• 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 - 1st of November 2016

Hi everyone, and welcome to another development diary for Europa Universalis IV. This time its rather meaty and is about major gameplay changes for the 1.19 patch.

While we were reasonably happy with how Fort and Zone of Control has played out since introduced over a year ago, it has had one major drawback. The rules have so many cases to keep track of that it was practically impossible to make all cases clear to the player. This causes much confusion amongst players, who also had an experience that was not as great as they had hoped while playing.

So now Zone of Control have changed completely. Instead of affecting a province and sometimes blocking passage in adjacent provinces, Zone of Control rules are now area based.

Areas = The same map division that States/Territories are organsied around. And which 1.19 will show thicker borders around.


A Forts is:
  • hostile if it is controlled by someone you are at war with.
  • friendly if it is controlled by you, or by someone on your side in any war, unless you are at war with them (should not happen).
  • neutral otherwise.


An area is:
  • friendly if it has at least one friendly fort and no hostile fort.
  • hostile if it has at least one hostile fort and no friendly fort.
  • contested if it has at least one hostile fort and at least one friendly fort.
  • neutral otherwise.

Zone of Control blocks an army to move between two adjacent provinces if they belong to different areas, one of which is hostile and the other being either hostile or contested.

(Note that movement within areas is never blocked by Zone of Control)

An occupied province without a fort will flip back to its owner's control if there is in the area at least one non-besieged fort controlled by him but no hostile forts.

To ensure an army can always reach the fort that is blocking it from moving and then come back after sieging it down, all armies can ignore Military Access in all non-neutral areas

Rebels never impact hostile rules, and yes, Capital Forts now work like all other forts.

In order to stop the enemy from reaching the interior of your country, you will often need to have one fort in every area.. Even without that though, forts can force the enemy to make detours unless they first siege down some forts.

While doing this, an average country ends up with more forts than before, so maintenance have been halved.

While doing these changes, we have tweaked the map dramatically, adding in lots of wastelands to give natural borders, and also made a big revision to the area setup, so now areas are pretty much all between 3-5 provinces, giving a more even balance.

eu4_131.png





We have added a new peace treaty as well in 1.19, called “End Rivalry”. This peace option force the enemy to remove one of their Rivals. The removed Rival cannot be added again until 15 years after removed.


We play the game quite a lot every week, and read far more on what issues you as players have. So we keep balancing and changing things to make for a greater player experience. In 1.19 we have some rather important changes to how you play the game.

Combat has been changed a bit as well in this patch, as we removed the combat width penalties from terrain, as it made battles last way too long, and was a double defensive bonus combined with diceroll penalties.

Sieging units will no longer get a rivercrossing penalty if a relieving force engages them, even if they did cross a river a few days, months or years earlier.

We have changed the chance to increase colonysize from colonist being placed to instead being a lower the bigger the colony becomes. Previously it was pretty much a no-brainer to keep it as long as possible, as it became better the bigger the colony is. Now íts more of a choice..

Another complaint was the fixed levels of liberty desire that got applied to vassals and marches as they grew past certain arbitrary limits. Now it is scaling by development of the subject so you can always judge impact of their growth.

For those of you that care about score, Great Powers are now likelier to be getting score each month, as they have a default +5 rating in each category. Also maintaining enough forts is now an impact on your military score gain.

Corruption is now not entirely 100% bad, as a country with 100 corruption will now get -20 unrest in their realm.

Courthouse & Town Halls no longer affect unrest but instead reduce state maintainance by 25% and 50% respectively, while their building costs have been halved.

The Casus Belli from Expansion and Exploration Ideagroups did not really work as great as before with the new technology system, so in 1.19 they are getting changed. The Casus Belli themselves are gone..

Exploration Finisher now allows you to fabricate claim on another continent that is in your capital in a colonial region. (Colonial Subjects can do it everywhere in a colonial region.)

Expansion Finisher now allows you to fabricate claims inside any trade company region that is on another continent than your capital. (Without Wealth of Nations, it is any overseas port not in a colonial region, and not in europe.)

At the same time, distance impact on building spy networks have been dropped to 1/10th of before.

For those of you that have Rights of Man, we are now adding even more things. In 1.19, Trade Goods will have a local impact. A Grain Province gives +0.5 Land Force Limit, Iron gives 20% Faster Building Construction & Ivory gives 20% cheaper state maintenance.

We have also improved the “trading in good” - bonus, where some are almost twice as powerful as before, and some have changed completely.

Next week we'll be back talking about all interface improvements for 1.19.
 
  • 239
  • 57
  • 26
Reactions:
3 words: U wot, Johan?

I'll need some time before I get accustomed to all these changes.

Also, how will small nations defend from the big blobs now that the terrain penalties have been removed? How do I stop the frenchies from invading Italy if I can't sit waiting for them on the Alps?
 
  • 4
Reactions:
To hold off an army merely 2x your size you need Prussia vs. an enemy with no combat modifiers, defending in good terrain. Anything beyond that is basically going full mil ideas versus someone with none.
Go watch Arumba's video on his Tuscany->Italy campaign. His entire strategy is to stand in the mountains of Northern Italy/Switzerland and wait for the 100 stacks of France to come fight his 20-4-24 (with some infantry to reinforce if the front line gets routed) army in the mountains to decimate them. Countless French and Austrian men crashed into his armies, and they all burned before his mountains power. Are you attempting to assert that France is an enemy with no good combat modifiers that takes bad military ideas? They sometimes outnumbered him 4 to 1 throughout the campaign, and his mountains saved him every time. When people say this is the only thing in the game allowing small nations to tactically defeat giant ones they aren't lying, trust me.
 
  • 12
  • 3
Reactions:
Go watch Arumba's video on his Tuscany->Italy campaign. His entire strategy is to stand in the mountains of Northern Italy/Switzerland and wait for the 100 stacks of France to come fight his 20-4-24 (with some infantry to reinforce if the front line gets routed) army in the mountains to decimate them. Countless French and Austrian men crashed into his armies, and they all burned before his mountains power. Are you attempting to assert that France is an enemy with no good combat modifiers that takes bad military ideas? They sometimes outnumbered him 4 to 1 throughout the campaign, and his mountains saved him every time. When people say this is the only thing in the game allowing small nations to tactically defeat giant ones they aren't lying, trust me.
Which tends to be a case of the player abusing the OP policy/idea stacking. I've played a shitload of multiplayer where everyone uses them. You'll never win a 2:1 odds unless your opponents aren't throwing everything in to a battle. And if they are it often comes down to attacking -> retreating for attrition tick -> repeat.
 
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
Combat has been changed a bit as well in this patch, as we removed the combat width penalties from terrain, as it made battles last way too long, and was a double defensive bonus combined with diceroll penalties.

I don't get the argument for this, there are a lot of double bonuses from the same thing in the game already, like discipline giving you improved military tactics or artillery also giving a defensive bonus to the first row. I thought all of this was good, giving the combat more depth and rewarding looking for information about tactics.

Also, this would make the game much harder for Georgia, Switzerland, Albania and other countries that historically survived from using the terrain to get huge advantages in spite of army size. And if it makes the battles really long, well that may be a good way to model guerilla warfare and the fact that it seems really difficult to invade a mountainous country in real history. By the way, in the latest patch the AI seems more ready to retreat when it is in bad terrain, so this might already be part fixed?

(Edit: And if you are an attacking power with smaller numbers but have a good leader with high maneuver, then this isn't even a double bonus for the defender, but a slight bonus for the attacker?)
 
Last edited:
  • 10
Reactions:
Which tends to be a case of the player abusing the OP policy/idea stacking. I've played a shitload of multiplayer where everyone uses them. You'll never win a 2:1 odds unless your opponents aren't throwing everything in to a battle. And if they are it often comes down to attacking -> retreating for attrition tick -> repeat.

In any serious MMORPG game PvP and PvE always receive different balance updates. Maybe Paradox should start thinking about it too?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
All changes seem good. Apart from the one about colonies. Why does the chance decrease when the size of a colony increases. It doesn't make sense to me. The survival of colonists during the trip and upon arrival depends on the knowledge of the route (which increases overtime) and the infrastructure in the colony (which improves overtime). Seems to me the chance should indeed increase, like it does now, and not decrease like is proposed in the update.
 
All changes seem good. Apart from the one about colonies. Why does the chance decrease when the size of a colony increases. It doesn't make sense to me. The survival of colonists during the trip and upon arrival depends on the knowledge of the route (which increases overtime) and the infrastructure in the colony (which improves overtime). Seems to me the chance should indeed increase, like it does now, and not decrease like is proposed in the update.

Maybe let the colonist chance decrease, but natural growth per year increase with size, as a larger colony is likely to grow more in terms of absolute numbers.
 
never be happy I guess.

While you may be happy to screwed on a daily basis, others simply react and say no thank you.
In other words I don't mind you being happy to pay for DLCs that basicly just contain stuff that ought to have been in the game from the start. However, when you beging your dumbass coments, then you are out of line .... Punk.
 
  • 7
  • 1
Reactions:
So, to review this patch so far. Forts are now crap, because instead of working on making ZOC clearer, Pdox decide to scrap it in favor of bringing back the carpet siege. Doomstacks have been buffed, because what Commonwealth, Ottomans and France really needed was another huge buff. Exploration and expansion groups now have ultra crappy finishers that force players to deal with the rubbish claims system even more.
 
  • 12
  • 2
Reactions:
ANYTHING is better than clusterfuck of a ZOC we have in EUIV now. Voyages across 10+ provinces, inability to move through your own territory, armies unable to move back and all this results of decision to implement interloping fort ZOC. That was one of a few fun-killing features in EUIV
 
  • 5
Reactions:
While you may be happy to screwed on a daily basis, others simply react and say no thank you.
In other words I don't mind you being happy to pay for DLCs that basicly just contain stuff that ought to have been in the game from the start. However, when you beging your dumbass coments, then you are out of line .... Punk.

"when you beging your dumbass coments" lol, I can't get over the irony of that statement. That has to be the funniest thing I saw today.
Also, you obviously haven't said "no thank you" more like, "good enough to keep playing". Nothing about this game has been screwing you, you are just indulging in self aggrandizement and a self-victimizing narrative. So, yes, some people will never be happy whatever you do.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Honestly, I don't mind the ZOC changes. But I think the Hostile areas should inflict the highest terrain penalty of hostile forts in the area to every army you have in the area.

So, if you are in a hostile area and the enemy has a fort in a mountainous provence, then your army that is in the farmlands next to the mountain takes the -2 mountain penalty as well. That would stop people from using blocker armies to prevent relieving armies from reaching a fort.

Also, I don't have a problem with removing combat width penalties from terrain if the terrain penalties were increased to take into account the nerfed defensive value. So a mountain would be -3, forest -2, etc.

The new explo and expansion finishers might have some interesting interaction with espionage. semi Universal claim production would work well with spy construction and reduced fabrication costs. It would also keep explo and expansion relevant end game where they tend to fall off. I guess it strongly depends on execution.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
@Trin Tragula
Are RNW tiles (especially continent-sized ones) getting updates to have interesting defensive wasteland placement as well? I recall a few of them having rather large wasteland areas over mountain ranges and such as opposed to the smaller border-style wastelands 1.19 is bringing.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
ANYTHING is better than clusterfuck of a ZOC we have in EUIV now. Voyages across 10+ provinces, inability to move through your own territory, armies unable to move back and all this results of decision to implement interloping fort ZOC. That was one of a few fun-killing features in EUIV

I don't see how any of those things would be better with the new system. You'd still have a voyage across 10 provinces if you were on the opposite side of an area and had to retreat to a friendly area, perhaps even through a neutral area. And your armies are going to be much much easier to kill when the arbitrary area lines don't work out in the favor of your nation. I don't see how that's better than the current ZOC. While your armies are easier to kill the few times the ZOC does something wierd, would you rather replace that with something that makes them easier to kill all the time.

The fort system brought me back to this game. I hadn't played it for months, and I probably played and enjoyed it more after forts came out than before. I truthfully don't get why everyone is so hostile to the old fort system. There were alot of problems with it at the beginning, and I'll admit that there was a lot to hate. But after the updates and refinement, I haven't had a problem with ZOC for a very very long time.
 
  • 7
  • 1
Reactions:
ZoC has some really glaring problems as it stands. (Consider in particular the consequences of occupying an enemy fort that has other enemy forts adjacent to it.)