• 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:
Whereas currently you also have Italy as a normal "State" as Ming AND every other region between Rome and Beijing.

That is why I said at the beginning that this is step in good direction. Now I wish to amend my statement: it potentially can be step in good direction.

Anyway, right now you need at least snake from Beijing to Europe (ah those snakes I have seen in Nagaur AARs). After change you do not need to bother with land connection.
Of course, you will conquer Norther India because it is rich, and some other places to dominate trade and steer it/collect wherever you want but that is it.
You will be able to do it even with Inca or Apache! which is not possible right now. Does it sound good for you?
 
Enjoy an empire consisting of 13 states consisting of all the highest development regions. If the 'maintenance' cost for the states outside capital region is high, it might be only option.
Only option? The OP says the maintenance cost is dependent on the development in the state, so it should be just as much an option to have a low development state as high (less of an income increase but less cost too). It would mostly be dependent on distance from capital whether it is worth it or not.

Again, actual numbers matter so we'll see.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Agreed, monarchs are a little bit too impactful. A weak king should be able to compensate by having strong councilors. I am pretty sure Cardinal Richelieu happened.
I agree with your base point, but Richelieu/Louis XIII is not the best example. It is very arguable.
 
Not sure if I'm a fan of the corruption mechanic, I don't necessarily see what deeper interesting choices it adds. Seems like a nerf to kingdoms and empires and mercantile republics - apparently corruption increases linearly between 0 and 100 for reasons you can't dynamically control as Empires and M. Republics (what am I supposed to do? NOT take +1 mercantilism or NOT become an Empire? Ridiculous) If at 100 corruption you have 50% min. autonomy everywhere and pay 100% more monarch points for everything (you can't be serious? At least leave tech & ideas alone!) then in effect it is really just a ducat sink you cannot possibly afford to neglect, maybe apart from avoiding going bancrupt. Also corruption furtner restricts what tech/idea strategies you can take and penalizes you for neglecting diplo tech (or other tech) even further discouraging viable customization of your nation by making it more expensive to fall behind tech. Maybe I do want to go all out on military ideas and gamble on crushing all my foes. And maybe I want to blow all my admin points on coring and annexing provinces, instead of teching. I don't know, seems like more "soft" limitations on diversity and even more unneccesary micro.

I don't know, I'm curious how it will play in the end because at this point it's obviously a mechanic here to stay. I wasn't a big fan of Estates either though they sounded so damn cool on paper. I'd rather see a naval mechanics upgrade, right now you just collect your fleet in a doomstack, deal one decisive blow and blockade everyone and their mum. Historically you couldn't possibly afford to collect your ships into one doomstack fleet.

I think the whole fundamental idea of making ships auto-fight inside sea-provinces analogous to land warfare is so deeply flawed that if a naval overhaul is once again based on this basic premise it cannot possibly turn out good. Ships have differences in speed and auto-finding one ship inside a sea province is ridiculous. Rival ships should mostly pass each other within sea provinces with a low-ish probability chance of an encounter event where perhaps you get to pick whether they try to run or fight with fleeing outcomes largely based on ship type and upgrades. Right now you often find yourself fighting forced naval battles that you had zero intention fight, when battle encounters of larger fleets in reality were basically "agreed upon" by both sides. You can't just hunt down one random ship with an entire battle fleet (and shoot it with 20 ships at once) - I find there are lots of good ideas in the Hearts of Iron IV naval system, so I hope this gets looked at in a soon-ish expansion.

300px-Naval_combat_result.png

^ there is no reason why 5 barques would willingly engage 6 carracks, they could just outrun them anytime.
 
Last edited:
  • 18
  • 4
Reactions:
I'm kind of confused by the description of the state/territory mechanic. Is it only for overseas territory or does it work for all provinces you own?

If it's the latter, then how is slapping overseas penalties on every province beyond a country's home territory an improvement over the way it's currently done, and how is this enhancing "the historical feeling" of the game?
 
  • 3
Reactions:
I'm kind of confused by the description of the state/territory mechanic. Is it only for overseas territory or does it work for all provinces you own?

If it's the latter, then how is slapping overseas penalties on every province beyond a country's home territory an improvement over the way it's currently done, and how is this enhancing "the historical feeling" of the game?

It's going to be for every province.

BUT - you may be misreading the mechanic, as virtually all nations will start with 2 - 3 states available and will be able to gain more over time. So, unless you're a tribal state, you're going to have more regions than your home region that won't be significantly penalized at the start (and more over time).
 
I dunno.....
I slept on it before making a response.
To me both features seem ok on paper, but a blooming disaster in practice.

If I could only give 3 thoughts:

1. Overseas distance from capital rules we have now should override the 2 new features we're getting.
Why?
It's intuitive, and would solve some problems people and myself have.

2. I personally feel this just serve as another nerf towards casual/SP/new players with no fun.
It seems like something to nerf the 1% Hardcore players while the +90% of others are getting the usual shaft.

3. I hope there is some cool toys we're gettting if we are getting some taken away.

"Solid,I don't understand figures of speech like most people of the Internet...."

I would be more hyped for these features, if it will allow players to escape to the new world and absorb CN's, like Portugal fleeing to Brazil during our timeline.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
And if necessary I can still download a mod that adds unlimited states, I guess.

Probably won't be an issue unless you're going for a huge empire. Huge as in Roman borders at their height huge.
 
I dunno.....
I slept on it before making a response.
To me both features seem ok on paper, but a blooming disaster in practice.

This.

Razing mechanic, anyone?

At least that disaster was FUN for a while.. I guess.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
This.

Razing mechanic, anyone?

At least that disaster was FUN for a while.. I guess.
I'm curious, why do you think it's so bad? I honestly think that corruption, silly as some parts of it are, would just be another background resource sink like inflation, and Regions only start affecting you severely when you are strong enough to roll over most other nations. Both no doubt will need a good deal of balancing but disaster seems like overstating it.
 
I'm curious, why do you think it's so bad? I honestly think that corruption, silly as some parts of it are, would just be another background resource sink like inflation, and Regions only start affecting you severely when you are strong enough to roll over most other nations. Both no doubt will need a good deal of balancing but disaster seems like overstating it.

the mechanic might be fine, but i predict load of problems implementing it with all dlc mechanics.

The list of problems I posted bit back is likely 'theorycrafted problems that aren't problems cause they are adressed already' but still.

What about people who own cossacks versus ones who don't, for example. Cossacks dlc owners can assign regions as state, never upgrade cores, and dump all in the lap of estates to avoid the 50% autonomy floor. Right?

Or will it be like Ming, no estates in regions that aren't STATE region?

If they do THAT, then they nerf a mechanic they let us pay for not even a couple months back. Which I commented on in cynical way a lot of times already..

See what I mean?

To be honest, I never should have posted here.. I rather have REAL datat and implementation data, rather then vague descriptions that don't adress all the possible problems.

To give small example... Can HRE states move capital outside HRE state regions now? Can HRE states or emperor MOVE his capital outside Europe? Or does the old set of layers of rules overrule the new set of layers of rules that was installed to replace the old set of rules without the intent of letting the old set of rules override the new set of rules?

And if NOT, how does this affect other rules? Can switching capital as HRE state lead to abuse of forming nations with culture shifting to revoke privelegia before 1550?

Sorry, that was cynical comment too ;)

I make fun of things if I'm concerned I guess. I predict a LOAD of new problems if they install such dramatic changes on top of old rules.

Something tells me they should start on EU5, and dump their new ideas there. But i have thought that before, readin a dev diary.

Hope it turns out allright, but I foresee huge balancing problems implementing this new ruleset on top of all the old rulesets and dlc rulesets.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
the mechanic might be fine, but i predict load of problems implementing it with all dlc mechanics.

See what I mean?

To be honest, I never should have posted here.. I rather have REAL datat and implementation data, rather then vague descriptions that don't adress all the possible problems.

To give small example... Can HRE states move capital outside HRE state regions now? Can HRE states or emperor MOVE his capital outside Europe? Or do the old set of layers of rules overrule the new set of layers of rules? Sorry, that was cynical comment too ;)

Yeah feature bloat is really becoming an issue because they can't integrate them due to being tied to different pieces of DLC. Estates are indeed a game changer simple way to deal with them would be making colonial cores penalties supersede estates LA reduction, but that's another layer of rules to remember hehe.

Your concerns are valid, but I do hope a lot of it has been dealt with, though I see no issue with speculating and theorycrafting ahead of time since if they missed something they might read it and fix it prior to release.
 
Yeah feature bloat is really becoming an issue because they can't integrate them due to being tied to different pieces of DLC. Estates are indeed a game changer simple way to deal with them would be making colonial cores penalties supersede estates LA reduction, but that's another layer of rules to remember hehe.

Your concerns are valid, but I do hope a lot of it has been dealt with, though I see no issue with speculating and theorycrafting ahead of time since if they missed something they might read it and fix it prior to release.

But.. but... I LIKE theorycrafting! Especially on shady dev diary writings that aren't clear by far! Pity the devs usually pretend I'm tumbleweed that needs to be dealt with fire, rather then talking to me!

(ok i'll stop being cynical here, we'll just see how it turns out! Just nevermind me ;))
 
Corruption is going to kill me
 
In regards to corruption. If I am playing as Vijay and have little to no corruption, then when Portugal takes Goa, because I would be behind in tech to them, I would get large amounts of corruption or need to spend money to keep it down? Or is corruption not effected because it is distant overseas?
 
  • 2
Reactions:
There isn't, and it's been the down point of the game since inception.

Every. single. aspect of the game boils down to : Acquire Land. War is about acquiring land. Diplomacy is about acquiring land, through allies, vassalization, or unions. Colonization is acquiring land. Having a better army lets you fight for land easier. Reducing rebels, unifying your religion, etc. manages the land you have so you can afford to gain more land. Earning money lets you fund more armies so you can fight for more land. There is nothing that doesn't feed back into this aspect. And yet again and again and again more conditions, layers, and restrictions are placed on doing so.

Of course, it all really boils down to multiplayer, which the devs continue to base their nonsensical decisions on. God forbid someone else acquires land faster and better than you.

You're right, there isn't, hasn't, and doesn't seem to be anything close to viable in building tall. Development? Building tall? Sure, development is nice for excess monarch points, but that's all. You need the points to keep up in tech, ideas - you don't have excess for your provinces. Conquering more with good development is just so much easier and cheaper and it weakens your rivals, who are a threat.

The game is about expansion, building tall isn't viable yet.
 
After reading the OP, I didn't understand at all which problem shifting to states and territories is trying to solve. Actually, same with corruption.
"States and territories" is fairly obviously an attempt to solve the problem that the "distant overseas" mechanic has a whole bunch of logical gaps in it. I'm confused as to how someone could not pick up on this.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
"States and territories" is fairly obviously an attempt to solve the problem that the "distant overseas" mechanic has a whole bunch of logical gaps in it. I'm confused as to how someone could not pick up on this.

So no gameplay problems but just immersion? I always considered distant overseas just as an abstract concept of more autonomous provinces anyway.