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

7.png

Welcome back next week, where we'll talk in detail about the enhancements we've done to the religious aspect of the game!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
With this differentiaon this time, i'm sure that a scottish great britain will be different from an english one.

Did we ever get a definitive answer as to how nation forming works with this system? Do we gain access to new ideas when we change tags? And do we still get access to the national ambition?
 
I like countries having unique characteristics that can't simply be switched out at the whim of the player, so I support where this game is headed according to the DDs seen so far. :)
 
I'm pretty sure the Ottomans were competent up to...HTTT? I know in IN they actually succeeded more often than not.

They were okay, but you never saw them rampaging over the Levant, North Africa and Eastern/Central Europe. While they usually could solidify control over the Balkans/Anatolia, they almost never moved beyond there. For instance, I almost never saw them take out Hungary.
 
The sick and hurt board national idea sounds like something that would be fairly useless in actual gameplay. Increasing supply range or increasing the months before attrition kicks in would seem more useful.
 
Did we ever get a definitive answer as to how nation forming works with this system? Do we gain access to new ideas when we change tags? And do we still get access to the national ambition?

Read my previous post and you'll find the answer; no. The developers have specifically avoided answering this question.
 
OK, so as I foretold, those countries which Paradox guys like will get huge, incredibly unfair bonuses compared to the rest of the world. In EU3 all we had to do is to be cunning and focus on a lucky nation bordering us, if we wanted to make a country prosper.
Now it's gone, you will never ever be able to compete with any nation with their own national ideas.
Congratulations Paradox! You made 95% of the world unplayable! Thank you for screwing up.
 
OK, so as I foretold, those countries which Paradox guys like will get huge, incredibly unfair bonuses compared to the rest of the world. In EU3 all we had to do is to be cunning and focus on a lucky nation bordering us, if we wanted to make a country prosper.
Now it's gone, you will never ever be able to compete with any nation with their own national ideas.
Congratulations Paradox! You made 95% of the world unplayable! Thank you for screwing up.

Yeah, exactly! How is anyone ever gonna beat a +10% big ship combat bonus? So when its combat power would be 10, it is now 11!!! Holy moly! England is unbeatable.
 
Yeah, exactly! How is anyone ever gonna beat a +10% big ship combat bonus? So when its combat power would be 10, it is now 11!!! Holy moly! England is unbeatable.

Not to mention that EVERY other nation has boni as well, just more generic, but not necessarily worse, ones.
 
Not to mention that EVERY other nation has boni as well, just more generic, but not necessarily worse, ones.

How is England ever gonna beat them!? Oh blimey.
 
OK, so as I foretold, those countries which Paradox guys like will get huge, incredibly unfair bonuses compared to the rest of the world. In EU3 all we had to do is to be cunning and focus on a lucky nation bordering us, if we wanted to make a country prosper.
Now it's gone, you will never ever be able to compete with any nation with their own national ideas.
Congratulations Paradox! You made 95% of the world unplayable! Thank you for screwing up.

Unfair bonuses? We dont even know what +10% means¡¡¡ +10% of what? We have no idea¡ but you are convinced that they have "screwed it up". I am sure if you want to become a nvaal power you´ll be able to do it. Take any nation, give them the naval idea group, and I am sure you´ll be able to compete with any other naval power, and I am sure that you´ll be able to beat England. Frankly, you are doing a mountain out of a grain of sand.

And if +10% is too much they can easily tweak it, as hundreds of things are twaeked after games go gold.
 
OK, so as I foretold, those countries which Paradox guys like will get huge, incredibly unfair bonuses compared to the rest of the world. In EU3 all we had to do is to be cunning and focus on a lucky nation bordering us, if we wanted to make a country prosper.
Now it's gone, you will never ever be able to compete with any nation with their own national ideas.
Congratulations Paradox! You made 95% of the world unplayable! Thank you for screwing up.

Then either don't play it, or mod it when it comes out. Christ, how entitled do you really feel that you think Paradox has to make the game the way YOU envisioned it?
 
It's certainly possible. There's a precedent even: Sweden went from being a non-feudal elective kingdom to an absolute monarchy (1400s-mid 1600s), on to become the most democratic country in Europe (1720-1772) - and back to absolutism yet again! Followed by revolution and a parliamentary constitutional monarchy in 1809. All in the time frame of the game.

So basically a tendency to a shared power structure which can be suppressed by competent rulers but tends to resurface under weaker ones? Seems something that can be perfectly helped along by an NI, if the narrative for their effect I made up is sensible.
Of course interpreting (and supporting the use of) the NI this way only makes sense if there are other nations where this pattern is not as extreme, in that case general game rules probably would a better solution.
 
Read my previous post and you'll find the answer; no. The developers have specifically avoided answering this question.

Yeah. I asked at the very beginning of this DD and wasn't sure if we ever got an answer to it. It might simply be a work in progress at the moment. We'll probably have to wait a bit before we'll really know.
 
Basically, all things being equal, to beat England's fleet of 50 Big Ships, you'd ideally need 55 to match it. Not a huge difference.

Or be playing a different nation with a similar bonus... Or take more naval ideas than England... or have a better military rated ruler than England... Or hire a naval advisor because England had to hire land advisors to compete with our army on equal footing...

OMG, we're all doomed to have our navies sunk in endless bloodbaths because England got a national idea!!!!!!
 
So basically a tendency to a shared power structure which can be suppressed by competent rulers but tends to resurface under weaker ones? Seems something that can be perfectly helped along by an NI, if the narrative for their effect I made up is sensible.
Of course interpreting (and supporting the use of) the NI this way only makes sense if there are other nations where this pattern is not as extreme, in that case general game rules probably would a better solution.

If it was so simplistic, and societies were destined to follow exact historical patterns, why paradox bothered with open ended, non scripted, elaborate PoP system for Victoria 2? Answer - there was cause and effect, and nothing was destined to strictly follow historical patterns - mechanics representing cause and effect are always better than script telling game that at date x, y happens (NI).

Why Denmark was an absolutist monarchy during last 150 years of the game? Because of ingrained predisposition in their genes that was there in 1444? No, from wiki:"As a result of the disaster in the war against Sweden, King Frederick III (reigned 1648–1670) succeeded in convincing the nobles to give up some of their powers and their exemption from taxes, leading to the era of absolutism in Denmark." There's a reason why this happened, in this case outside factor of lost wars against Sweden. If such thing would be handled by NI, it would introduce absolutism even in successful Denmark, with disregard to actual cause. That would be terrible and simplistic.

If everything was set in stone, why bother with player's input - game would be much more 'historically accurate' by playing itself.
 
I for one think that if they give unique Ideas to new countries formed by another country, they might have to discard those that never formed (Hindustan, Scandinavia etc.) as then it would be pretty much gambling what "National Tradition" those never existed countries would have and why.
 
Instead of discussing about how the game is being developed, every week the debate turns nationalistic within 3 pages.

I will repeat myself, even if I kept largely out of the discussion, this time. I'm NOT nationalistic (sono di Milano, tra l'altro). Milan will be well off, as far as I saw. If it was nationalism, I would be fighting AGAINST sandbox, because it would remove content for my country. I simply disagree with the basic idea behind DHE, NIs and Traditions: that history is better and the game should be guided (even if lightly) towards it. I think the tide has turned and this week the "determinists" (not that exact a term, but close enough) are saying that THIS is better and those sandboxy fantasy random Spanish Anatolia supporters should keep playing EU3.

It was asked to end this debate. Can we, please, end it on both fronts? Thank you.
 
If you watch my posts, you could already know, that I am real fan of sandbox and fight against so called "historical determinism" or just "determinism", altrough it isn't historical and it isn't deterministic in any way.

But, although I am a bit worried about all those modifiers (just as someone posted: What if Polands became trading republic? Would it still get imperialistic and horse bonuses?), I am content to the very time, when all those bonuses and events would be subtle and not overly guiding. Just as in EU2, when Burgundy was ALWAYS inherited by OPM Austria or when Bohemia was inherited by OPM Austrian vassals.

I would still prefere general events that try to simulate quite specific historic situations but with some historic description. I think, that this would bring enough "history feeling" into game. And I would like to have those NNI modable, it would be cool if they would be dependent not on some arbitrary real history, but on in-game situation, by choice of NI, by tech, player and AI decisions trhough game etc.