Richard the Lionheart LARPer.

“England-France” would be terrible, but still better. “Anglois” would be terrible but better. What happened to the devs rejecting absurdities like “Latin Empire” and “Angevin Empire” formables? What’s next, Austria forming “Austria-Hungary”? Norway forming “North Sea Empire” when it conquers London? A formable “Africa”? I hate the direction this game has taken. :(
My Preference would be for United Kingdom of England and France (United Kingdom of Great Britain and France if you also own Scotland and Ireland)
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm pretty sure this has been asked so, so many times aleardy here, but I have no time rn to read the comment sections because of work...but as a QOL, could we please, PLEASE get a "parliament" map mode, so that every time I adopt the reform for some large country and want to RP, I don't have to be in so much pain when assigning seats? Also a "add all eligible provinces to parliament" button would be a lifesaver too.
 
  • 7
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
It makes sense though - it's like the Stuarts from Scotland to England - they will prioritise the greater crown over the one they held previously.
The English King's started using English over French from the time of Edward III, which is before the EUIV timeline. Had it been before this changing the culture to French would have made sense, but since it is after this period I think the player should at the very least be given the option regarding which culture group they prefer.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
A lot of interesting updates. My notes:
-I really love the idea of forming an East India Company vassal, but I really hope the option is available to other colonizing nations if they conquer enough of India.
-A shame no mention for content in the rest of the isles, particularly for Scotland. In particular I'd really appreciate if the Scots were given their own parliament which they operated until the acts of Union in 1707. Potentially the English Monarchy reform could be reworked as a 'British Parliament' reform that England and Scotland share, and maybe a formable Ireland could access (or other British tags if they reach kingdom rank).
-It's nice to see a branching path between the historic English/Great Britain and a continental focused Angevin playstyle, that should be a binary choice that leads to two different playstyles. I think it's also interesting to francofy the English in the Angevin path, but I abhor that the Lowland Scots will get roped into it. On that note, I really do beg that you undo the Celtic culture group being seperate from the English, it's something that really triggers me, particularly with how you have two halves of Scotland in two different culture groups. I understand you want to model the tensions the English had with integrating their lands in Scotland and Ireland, but I'd argue this is much more due to the English acting like dicks about everything than it is about how disparate the cultures are- I point to the American Revolutionary War as an example, a conflict that could have easily been avoided had the English just listened to the concerns of the colonists more. I think a better way to simulate it would instead give England some debuff to how it accepts cultures within it's own culture group- or perhaps some branching decisions on how to handle the union within Great Britain. Other nations throughout the game have several events or decisions or missions handling how much they want to integrate cultures or suppress them that touch on similar disputes.
-On the note of England trying to form the Angevin Empire, there should probably be some tweaking to the AI in case England loses the Hundred Years War. It'll probably be unlikely they can form a real counter-invasion of france again, but all else being equal the English will likely still gobble up Ireland and Scotland without being able to form Great Britain leaving a notable power vacuum. So the AI should probably be tweaked that Scotland, or perhaps occassionally an Irish minor (or maybe a releasable tag in Engand) manages to eat up the English territory instead so they have the chance of forming Great Britain instead. You know, since it's very rare that a non-English nation forms Great Britain anyway.
-While it's nice seeing England get more colonization options, I think it's a missed opportunity to not put some more content regarding the American Revolution in there. Granted I suppose to not weigh things too in their favor you'd have to rebalance the American side of the equation too.
-I think the misison tree could be better balanced if you moved some of the English missions into Great Britain's tree to make forming Great Britain more key to unlocking thier potential- as well as balancing England better against the rest of the British tags (rather than just leaving England as the obvious choice because they get access to pretty much all the cool stuff GB does at the start of the game).
-I definitely prefer that British Marines get a unique buff than Britain getting a new unique unit. But it makes me want to see marines getting unique buffs in other countries- particularly pirate republics. Maybe it could be a decision since not every pirate republic gets it's own set of mission trees, but it'd make sense if they got buffs to looting speed and such.
I strongly disagree with the idea that you should be faced with a binary choice between colonisation as GB or the Continent as the Angevin Kingdom. The current mission tree allows the player to do both and some of us enjoy that playstyle. I am perfectly happy for there to be an Angevin path that has additional missions focused on the continent, but it should not come at the cost of the GB player getting the same options as currently to expand on the continent. Here I am mainly thinking of the Union CB on France and the other missions to conquer French territory. The mission trees should provide the player with a sandbox of opportunities rather than pigeonhole the player into choosing one direction or another.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
As for the flag, It would make sense for the English to start with the current flag, but then change its flag to St. George’s Cross when it loses its French possessions/ Destiny of England Event, and keep its current one if it takes the Angevin route.

But a quick question does the British East India company at least have a small mission tree that can facilitate its historical expansion?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I must say that I was absolutely waiting for new Mamluks update especially after the news that Ottomans will gain one and was frustrated when I didn't see one, Mamlukean mission tree looks a bit odd and underlooked compared to other great powers, even though their "mechanics" side looks pretty all right, I guess. And, in addition, it would be cool to see a new reasons to form Arabia and Egypt as it's rather downside to form them as if you play Mamluks you lose your special government and their (Arabia's and Egypt's) ideas are just bad, and by that I mean that they don't even have ones.
 
Very nice dev diaries lately, thx a lot! I would prefer Option 3:

Give the Angevin Kingdom the current English flag and give England the St. George cross as flag.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Would be nice if there was more English Civil War content, such as the ability to have the levellers (and/or diggers, ranters) take power instead of Cromwell. Perhaps to have Thomas Rainsborough not get killed in 1648 and lead a more egalitarian/proto-socialist parliament than Cromwell.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
@Ogele : I very respectfully suggest the Civil War "trigger modifier" for the Star Chamber be made very much higher. The reason is that the SC was utterly, viscerally, hated by the parliament. One of the first actions of the Long Parliament upon seizing power was to enact Habeas Corpus Act 1640 (from preamble: "All Matters examinable in the Star Chamber may be examinable and redressed by the Common Law; Council Table has assumed a Power contrary to Law.; Court of Star Chamber and all its Powers dissolved"). The first half (i.e. most of the "Recital") of Section 1 is really just a long whinge. The second half is where the legislation becomes specific about the Star Chamber and what the parliament proposes to do about it: abolition. But it's not that simple: here's that second "action" part of section 1:

"...And forasmuch as all matters examinable or determinable before the said Judges or in the Court commonly called the Star Chamber may have theire proper remedy and redresse and theire due punishment and correction by the Common Law of the Land and in the ordinary course of Justice elsewhere And forasmuch as the reasons and motives inducing the erection and continuance of that Court doe now cease and the Proceedings Censures and Decrees of that Court have by experience beene found to be an intollerable burthen to the subjects and the meanes to introduce an Arbitrary Power and Government And forasmuch as the Councell Table hath of late times assumed unto it selfe a power to intermedle in Civill causes and matters onely of private interest betweene party and party and have adventured to determine of the Estates and Liberties of the subject contrary to the Law of the Land and the Rights and Priviledges of the subject by which great and manifold mischeifes and inconveniencies have arisen and happened and much incertainty by meanes of such proceedings hath beene conceived concerning Mens Rights and Estates For setling whereof and preventing the like in time to come. Be it Ordained and Enacted by the Authority of this present Parliament That the said Court commonly called the Star Chamber and all Jurisdiction Power and Authority belonging unto or exercised in the same Court or by any the Judges Officers or Ministers thereof be from the first day of August in the yeare of our Lord God one thousand six hundred fourty and one cleerely and absolutely dissolved taken away and determined and that from the said first day of August neither the Lord Chancellour or Keeper of the Great Seale of England the Lord Treasurer of England the Keeper of the Kings Privie Seale or President of the Councell nor any Bishop Temporall Lord Privy Councellor or Judge or Justice whatsoever shall have any power or authoritie to heare examine or determine any matter or thing whatsoever in the said Court commonly called the Star Chamber or to make pronounce or deliver any Judgement Sentence Order or Decree or to doe any Judiciall or Ministeriall Act in the said Court And that all and every Act and Acts of Parliament and all and every Article Clause and Sentence in them and every of them by which any Jurisdiction power or authority is given limited or appointed unto the said Court commonly called the Star Chamber or unto all or any the Judges Officers or Ministers thereof or for any proceedings to be had or made in the said Court or for any matter or thing to be drawn into question examined or determined there shall for so much as concerneth the said Court of Star Chamber and the Power and Authoritie thereby given unto it be from the said first day of August repealed and absolutely revoked and made void." [ source: https://www.british-history.ac.uk/statutes-realm/vol5/pp110-112 ]

So it's kind of a cross between Monty Python's dead parrot sketch, and angrily hammering dozens of stakes through a vampire's heart. One thing's for sure: they were permanently furious about the Star Chamber! :)

Also: section 1 was the longest-lasting part of the Act, repealed only in the late 1960s. Sadly, this repeal coincided with the law and order "troubles" in Northern Ireland.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
This is the "Universal Monarchy Conquer everything Spain".

Meanwhile "we decided to split the GB MT into two. You can now either be French or Scottish instead of both".
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I really dislike the spirit of the proposed changes in this DLC, as I touched on with the Russia changes. Why do we suddenly have three overlapping mechanics which fulfil the same concept? Absolutism AND autonomy AND Russian Rule AND Absolute Rule? Why do we have trade companies and Trade Companies? Why does every country get a unique unit with minor stat changes, when these should be represented as stat modifiers to that country's troops as a whole? Why Man Of Wars AND heavy ships? Why Janissaries AND Caroleans AND Tercios? This is such a radical and poorly thought-out change in design philosophy, and adds so much unnecessary bloat to the game. Why does only Britain, and only under a certain Parliament issue, get to decide the direction of their colonies? Why is the new Civil War Court and Country in all but name? Why model an impotent Parliament here in the event of a Royalist victory, but not in the many other kingdoms which had similar institutions?

A commenter above called the Angevin name choice 'historically illiterate'. I would say that not only is this the case, the philosophy of this entire update is historically illiterate. This update abandons the broadly structuralist idea of EU4 - that generalisable systems interact in different ways to create different regional outcomes - and dives headfirst into esoteric particularism and determinism, abandoning the idea that comparisons between similar structures (such as government forms) in different nations are fruitful or even possible. Not only is this bad history with a surprising lack of self-awareness from a generally historically competent studio, it's bad game design, as it departs from the idea that countries, historically and in game, have the same building blocks to work with.

I do not think that refreshing mission trees every few years for replayability is worth this level of disrespect for existing gameplay systems, and I urge you to reconsider this philosophy, if not for this expansion then for the next one. I'd be interested to hear other people's thoughts on this.

Edit: Something I really do like is the reconstitution of the state done through Parliament rather than through national decision. Really historically sound choice, interesting from a gameplay perspective, and hopefully one to be expanded on in other countries' Parliaments!
 
Last edited:
  • 14
  • 4
  • 2Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
For the Angevin path we have something similar. The mission “The Angevin Kingdom” unlocks the English-French Acts of Union parliament issue which allows you to form a new tag:
acts_of_union_issue.png

And why not simply add a second parliament issue which would allows us to form France, instead of going through the old convoluted culture conversion thing for that? This would (in some way) address the historical accuracy issues raised by the creation of an Angevin Kingdom for some of us... Pretty simple to introduce, I guess.

"Inherit France and form France"
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
You missed one at the "Political Situation Changed"-List.
empire_name.png
 
I strongly disagree with the idea that you should be faced with a binary choice between colonisation as GB or the Continent as the Angevin Kingdom. The current mission tree allows the player to do both and some of us enjoy that playstyle. I am perfectly happy for there to be an Angevin path that has additional missions focused on the continent, but it should not come at the cost of the GB player getting the same options as currently to expand on the continent. Here I am mainly thinking of the Union CB on France and the other missions to conquer French territory. The mission trees should provide the player with a sandbox of opportunities rather than pigeonhole the player into choosing one direction or another.
I disagree. You cannot make one pizza that is the best pizza to all peoples by simply throwing every topping on the menu on it, to use an analogy.

I think it's better if you get two pathways that have very different goals, scopes, and gameplay strategies. Historical Great Britain would naturally focus on colonization, uniting the isles, and using their fleets to project power as happened historically. If you can do all that, and at the same time ALSO take over continental europe, then what's the point in having it be a branching path? Why not just do both at the same time every singe time unless you want to do more roleplaying? If it's a binary choice it's committing to a style of play, and rewarding that choice by opening up options that would be locked out from you than if you picked otherwise. An example of this already in the game is with the Teutonic Order, which last update was given broadly a choice between the historical prussian path, which involves getting involved with the HRE and trying to form Germany, and the ahistorical crusader path that is about staying catholic and continuing to expand eastward instead of westward.

Not to mention, it'd also be rather breaking for the AI to have access to both the strengths of historical Great Britain, while also being able to expand so much into continental europe. There needs to be a tradeoff.
 
  • 6
Reactions:
I really dislike the spirit of the proposed changes in this DLC, as I touched on with the Russia changes. Why do we suddenly have three overlapping mechanics which fulfil the same concept? Absolutism AND autonomy AND Russian Rule AND Absolute Rule? Why do we have trade companies and Trade Companies? Why does every country get a unique unit with minor stat changes, when these should be represented as stat modifiers to that country's troops as a whole? Why Man Of Wars AND heavy ships? Why Janissaries AND Caroleans AND Tercios? This is such a radical and poorly thought-out change in design philosophy, and adds so much unnecessary bloat to the game. Why does only Britain, and only under a certain Parliament issue, get to decide the direction of their colonies? Why is the new Civil War Court and Country in all but name? Why model an impotent Parliament here in the event of a Royalist victory, but not in the many other kingdoms which had similar institutions?

A commenter above called the Angevin name choice 'historically illiterate'. I would say that not only is this the case, the philosophy of this entire update is historically illiterate. This update abandons the broadly structuralist idea of EU4 - that generalisable systems interact in different ways to create different regional outcomes - and dives headfirst into esoteric particularism and determinism, abandoning the idea that comparisons between similar structures (such as government forms) in different nations are fruitful or even possible. Not only is this bad history with a surprising lack of self-awareness from a generally historically competent studio, it's bad game design, as it departs from the idea that countries, historically and in game, have the same building blocks to work with.

I do not think that refreshing mission trees every few years for replayability is worth this level of disrespect for existing gameplay systems, and I urge you to reconsider this philosophy, if not for this expansion then for the next one. I'd be interested to hear other people's thoughts on this.

Edit: Something I really do like is the reconstitution of the state done through Parliament rather than through national decision. Really historically sound choice, interesting from a gameplay perspective, and hopefully one to be expanded on in other countries' Parliaments!
I think unique units are fine so long as they are somewhat balanced, and spread out amongst major nations (with chances for minors to use them through formables or special events). I'm more wary or unique ships though, cause I thought that the unique naval doctrines filled that role of displaying the advantages of different navies very well already.

I agree though that if the game has a general mechanic, it's better to work with that mechanic than create a new one. I'm not as big a fan of giving every country a unique government reform (though this is better than when we didn't have reforms and they instead had unique governments). Some big ones like say the Chinese Beuracracy and Polish Elective Monarchy make sense to include and should be there, but I don't think that you should give the majors five new reforms each with a unique mechanic behind it. Ditto for the Russian westernization mechanic they added, since as you point out that's already covered with institutions (on that note- they need to reform how the westernization mechanic works for the American Native tags since they were given old westernization mechanics and added the institutions on top of them- tying westernization to government reforms for the migratory tribes is much better but needs work, but the incans, mayans, and aztecs still can't embrace institutions without reforming their religions which is mechanically backwards).
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
I have a proposal for the flag. Why not keep the flag of England from the
lancaster as long as this family is in power and the English possessions in France still belong to them, then keep this flag if the Angevin Empire is created see make a nice little fusion with the French fleur-de-lis. and in the event that England loses its continental possessions as historically giving it access to an event which removes its claims in France and in exchange gives it its modern flag

sorry for my not very good english :)
 
  • 1
Reactions:
(the Roman Empire, the Holy Roman Empire, and the Mongol Empire)
I'd honestly like to see those countries have the same mechanic (especially Rome).

"Angevin" is also a dynastic name, which can be problematic for Christian countries in particular.
"Angevin" really just mean "from Anjou," so it could be understood as a non-dynastic name (though it's so utterly specific that it's still quite odd).
 
  • 4Like
  • 2
Reactions: