Thoughts on the new institution tech penalty cost?

[CrazyMe]

I actually like the new system, it is more logical. Though some tweaking may be necessary.

AIs pays more for techs across the whole game, like more 5000-10000 mana points than before. This AI mana isn't going to ideas, deving, coring etc. So AIs got massively weaker by this change. They neeed more time to get to the same point than before (time gets those lacking points).

I think this is just an unintended effect of the change. Hard to imagine devs trying to wreck AIs and at the same time saying they're working on improving them.

I see your concerns, but I think you exaggerate the problem (based on your specific case) and you do not even focus on real problem that is the often big de-sync between the institution spawn and penalty. A bit lesser problem is the balance in institutions spread.

Colonialism really needs tweaking, as it may spawn too late, in “unlucky” location and spreads badly. This may break the balance in MPs in 16th century.

Also some %% and MPs spending prioritization may be tweaked a bit, but this does not seem to be a major problem.

 

[Zelius]

I'd just like to point out that there's a bug in 1.32 (and 1.32.0.1 beta) that causes the AI to not budget for advisors.

See for yourself, Run observe/spectate mode for a year or two and see that the most spent on advisors is by Ming, with a whopping +1 military advisor.

There's already a bug report and the issue is easily replicable, so let's hope the devs fix this, maybe give it a balance pass, before redesigning the whole thing.

 

[_Bachus_]

Edit: Thinking more about it, these numbers are probably a bit undertuned for institutions spawning on time, where staying even just slightly behind is already cheaper than the old system. But you get the idea.

The issue is that tech is now unconnected to institution spawn. So it leads to cases where you have massive jump on tech costs vs other scenarios where spawn was different, time and place wise.

As as concept this could work. I have no qualms with it alone. But the problem is that AI is totally unprepered for the change. Again they release sth that AIs completely not work with.

Either you teach AI your concepts and release it only after or not make the change at all. Because you break the system otherwise like I just presented before.

 

[Bandua_of_Gallaecia]

So... Is the system working as intended, but the AI is stupidly rushing techs, thus paying far more MP than they used to?

In that case it should require only a few tweaks on the AI decision weighting for researching technology right?

 

[_Bachus_]

In that case it should require only a few tweaks on the AI decision weighting for researching technology right?

Yes. But it's not a simple change as putting icons or monuments modifiers. You need to actually factor different scenarios in and teach AI when it's not dumb to do sth. This only sounds easy and looking at the track record..................... best solution is not to make those changes if you need 2 years to teach AIs.

 

[Smeeved]

Thanks everyone for sharing your feedback, I will keep following this thread to see what people think and gather ideas.

Let me just share some of my thoughts since I'm the one responsible for this rework
- Balance wise, the only real change is supposed to be that the tech penalty will now be more forgiving when you are behind on tech than when you are ahead, unlike the old system which often did the opposite.
- This means if you are used to being ahead of your neighbors in tech, and especially if your neighbors get the institutions before you do, you should expect to have to swallow a somewhat greater tech cost than before. This applies very much to Gougluinn's Ottomans example.
- On the flip side, if you allow yourself fall behind in tech, this will be a lot easier to recover from.
- In most cases, as some here have noted, the balance hasn't really changed. In Swagmeister's Ethiopia case for example, I guess he would have the same problem with the old system. However in the new system, he also had the option to temporarily fall behind on tech until Renaissance reaches him. Which in the old system would have been terrible, because then he would just have had to pay the Colonialism penalty instead.

Anyway, I'm very much open to changing this system based on feedback, so please keep putting your thoughts here.
Personally I enjoy playing with the new system though, and I had one Lübeck and one Semien campaign

Please can you make it moddable to revert to the previous system?

Right now you can only remove the tech penalties tied to tech, but not restore the old system which isn't ideal. Speaking on behalf of the MP community, most groups will either stay on earlier patches or mod it out. It's just not a good change for multiplayer, where you have multiple different people in different regions across the map that need to stay update to date on tech for a number of different reasons, and devving for every instutition as soon as it spawns is just not realistic.

 

[_Bachus_]

Orgins update:

In stunning development France and England are first colonizers in Caribbean. There is no Portugal or Castile there yet.

Meanwhile Castile can't complete idea groups that allow colonization. And we have year 1556. No colonial nations yet after 100 years.

 

[_Bachus_]

And first time since starting playing Eu4 France claimed Caribbean. Strange new Orgins

 

[Nostalgium]

I really like the change - gating specific techs to certain institutions feels more natural than suffering to embrace Standardized Pikes as the Aztecs because you have to pay 150% for lacking three institutions, two of which aren't even relevant to that tech for those who took it earlier - but as others have pointed out, I think it's causing the AI to struggle with ideas. Probably has to do with which at which penalty values the AI thinks taking tech over ideas is acceptable.

 

[Krschtschn]

I have also noticed the AI spending too many points on technology. I think it might be an issue with the AI evaluating technology levels as too important. At least in my games, they seem too budget too little for development and ideas. Which could also explain why AIs seem to ignore universities in 1.32.0.

Nevertheless, I think the idea of tech levels being tied to institutions is superior to a global penalty. As others have said before, the issue is with the fine tuning.

 

[_Bachus_]

I have a problem with methodology of changing mechanics here.

Currently it looks like this:

1) PDX changes sth without any plan or consistency between different mechanics
2) Then something always blows up in their faces because point 1 and game breaks in one way or the other (e.g. Concentrate Development or now tech rework)
3) 1-2 patches later they look at it and adjust what isn't working.

Does anybody else think this is crazy concept to make anything like this? Before they repair what isn't working correctly they destroy some other mechanics. This is for sure not the way to build anything good long term.

The concepts are maybe good but execution is abysmal. The premise of meddling with tech was to make institution more important, at least that what was said. But nobody said anything about destroying Ais ability to cope with institution system as part of this process. Yet that is what happened. The change broke more things that it improved. We just don't know them all yet.

 

[Josar]

Overall does not feel that different, and may actually be more lenient for those countries that are often 3 institutions behind like Ming.

 

[Less2]

I have also noticed the AI spending too many points on technology. I think it might be an issue with the AI evaluating technology levels as too important. At least in my games, they seem too budget too little for development and ideas. Which could also explain why AIs seem to ignore universities in 1.32.0.

It could be a problem. The other problem is the unbalanced research penalty. It's always been a pretty dumb and annoying hack-job to encourage players to not drop behind in Adm/Dip tech, but players could be efficient enough economically to buy down corruption. AIs generally can't. If AIs are encouraged to ignore Adm/Dip tech (which is a good idea if you have a tech cost penalty), the unbalanced research would need to be looked at because AIs can't handle the corruption.

IMO unbalanced research should just be scrapped completely. If Paradox wants to discourage players waiting till they are 15 techs behind to start buying at a -75% discount then they should simply cap the max behind time discount at -25% or so.

 

[DrZoidberg]

They should remove that you can deving for institutions.
It is unhistorical that you can invent renaceans or enlightenment by deving 15 times. Reneceans and enlightenment was a long process of european thought.
Also for gameplay it is too easy to dev to get institutions, if you play lets say in japan it is easy to stay at the technological frontier.

 

[MachopPower69]

They said they working on improving AI. And we've got a massive AI nerf. AIs lost ideas, lost dev, have less modifiers, have less buildings and armies than before. They even colonize later than before on average, and this was like main focus of the update.

This is just a random consqueqnece that PDX didn't even see and predict. It just happened to them and they are baffled. Shows you how this is done. Someone makes some change and it blows randomly in their face because they didn't see what the change causes and changes. They should say: "we're changing this and that and we'll see what it will change" instead of "we're working on improving AIs". They just look dumb now. Because AIs got even more dumb than before working on this improvement. And if someone was working on improving sth and the effect is completely opposite, should they continue in other areas? It leads to disaster..................

The only colonies I seen post-League Wars were just Spanish Brazil and Portuguese Cuba. Nothing in Colombia, nothing in the quiet NA, just Brazil and Cuba

 

[adin85]

1) It's much easier play in the Europe.
2) From Technology point of view Catholic has fastest access to get institution without deving provinces.
3) It went in good way. It's more realistic.
4) Biggest issue is Ai dont deving provinces.

 

[Manwe_Sulimo]

Still need to observe the impact on AI as I am still in my first game in 1501 without seeing beyond the Ottomans as Ethiopia.

Personally I like the concept, but I think the tech penalty come one tech too early, you already get a 15 % penalty for a tech that you could buy at no, or very low penalty before. That is a problem for the player but with the reported behaviour even more for the AI.
I find it strange that the instituions now significantly affect nations that are at the forefront of adopting instituitions. IMO Italian nations, ... should be able to buy tech immediatly without paying a penalty, but as it is now they might need to either wait or pay. Pushing back the penalty by 1 tech might solve it, maybe it could then be raised to 20 / 35 / 50 or so, or if it is kept for the current tech levels go something the like of 10 / 20 / 35 / 50.

Generally I find it a bit strange that the AI sometimes prioritizes tech over ideas, wouldn't it make more sense to let it always go for ideas first and then catch up with the now cheaper tech?

 

[_Bachus_]

Generally I find it a bit strange that the AI sometimes prioritizes tech over ideas, wouldn't it make more sense to let it always go for ideas first and then catch up with the now cheaper tech?

Except military tech. Most dip and adm aren't worth rushing unless you have some specific strat in mind, which AIs don't have anyway.

Colonization is very weak in my Sweden game. In 1574 Castile has 10 provinces in Brazil. Portugal the same in La Plata. Caribbean 10 provinces for France. In NA only Holland and Norway with 2 provinces each. England went for Caribbean as well but lost it to France after one war. All this effort to nerf natives ended in nerfing colonizers much more by increasing their tech costs.

 

[Sunlg103]

I like the new system better than the old one. It makes more sense that techs closely related to certain institutions are more costly (harder) to research without that knowing/being influenced by that particular institution. I also feel like it works balance wise...

However like the old system it doesn't solve the main tech problem in eu4... That tech disparity between certain countries should grow larger during the games time frame, not smaller.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Colonization is very weak in my Sweden game. In 1574 Castile has 10 provinces in Brazil. Portugal the same in La Plata. Caribbean 10 provinces for France. In NA only Holland and Norway with 2 provinces each. England went for Caribbean as well but lost it to France after one war. All this effort to nerf natives ended in nerfing colonizers much more by increasing their tech costs.

Colonizers taking this long is game over for natives, if you rely on Europeans to reform. Randomly, settled natives can't colonize with a colonist either, so anybody running natives under this condition should either make an animist feudal monarchy in Mexico/Peru to reform off them, or reform into horde as a tribe so they can play the game.

Hordes with new world religions have some problems with unity, but in contrast to waiting for the AI to do something that's not completely unsolvable.