“This England never did, nor never shall,
Lie at the proud foot of a conqueror”

Welcome to the 7th development diary for Europa Universalis IV,
where we talk about the dominant power by the end of the Europa Universalis time frame, the country formerly known as England.
England can be considered both as one of the easier nations to play, but also one of the more challenging nations. That´s a paradox, you say?
Well, it all depends on what you wish to accomplish and what kind of empire you want to create

The unique possibilities of England
What truly makes England unique to play is that the country has natural borders protecting it and that you can strengthen those borders dramatically with rather cheap investments. You can decide to let England get involved in the continent, from a safe position, or choose to isolate England and go overseas. The country also sits on a bloody nice position to control the trade from the Baltic and from North America. So the options are huge for you to take England in plenty of directions when creating your empire.

England’s Dynamic Historical Events
England is has one of the richest and best known histories. That may sound lovely for you guys, but it also means that we have had to work hard when it comes to decisions about historical events to include in Europa Universalis IV. The important countries in EU4 have a lot of events going on, so some of those major historical events have been turned into the starting points of large event chains that we call Dynamic Historical Events.

War of the Roses is an excellent example of Dynamic Historical Events. If England in the 15th century has a ruler without an heir, that means that there is a likelihood of a large event chain beginning. The player has to select who to back for the throne, York or Lancaster. This decision will throw the country into turmoil with various parts declaring for either the red or white rose, and you have to make sure to eliminate the very strong, rather resilient pretenders. What makes this interesting is that this event chain is not an event series that is guaranteed to come every time you play as England. It only occurs if all the necessary underlying factors are fulfilled. When it happens, you won't have planned for it to arrive on schedule, like many people did when they played Europa Universalis II, the last game in the series with a serious focus on historical events. We hope that this variation will gives you rather unique experiences when you play major powers.

The English Civil War will be another major event series that might encounter when you play as England, but we will not spoil it for you here yet.
England also has many smaller DHE, like The War of Captain Jenkin's Ear: if they are rivals with Spain, after 1700, then you can get a casus belli on Spain. Or an event like The Muscovy Trade Company, where if you discover the sea route to Archangelsk, and its owned by the Muscovites, then there is a likelihood of this historical event happening.

England’s Missions & Decisions
We have kept the historical missions that existed in Europa Universalis III and we are expanding them for Europa Universalis IV, so you'll still see missions to conquer Scotland and colonize North America. When it comes to decisions, England still manually have to rely on the Wooden Wall, and make Calais into a Staple Port.

England’s National Ideas
The traditions that England starts with is a small boost in naval morale and a 5% boost to their trading efficiency.
The trading efficiency boost is due to the fact that the economy of England to fund their participation in the Hundred Years War was their taxation of the very profitable wool trade.

The 7 National Ideas for England are:

2. Royal Navy : 25% higher naval force limit, and +10% more combat power for big ships.
3. Eltham Ordinance : +15% higher tax.
4. Secretaries of State : +1 diplomat
5. Navigation Acts : +10% trade income, and +10% more combat power for light ships.
6. Bill of Rights : -1 revolt risk.
7. Reform of Commission Buying : +10% discipline
8. Sick and Hurt Board : -50% Naval Attrition.

Reward: English Ambition
When England has gotten all seven of their National Ideas, they get the bonus of 'English Ambitions' which gives them a +100% on their embargo efficiency.

Here's a screenshot where I've cheated to show a little bit of the idea progress..



Welcome back next week, where we'll talk in detail about the enhancements we've done to the religious aspect of the game!

 

[1alexey]

I think it would be better to phrase it like this: If a "grand strategy" game relies on flavor buffs to change the play style of nations, it is worse off for not being able to do so through dynamic, general game features.

For example, how does England still become a naval power and colonizer in EU3? It is not because of a big "England Naval Bonus" peg-on, but because its particular situation and initial condition makes it do so. Yes, sliders, missions and decisions guide you to a more particular play style, but they are either not major factors or reproduceable in any other nation given the right circumstances.

England could be any other nation tag in the same position with the same set of circumstances and the systems of the game would make it organically assume what we see as the English method . Making it so "England acts like England" by giving it a big, unique set of buffs is just lazy in a grand strategy game (EDIT: Of the level of complexity that Paradox have shown themselves capable of creating).

2 poblems:
1. development cost.
2. History is interesting baceause of people`s connection to specific nations and specific events. A 'pure' sandbox game can be about elves, orks and other fantasy races and be fine as is. It is about gameplay, and not historical flavour. And there are a lot of consumers who want the latter, as long as it doesn`t sacrifices the former too much, which is not the case in EU4.

Instead of being able to mould your country perfectly to your will, you'll have to find ways to leverage your strengths to overcome your weaknesses. It might not be as easy, but it should be more fun.

This

 

[WeissRaben]

Every single country in the game will get national ideas. Kongo will get them. Aceh will get them. Köln will get them. The only thing is that countries like England will get specific ones, while "less important" countries will presumably get a more balanced set of general ideas giving them all-round bonuses instead of more focussed ones.

And honestly, I think the idea that a +10% bonus to big ship combat is some sort of game-ending, unbeatable 'win' button to be hyperbolic in the extreme. It'll give England a slight edge at sea, perhaps, but they'll still lose plenty of battles. So what happens if you're playing France with Land ideas and you need to challenge Britain at sea? Are you doomed by the game to always losing? Of course not. You can use your land advantage to conquer some extra coastal provinces in Europe, get a higher naval force limit, and then out-build the superior English navy and crush them with your superior numbers.

Instead of being able to mould your country perfectly to your will, you'll have to find ways to leverage your strengths to overcome your weaknesses. It might not be as easy, but it should be more fun.

I would not say that 10% is exactly slight. Maybe 5% is.
(No, I'm not magically agreeing with NIs, but I won't rekindle the discussion)

The bona look enormous, though. DOUBLE blockade efficiency? It's at the end, yes, but whoa. I would not want to be in the shoes of those who, in MP, will end up at war against England as Land powers.

 

[desiriel]

I'm still very excited about EU4 but I'm liking less and less this "history-on-rails" approach that comes enforced with each DD.
Just my 2 cents.

 

[Te. Kenzo]

Yes. And we'd have the multiplayer and world conquest style players up in arms.

More to the point...especially in the absence of serious meaningful peacetime things to do (other than : trade to get richer to build larger armies), conquest is one of the relatively few actual "thigns to do" in EU. So if you cut back on the ability of conquering, then you're right back to needing extra features that require a large load of work.

I Agree

 

[Red_warning]

I for one welcome more flavour to the EU series, EUIII could be awfully abstract which would often result in aimless blobbing. RP is a major factor for many people in historic games and I think this may bring in new players while at the same time stay interesting for old players as long as the complexity is kept.

 

[Phelan]

England sits on an Island. It is not surprising they are good in narval things. If you want a true sandbox, then every nation must get the same amount of provinces with the same amount of manpower, taxes and production. Every nation should have the same number of coast and inland provinces. Every one must get the same technology level...

 

[WeissRaben]

England sits on an Island. It is not surprising they are good in narval things. If you want a true sandbox, then every nation must get the same amount of provinces with the same amount of manpower, taxes and production. Every nation should have the same number of coast and inland provinces. Every one must get the same technology level...

No. I'm trying not to restart the whole discussion, but HERE I have to reply.

This is an HISTORICAL game. Which means it should model HISTORY as well as possible. Some nations will be stronger at something because of their CURRENT situation, which often will not change (England is an island, case closed) but it could (Anglo-French Union, capital in Paris, more land-oriented but not as much as a pure France). Rigid modifiers do not do the trick.

Now, before everyone starts yelling that I'm going to ruin this thread, can we go on discussing ENGLAND?

 

[unmerged(63836)]

2. History is interesting baceause of people`s connection to specific nations and specific events. A 'pure' sandbox game can be about elves, orks and other fantasy races and be fine as is. It is about gameplay, and not historical flavour. And there are a lot of consumers who want the latter, as long as it doesn`t sacrifices the former too much, which is not the case in EU4.

I don't want to restart certain debate, but something to point out:

Poor sales of FTG with AGCEEP, lack of mods with historical events for EU3 after all these years, some comments in EU4s' DDs, and success of 'sandboxy' CK2, suggests that number of people digging restrictive historicity may not be that great.

 

[Jaol]

This is blatantly untrue. At the very most you could argue that they were advanced in comparison to other Atlantic powers, but even then I would contest that claim. Saying they were ahead at all compared to states like Aragon or Venice though is pure ignorance.

Granted by the end of the 16th Century the English navy was certainly on the rise, but Paradox is apparently giving them bonuses in the 15th Century.

Which is probably why the early English NI gives a bonus to big ships only. England never gets a bonus to galleys, and only gets a light ship bonus mid-way through its NIs.

 

[Dafool]

Every single country in the game will get national ideas. Kongo will get them. Aceh will get them. Köln will get them. The only thing is that countries like England will get specific ones, while "less important" countries will presumably get a more balanced set of general ideas giving them all-round bonuses instead of more focussed ones.

And honestly, I think the idea that a +10% bonus to big ship combat is some sort of game-ending, unbeatable 'win' button to be hyperbolic in the extreme. It'll give England a slight edge at sea, perhaps, but they'll still lose plenty of battles. So what happens if you're playing France with Land ideas and you need to challenge Britain at sea? Are you doomed by the game to always losing? Of course not. You can use your land advantage to conquer some extra coastal provinces in Europe, get a higher naval force limit, and then out-build the superior English navy and crush them with your superior numbers.

Instead of being able to mould your country perfectly to your will, you'll have to find ways to leverage your strengths to overcome your weaknesses. It might not be as easy, but it should be more fun.

Exactly. I feel that people are turning a 10% bonus into a massive game breaking number.

I don't want to restart certain debate, but something to point out:

Poor sales of FTG with AGCEEP, lack of mods with historical events for EU3 after all these years, some comments in EU4s' DDs, and success of 'sandboxy' CK2, suggests that number of people digging restrictive historicity may not be that great.

Funny, because almost every major mod for EU3 is focused around increasing historical content and giving nations more flavor.

 

[Svip]

I don't want to restart certain debate, but something to point out:

Your examples are likely to be failing or succeeding for completely different reason than what you think.

Poor sales of FTG with AGCEEP,

FTG was based on EU2, and arrived rather late. While HoI2 remained popular (and still is) after HoI3 came out, EU2 was far more quickly sidetracked for the glory of EU3. FTG's largest problem was that no one knew about it.

lack of mods with historical events for EU3 after all these years,

Modders - perhaps with the exception of AGCEEP - tend not to be interested in just adding historical events. Maybe it is too much research? A lot of MM and other big mods tend to be about creating new game mechanics than doing research.

some comments in EU4s' DDs,

The number of people who thrive in EU4's DDs with these comments tend to largely be the same group of people. Furthermore, I doubt is everyone who actually bothers to post. (Or even know these DDs occur.)

and success of 'sandboxy' CK2, suggests that number of people digging restrictive historicity may not be that great.

I would largely to CK2's success attribute its polished release and return to a kind of game that is not a lot of, despite the demand. My - personally at least - largest issue with CK2 is actually the lack of flavour. Fortunately, the new major DLCs tend to be dealing with this. Makes playing Orthodox and particularly Byzantine actually different than playing the rest of Europe.

 

[unmerged(63836)]

Modders - perhaps with the exception of AGCEEP - tend not to be interested in just adding historical events. Maybe it is too much research? A lot of MM and other big mods tend to be about creating new game mechanics than doing research.

Bingo! Years of developing AGCEEP made need of research unnecessary (it's seriously impressive library of historical events), yet nobody bothered to make EU3 version out of it...

Oh, and DLCs adding generic events and mechanics for certain religion are not the same thing as scripted historical events/mechanics. CK2 still lacks any kind of that, apart from Mongol invasions.

 

[Dafool]

Bingo! Years of developing AGCEEP made need of research unnecessary (it's seriously impressive library of historical events), yet nobody bothered to make EU3 version out of it...

Oh, and DLCs adding generic events and mechanics for certain religion are not the same thing as scripted historical events/mechanics. CK2 still lacks any kind of that, apart from Mongol invasions.

Historical events are one thing due to their limited flexibility, but as I just mentioned, almost every major mod for EU3 delves into greater historical authenticity and increased content, especially for flavor purposes. This is not an accident.

 

[WeissRaben]

Historical events are one thing due to their limited flexibility, but as I just mentioned, almost every major mod for EU3 delves into greater historical authenticity and increased content, especially for flavor purposes. This is not an accident.

+100% Blockade Efficiency in 1789 whether you are England locked in a fratricidal war with Scotland since 1444, Great Britain, or the Anglo-French Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, isn't exactly something that many mods pride themselves of. But well, this discussion seems to live a life of its own.

 

[1alexey]

Poor sales of FTG with AGCEEP,

Wouldn`t atribute to historical events.

lack of mods with historical events for EU3 after all these years,

Magna Mundi?
To name a few, Burgundian king`s death that creates the Austrian Nederlands, the pretty event-forced Brandenburg-Prussia PU, ex.

success of 'sandboxy' CK2,

Let`s not restart the "sandboxines" debate of CK2, but CK2 is not nececerely more sandboxy than EU4.
CK2 has a lot of content specific to religion, country(BYz), or culture, so it is not exactly the absolute sandbox game. Even if Cristians conquer muslim lands, they do not really become similar to muslims, in gameplay.

suggests that number of people digging restrictive historicity may not be that great.

Or maybe people just get that EU4 is not that restrictive with a 'huge' lot of 1/9 of NI group bonuses that country get`s pre-selected, while other 8 are up to player to decide.

 

[Palfouri]

scripted historical events

DHEs aren't scripted historical events. Furthermore, I believe Gars has already said a lot of them have generic equivalents. I really don't get what people's issues with DHEs are. "They don't suit my style of play and make it too enticing to follow the historical route so Paradox should ignore them and only focus on things I care about."? Should Paradox get rid of country-specific events and decisions too? Apparently the ideal state of an EU game would be the same as CK2 where every playable is identical and the only reason to choose one over the other is picking the dynasty you like best and color you want to paint the map.

 

[1alexey]

Apparently the ideal state of an EU game would be the same as CK2 where every playable is identical and the only reason to choose one over the other is picking the dynasty you like best and color you want to paint the map.

NO!
Having pre-scripted map color, coat of arms and country name is absolutely wrong in a proper sand box game, so you should be capable of choosing the colour of map painting and the label it puts on the map no metter what country you start with.

 

[Sotof]

Guys, we already had an entire DD of this kind of discussion. Let us turn the talk back to England, okay?

Personally I think England looks astonishing on the map, and the trade routes (I assume) add to it. Are the carts and ships merchants travelling?

 

[unmerged(63836)]

Personally I think England looks astonishing on the map, and the trade routes (I assume) add to it. Are the carts and ships merchants travelling?

I guess so. Would be cool if amount of traffic on the map would indicate amount of trade going through each route, similarly to M2TW.

Also, it would look much better if routes would go through ports when going from land to sea.

 

[v1989]

I think we are getting a little bit off from track talking about sandbox and force called DHE.
For now we know that DHE will take place only if all factors are true and still we have some choices.
So, let's return to our country called England.
We have a part of island and if you are a greedy son of mother (like me) ,then you will want to have a whole island for yourself. Missions for conquer island, even not historically proper aren't strange or illogical.
In case of IN, we still do not know IN's of the rest world, so comparing at this moment is too soon.