• 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:
The difference is that you don't get inflation for being near richer countries.

You also don't get inflation strictly from being poor, nor is the primary source of it random. Inflation isn't a good comparison point at all, unless one's objective in using it is to demonstrate the difference between a drawback to something otherwise purely advantageous vs a drawback at random or to double-count punish a bad position.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
not a major problem imho. most portuguese players abandon europe if its weak anyway.

B-but

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.

Unless you want to be a cheeky fu--friend and are using the historical transfer of the Portuguese Court to Brazil as an argument, incentivize such drastic capital transfers is anything but historical...
 
  • 9
  • 1
Reactions:
Uhm... Corruption increased by government rank? Wouldn't that mean that it could be a better idea *not* to upgrade your government rank to prevent the corruption? So it might be best to remain as a duchy for the entirety of the campaign?

If you're willing to dump ticking -LA, an extra diplomat, and an extra general w/o upkeep go for it.
 
Well they were corrupt, especially with the way their colonies were administered in the Americas. Philip II was known as a super bureaucrat. He would write down everything and have a desk with mountains of papers. Latin America still today is full of corruption thanks to the Spanish colonial legacy. The strict mercantilist system put in place by the Spanish crown made colonies unable to trade with each other directly. Goods had to go to the Casa de Contratacion in Seville first to be registered and then dispatched to whichever colony needed something. This made the wait a long time, but more importantly the prices raised cause of the shipping and tariffs. The colonists in Spanish colonies remedied this through bribing officials in order to keep some of the goods from going to Seville. They also engaged in trade with pirates of other nationalities who would steal goods from merchants and resell them. Black markets also became a popular way of acquiring goods faster.
It may be realistic but Im more getting at the fact Castille is supposed to be a new player friendly country, one without any real difficulties or challenges and money/profit in every direction. If corruption actually has some teeth to it, Castille effectively becomes Experienced Players only territory.

Also, if the last survey of players remains true today, Castile is among the top 3 played countries in the game. A dramatic change making it harder is a slap in the face to a large percentage of the base.
 
Uhm... Corruption increased by government rank? Wouldn't that mean that it could be a better idea *not* to upgrade your government rank to prevent the corruption? So it might be best to remain as a duchy for the entirety of the campaign?

Someone already respond to this, rank is not just a name.

@TheMeInTeam It is the same thing as inflation. Moreover Astec for instance don't take inflation from goldmines so i guess corruption will have a similar balance mecanic for RoTW nations.

It may be realistic but Im more getting at the fact Castille is supposed to be a new player friendly country, one without any real difficulties or challenges and money/profit in every direction. If corruption actually has some teeth to it, Castille effectively becomes Experienced Players only territory.

Also, if the last survey of players remains true today, Castile is among the top 3 played countries in the game. A dramatic change making it harder is a slap in the face to a large percentage of the base.

When i play Castille i snowball the **** of everything so now with corruption related to inflation, it just gone from easy game to medium game, because you guys forget something important here : Those changes are not the only ones from this future patch, there are sailors, espionnage rework, states/territories... and johan is the one who brings ArtofWar to EUiV so just give them a chance to surprise you. Because now after 1600 i'm just always overpowerful with kingdoms (aka France/Spain/England) so mid and late game mecanics are welcomed. Except if you want everysingle game to be a world conquest in that case just play with previous version of the game and use old exploits. Personnaly i'm looking forward to see those improvments and if they are unbalanced i'm sure Paradox will look into feedbacks.

And this not a money sink because if i actually read it right, it seems to me that it would be a patch or at least a cheap expansion.

If they add now an inflation mecanic now will you all be like ... " i don't like those changes, they are game breaking changes ... blabla" the only complain that does make sense here is the color of south germany compared to france.
 
Last edited:
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
I'm.... very on the fence about these new mechanics.

States/Territories being tied to regions just strikes me a terribly railroading and arbitrary. And the corruption mechanic just doesn't look all that interesting. Oh joy, another money sink. Yay.

There is, however, one even larger issue I must take with the new region system. One which may make or break the entire game. ONE WHICH WILL BRING PARADOX TO IT'S VERY KNEES!!!

I of course speak of the fact that the France and South Germany regions have too similar colors. Seriously, I can barely tell where one stops and the other starts.
 
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
The more I read about it the more I dislike this changes...

The only function of states seams to punish the players without any benefit. And to a extend, so does corruption.

Until now every change in the game to increase realism and difficult had a trade off. Like Estates, you have 25% autonomy, but in exchange you get some benefits. Same with diplo feedback, you can't just use your allies to win wars for you, but it works both ways, so your allies won't be stating wars left and right expecting you to win for them.

But this... it has no point besides creating a new mechanic that does nothing but annoy the players.

People have been asking for years now that autonomy be linked to how distant the province is from the capital, and not a arbitrary border that only exists because the way countries expanded in the real word, but what does paradox do? Create a system based on a arbitrary border that only exists because the way countries expanded in the real word.

One benefit they could implement is that every culture in the state be considered accepted despite the % they contribute.

Also invert the tech corruption relation... Meaning. If you are behind tech you get a bonus decreasing corruption. And if you are ahead increasing the rate of corruption. Which would make the game more balanced and not break the game for people behind time on tech. And besides it would make the game more historically accurate. Or paradox thinks the Native Americans had more corruption than the British who were more advanced?
 
  • 11
  • 2
Reactions:
Also I'd love if Johan could at least tell us if Tribal nations (maybe except for Hordes) below Empire rank would be exempt from Corruption. I mean. Come on.

EDIT-- Wait where's my other post here
 
Also I'd love if Johan could at least tell us if Tribal nations (maybe except for Hordes) below Empire rank would be exempt from Corruption. I mean. Come on.

Why because corruption is a western related issue ? Modifier will change, read again the third last sentence of this dev diary

The actual numbers are still in the balance phase here, so won't mention them just yet.
 
Last edited:
Also I'd love if Johan could at least tell us if Tribal nations (maybe except for Hordes) below Empire rank would be exempt from Corruption. I mean. Come on.


Supposedly with civilization came corruption. Tribal nations should not have corruption. Not that it didn't exist but it would be at a personal level or within tribal members/community members. A tribal nation does not have the political, economic, and social structure that would allow for corruption to play a role the same way it does in a "modern" state.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Supposedly with civilization came corruption. Tribal nations should not have corruption. Not that it didn't exist but it would be at a personal level or within tribal members/community members. A tribal nation does not have the political, economic, and social structure that would allow for corruption to play a role the same way it does in a "modern" state.

Come on, you should read about Astec history..
 
Well, aren't the Aztecs monarchies in-game? I know the Inca are at least.

But still, if not exempting, at least have smaller modifiers to make up for the lesser number of states and that uncapable ruler modifier and terrible -stab events they have. It's not fun when you force a "reform or die" gameplay just because you want everyone to look like Europe. Even more so when now they gave an advantage to being a Duchy and a disadvantage for being an Empire (corruption ticks)


EDIT-- By the way, this whole gimmick is now a gigantic Ottoman buff, isn't that so? They can now fully control Egypt and Arabia (hah), both by making states and by being in the same cultural group with Ottomans already having a decision that turns them into an Empire after killing some easy pickings. Nevermind that the devs want a more historical approach, Ottomans deserve it all!
 
Last edited:
The more I read about it the more I dislike this changes...

The only function of states seams to punish the players without any benefit. And to a extend, so does corruption.

Until now every change in the game to increase realism and difficult had a trade off. Like Estates, you have 25% autonomy, but in exchange you get some benefits. Same with diplo feedback, you can't just use your allies to win wars for you, but it works both ways, so your allies won't be stating wars left and right expecting you to win for them.

But this... it has no point besides creating a new mechanic that does nothing but annoy the players.

People have been asking for years now that autonomy be linked to how distant the province is from the capital, and not a arbitrary border that only exists because the way countries expanded in the real word, but what does paradox do? Create a system based on a arbitrary border that only exists because the way countries expanded in the real word.

One benefit they could implement is that every culture in the state be considered accepted despite the % they contribute.

Also invert the tech corruption relation... Meaning. If you are behind tech you get a bonus decreasing corruption. And if you are ahead increasing the rate of corruption. Which would make the game more balanced and not break the game for people behind time on tech. And besides it would make the game more historically accurate. Or paradox thinks the Native Americans had more corruption than the British who were more advanced?

I'm not a big fan of the changes themselves, but honestly my first thought about corruption bringing down empires is the Ottoman and Roman/Byzantine empires.

But yeah, I have faith. They did after all stop the terrible horde razing unrest change before it made it to live.

The ideas definitely have merits, but I wish the whole state aspect wouldn't restrict you to half of a continent worth of provinces. As the only provinces below 75% LA. I would much rather be able to make everything into a state at some point, with the biggest amount of unlocked states done around the time of imperialism. Mid game having half of a continent fully incorporated makes sense, late game it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Early game getting more nerfs is not ideal, but at least would make mid and late game more fun to progress into.

That all said, people are knee-jerking and trying to make solutions to a mechanic they have never even played with. Reddit is even worse about it atm. Will be interesting to see how this end ups turning out on release once QA is finished.
 
Does corruption still increase if your neighbor is a territory rather than a state?

I don't know, I think I'll just have to play with it first and see what it is like.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
IThe ideas definitely have merits, but I wish the whole state aspect wouldn't restrict you to half of a continent worth of provinces. As the only provinces below 75% LA. I would much rather be able to make everything into a state at some point, with the biggest amount of unlocked states done around the time of imperialism. Mid game having half of a continent fully incorporated makes sense, late game it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Early game getting more nerfs is not ideal, but at least would make mid and late game more fun to progress into.

Everyone starts with 1. Empires get +2. If you are non-tribal, +1. Admin tech gives up to +7. And they also rebalanced the current regions.

I'd say that, somewhere by ADM 26 will have 1+2+1+5 = 9 states and I'd guess you can cover the whole of Western/Central Europe already. France, South Germany, North Germany, Britain, Scandinavia, Baltic, Poland, Italy, Iberia. Then Lithuania, Russia and Balkans are overseas and huh you could make Netherlands a vassal. And if you control all of Europe you probably won the game anyway.

The real issue will be the other bigger continents. Asia will work terribly with this.
 
the corruption is added if you are more than 1 tech level behind a neighbor. falling behind in tech? now you're going to have increase in your tech costs because you're behind in tech

which of course makes me wonder, if i go ahead of time (which would only really be possible as a european) can I make my neighbors be corrupt for them being "on time" while I become virtuous? (being ahead of time apparently decreases corruption). this will then force my neighbors to pay more in power costs... it's all just, very poorly thought out or very poorly explained or both
Adding to this, it's also farily common for some random nation in India with a god-emperor leader to get tech 7 way before the Ottomans in military. So this seems rather poorly thought out. Heck, a bored OPM can go way ahead of a gigantic empire because they have no use for their monarch points.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions: