EU4 - Development Diary - 8th of September 2016

[JustMormegil]

... It does, though. And no, there was no human interference in Ireland at all.

Okay... anyway, the probability is very low. But no, we will spend our LOE for feature which will be used once per 500 games. In terms of business planning its a shame.

 

[aantia]

I'm amazed that nobody's mentioned this yet: your grammar's a bit iffy in the 'Imperials' section in the screenshot. They should abhor the excesses etc, not be abhorred by the excesses etc. Nice feature, I'm going to have to try the last start date (for the first time ever).

 

[Lamahorse]

Can we some late game mechanics to mimic the near permanent coalitioning and warring against France in the late period? Diplo tech should remove or reduce any truce timer to ensure the plunging of the world into some insane constant coalition war against the Revolution.

 

[romothecus]

Looking at the event text in that second image (A Constitution for Revolutionary France) you seem to have included an extra "the" - "the The Girondists are also in many ways the voice of the establishment."

@DDRJake

 

[Kapitalisti]

Can we some late game mechanics to mimic the near permanent coalitioning and warring against France in the late period? Diplo tech should remove or reduce any truce timer to ensure the plunging of the world into some insane constant coalition war against the Revolution.

A rehaul of war mechanics and truces would be great for other "megawars" too, like the 30 years war analogue.

 

[cliffo]

you're grammar's a bit iffy

 

[bitmapmedivh]

Looks kinda boring to be honest.

Instead of transforming interesting historical dynamics into gameplay, you shoehorn (bad) gameplay to fit the historical dynamic.

The ming system has always been terrible, is not particularly interesting in Merchant republics either, so i don't get why you're once again trying to use this feature as part of a paying DLC.

By the way those event affecting which party is in power should be much more powerful in their effect. Y
ou'd think proclaiming the consititution would at least give the girondins +50 power rather than +5.
+5 doesn't change anything about the balance and can be cancelled in one click and a few MP.
Maybe more impact from events would make the feature a little bit more interesting

If anything, factions should be replaced with estates wherever possible. For what it sets out to do it's a vastly superior system, able to model local centres of power and interaction between estates and the ruler in a much better way.

 

[Frogbait]

Pathetic. Because people like you, the videogame industry is what it is. And especially Paradox have the worst DLC policy ever.

Paradox actually gives most of their DLC features as free for having the base game. Not quite sure why you think Paradox is the worst ever because they actually give most of it free per DLC. They're not like the Civ series of games where you have to buy DLCs to fix bugs and to get any new features. Total War games give bug fixes but lock you out from previously moddable "free" content by locking it behind a paywall (aka, you can unlock factions via modding, but if a DLC comes out for those factions you have to own the DLC to play those factions now).

I'm all ears for why Paradox has the worst DLC policy ever, but I'd like some examples as well as comparisons against their competitor companies in the same Genre to demonstrate how they have the worst DLC policies. From my experience, Paradox has some fairly amazing DLC practices.

 

[Me_]

I like revolution being fleshed out, but you really could give those faction screens some background or maybe redesign all additional menus. I was rather excited when we saw the pictures of Miaphysite Holy sites. That kind of stuff adds to immersion (see CK2's religion-specific interface for reference).

 

[Darkath]

If anything, factions should be replaced with estates wherever possible. For what it sets out to do it's a vastly superior system, able to model local centres of power and interaction between estates and the ruler in a much better way.

In the case of the revolution, all this power struggle was mostly concentrated in the capital city, so i can understand why they didn't go with estates. But from a gameplay perspective, estates are more interesting and are actually harder to control than ming factions that you can change at will for a very small cost.

 

[Mauer]

I've only had one revolutionary republic form in all my games, (though to be fair I don't always play until the very late game), is there a chance to make them more likely to fire, maybe even two or more at a time? Doesn't sound implausible to me.

 

[OldmansHQ]

I don't know. This feature pretty much summarizes what eu4 is. DLC after DLC, patch after patch, all we get is more button clicking. Developing an entire nation reduced to spending "credits" on three buttons. The precarious balance between burghers, nobility and clergy reduced to maintaining 6 numbers between 40% and 80%. And now the whole revolutionary republic administration and very violent conflict between the various factions reduced to spending admin, dip or mil into three buttons giving meagre bonuses.

Make no mistake, i think this feature a reasonable one for what EUIV currently is. And what EUIV is, it's nothing more than the collection of independent and most of the time extremely superficial mechanics. Ck2 has its character interaction. Vic 2 its economy. What do we have here? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. I know it's too late in the game for such complaint, i'm just expressing some of my frustration.

I would agree with you that the systems EU4 offers feel 'decentralised'. What would you suggest?

 

[Belschaft]

Having the Jacobins as the "stabilising" faction doesn't make much sense - it should also be noted that the Girondists were a faction of the Jacobin Club. The division you've got there would be better represented as Montagnards vs. Girondins, though it's still inaccurate; the Montagnards didn't come to dominate the Jacobin club until the reign of terror, when much of the Girondist membership was purged and executed. Even then, The Jacobin club didn't come to dominate the revolution until 1792 after the fall of the moderate Feuillants - and then only ruled France for just over two years; Girondists in 72/73, Montangnards in 73/74.

I understand what you're trying to do with the faction set up, but the the names you've given them just don't work - shoehorning in the names of two of the best known factions of the French Revolution isn't appropriate.

 

[Ornlu Wolfjarl]

I assume the Girondists give -20% AE Impact, instead of +20% as @DDRJake wrote.

 

[Broletariat90]

I'm really digging the Republic factions! Good work!

 

[Darkath]

Having the Jacobins as the "stabilising" faction doesn't make much sense - it should also be noted that the Girondists were a faction of the Jacobin Club. The division you've got there would be better represented as Montagnards vs. Girondins, though it's still inaccurate; the Montagnards didn't come to dominate the Jacobin club until the reign of terror, when much of the Girondist membership was purged and executed. Even then, The Jacobin club didn't come to dominate the revolution until 1972 after the fall of the moderate Feuillants - and then only ruled France for just over two years; Girondists in 72/73, Montangnards in 73/74.

I understand what you're trying to do with the faction set up, but the the names you've given them just don't work - shoehorning in the names of two of the best known factions of the French Revolution isn't appropriate.

Well we still have the strange temple faction in China which is apparently all about murdering bouddhists, they never changed the weird name nor the idiotic text (and i remember threads about it)

(btw you got your dates wrong, it's 1792, not 1972 )

 

[Belschaft]

Well we still have the strange temple faction in China which is apparently all about murdering bouddhists, they never changed the weird name nor the idiotic text (and i remember threads about it)

(btw you got your dates wrong, it's 1792, not 1972 )

....

I made that exact same bloody typo in an exam at University <_<

Luckily the professor marking them was lenient.

 

[SignedName]

I assume the Girondists give -20% AE Impact, instead of +20% as @DDRJake wrote.

Factions generally have two bonuses and a drawback, so I believe it is indeed extra AE (appropriate given the constant coalition wars against France).

 

[Darkath]

In which case you'll just spend 25 mana just before signing the peace deal to avoid it.

 

[Searry]

This paid feature is a bit silly as the French Revolution was much more complex than 3 factions competing for power. In fact it was a ruthless power struggle where entire political factions were mercilesly executed, opposition suppressed and other such stuff typical for a REVOLUTION. Making it a 3 faction thing is very disappointing when it could be much more.
You're essentially paying for a feature a modder could do in a few weeks instead of making it a full blown expansion feature.