Europa Universalis IV

[Zeriel]

Anyone else feeling like the new 3D map looks way, way less attractive than the previous iterations? Actually, maybe not even "less attractive". It just looks out and out wrong, especially where they tried to reflect mountainous terrain, and it looks like someone had a psychotic break while terraforming a map in a toolkit.

 

[Grinolf]

Loved the Forced March ability, this might introduce some awesome tactics involving high-manuever generals and lots of cavalry. I do find strange that it doesn't weaken your armies if you march for long.

It is hard to say before plaing, but it seems already pretty balanced. You need choose offensive idea slot for that, which now seems mandatory for every game. And, most importantly, you need use monarch points, which can be used on technology, ideas, generals, other military actions and, maybe, some buildings.It is not looking as bad as situation with administrative points, but you shouldn't have much surplus of them.

Like I said earlier, I don't like the idea of certain countries having their own unique NIs. Seems like a more furtive instrument of Historical Determinism.

No, it looking more like lazy game design. And I don't understand, why not doing that like in Magna Mundi, when you begin the game with some already choosen ideas, which is pain in ass to abadon. It is making much more sense.

LOL NO FINNS!!!!11

Which is good, since Finland is as low priority country as possible in that timeframe. Generic ideas would be more than enouth in that case.

 

[Spectacle]

One thing that really worries me about the new "monarch points" system is how it ties into technology. For example, a country that's frequently at war will be spending many points on military actions and will have less points over for advancing military technology, so their armies stagnate, while a peaceful trading country will have little else to spend MIL points on so their military tech will increase much faster.

Technological advance is generally driven by necessity, so it seems weird that you advance faster in a field the less you use it.

 

[Grinolf]

One thing that really worries me about the new "monarch points" system is how it ties into technology. For example, a country that's frequently at war will be spending many points on military actions and will have less points over for advancing military technology, so their armies stagnate, while a peaceful trading country will have little else to spend MIL points on so their military tech will increase much faster.

Technological advance is generally driven by necessity, so it seems weird that you advance faster in a field the less you use it.

Well, now you have to find balance between shortterm and longterm. And you shouldn't constantly improving your technology because ahead of time penalty. Also it is discouraged have two or more not completed military ideas in the same time.
Also, if we belive developers, you shouldn't have enough money to be constantly at war. And more wars mean more traditions, which now not wasted on generals, who dies after a year of life. Now you spent monarch points for that, which may be even more frustrating.

 

[Spectacle]

My point is that if you have no short-term interests in a field, there's nothing to balance. Even if there's a severe ahead of time penalty, you'll be spending your points on technology if you don't have anything else to use them for. Unless there are some extra modifiers they haven't told us about, warlike countries will inevitably have lower military technology than peaceful ones, and that's just weird.

 

[Grinolf]

My point is that if you have no short-term interests in a field, there's nothing to balance. Even if there's a severe ahead of time penalty, you'll be spending your points on technology if you don't have anything else to use them for. Unless there are some extra modifiers they haven't told us about, warlike countries will inevitably have lower military technology than peaceful ones, and that's just weird.

But on other hand, peaceful trading nations will be discouraged take too much military ideas, since they didn't have much use of it. More likely they will have only two of them. And taken would be those ideas, which improves also navy. I am not sure, but offensive ideas doesn't have such. Ahead of time penalty would let them have too large gap from other countries. And they would have very poor generals. Also warmonger would have much larger army from conquered territory.

Same situation also with administrative points, when small peaceful countries would have plenty of them, expansionis will be in constant shortage of them. So expansion are now looking pretty expensive.

Of course all that true for the player, and AI may be very stupid. So we will see enice with only one diplomacy idea group by the end of the game. But I hope they fix it fast if not already.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

LOL NO FINNS!!!!11

Which is good, since Finland is as low priority country as possible in that timeframe. Generic ideas would be more than enouth in that case.

Paska peli!

My point is that if you have no short-term interests in a field, there's nothing to balance. Even if there's a severe ahead of time penalty, you'll be spending your points on technology if you don't have anything else to use them for. Unless there are some extra modifiers they haven't told us about, warlike countries will inevitably have lower military technology than peaceful ones, and that's just weird.

But on other hand, peaceful trading nations will be discouraged take too much military ideas, since they didn't have much use of it. More likely they will have only two of them. And taken would be those ideas, which improves also navy. I am not sure, but offensive ideas doesn't have such. Ahead of time penalty would let them have too large gap from other countries. And they would have very poor generals. Also warmonger would have much larger army from conquered territory.

Same situation also with administrative points, when small peaceful countries would have plenty of them, expansionis will be in constant shortage of them. So expansion are now looking pretty expensive.

Of course all that true for the player, and AI may be very stupid. So we will see enice with only one diplomacy idea group by the end of the game. But I hope they fix it fast if not already.

It also bears mention that high Martial will make up for lacking Learning, as both factor in equally for monthly points in Military tech. And of course, battles themselves will generate Military tech points (~1 months worth per battle most of the time), whcih in turns means raiders can raid "war" for military tech rush.

And of course, the only military tech that really matters is Organization. Your generals will matter more than the % bonuses from unit type techs, with enough coastline you're drowning in galleys after a few Shipbuilding techs, and Siege Equipment loses important as doomstacks become readily available.

(EDIT: I'm way too tired if I thought this was the CK2 topic)

 

[Malakal]

Anyone else feeling like the new 3D map looks way, way less attractive than the previous iterations? Actually, maybe not even "less attractive". It just looks out and out wrong, especially where they tried to reflect mountainous terrain, and it looks like someone had a psychotic break while terraforming a map in a toolkit.

Yea, no, take off nostalgia goggles the new map can look awesome and has this "cloth map" feeling with good enough zoom out. Or do you not play exclusively in political mode zoomed out?

I personally dont like the geographic mad mode or the economic one but political is very nice, especially with mods changing the colors of nations. Because Paradox just LOVES giving weak ass colors to their map, like pink Poland. They lack saturation imo.

 

[Zeriel]

Anyone else feeling like the new 3D map looks way, way less attractive than the previous iterations? Actually, maybe not even "less attractive". It just looks out and out wrong, especially where they tried to reflect mountainous terrain, and it looks like someone had a psychotic break while terraforming a map in a toolkit.

Yea, no, take off nostalgia goggles the new map can look awesome and has this "cloth map" feeling with good enough zoom out. Or do you not play exclusively in political mode zoomed out?

I personally dont like the geographic mad mode or the economic one but political is very nice, especially with mods changing the colors of nations. Because Paradox just LOVES giving weak ass colors to their map, like pink Poland. They lack saturation imo.

As a basis for comparison. Personally, the topographical "tricks" come across like an eyesore to me. I prefer the old look for map-painting. I agree that you spend almost no time looking at the terrain mode in EU3--but it definitely does look better than the terrain mode for EU4, if you happen to glance at it.

 

[Malakal]

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?385077-HandDrawn-Map-by-Strannik-v2.x

Ye of little faith clicketh the link and watcheth what modders can do with eu3 map. Yes vanilla is shiteth but it doesnt matterth, who playeth vanilla anyway.

 

[Jim the Dinosaur]

One thing I really hope they get rid of is Super Indivisible/Indestructible China. I hated how in EU3 vanilla, no matter what happened, China never fell into the characteristic divisions and collapses that plague it from time to time. One of the things that sold Magna Mundi for me is that it was very possible for such a thing to happen – I think that one third of my games had China divided into warring states, which I loved to check on from time to time just to see how the mess was going. In fact, that also goes for Russia, Ottoman Empire, England and France, too. They are always united, whole, no long divisions or large-scale civil wars of any sort. They are the EU equivalent of Victoria 2 Super Indivisible Brazil, where, no matter what happens, Brazil never breaks up, ever, it always remains a giant South America blob. Its ridiculous because 1835-1840 was Brazil's darkest hour, it could've split into multiple countries rather than continuing united. Argentina too, which is hilarious because in the early Vicky 2 period it had just come out of a period of instability.

The whole idea of predetermined revolter nations has Historical Determinism written all over it anyway. Remember that old KOEI game Genghis Khan 2? That just had generic revolter nations named after the general that led the revolt. I once made a made for FTG that had a similar effect: (almost) every province could become a revolter nation, without predetermined culture, religion, etc.; only way to go for us anti-determinists.

Its also not a coincidence French demographics went to hell after this.

Pops, son, pops; only way to do it. Shame they never finished that EU2 to Vicky port.

 

[Grinolf]

Paska peli!
(EDIT: I'm way too tired if I thought this was the CK2 topic)

On the second I think, that I hopelessly fall behind last events.
But there is one thing, that I forgot. Advisors contribute contribute significant amounts of your MP. And it was already established, that good advisor cost you a fortune. So if a country don't need more military points, it can hire cheap advisor and save money on something else, like diplomat advisor.
But in such case we need hope, that money would be problem in entire game, not vanishing after first hundred years like in EU3.

 

[Destroid]

Anyone else feeling like the new 3D map looks way, way less attractive than the previous iterations? Actually, maybe not even "less attractive". It just looks out and out wrong, especially where they tried to reflect mountainous terrain, and it looks like someone had a psychotic break while terraforming a map in a toolkit.

Yea, no, take off nostalgia goggles the new map can look awesome and has this "cloth map" feeling with good enough zoom out. Or do you not play exclusively in political mode zoomed out?

I personally dont like the geographic mad mode or the economic one but political is very nice, especially with mods changing the colors of nations. Because Paradox just LOVES giving weak ass colors to their map, like pink Poland. They lack saturation imo.

I really like the new colour schemes and look of the new maps in general. Eu3 map is pretty hideous.

 

[Whisky]

New trailer. No gameplay, it's all about the music.

 

[Malakal]

Unfortunately their music was the best in Vic1/EU2 and then went to shit when they abandoned the classical music in favor of that composer of theirs that cant hold a candle to real masters...

 

[PorkaMorka]

Unfortunately their music was the best in Vic1/EU2 and then went to shit when they abandoned the classical music in favor of that composer of theirs that cant hold a candle to real masters...

Paradox's musical peak:

 

[Whisky]

Thanks a lot Porka, now I'm going to have that in my head all day at work.

 

[Corporate_Jew_Master]

Well, after Vapor vs Ware got pushed to next year, EUIV is the only thing we have to look forward to.

Dark times.

 

[Sranchammer]

Well, after Vapor vs Ware got pushed to next year, EUIV is the only thing we have to look forward to.

Dark times.

Look on the bright side. Now you can read all the rage on the EvW forum

 

[Whisky]

Well, after Vapor vs Ware got pushed to next year, EUIV is the only thing we have to look forward to.

Dark times.

It did? Fuck!

It's gonna be Magna Mundi all over again, won't it?

 

[Spectacle]

Well, after Vapor vs Ware got pushed to next year, EUIV is the only thing we have to look forward to.

Dark times.

It did? Fuck!

It's gonna be Magna Mundi all over again, won't it?

Looks like it. Good thing I stopped caring about it long ago. It's been clear from the dev diaries that it's just another mappainter and not a real representation of cold war power politics.

 

[DakaSha]

Thanks a lot Porka, now I'm going to have that in my head all day at work.

I can fix that



No need to thank me

 

[Average Manatee]

The whole idea of predetermined revolter nations has Historical Determinism written all over it anyway. Remember that old KOEI game Genghis Khan 2? That just had generic revolter nations named after the general that led the revolt. I once made a made for FTG that had a similar effect: (almost) every province could become a revolter nation, without predetermined culture, religion, etc.; only way to go for us anti-determinists.



Pops, son, pops; only way to do it. Shame they never finished that EU2 to Vicky port.

Never played that game, awesome concept, makes a lot of sense in pre-nationalism times.
You made a mod like that? Does it slow down the game? Got a version I can download that works with version 1.2 (Can't get the beta patch) and AGCEEP? You gotta post that stuff in the 'dex, bro.

That's pretty much how things work for EU:Rome. Put people in charge of territories and they revolt.

 

[Jim the Dinosaur]

Never played that game, awesome concept, makes a lot of sense in pre-nationalism times.
You made a mod like that? Does it slow down the game? Got a version I can download that works with version 1.2 (Can't get the beta patch) and AGCEEP? You gotta post that stuff in the 'dex, bro.

Still have to make a version suitable for release at some point, but it probably wouldn't work without the beta patch anyway (or with AGCEEP, it was made for the latest WATKABAOI map, which if you haven't tried it, you should). It was originally part of a much bigger anti-historical-determinist mod, with all the original events stripped away, the entire world filled out with nations, and an attempt to model things like colonization generically. The thing didn't work out because even with FTG, the damn engine still doesn't take such attempts kindly (the main problem is that you can't easily script for a generic nation; you can't say "if nation x has conditions a, b and c satisfied, then it has a chance of getting a chunk of new world", etc.). So I wanted to separate out the viable parts for release and then got distracted by FO2 modding, which is a lot more versatile anyway. Will get to it one day though.

 

[Spectacle]

Exporter DLC from CK2 is pretty much confirmed: