• 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.

EU4 Development Diary - 25th February 2016

Hello and Welcome to another development diary for Europa Universalis IV. Today we’ll talk about features that will be part of the next patch, and will enhance the historical feeling of the game.

The first of these major paradigm shifting concepts is what we refer to as States and Territories. A large part of the game has been related to what you can do with a province depending on if it is overseas or not. With the overseas concept, there have been very many limitations that have reduced immersion.

What we have now, is that every region you own and control is represented as a Territory. Provinces in a Territory, unless the Territory is upgraded to a State, is considered overseas for almost all previous rules when it comes to things like coring, autonomy, trade companies etc. So why would you not just make everything into a state then you ask?

Well.. First of all, each state that is not your capital has a maintenance cost in gold, which is dependent on its development, the distance to the capital and if it is on another continent or not.

Secondly, there is a limit on how many states your empire can control. Everyone can have at least 1 state in their realm, with a Kingdom being able to add 1 more state, and an Empire 2 more states. All non-tribal states can also add another state, and the Celestial Empire can have 2. Administrative technologies can add up to 7 more states to your realm, and if you get the administrative ideagroup fully filled out, you get another state as well.

You can at any time abandon a state to become a territory, but then it’s autonomy will grow to 75% immediately, while it takes time for it to decay down after making a territory to a state.

Your capitals region is always a state, and can not be downgraded to a territory. Another benefit from this is the rule change when it comes to capitals. You can now move capital to any province in a state that is your core.

Coring in a Territory is 50% cheaper, but the cores created are “colonial cores”, which require an instant upgrade cost when it becomes a state. If a province is still a colonial core and not upgraded when a state, the autonomy will not go below 50%.

While doing this we have revised the setup of regions on the map, so they are more similar in the amount of provinces they contain.

uw9kMf4.jpg



Our second large feature from today is Corruption. Corruption is a state in your country, easily seen in the topbar. The higher corruption you have the worse off your country becomes. Corruption affects all power costs in a country by up to 100%, and it also increases minimum autonomy by up to 50%. Corruption also affects your defence against hostile spies and your capacity to build up spynetworks in another nations.

Corruption increases include the following.
  • Mercantilism
  • Being an Empire
  • Hostile Spy Action
  • Having one tech being more than 2 techs behind another.
  • Being more than 1 tech behind a neighbour.

Corruption is reduced by the following.
  • Investing money, you now have a slider indicating how much money you want to spend on combating corruption. This cost is scaled like advisor costs are scaled through time.
  • Being ahead of time in administrative or diplomatic technology.
  • Being a Duchy
61T6yeq.jpg


The actual numbers are still in the balance phase here, so won't mention them just yet..

There are alerts indicating if corruption is growing or not, and there are plenty of events triggering and/or affecting corruption. Having no corruption, and not having corruption growing can even trigger some really beneficial events.

Finally, one of the remaining espionage actions we mentioned in an earlier development diary is related to corruption. You can for a very high cost of your network place down a spy to increase corruption in the target country for five years. Of course, only one can do it in the target at a time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 307
  • 216
  • 55
Reactions:
Having increased corruption for being behind in tech creates a downward spiral. Behind in tech -> increased corruption -> lowered mana -> more behind in tech. This needs to be removed.
Corruption seems to be inflation for MP. So while you can make the same complaint about inflation (it lowers your income, which causes you to take loans, which causes inflation), I feel like it's a marginal enough cost that you're not really going to get a spiral. I agree that it feels like a nerf for nations that are behind in tech, which is unnecessary, but it's not a death spiral.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
By the way CK2 has real DYNAMIC borders for all subjects like Duchy, Kingdom and Empire.
CK2 also has 'de jure' fixed borders but that wont restrict you to create whatever empires you like with whatever kingdoms inside it.

Not sure why Paradox can't take that great feature.
 
  • 9
  • 1
Reactions:
I haven't yet said anything about corruption, but having thought about it and read others' comments, I agree that the behind neighbor tech trigger is likely a bad idea. It is a lose-more mechanic and the game doesn't need any more of those.

Of the mechanic as a whole I do not have nearly as bleak an opinion. It offers another way for gold and monarch points to interact, which is somewhat needed, IMO. As long at it isn't a number that you always just get to zero ASAP and feels like just an extra tax...
 
I really like the Territory/State thing, and have been hoping for something like this (specifically, 'colonial cores') for a long time. It solves the overseas coring exploit nonsense, but also tones down the power level of huge Eurasian land blobs and gives a bit more incentive to focus on your true heartland.

As for Corruption, it'll really depend on the numbers as to whether it's a minor nuisance or a constant menace. One side-effect is that it gives another indirect way to turn money into MP (or rather, if you don't have enough money, it will exacerbate your MP problems). This could make money-based buffs more significant in the later game. On the other hand, I'm a bit worried that if it's dangerous enough to be a real concern for human players, corruption will become another way that AI countries routinely fall into a death spiral.

I did not read all thread, so maybe this concern was already voiced.
Many feel that minor countries at borders will be penalized at the game start; if you are tribal, yes.

My concern is slightly different: 1 + 1nontribal +1kingdom +2 for empire + 7 from admin tech +1 for idea group = 13 States, 15 for Ming player. And look at the map: those regions are huge, owning even five regions depicted in center (2 German, Low countries, France and Italy) makes you unstoppable. And you are allowed double and more your area without facing any penalty.

My reading was that yes, in the late game you are allowed to have a very large area as States (still much less than you can have now), if you colour in solid regions of the map. Probably the exact number will change with patches if it is too large (or maybe some of the excessively large regions we have now will be subdivided). The # of states limitation is more a soft version of the overseas penalty: a widely dispersed empire can have truly global reach with its merchants, colonists and fleets, but needs to keep a lot of its outposts as Territories, whereas a more compact empire is more efficient in terms of tax/production/manpower but has more constrained expansion opportunities.

The same applies on smaller scales at the start of the game: if you're playing as Aragon say, you'll have a trade-off between setting up outposts all over the Mediterranean (great for trade, but poor manpower/production) and consolidating your power in Iberia or Italy.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
Your math is a little off as some of additions are interchangeable. From what I have calculated you can have at most 12 states.

I do not want to be nitpicking, but why to say celestial gov +2 if Ming is already Empire IIRC? , and maybe it is +1 kingdom and +1 Empire (total+2), but it does not really matter is it 12 or 15. Regions are huge, you can have a lot of States in late game, and at the start they will make one more artificial hurdle.

So playing Aragon, Genoa, ... : what is you destiny? It is to control area around Mediterranean, which means provinces from southern France, Italy, Catalunya, Greek Islands, maybe Tunis, Alexandria, ... But they are in different regions!

I love idea presented above - let players define regions, maybe they must not be disjoint (although 1 see province should be OK), of course cap the maximum number of provinces but I could even agree for additional rule that "snakes" are not allowed, so there is maximum distance between capital and orpovinces at the edge.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Am I getting it right from the screenshot? All of france would be one state? Or the individual areas inside of france? Also it seems the strategy of falling behind on tech to fill out idea groups may end up costing too much thanks to corruption. Not to mention we already have to pay for troops, ships, forts, advisers, sometimes colonists and missionaries. And now corruption is added to siphon more income? I hope there are anti corruption ideas, especially for Empires. I know corruption is inevitable in real life but at least give me a way to fight it if I play well enough.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I do not want to be nitpicking, but why to say celestial gov +2 if Ming is already Empire IIRC? , and maybe it is +1 kingdom and +1 Empire (total+2), but it does not really matter is it 12 or 15.
I get 13: 1 + 2 empire + 2 Ming + 7 tech + 1 IG. That's assuming kingdom + empire don't stack nor non-tribal + celestial.

Still, I agree that it seems like a lot.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I do not want to be nitpicking, but why to say celestial gov +2 if Ming is already Empire IIRC? , and maybe it is +1 kingdom and +1 Empire (total+2), but it does not really matter is it 12 or 15. Regions are huge, you can have a lot of States in late game, and at the start they will make one more artificial hurdle.

So playing Aragon, Genoa, ... : what is you destiny? It is to control area around Mediterranean, which means provinces from southern France, Italy, Catalunya, Greek Islands, maybe Tunis, Alexandria, ... But they are in different regions!

I love idea presented above - let players define regions, maybe they must not be disjoint (although 1 see province should be OK), of course cap the maximum number of provinces but I could even agree for additional rule that "snakes" are not allowed, so there is maximum distance between capital and orpovinces at the edge.

I think they added something called sailors...
 
I do not want to be nitpicking, but why to say celestial gov +2 if Ming is already Empire IIRC? , and maybe it is +1 kingdom and +1 Empire (total+2), but it does not really matter is it 12 or 15.
You have a point there - forgot its a government type and not just a name.
 
Last edited:
I do not fully understand the rationale for increasing corruption due to inbalanced tech. Perhaps being behind in administrative tech specifically (for your tech group) would be better, as it would be indicative that the country is expanding faster than it is developing the necessary administrative infrastructure to manage it. I also think that every completed set of administrative ideas should serve to grant a negative corruption bonus, since this shows that the state has developed further means of managing its domain.

Also, can you please lock the state coring costs to the development level at which it was territorially cored? That way if we develop the province--say production for increased trade goods--we won't be penalized further when we state core it? Maybe just make the state coring twice the cost of the original territory core?

I pray the powers that be read and consider this:
  • Corruption due to behind in ADM Tech
  • Corruption reduction from all completed ADM idea groups
  • Lock state core costs to original territory core costs
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
By the way CK2 has real DYNAMIC borders for all subjects like Duchy, Kingdom and Empire.
CK2 also has 'de jure' fixed borders but that wont restrict you to create whatever empires you like with whatever kingdoms inside it.

Not sure why Paradox can't take that great feature.

Exactly! States would not be an issue if the borders of them were dynamic instead of static and arbitrary.
 
  • 15
Reactions:
I think administrative idea "book-keeping" should reduce corruption somewhat; but most of the administrative ideas seem to add more bureaucracy and middle men, which would only serve to increase agency costs and thereby adding to corruption.
 
I wish I had something more constructive to add... But none of this sounds good at all, it just sounds like more convolution to make the game more tedious and difficult.

I don't mean to troll or be negative, I'm just stating my honest opinion. In this case I felt it's necessary because this is the first dev diary i've ever read that i didn't like any of at all.
 
  • 7
  • 1
Reactions:
How will the states & territories feature interact with colonial regions? Can you make a state in a colonial region (if you don't yet have enough colonies to form a colonial nation)?
(What happens if you make it a state and then get enough colonies for a colonial nation?)
 
I was thinking posting all my critique on those changes (esp. about "Corruption") but I'm sure they were already voiced here. Most likely more than once.
So I'll just say, that I'll stick to 1.15 (or even go back a version or two) and proclaim it to be a final version of EU4.
Will wait for Vic3 and EU5.
 
With regards to the state system, I personally would have liked something that was more like the administrative sector system in Stellaris, which I think would work perfectly and have a lot of potential in EU4. This would also work well with a small dose of Crusader Kings 2-style feudal mechanics for feudal governments.
 
  • 9
Reactions: