EU4 - Development Diary - 4th of December 2018

[Bandua_of_Gallaecia]

I don't know either, perhaps one of these things:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_fly_(disambiguation)
I don't know which one. Perhaps the comedy film?

My money is on a Spanish Flu pun.

 

[navaluiki]

My money is on a Spanish Flu pun.

Or the song Spanish Flea. In any case I don't get the joke and what's the relation to Offaly.

 

[Van Kasten]

Yes; completely ignored. It's not like there weren't changes to the Religion Conversion changes in the patch immediately after they happened.

Seems like you're the one completely ignoring events

Of course I remember the missionary changes. But let me recall them, just to make sure:
-out of nowhere come the Missionary nerf and Culture Conversion nerf, skyrocketing the effectiveness of the Humankst metà and needing Religious Ideas into the ground
-massive influx of feedback from the players, who pointed out the overwhelming strength of humanist ideas and suggested many different changes to enact while not changing the core idea of restricting religious conversions. Among them were the scaling-with-autonomy missionary strength and ones that involved buffing the Religious Idea Group.
-nothing. The patch comes out as nothing happened.
-people played the game and didn’t like the changes, as they thought. So much more feedback for the developers.
-nothing. Bugfix patch followed without changes.
-More complaints.
-Poland Patch -> buff to Religious Ideas and more feasible conversion
-some complaints, some extra suggestions, some pleased people
-Spain patch -> nerf to humanist Tolerance and rework of conversion that invalidates anything seen previously. Almost all the changes got reverted and some other things were scaled (missionary cost).
-some claim this increased cost will make the game much more difficult for little nations helping the bigger nations. We’ll see how it goes.

So: they implemented an unpleasant and poorly implemented change (which players pointed out) and then immediately after scrapped most of it to go another direction completely. This is not listening to feedback. The change in the Poland Patch maybe was. But now it all got reverted so... I guess we’re at the starting point again. I would not use the Missionary Change argument as a virtuous example of listening to feedback and caring for the player base.

 

[Ironside121]

Glad to hear you'll be giving us some kind of.. roadmap. But I hope that it means you'll be doubling down on the quality of content you put out.

If not, no matter what you're adding, I will no longer support this game- and will more than happily keep playing CK2 and Vicky2.

 

[Fyrion]

Being portuguese I was so excited for this Iberian dlc, to make things fun, especially for an area where both countries managed to form a long lasting legacy and two massive empires.
There's so much they could've done, so many plot twists, historical events, so many great achievements, cool concepts like "Feitorias" , the spanish inquisition, the map of the peninsula could've been so great too, I feel like they alienated us Iberians, especially us portuguese, "Spanish" update, focused on pirates, not a single update achievement for us and just a few more buttons to click, we only received one more province, we deserved at least as many as Aragon, Ireland has so many and they didn't form the 10th largest colonial empire, no changes to the national ideas, pretty much I'll be getting a new button to click for Portugal, a decision to move to Brazil and a anachronistic province.

Just feels so disappointing, I really love paradox and really wish this dlc was different, I'll probably get it but won't be with the same excitment..
I'm happy paradox is at least aware there was a lack of communication and would love to see a bit of transparecy regarding the game's roadmap and future updates, It's an amazing game and hope it will continue to improve in a substancial way.

 

[BuchiTaton]

Being portuguese I was so excited for this Iberian dlc, to make things fun, especially for an area where both countries managed to form a long lasting legacy and two massive empires.
There's so much they could've done, so many plot twists, historical events, so many great achievements, cool concepts like "Feitorias" , the spanish inquisition, the map of the peninsula could've been so great too, I feel like they alienated us Iberians, especially us portuguese, "Spanish" update, focused on pirates, not a single update achievement for us and just a few more buttons to click, we only received one more province, we deserved at least as many as Aragon, Ireland has so many and they didn't form the 10th largest colonial empire, no changes to the national ideas, pretty much I'll be getting a new button to click for Portugal, a decision to move to Brazil and a anachronistic province.

Just feels so disappointing, I really love paradox and really wish this dlc was different, I'll probably get it but won't be with the same excitment..
I'm happy paradox is at least aware there was a lack of communication and would love to see a bit of transparecy regarding the game's roadmap and future updates, It's an amazing game and hope it will continue to improve in a substancial way.

Agree about all. The setup for Iberian provinces should be way better for an "Iberian" DLC and of course Portugal can get few more provinces. BUT the reason why the poor and humble Ireland can justify its high number of provinces is the political fragmentation of the island. Something that Portugal lacks.

Portugal was a powerfull and rich nation, but also a small and unified one. So Portugal must get powerfull national ideas, missions, events and mechanics, but relatively few (still more that 1.28's) yet highly developed provinces.

Ireland can get many poor one-province nations whose need to unify to have any chance to be strong enough to fight back England. This kind of historical fragmentation is the same reason that justify why Japan have so many provinces compared to the "unified" Chinese provinces.

 

[peleliu]

Is there any chance that PDX management might apply the brakes and put this DLC on hold until after the holidays? Perhaps for a complete overhaul based on feedback from these forums. The devs do profess listening to suggestions, but I get the sense that the EU4 community here has been increasingly frustrated by the lack of communication. Actually, EU4 fans here have become downright rowdy and rebellious of late. There is clearly a disconnect between what was expected by many fans and what the development team is offering. Our faith in the ability of the EU4 team to deliver a quality product is wavering. Perhaps someone higher up the PDX management ladder can weigh in and assure us our concerns will be addressed.

 

[Xdevo]

Okay, this is driving me crazy: What is "Spanish Fly" a reference to?

Spanish fly or fliege is/was an aphrodisiac.

 

[maxirage]

On the first page of the main EU4 forum right now, there is a thread that calls a feature that of course can be questioned, but is still something a significant part of the player base agrees with "absolute garbage".

I am that poster and that description is completely accurate. There's multiple people like me who believe territory corruption is the single worst change ever done in EU4. The only people I've seen defend it are those who are vitriolically anti-blobbing and like anything that do so, no matter how detrimental it is to the game as a whole.

 

[Casko]

I am that poster and that description is completely accurate. There's multiple people like me who believe territory corruption is the single worst change ever done in EU4. The only people I've seen defend it are those who are vitriolically anti-blobbing and like anything that do so, no matter how detrimental it is to the game as a whole.

I like the territory corruption as a concept. however when it was released, alongside the missionary change that you could not convert in non-state provinces made it more garbage than it would had been on itself honestly. As if you can't convert you get double whammy of corruption. which was a pain and ruined playing as Russia for example.
And I have nothing against people who like to blob either.

 

[Aponez]

Currently the naval power is:
England/GB > The rest

It should be:
1444 - 1540 - Portugal & Venice & Denmark
1540 - 1600 - Portugal & Spain
1600 - 1660 - England & Spain
1660 - 1750 - Netherlands & G.B & Spain
1750 - 1820 - Great Brittain > The Rest

I would add the french navy from 1660 to 1750 , since 1670 and until their defeat at La Hougue in 1692, in the Spanish Succesion War they had a not bad role against the british and dutch fleets (even if they couldnt avoid the Borbonic defeat) and in 1782 they even got a last victory over the british at Chesapeake.

 

[Lusitania]

Spanish fly or fliege is/was an aphrodisiac.

Yeah, its mentioned briefly in the original Leisure Suit Larry game, so it has a slight pop culture notoriety.

 

[JustMormegil]

So after many failures you say that you are opened to suggestions... Maybe you should just have a look in suggestions subforum? Oh no, its too late...

 

[Snake_Squeezins]

Okay, this is driving me crazy: What is "Spanish Fly" a reference to?

The reference is a lot older than this clip, which is already pretty old:

 

[withche.07]

The English navy is by far the best in the game from 1444 to 1820 hands down.
This is laughably innacurate, as the Spanish navy did dominate England in the sea until the late 17th century.
The Spanish Armada wasn't thoroughly wrecked, not even close, it was scattered fought separately and disorganised and then was wrecked by storms, most of the Fleet still arrived home intact. The Spanish Flagship (Actually it was a Portuguese ship due to the P.U) S.Martinho alone sank 12 English ships in open battle.
England then sent their navy to retaliate and then yes, England got thoroughly defeated in Coruña and Lisbon by the Iberian Union.
Spain then sent two other Invasions of England, and England was unable to stop them.
One was again scattered by storms and the other actually managed to land in England, but sailed back without meeting the English army in the field.
Then later in 1741 when Great Brittain supposedly ruled the waves, Spain also utterly crushed them near Colombia, while being far more outnumbered than Brittain ever was. So Spain should be able to compete with Brittain navaly untill 1750 at least.

Currently the naval power is:
England/GB > The rest

It should be:
1444 - 1540 - Portugal & Venice & Denmark
1540 - 1600 - Portugal & Spain
1600 - 1660 - England & Spain
1660 - 1750 - Netherlands & G.B & Spain
1750 - 1820 - Great Brittain > The Rest

I would add the french navy from 1660 to 1750 , since 1670 and until their defeat at La Hougue in 1692, in the Spanish Succesion War they had a not bad role against the british and dutch fleets (even if they couldnt avoid the Borbonic defeat) and in 1782 they even got a last victory over the british at Chesapeake.

Ottoman navy could be included in that list for small periods especially when Aruj and Hayreddin Barbarossa brothers were leading it. They were probably stronger than Venice. Not about quality/tech so.
Ottomans could also at least try to resist Portuguese navy overseas, and secured some eritrea coast ports, fight against portuguese in india, supported se asian muslims, resisted spanish colonization of maghreb with Berbers etc.
Black sea was once Turkish lake and Ottomans once nearly fully ruled red sea as well.

They at least had high influence overseas as well. Not many non Europeans were that much strong to back local african, indian, se asian nations against European powers (even if they failed a bit)

Then they kept getting defeated in decline period...

By the way I wish they would include naval clashes of Ottomans with Portuguese as event or mission. That would show Portuguese superiority and would make gameplay playing with Portugal or Ottomans more enjoyable.

 

[Bandua_of_Gallaecia]

Ottoman navy could be included in that list for small periods especially when Aruj and Hayreddin Barbarossa brothers were leading it. They were probably stronger than Venice. Not about quality/tech so.
Ottomans could also at least try to resist Portuguese navy overseas, and secured some eritrea coast ports, fight against portuguese in india, supported se asian muslims, resisted spanish colonization of maghreb with Berbers etc.
Black sea was once Turkish lake and Ottomans once nearly fully ruled red sea as well.

They at least had high influence overseas as well. Not many non Europeans were that much strong to back local african, indian, se asian nations against European powers (even if they failed a bit)

Then they kept getting defeated in decline period...

By the way I wish they would include naval clashes of Ottomans with Portuguese as event or mission. That would show Portuguese superiority and would make gameplay playing with Portugal or Ottomans more enjoyable.

I was talking strictly about quality though, the Ottomans are huge and rich, they can field massive fleets so a lot of combat bonuses would be an overkill.
Besides it should be noted that there is a difference between being good in inland seas(galley power) or high seas (heavy ship power), so nations like Venice, the Ottomans and maybe even Denmark to some extent are more inland sea oriented than high seas oriented.

 

[Wagonlitz]

maybe even Denmark to some extent are more inland sea oriented than high seas oriented.

I wouldn't really call us inland seas focused. We never really had galleys and kept doing well with heavy ships.

 

[Bandua_of_Gallaecia]

I wouldn't really call us inland seas focused. We never really had galleys and kept doing well with heavy ships.

I honestly don't know much about Dannish naval warfare in the 15th to 17th centuries, so i was assuming a lot (but obviousoy not all) of its feats were in the Baltic Sea.
I apologise if i was wrong.

 

[Wagonlitz]

I honestly don't know much about Dannish naval warfare in the 15th to 17th centuries, so i was assuming a lot (but obviousoy not all) of its feats were in the Baltic Sea.
I apologise if i was wrong.

A lot of things were in the Baltic Sea, yes, but that's due to many naval battles being centered in and around Sjælland. But that doesn't mean that the fleet was galleys or in other ways unsuited for fighting on the high seas, and at least as late as the 1860s we won a big naval battle on the high seas and also had some really scary high seas ships, though our time as a big naval power ended when the Brits stole the navy in 1801. Not sure about how competitive we were in the 1700s, since from 1720 (end of the Great Nordic War) until 1801 we weren't really at war aside from a couple small skirmishes with the Swedes. Which was why I thought that 1600 or alternatively 1660 was a more fair cutoff. Plus, the Royal Navy of the 1700s/1800s it never was. But we did use to sink any fleet we opposed.

 

[Metz]

But i just love them to expand organic, sometimes stilling provinces from rivaling CN. Why destroy it?

You can end up with a Caribbean colonial nation that has provinces in Canada, the Northeastern part of the US, and South America.

It is administratively illogical to do so. That's why all the colonial powers divided their colonies based on specific geographic sectors.

We must also keep in mind that Great Britain is the size of Florida and Cuba is almost the size of Italy which the game scale doesn't represent.