• 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.

PortDoubloon01

Corporal
50 Badges
Jan 30, 2023
36
253
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
Something many have voiced concerns about are the assimilation and conversion (“A&C”) mechanics and speed. Many of us have noticed from youtuber gameplay that a player priority becomes assigning the cabinet to assimilate/convert (“A&C”) areas, resulting in ahistoric, rapid, mass A&C.

The devs have done an amazing job of creating what feels like a realistic and immersive historical gameplay experience, complete with granular depiction of historical religions and cultures. Game mechanics mostly reflect historical mechanics. The cabinet A&C action thus sticks out like a sore thumb, as mass A&C promoted by central government did not exist for most of this period, and the amazing depiction of diverse historical groups stands to be quickly wiped away by mass A&C from cabinet. There was no mechanism by which the central government could rapidly change language or habits until mass schooling in the 19th century. There were mass conversions, though these often failed and normally ended in abandonment or mass emigration (emigration is another cabinet feature which is more grounded imo).

Cabinet A&C is unrealistic and causes a strange and likely unsatisfying gameplay loop where the player must focus on clicking the cabinet A&C button to do unexplained mass A&C in one area at a time, waiting roughly 20-30 irl minutes before they must go and click the button again. The faster cabinet A&C is made, the more it undermines the history/realism of the game, and the need for the player to manage diverse populations. The slower cabinet A&C is made, the more frustrating/useless it becomes. Since cabinet A&C undermines depiction of and interaction with religion/culture, and nerfing it would just be frustrating, it ought to be removed. Luckily, Paradox already has the framework for a great A&C system.


Infrastructure & Laws, a proposed alternative to cabinet action:

1) A&C should primarily take place through government investment in infrastructure like universities, courts, theaters, and churches/mosques. Paradox has already included such modifiers for buildings, so this is prime for replacing the cabinet as the main mechanic. A&C infrastructure would be more rewarding than cabinet A&C button because players would have to weigh A&C against other building goals, it would provide incentive to build cultural infrastructure that was historically important, and it would encourage the player to interact with locations on the map rather than the cabinet menu. "I built a grand church/theater in [location] so people there gradually converted or learned my language" is more engaging than “cabinet member used abstract method to change culture in [location].” A&C infrastructure would be more realistic because players would focus on densely populated areas first (where A&C happened historically) and infrastructure like churches/schools encourage A&C in an intuitive and historical way. This could simultaneously be more realistic and fun by scaling with technology and state capacity over the span of the game. By end game, the player may even be able to build a school system like the French did to achieve mass A&C.

As an example, building for A&C created a fun gameplay loop in Imperator Invictus with theaters and temples. It was probably overtuned though.

2) Laws could also possibly be an engaging way to change A&C, with things like "restricting right of X minority to ride horses/bear arms" or "special privileges to primary culture/religion." This would provide a less abstract mechanism for A&C, give extra flavor, and give the player an interesting tradeoff between unrest and furthering A&C. However, I do realize this would probably be extra work for the devs compared to the already existing building modifiers.

3) If the cabinet A&C mechanic must remain, then it should at least cost something and cause substantial unrest.


Other thoughts:

It ought to be said that the devs have done a great job with religion and culture mechanics generally, including control and cultural strength features. The devs have also done a great job of making managing diversity a core part of the game. Even other cabinet features, like immigration/emigration actions are more realistic, as government resettlement was more common historically and moving people is less abstract than a premodern cabinet somehow changing the language of masses of peasants in 20 years. Moving pops also presents the player with strategic tradeoffs and a tool to manage diversity, while somehow assimilating a whole region presents no downside.

In game A&C should be balanced to be realistically slow. We should normally still see minorities like Jews in Europe and Greeks in Anatolia in the end game. It should take ~200 years to fully wipe out the Old Prussians (wiped out around 16th-17th century irl). If balanced properly, my proposal could depict A&C at a realistic pace. My proposal would also engage the player by depicting A&C as a result of long-term investment in specific locations and laws, rather than primarily the abstract action of a cabinet member.

Any suggestions by the rest of the community are welcome.
 
  • 22
  • 13
  • 7Like
  • 4
  • 1Love
Reactions:
I think the active role of a cabinet member can be plausible — even if, and I’ll give you that, it’s a bit ahistorical. But after all, it’s still a game, and culture is a fundamental feature of the gameplay. Maybe it could be tweaked a bit, but I still think cabinet actions are plausible and fine the way they are — at least, that’s how I see it.
 
  • 6
  • 3
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I think the active role of a cabinet member can be plausible — even if, and I’ll give you that, it’s a bit ahistorical. But after all, it’s still a game, and culture is a fundamental feature of the gameplay. Maybe it could be tweaked a bit, but I still think cabinet actions are plausible and fine the way they are — at least, that’s how I see it.
I think it is actually worse because culture is a fundamental feature of the gameplay. What is the point of setting up such amazing granular diversity, and engaging systems for players to manage diverse realms, if in the end there is a cabinet button you click to mass assimilate a whole region in only a few decades? Further, if you nerf the cabinet action, it becomes frustrating/useless because you then have to wait forever to click the button again. I also don't think it is plausible for the reasons I laid out. How is the cabinet causing these mass changes in language and culture among the peasantry? That didn't happen. If coring is the issue, I'd rather see coring not quite as tied to having majority primary culture pops than see mass assimilation as necessary gameplay.

I'm not saying you shouldn't be allowed to assimilate either, it should just be through interacting with infrastructure in locations and with specific laws.

I do have to grant that forced conversions happened and are plausible, even if they were often ineffective. The Byzantines "forced all the Jews" to convert multiple times. Funny that the Jews were still around to force to convert every few decades LOL. Also, forced conversions should at least result in unrest and emigration.
 
  • 5Like
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
I think it is actually worse because culture is a fundamental feature of the gameplay. What is the point of setting up such amazing granular diversity, and engaging systems for players to manage diverse realms, if in the end there is a cabinet button you click to mass assimilate a whole region in only a few decades? Further, if you nerf the cabinet action, it becomes frustrating/useless because you then have to wait forever to click the button again. I also don't think it is plausible for the reasons I laid out. How is the cabinet causing these mass changes in language and culture among the peasantry? That didn't happen. If coring is the issue, I'd rather see coring not quite as tied to having majority primary culture pops than see mass assimilation as necessary gameplay.

I'm not saying you shouldn't be allowed to assimilate either, it should just be through interacting with infrastructure in locations and with specific laws.

I do have to grant that forced conversions happened and are plausible, even if they were often ineffective. The Byzantines "forced all the Jews" to convert multiple times. Funny that the Jews were still around to force to convert every few decades LOL. Also, forced conversions should at least result in unrest and emigration.
The problem would be that if you have a whole bunch of different cultures, rebels would start spawning like crazy — especially in the Balkans — and that would get extremely annoying. It would be a bit like the anarcho-liberals in Victoria 2, who popped up every few years.


And honestly, it would feel kind of genocidal if the system allowed you to just deal with unrest by killing off other cultures — since with a pop system, you could effectively wipe out entire cultures just by letting their pops die in rebel wars. I’m not sure Paradox would want to go that route.


But yeah, you do have a valid point: the current system is a bit ahistorical. Still, I definitely prefer it over a system that basically encourages you to slaughter everyone who isn’t your culture.
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
I think it is actually worse because culture is a fundamental feature of the gameplay. What is the point of setting up such amazing granular diversity, and engaging systems for players to manage diverse realms, if in the end there is a cabinet button you click to mass assimilate a whole region in only a few decades? Further, if you nerf the cabinet action, it becomes frustrating/useless because you then have to wait forever to click the button again. I also don't think it is plausible for the reasons I laid out. How is the cabinet causing these mass changes in language and culture among the peasantry? That didn't happen. If coring is the issue, I'd rather see coring not quite as tied to having majority primary culture pops than see mass assimilation as necessary gameplay.

I'm not saying you shouldn't be allowed to assimilate either, it should just be through interacting with infrastructure in locations and with specific laws.

I do have to grant that forced conversions happened and are plausible, even if they were often ineffective. The Byzantines "forced all the Jews" to convert multiple times. Funny that the Jews were still around to force to convert every few decades LOL. Also, forced conversions should at least result in unrest and emigration.
idk if mass assimilation is really accurate. For the another nation to convert all of anatolia to be majority (not entirely) another culture, it would take longer than the entire game's timeframe even if they used all their advisors (depending on how many additional cabinet members you get later).

Like let's take an average of 50 years per province, and you have like 3 cabinet members working (I believe you currently start with 3). There's about 44 anatolian provinces. If - say - the Mamluks or something conquer anatolia day 1 and start mass assimilating, they will convert the majority of anatolia to egyptian by approximately the year 2070, and the provinces would still have a ton of turkish and greek peoples.

And that is assuming that you literally have nothing else you want to do with your cabinet.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
The problem would be that if you have a whole bunch of different cultures, rebels would start spawning like crazy — especially in the Balkans — and that would get extremely annoying. It would be a bit like the anarcho-liberals in Victoria 2, who popped up every few years.


And honestly, it would feel kind of genocidal if the system allowed you to just deal with unrest by killing off other cultures — since with a pop system, you could effectively wipe out entire cultures just by letting their pops die in rebel wars. I’m not sure Paradox would want to go that route.


But yeah, you do have a valid point: the current system is a bit ahistorical. Still, I definitely prefer it over a system that basically encourages you to slaughter everyone who isn’t your culture.
The balkans being rebel factories? Boy that sounds unrealistic, can't have that! But also I think small cultures dissimilar to yours *should* be annoying, they typically won't be worth holding personally due to culture capacity, and your best bet therefore is handing balkanized provinces outside your culture group to a vassal who's primary culture is one of them. I'm no expert on the balkans, but that seems like it was done pretty often irl whether due to control, rebellion, the pacta coventa or w/e
 
  • 5
  • 1
Reactions:
I agree, straight up culture conversion should not be possible. My suggestion for reasonable and realistic conquest would work something like this:

1. Locations with your primary culture can be cores, and if you conquer provinces with your primary culture those provinces can be turned into cores through cabinet action.

2. Locations with accepted culture (at the cost of culture capacity) can be turned into integrated locations (akin to territorial cores in EU4). Advances in later ages can lower the penalties for not being cores.

3. Locations with tolerated culture (at the cost of culture capacity) can be turned into semi-integrated locations (akin to non-cored provinces in EU4). Advances in later ages can lower the penalties for not being integrated locations or cores.

4. Locations with non-tolerated culture will never be able to be integrated, they will stay occupied indefinitely. These locations will incur overextension, that in turn works like in EU4. Later advances can lower the penalties of overextension.

No assimilation or culture conversion is possible. Only migration of own primary culture pops can change the culture of a location, and that is the only way to fully core new locations. Migration WILL cause ethnic conflict and unrest. Semi-integrated and occupied locations will be plagued by permanent unrest and separatism. Some late advances (perhaps in conjunction with the rise of nationalism) might extend cores to the culture group instead of just the primary culture.

The above would appropriately hamper unrealistic blobbing, and make WC impossible. It would be realistic and fair, and a nation that invests significant resources in repression of local populations would be able to expand more at the cost of stability and even more unrest.

Just my 2 cents.
 
Last edited:
  • 11
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
The problem would be that if you have a whole bunch of different cultures, rebels would start spawning like crazy — especially in the Balkans — and that would get extremely annoying. It would be a bit like the anarcho-liberals in Victoria 2, who popped up every few years.


And honestly, it would feel kind of genocidal if the system allowed you to just deal with unrest by killing off other cultures — since with a pop system, you could effectively wipe out entire cultures just by letting their pops die in rebel wars. I’m not sure Paradox would want to go that route.


But yeah, you do have a valid point: the current system is a bit ahistorical. Still, I definitely prefer it over a system that basically encourages you to slaughter everyone who isn’t your culture.
I don't think removing the cabinet button would necessarily lead to this. I would also not support rebel spam. A losing rebellion ought to pacify a region for a while, and I think it does right now. I am fine with persisting unrest in an unaccepted and unassimilated region though, as that is both realistic and a challenge for the player to deal with to keep mid-end game interesting. I certainly oppose genocide in game, as it would be terrible and also be very ahistorical.

I would propose a system that focuses on integrating cultures and/or getting them to accept your rule over them as legitimate. Or vassalizing large cultures that are too hard/distant to deal with. Or alternatively assimilation through my proposals on investing in locations and choosing laws that, while they come at a cost, also help A&C.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Maybe the cabinet action shouldn't be as strong as it is and should be augmented by other stuff, but I don't see an actual argument to not have it at all.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Maybe the cabinet action shouldn't be as strong as it is and should be augmented by other stuff, but I don't see an actual argument to not have it at all.
I just wish it was more clear how it's supposed to be working, as a number of plausible methods are already represented in game already like migration.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
idk if mass assimilation is really accurate. For the another nation to convert all of anatolia to be majority (not entirely) another culture, it would take longer than the entire game's timeframe even if they used all their advisors (depending on how many additional cabinet members you get later).

Like let's take an average of 50 years per province, and you have like 3 cabinet members working (I believe you currently start with 3). There's about 44 anatolian provinces. If - say - the Mamluks or something conquer anatolia day 1 and start mass assimilating, they will convert the majority of anatolia to egyptian by approximately the year 2070, and the provinces would still have a ton of turkish and greek peoples.

And that is assuming that you literally have nothing else you want to do with your cabinet.
Even just turning Cilicia majority Egyptian in 100 years would qualify as a mass assimilation. Especially with AI nations using the cabinet action, much of the diversity will be ahistorically wiped out. I know a lot of people on here don't like Ludi, but he showed video proof that Greeks and Cappadocians were near absent in Anatolia by ~1420. There were still hundreds of thousands in 1920 irl.

Also, I'm not against having assimilation and conversion in game. I just think its unrealistic, uninteresting, and undermines other aspects of the game to have a cabinet action that can mass assimilate the peasantry. Then if you nerf the cabinet action, it just becomes a frustrating false option.
 
  • 4
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Even just turning Cilicia majority Egyptian in 100 years would qualify as a mass assimilation. Especially with AI nations using the cabinet action, much of the diversity will be ahistorically wiped out. I know a lot of people on here don't like Ludi, but he showed video proof that Greeks and Cappadocians were near absent in Anatolia by ~1420. There were still hundreds of thousands in 1920 irl.

Also, I'm not against having assimilation and conversion in game. I just think its unrealistic, uninteresting, and undermines other aspects of the game to have a cabinet action that can mass assimilate the peasantry. Then if you nerf the cabinet action, it just becomes a frustrating false option.
Are you just lying lol?

1747343549513.png
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Maybe the cabinet action shouldn't be as strong as it is and should be augmented by other stuff, but I don't see an actual argument to not have it at all.
The argument, shortened:

1) One of the best parts of the game is historical/realistic mechanics and granular depiction of minorities.
2) There is no basis in real history for central government directed mass assimilation.
3) Assimilate cabinet action will undermine other mechanics surrounding managing diversity if it too good
4) If you nerf the cabinet action, it will just become frustratingly slow and useless
5) Therefore, other methods of assimilation would better serve the game.
 
  • 5Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
That's a general problem with cabinets imo

There are few slots so I'm afraid they will all being used for the 1 or 2 best actions, depending on the current meta

It's like always picking more or less the same idea groups in eu4
 
The argument, shortened:

1) One of the best parts of the game is historical/realistic mechanics and granular depiction of minorities.
2) There is no basis in real history for central government directed mass assimilation.
3) Assimilate cabinet action will undermine other mechanics surrounding managing diversity if it too good
4) If you nerf the cabinet action, it will just become frustratingly slow and useless
5) Therefore, other methods of assimilation would better serve the game.
1)I mean this is granular way of tackling minorities too
2)This is not mass assimilation, it's targeted and not even that fast(even if you argue it should be slower). Regardless it's an abstraction and the player is allowed to do things that were only rarely done IRL
3)4)I think it's a bit silly to argue you can't balance it to be meaningful but not too strong, like you say it's not possible but I don't see why. It seems a false dilemma
5)Non sequitur, both can coexist.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
yes! i also had the idea of "culture relations" like religions have, like if greek and turkish have good relations(less pillaging more development in minority pop locations, and maybe add the devshirme law or something to keep them hostile) would make them kindered and more likely to assimilate(alongside the works of art culture war mechanic)
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I just wish it was more clear how it's supposed to be working, as a number of plausible methods are already represented in game already like migration.
I agree, it should be boosting migration of accepted/primary culture, conversion of urban, noble and clergy elites of your religion and a weaker assimilation effect
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Are you just lying lol?
If you compare that map with the TT feedback map you will be able to see how vastly changed the situation is within less than 100 years, including elimination of most hashed areas. Around that timestamp (49:50) he also shows that he assimilated a fully Bulgarian area to 90% Greek with the cabinet action really quickly. Ludi and other youtubers also commented on assimilation rates without video proof. I will admit I forgot that the pocket of Cappadocians still remained.

I do not appreciate calling me a liar, that is needlessly aggressive. I would guess you didn't mean to cause offense though. Next time maybe drop the accusation to "mistaken?" I would appreciate that.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions: