• 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.

NoseFaceButt

Private
71 Badges
Nov 22, 2016
12
2
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Prison Architect
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Cities: Skylines - Campus
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Victoria 2
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
It's a region that comprises 10% of the development of the game, yet it has no attention given to it.

The major problems I see, just off the top of my head:
  • The Mughals never form
  • The Delhi Sultanate never dominates North India
  • Vijaynagar never disintegrates
  • Bahmanis don't beat the living shit out of Vijaynagar
  • 70% of the time Europeans don't break into India
  • Literally zero events for most countries in the region, significant or insignificant.
Some of these issues are really easy to fix, to fix the first issue, just make Delhi collapse and turn into the Mughals, because that's literally what happened in history (kinda).

For the second, give Delhi lucky nation status for a while, or boost its development, also Multan should be a tributary to Delhi, which would also help boost its power.

Some important but not as significant things are:
  • Sikhism always dies out
  • The Punjabi empire never forms
These are just the really obvious problems, I'm sure there are a 100 more I could point out if I spent some time, but it's really annoying when Arabia, a region with 300 development, is more historically accurate than the region with 6 time that much dev. I would seriously pay for the DLC that fixes this region.

TL;DR: 3 minute clip on what South Asian after 1444
 
Upvote 0
India always becomes a "Big 3" but who those three are will vary a ton. I've seen it be Orissa, Punjab, and Nepal, and other various strange/atypical combos.

Anyway, I know Trin has said specifically that India is a region he wants to get some attention, so it could be the DLC after the 1.25 immersion pack.
 
I think most would agree that India should be next in line for a focused DLC. I'm personally glad the next DLC is Western Europe but I can certainly see why fans of India are clamouring for some attention.

However I'm not sure you'll make many friends on this forum by asking for a more historical outcome, particularly if you use phrases like "make Delhi collapse". People don't like flavour if it causes historical outcomes without the appropriate in-game causes.

Me being a Eurocentric shitlord my main gripe with India is the anti-Europe trade node configuration and the inabilty of the European AI colonisers to make any sort of headway on the subcontinent.
 
While I agree it would be nice to have India revisited, I'd love for Spain & HRE to be updated first as I am pretty sure they are played significantly more often than Indian nations.

Your reasoning for an Indian update does seem to be driven by conformation bias, as it is largely exaggerated how little the more historic like outcomes are. The rarest thing is to see Europeans in India. Deli regularly dominates, Bahmanis regularly dominates, Mughalls sometimes form, Punjab sometimes exists and survives and expands a little, sikhism usually dies out - at times they even spread. Personally I'd love to see Mughalls dominate fairly often, then explode which then triggers events for europeans to try to invade.
 
Your reasoning for an Indian update does seem to be driven by conformation bias, as it is largely exaggerated how little the more historic like outcomes are. The rarest thing is to see Europeans in India. Deli regularly dominates, Bahmanis regularly dominates, Mughalls sometimes form, Punjab sometimes exists and survives and expands a little, sikhism usually dies out - at times they even spread. Personally I'd love to see Mughalls dominate fairly often, then explode which then triggers events for europeans to try to invade.

I agree with you except that

1. In reality the Bahmanis didn't dominate, they just died after beating up Vijaynagar.
2. I've played 900 hours and never seen the AI form Mughals, maybe I'm an outlier, dunno.

It just seems like to me that Europe is super historically accurate compared to all the other regions, and while I get that the game is called europa universalis that still doesn't mean that the focus should only be Europe, which paradox has also said with it's recent DLC.

And I think that you can also agree with me that the number of events that India gets is on par with regions like Central Africa and the new world, regions that aren't documented very well in comparison.

I also think that you can agree with the fact that Vijaynagar beats Bahmanis more times than Bahmanis beats it, by a large margin. Mostly because of Vijaynagar's large development and because Bhamanis is Shia.

From what I've seen they haven't said where this one will be based. No new mechanics have been shown.

Yeah, I think I heard it's in western europe, haven't really been active on the forums lol.

However I'm not sure you'll make many friends on this forum by asking for a more historical outcome, particularly if you use phrases like "make Delhi collapse". People don't like flavour if it causes historical outcomes without the appropriate in-game causes.

Me being a Eurocentric shitlord my main gripe with India is the anti-Europe trade node configuration and the inabilty of the European AI colonisers to make any sort of headway on the subcontinent.

It just seems like Europe is super historically accurate relative to other regions, Arabia and the near east are also way more accurate now and so is South East Asia, I feel like a region this important (to Europe considering it was a very large colony) needs some attention.

I also strongly agree with your second point, perhaps if more of the trade flowed into Zanzibar.

India always becomes a "Big 3" but who those three are will vary a ton. I've seen it be Orissa, Punjab, and Nepal, and other various strange/atypical combos.

I don't want rigid historical accuracy but I think that the region should at least be historically accurate to the point that the Mughals form and Vijaynagar breaks down, both of these things don't happen a lot of the time. More often than not Vijaynagar eats up Bhamanis and dominated South India and the Deccan, more often than not (in fact pretty much never as far as my games are concerned) the Mughals don't form. Considering that the Mughals and the British were the two powers that Influenced South Asia the most in the time frame of the game I think this is pretty wrong. This would be the equivalent of Scotland almost always eating England and Ireland and becoming the colonial power that England became irl.

That's not true at all. In my games, Bahmanis completely annexed Vijaynagar multiple times, becoming the local blob.

Same here but more often than not Vijaynagar beats Bahmanis because Bahmanis is Shia so it can't get allies easily, and Vijaynagar has more development.

Also both the Vijaynagara empire and the Bahmani sultanate disintegrate irl, I wouldn't mind them living on in my games but I think it should at least be a little historically accurate. In Europe most of the countries are very historically accurate. In the near east, south east asia and arabia it's moderately accurate, but India is just crazy inaccurate. I think that at least the Mughals should form, but that isn't the case 99% of the time. They haven't formed in a single one of my games.

Edit: Also wanted to mention that the reason I'm obsessed with the formation of the Mughals and collapse of VIjaynagar is because these aren't facts you can just brush over, the Mughals are the literally the biggest cultural and historically important empire of the region and not in a small sense either.
 
Last edited:
I agree with you except that

1. In reality the Bahmanis didn't dominate, they just died after beating up Vijaynagar.
2. I've played 900 hours and never seen the AI form Mughals, maybe I'm an outlier, dunno.

It just seems like to me that Europe is super historically accurate compared to all the other regions, and while I get that the game is called europa universalis that still doesn't mean that the focus should only be Europe, which paradox has also said with it's recent DLC.

And I think that you can also agree with me that the number of events that India gets is on par with regions like Central Africa and the new world, regions that aren't documented very well in comparison.

I also think that you can agree with the fact that Vijaynagar beats Bahmanis more times than Bahmanis beats it, by a large margin. Mostly because of Vijaynagar's large development and because Bhamanis is Shia.

Yeah, I was just letting you know Bahmanis regularly dominates because you said they never beat Vijayanagar - that being one of your reasons for India to be touched next.

EU:IV has focused on Asian plenty recently with 2 major expansions focusing there. I'd like to see Europe being updated to the same detail. I'm not saying I don't want an updated India, but only after Europe has been revised.

Mughalls forms a lot more now with the latest update/expansion. It's not common, but it does happen from time to time.

I cannot agree that Vijayanagar beats Bahmanis more often. In the majority of my games Bahmanis beats Vijayanagar, and from looking at other peoples screenshots on this site and Reddit, it happens in their games more often too.
 
Also both the Vijaynagara empire and the Bahmani sultanate disintegrate irl, I wouldn't mind them living on in my games but I think it should at least be a little historically accurate.

Historical accuracy, well you have got it wrong here.

The higher development of Vijayanagar over Bahamans sultanate in 1444 is perfectly accurate.

The Vijayanagar empire lost prominence after battle of Talikota in 1565. And to be historically accurate The Bahamani Sultanate shouldn't even exist after 1527. (disintegration between 1518-27).

The fact is between 1540-1555 Vijayanagari armies were the military machine deciding every battle in the South India. Just a few years later in 1565 in the battle of Talikota they were defeated by a coalition of five armies of Ahmednagar, Golconda, Bidar, Berar & Bijapur. And as per the book by Robert Sewell "The Forgotten Empire" the Vijayanagar were winning the battle initially but later two of their general betrayed them and joined the enemies in the middle of war making things difficult for Vijayanagar.

Also note that after the battle the city of Vijayanagar was burned and tuned to ruins but the Deccan sultanates didn't take any land beyond Tungabhadra river, (Raichur Doab.)

Vijayanagar did survive till 1646 but were no longer prominent. Nayak states surfaced everywhere in the south including Ceylon. (erstwhile Vijayanagari vassals).

You seem to have problem with Delhi sultanates as well. Well story is not very different, During multiple of battles between Delhi & Jaunpur, many chiefs and vassals (including local Rajas & Rais) were in the habit of switching sides during crucial moments. A feature very characteristic in British India as well.
Moreover EU4 battles in the north India completely ignores the role of geography and rainy season, a 5km to 10km wide Ganges (July-August) and floods in most of the places where Jaunpuri though expert in river warfare will unfortunately get drowned and Jaunpur will loose substantial men and Afghani armies of Delhi will try to avoid water because of lesser river warfare experience and be lucky.

India does need a lot of attention, not only Mughals but Maratha as well & the war of colonisers for larger cake and lots of tags. And many more.

Having said all that I would like to quote as Johan says in the words of Tolkien, "A patch is never late, NorseFaceButt, nor is it early, it arrives precisely when it means to."
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I think I heard it's in western europe, haven't really been active on the forums lol.
I've seen them mention changes to the British isles but that seems part of the free change. Could still have the DLC focus else where. Could also have a free rework of the old trade company mechanic.
 
Moreover EU4 battles in the north India completely ignores the role of geography and rainy season, a 5km to 10km wide Ganges (July-August) and floods in most of the places where Jaunpuri though expert in river warfare will unfortunately get drowned and Jaunpur will loose substantial men and Afghani armies of Delhi will try to avoid water because of lesser river warfare experience and be lucky.
this is actually pretty interesting. i'd like to see a seasonal modifier to tropical/jungle lands similar to the arctic's "severe cold". There could be a notable attrition boost, further reduced movement speed, and a bigger bonus roll to defenders.
 
Historical accuracy, well you have got it wrong here.

The Vijayanagar empire lost prominence after battle of Talikota in 1565. And to be historically accurate The Bahamani Sultanate shouldn't even exist after 1527. (disintegration between 1518-27).

The fact is between 1540-1555 Vijayanagari armies were the military machine deciding every battle in the South India. Just a few years later in 1565 in the battle of Talikota they were defeated by a coalition of five armies of Ahmednagar, Golconda, Bidar, Berar & Bijapur. And as per the book by Robert Sewell "The Forgotten Empire" the Vijayanagar were winning the battle initially but later two of their general betrayed them and joined the enemies in the middle of war making things difficult for Vijayanagar.

Also note that after the battle the city of Vijayanagar was burned and tuned to ruins but the Deccan sultanates didn't take any land beyond Tungabhadra river, (Raichur Doab.)

Vijayanagar did survive till 1646 but were no longer prominent. Nayak states surfaced everywhere in the south including Ceylon. (erstwhile Vijayanagari vassals).

You seem to have problem with Delhi sultanates as well. Well story is not very different, During multiple of battles between Delhi & Jaunpur, many chiefs and vassals (including local Rajas & Rais) were in the habit of switching sides during crucial moments. A feature very characteristic in British India as well.
Moreover EU4 battles in the north India completely ignores the role of geography and rainy season, a 5km to 10km wide Ganges (July-August) and floods in most of the places where Jaunpuri though expert in river warfare will unfortunately get drowned and Jaunpur will loose substantial men and Afghani armies of Delhi will try to avoid water because of lesser river warfare experience and be lucky.

India does need a lot of attention, not only Mughals but Maratha as well & the war of colonisers for larger cake and lots of tags. And many more.

I pretty much agree with all of this, I honestly only have a brief overview of South Indian History since I'm mainly interested in the Mughal empire in India and the Mauryans so those are who I read up on most. I can't believe I forgot about the Marathas either, they were a military powerhouse in India during Aurangzeb's later years.

As for what you mentioned about terrain I strongly agree, rivers like the Ganga and the Indus are as wide as 25 km in some areas (at least the Indus is idk about the Ganga), the same applies to the Brahmaputra.

Also I think that you can agree with me on the fact that the destruction of the Vijaynagar empire was incredibly significant in South Asian history and isn't something that can simply be overlooked.

On terrain modifiers I think they should really add more attrition modifiers for some regions, e.g. earlier I was reading up on the Battle of Samugarh and I read up on how soldiers from both armies constantly fell ill, passed out, and sometimes died from the incredible heat. The book I read was "the Mughal Throne" by Abraham Eraly, I really don't know about the attrition numbers but he sure made the heat seem like an important factor in the war.
 
"Zero attention"?

Sorry but that's just hyperbole. India got a major rework in Art of War. Yes, that's been yeara ago and other parts of the world are more detailed than ever before while India hasn't changed post-AoW, but @Trin Tragula has shown interest in the region.

I think the developers are well aware.
 
I bet that India DLC will receive lukewarm reception similar to Rajas of India in CK II. Can't see any useful feature that will improve the game that can be measured with India improvement if we talk about regular DLC. Another Immersion Pack may also be seen negative and not useful, because Indian countries are far more rare choices to play in comparison with Russia or England/France//Burgundy/Dutch minors.
 
Yeah it was meant to be hyperbole.
It's the kind of hyperbole that tends to make people think you're a blind idiot, though - because we do get blind idiots asking why (region that has received significant attention) is not getting any attention.

"India needs more attention", while still not the best way to express your sentiment, would have been much a better thread title than "Why is India given zero attention" :)
 
I bet that India DLC will receive lukewarm reception similar to Rajas of India in CK II. Can't see any useful feature that will improve the game that can be measured with India improvement if we talk about regular DLC. Another Immersion Pack may also be seen negative and not useful, because Indian countries are far more rare choices to play in comparison with Russia or England/France//Burgundy/Dutch minors.
I doubt it. India was a big factor in the EU4 timeline, with the spice trade (along with the silk road) being the very reason colonialism started (Remember, Spain went to find the new world in search of a way to reach INDIA. It just so happened that planet Earth is a lot bigger than the Spanish thought). Additionally, a DLC to better model how the Europeans actually handled India (via some sort of trade-post system where they gain transfer trade in exchange for giving the local rulers ducats would be the best I think could be modeled in-game. Really they just controlled single ports and would embargo if the local ruler got uppity, hurting the economy too badly to make it worth going to war with them but EU4's total war system doesn't really allow for this). In short, India was important and being able to create a different India which either works with the Europeans in a way which benefits them even more or outright tells them to go stick themselves is an option which EU4 does need. Currently your choices in India consist of picking if you want to be Shia, Sunni, Hindu, Buddhist or Sikh and trying to expand to the point where you're big enough to form Bharat/Hindustan. Optionally you also have the Mughals if you chose to start instead as one of the Timurid states.

There's very little variation between the states when in actuality the different Indian states had a lot more to show and many possibilities for alternative worlds which were decided through minor shifts in the history timeline.

CK2's issues with Rajas are this as far as I understand:
1) CK2's engine was failing at the time of RoI: The engine couldn't cope with its existing number of AI characters and adding an India more just meant for the inevitable slowdown of games to occur sooner. Subsequent patches improved this but players never forgave Paradox for it.
2) India's influence in CK2's period: While India had an impact, it was largely an impact upon the Muslim world and the direct impact on Europe was quite minimal.
3) India's mechanics: India in CK2 is very insular. It's pretty difficult to expand from India out to the rest of the game world, leading to a largely ignored segment and a perception of it being a waste of resources to run this "minigame" in CK2.
 
As we have said before (and have for years, like I used to whenever the Timurids were brought up) we also recognize India is in need of attention in the future. It is not the only region to be in need of that however, so all in due time :)

Like with all regions concrete suggestions are welcome and will be revisited when we do get to that region at some point. That’s also more or less what this forum is for so by all means make more of them for all topics you have something you would like to suggest something for (not just India). :)

I bet that India DLC will receive lukewarm reception similar to Rajas of India in CK II. Can't see any useful feature that will improve the game that can be measured with India improvement if we talk about regular DLC. Another Immersion Pack may also be seen negative and not useful, because Indian countries are far more rare choices to play in comparison with Russia or England/France//Burgundy/Dutch minors.

There has never been strong reactions against adding non-European content for eu during my 3.5 years on the project. Quite the contrary. That is as far as I know mostly a thing in the ck community (and that community is off topic to discuss here).

Given that this is a suggestions forum for what could be done in various ways with the game I would not worry about discussing stuff like popularity, we have better ways to judge that. :)
We come here for the suggestions themselves.
 
Another Immersion Pack may also be seen negative and not useful, because Indian countries are far more rare choices to play in comparison with Russia or England/France//Burgundy/Dutch minors.
Improvements in the representation of India are critical to providing a satisfactory gameplay experience in Europe.

Remember, a big part of the reason why the Age of Exploration happened was that Europeans wanted to find a sea route to India so that they could get their hands on those sweet, sweet Indian trade goods without paying the markup charged by Muslim middlemen.