Europa Universalis IV

[Average Manatee]

Anyone think that Portugal mission tree is a bit sad? I liked how it now rewards conquering the Morrocan coast (but be prepared to spend mil points to give harsh treatments to revolters) now. They should have given it some more depth, like:

Mission trees were designed to be the new thing you buy DLC for. Russia got one, UK got one, India got one. Prepare to pay $20 for another 10 missions in the Iberia DLC.

 

[The Brazilian Slaughter]

Anyone think that Portugal mission tree is a bit sad? I liked how it now rewards conquering the Morrocan coast (but be prepared to spend mil points to give harsh treatments to revolters) now. They should have given it some more depth, like:

Mission trees were designed to be the new thing you buy DLC for. Russia got one, UK got one, India got one. Prepare to pay $20 for another 10 missions in the Iberia DLC.

Honestly, an Iberia DLC is overdue. They're increasing granularity across the board - look at how big Ireland is now. Its kinda bizarre to see Ireland have more provinces than Portugal now.

 

[fantadomat]

Anyone think that Portugal mission tree is a bit sad? I liked how it now rewards conquering the Morrocan coast (but be prepared to spend mil points to give harsh treatments to revolters) now. They should have given it some more depth, like:

- A mission to conquer the rest of Morocco, and/or maybe convert all of it. Maybe make it part of a "Path of Reconquista" that leads Portugal as far as Jerusalem. Some Portuguese kings had ambitions in that regard.
- A deeper Angola/Kingdom of Kongo path? The Portuguese relations with the Kingdom of Kongo were fairly important. The end-game should be either conquering for real (as OTL) or keeping it as a useful vassal/ally. As it is, colonizing near them makes them want to conquer your stuff.
- A deeper Iberia-focused subtree? Liberate Galicia, conquer Castille, maybe conquer Aragon too. But NOT lose the Portugal tag, because fuck becoming Spain.
- Deeper Brazil tree? Conquer amerindian nations, colonize certain regions, defeat any other colonizers. Perhaps a mission that leads into colonizing Uruguay/Cisplatina, because the Portuguese were quite interested in the area and tried to take it - hell, the game pretty much pushes you to make Portuguese South Africa, and the Portuguese never made big colonies there in our timeline.
- No Japan? Nigga plz. We should totes be able to ship guns and Christ to the Japanese.

Overall, I think the best developed part of the whole Portuguese mission tree is the one that leads to India. Althrough I would make it less dependent on certain specific provinces and use % of region more, one major taking your stuff could ruin the entire game. Perhaps an alternate "Fuck Islam and the Ottomans" path that leads into war against Ottomans and other islamic powers, alliance with their enemies like Persia, with the end-goal being conquering Mecca and Jerusalem.

Talking about indian nations: I find it a fucking crime they don't include the Guaicuru and the Amazonian Chiefdoms in this game. Especially the Guaicuru, they're cool as hell and the Portuguese never beat them

The Brazilian Slaughter I really hate mercs mate,i change the file so you could be able to have only 1 merc for AI and player alike. Mercs do kill the whole period immersion for me,also it makes the game a lot more fun.

What do you mean? 1 merc?
I actually think Mercs are pretty cool, and very useful because they're a way for low-manpower high-money nations to fight the big blobs. I remember my Milan >>> Italy campaign, I used insane quantities of Mercs to win almost-unwinnable wars.

As i posted earlier,the missions are pretty bad for most nations in the game. You should try play as Byz or some indian nation,after the DLC they have some interesting ones. I do agree that they should expand on the Iberian missions and in European countries as a whole. There is a lot of options for missions,but paradox are not known for their productivity.

As for the mercs,well i make it so you could have only 1 recruited merc. It makes manpower a lot more important and you could even drain the enemies from their in long wars. I really hate merc spams,both from players and the AI. It is far more realistic to run out of manpower during a big war than to have like 2 million casualties and not a dent in you. Also i do play on very hard with a few edits in the files. Also i have fast coreing and culture conversions,it makes wonders for the AI. Faster AE lost makes the game a lot more fun for me. Really hate the coalition mechanics.

 

[Stavrophore]

Got this, been playing as Portugal. Its 1560s and the Portuguese Colonial Empire is doing p. well. I just took all the Cape of Good Hope region and am planning to invade Moçambique.

Right now I'm having to fight off Tunis and Morocco, been almost a century since that front stopped bothering me. My manpower just ran out so I'm thinking between peacing out, or just cranking mercs to beat down Morocco and Tunis so I can create a vassal out of Morocco's southern regions.

Now you can't convert provinces without making them a full core,thus can't convert 95 percent of the map.

Yes, this is total bullshit. I can no longer play a propa historical portuguese game without spending unecessary admin points to core provinces. I'm playing as the PORTUGUESE FFS, the Portuguese could barely get out of their house without asking people if they heard about Jesus Christ.

Now its pretty much a choice between doing such a wasteful thing, or just doing the smart thing and turning it into trade company territory.

Ive been playing the humanist Portugal this patch, which ive never done[well its super ahistorical as you mentioned], but the american colonial nations still rock missionaries left and right, which is good. The colonial regions, the afican ones i dont bother going for trade company. Its a shame that you have to core them as a state to do this, mozambique was never a part of portugal "core" it was overseas territory, and still theyve converted lots of people from animism and other primitive shamanism. Why they've changed that? What was the purpose? They wanted to stop people world converting? Its still probably doable with some well thought strategy, although this patch is pretty much worst time to go for One Faith achievement.

 

[Agame]

I am against making EU like CK2,they are different games for a reason. Still personalising and making different nations unique is the way. I would like to see a game like EU in a original fantasy setting with all kind of nations and races.

I agree its good that CK and EU are different games and they should stay that way. But there is still a massive problem with EU gameplay that requires a new system that emulates internal empire management. You can see that they actually tried to add this with estates, making internal factions that have the potential to mess up your empire. But this is a total failure as its so easy for a human player to min-max it and avoid any bad results. So once again its another system of hitting buttons for more "magical mana" and waiting for timers to cool down, more busywork that does not provide actual C&C.

Mission trees were designed to be the new thing you buy DLC for. Russia got one, UK got one, India got one. Prepare to pay $20 for another 10 missions in the Iberia DLC.

Of course, gotta milk those dolla-dolla bills. I still think the mission system is really lackluster even in the dlc as there is no choice and branching trees like in HOI4. Why they didnt straight copy that is so stupid, at least that way you can do replays with a country and do something different. Funnily enough the mission system has the potential to work against the holy grail of "muh sandbox" and make each playthrough with a specific country identical as you are forced to do the same things.

 

[The Brazilian Slaughter]

CK2 also has a similar problem, in which the basic gameplay of most Religions/Cultures/Governments is pretty much the same, but the real problem is how the game was designed - they designed it for Christian European gameplay from the ground-up, everything else (Republics, Iqta, Tribes, Nomads, etc) is a work-around.

Also IMHO they never took the time to make cultures more interesting, most cultures pretty much provide a bonus building, different combat tactics and some decisions and that's it, while a few cultures get to do cool extra things - Nordics can raid and navigate through rivers, Greeks can blind, castrate and take off people's noses, Celtic Cultures have the unique Tanistry sucession, Basque can use Absolute Cognatic, etc.

The difference is that in CK2 you have other things to deal with other than blobbing:

- Building your current character.
- The eugenics program.
- The marriage game to get big claims and inheritances, especially in Christian Europe.
- Dealing with vassals and the Council
- Secret Societies
- General skullduggery.

 

[The Brazilian Slaughter]

There is a fundamental problem with EU, it doesnt have the character and personality aspects of CK, instead you are just a faceless giant blob of color.

A character-based EU-like would absolutely rock. Just have to program it so it doesn't melts computers into slag.

As i posted earlier,the missions are pretty bad for most nations in the game. You should try play as Byz or some indian nation,after the DLC they have some interesting ones. I do agree that they should expand on the Iberian missions and in European countries as a whole. There is a lot of options for missions,but paradox are not known for their productivity.

As for the mercs,well i make it so you could have only 1 recruited merc. It makes manpower a lot more important and you could even drain the enemies from their in long wars. I really hate merc spams,both from players and the AI. It is far more realistic to run out of manpower during a big war than to have like 2 million casualties and not a dent in you. Also i do play on very hard with a few edits in the files. Also i have fast coreing and culture conversions, it makes wonders for the AI. Faster AE lost makes the game a lot more fun for me. Really hate the coalition mechanics.

Informative. Think I will play France or Byz after finishing this game.

1 recruit merc is absolutely nothing. Also, restricting mercs nerfs money-rich manpower-poor nations (like Portugal, Italian and German City-States) too hard, mercs allow rich tall nations a way to fight.

One superior idea would be to limit mercs to a certain % of the land limit. Say, 10% or 20% - so a 10 land-limit nation would only be able to call a single merc division or two, but a 100 land limit nation can recruit up to 10 or 20 merc divisions. Make it a soft limit that can increased by Ideas, so we can see large Italian Merc-Armies, for example. On the plus side, they should not count as part of Land Limit - they're already capped.

 

[Average Manatee]

One superior idea would be to limit mercs to a certain % of the land limit. Say, 10% or 20% - so a 10 land-limit nation would only be able to call a single merc division or two, but a 100 land limit nation can recruit up to 10 or 20 merc divisions. Make it a soft limit that can increased by Ideas, so we can see large Italian Merc-Armies, for example. On the plus side, they should not count as part of Land Limit - they're already capped.

That's basically how it works now. Merc limit is something like 20 + (30% of land force limit * available merc multipliers). Available merc bonuses does increase land limit.

 

[Agame]

A character-based EU-like would absolutely rock. Just have to program it so it doesn't melts computers into slag.

I assumed this was their plan for Imperator but Im afraid they will fuck it up by leaning more to the EU model of abstraction.

I would really like to see a middle ground between CK and EU, it would be a damn shame if they dont use this opportunity to do it.

 

[fantadomat]

I am against making EU like CK2,they are different games for a reason. Still personalising and making different nations unique is the way. I would like to see a game like EU in a original fantasy setting with all kind of nations and races.

I agree its good that CK and EU are different games and they should stay that way. But there is still a massive problem with EU gameplay that requires a new system that emulates internal empire management. You can see that they actually tried to add this with estates, making internal factions that have the potential to mess up your empire. But this is a total failure as its so easy for a human player to min-max it and avoid any bad results. So once again its another system of hitting buttons for more "magical mana" and waiting for timers to cool down, more busywork that does not provide actual C&C.

Mission trees were designed to be the new thing you buy DLC for. Russia got one, UK got one, India got one. Prepare to pay $20 for another 10 missions in the Iberia DLC.

Of course, gotta milk those dolla-dolla bills. I still think the mission system is really lackluster even in the dlc as there is no choice and branching trees like in HOI4. Why they didnt straight copy that is so stupid, at least that way you can do replays with a country and do something different. Funnily enough the mission system has the potential to work against the holy grail of "muh sandbox" and make each playthrough with a specific country identical as you are forced to do the same things.

Well every nation plays the same to me,i have a few thousand hours in the fucking game. I end up doing all the mission in the first 100-200 years of gameplay. I find it a welcoming change of pace to a game that i have done everything i wanted to do. It is good to see some focus,it is tiring to do WC for the 100th time. I find the new DLC refreshing,it is shame that it is only about India. Still i am in the middle of a second game and intend to try out a few other countries after i finish it. I do agree about the lack of actual game play mechanics,they are all "push a button and watch numbers change". Paradox really lack that creative guy with some wild imagination. Even i could come up with some interesting concepts. I would have made Ming more like Japan and HRE than a big blob of destruction. The new missions are the first interesting thing i have seen in this game for a very long time,at least gives you some face and flavour to the nation you play. I have the feeling that only creative people are working on CK.

There is a fundamental problem with EU, it doesnt have the character and personality aspects of CK, instead you are just a faceless giant blob of color.

A character-based EU-like would absolutely rock. Just have to program it so it doesn't melts computers into slag.

As i posted earlier,the missions are pretty bad for most nations in the game. You should try play as Byz or some indian nation,after the DLC they have some interesting ones. I do agree that they should expand on the Iberian missions and in European countries as a whole. There is a lot of options for missions,but paradox are not known for their productivity.

As for the mercs,well i make it so you could have only 1 recruited merc. It makes manpower a lot more important and you could even drain the enemies from their in long wars. I really hate merc spams,both from players and the AI. It is far more realistic to run out of manpower during a big war than to have like 2 million casualties and not a dent in you. Also i do play on very hard with a few edits in the files. Also i have fast coreing and culture conversions, it makes wonders for the AI. Faster AE lost makes the game a lot more fun for me. Really hate the coalition mechanics.

Informative. Think I will play France or Byz after finishing this game.

1 recruit merc is absolutely nothing. Also, restricting mercs nerfs money-rich manpower-poor nations (like Portugal, Italian and German City-States) too hard, mercs allow rich tall nations a way to fight.

One superior idea would be to limit mercs to a certain % of the land limit. Say, 10% or 20% - so a 10 land-limit nation would only be able to call a single merc division or two, but a 100 land limit nation can recruit up to 10 or 20 merc divisions. Make it a soft limit that can increased by Ideas, so we can see large Italian Merc-Armies, for example. On the plus side, they should not count as part of Land Limit - they're already capped.

I like the 1 merc,it is really annoying to see 20 1 guy stacks of mercs running around like headless chickens. I personally never use mercs or the filthy humanist ideas. At least that way manpower is the only realistic and important resource in the whole game that you can run out of and get fucked. Also the whole merc system really pisses me off,they are just more expensive soldiers. If they had actual drawback like poor discipline or not getting tech benefits,it could have been interesting. I really dislike playing like florryworry,just go heavily in debt and merc up. Both systems are broken in my eyes and i try to not use them.

I would recommend you to for Byz if you have the purple phoenix dlc. It is by far the greatest campaign in the game. Another ok nations are Russia,France,the indians after this DLC and persia/tim in to them mughal. The rest is pretty meh. Taungo empire was pretty fun game,still Buddhism is the worst religion and it is filled with terrible event spam.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

I never played EU before 4 so I dunno but maybe it was more historically driven? I think this obsession with sand box gameplay vs historical is a huge mistake, but clearly I am in the minority.*

Europa Universalis II (2001) featured hundreds of historical events, with various trigger conditions, to provide shape to the course of events outside the more general game mechanics. This was typical of early Paradox games, but by the time of Europa Universalis III (2007) Paradox had changed course and decided that everything should be a sandbox determined by whatever botched game mechanics they devised and devoid of historicity.

 

[Tigranes]

Honestly, I think each of their games should be made for a particular country/region/type, and then if you make the rest playable, fine, but that's just an added bonus for the intrepid.

You can't really have a genuinely interesting gameplay system that works for Christian Kingdoms and Merchant Republics and Muslim Caliphates, Roman Republics as well as Gaulish tribes. Not even with years of DLCs, as CK2/EU4 lifespan has made clear.

So Imperator should be made with the Roman senate and 2 Consuls, etc. in mind. If they make that genuinely great, then it's totally fine with me that playing the 'barbarians' is an afterthought. The problem right now is that they try to keep the mechanics generic enough for easy translation across regions/etc, but they can't develop the secondary regions enough to really feel different.

EU2/3 is a really long time ago - I hardly remember how different it felt to play the more deterministic versions, actually. One major thing was that for well-covered nations like France or whatever, you'd chart your entire gameplay around major, earth-shattering decisions/events that will always come at a certain point.

 

[fantadomat]

Here is for people asking for citation about the event spam,it happens in one day....frequently:

 

[oscar]

EU has always had a problem with the game not really encouraging long-term alliances, instead you always turn on everyone eventually

I agree with the rest but this is pretty historical.

 

[Average Manatee]

EU has always had a problem with the game not really encouraging long-term alliances, instead you always turn on everyone eventually

I agree with the rest but this is pretty historical.

Ehh, kind of. In EU4 it's more a problem of the AI being there to be played and discarded by the player. There's also the fact that there is no war NOT worth fighting so long as you win and take a bunch of land, unless you could have fought someone else and obtained more land faster. If real life was EU4 then after WW1 the UK would have fully annexed Germany, broken the alliance with France the next day, then invaded the day the 5-year truce was up. Also France has no allies because everyone hates them for allying you.

The one place it sort of works in EU4 is in and around the HRE, because the HRE is a high-threat area that you have to play carefully around. You can get a fairly long-term alliance on the other side or with the Emperor. But everywhere else in the world? Just eat land like crazy. Used to be you could unite India in under a hundred years with basically no coalition problems, not sure if it's still possible with the much higher development, but you'd never come close to doing something similar like taking all of western europe.

 

[The Brazilian Slaughter]

I never played EU before 4 so I dunno but maybe it was more historically driven? I think this obsession with sand box gameplay vs historical is a huge mistake, but clearly I am in the minority.*

Europa Universalis II (2001) featured hundreds of historical events, with various trigger conditions, to provide shape to the course of events outside the more general game mechanics. This was typical of early Paradox games, but by the time of Europa Universalis III (2007) Paradox had changed course and decided that everything should be a sandbox determined by whatever botched game mechanics they devised and devoid of historicity.

For the Glory with AGC-EEP is the apex of the "Historical Event" school. There's also Plvs Vltra which is AGC-EEP + WATKABAOI map, dunno if it was updated for the last FTG patch.

The historicity vs sandbox is a complicated question. Its the Strategy Game equivalent of Storyfags vs Combatfags debate here.

Personally I lean sandbox, because having events pop up from 1399 all the way to 1826 make no sense because that's not how history works. One little change and the entire world will start to become unrecognizable in a decade or so, with a collorary for what AltHistory types call a "Butterfly Net". So in EU2 you had stuff like conquering half of Europe and generally doing great, but SUDDENLY, random events pops up and you get assraped by 50-unit rebel stacks out of the aether, because that's what happened in 1627 in our universe, nevermind that the Eastern Roman Empire fell in 1453 in our timeline, and in yours its better than ever.

And pre-determined monarchs, so there was metagaming like going into the folders and seeing which monarch will be around at which year, then determining your gameplay around it.

IMHO the game should start events-minded because of things already in motion by game-start (for example, HYW), but the further it gets, the more sandbox it should be. Also, it eventually requires the devs and the mod authors to autistically account for every little possibility in history and write events for it.
These days Paradox seem to be going back to a more free-form version of this with mission trees and such.

I prefer a emphasis on sandbox/systems, because it places what matters in the forefront: Player agency and game mechanics. If the system is bad, change the system.
EUIV's problems is that its mechanics are simply inferior to all the other Pdox games of the same gen. Its a pretty complex game (not in depth, I mean), but in my opinion it will never transcend its limitations due to being nation and not character based. Essentially, EUIV's problem is that its not CKII and cannot be.

 

[janior]

*Honestly if someone is so desperate for a "sandbox" experience with all the pseudo historical trappings then go fuck off and play CIV... I play EU, CK, and HOI because I love history.

lol

 

[fantadomat]

Buahahahaha this patch is the most insane thing that i have seen in EU4.

Here is a few pictures of my relaxing Indian game. I was only doing the evens and missions and clearing the borders.

Here is my favourite vassal. It spawned from rebels when i decided to accept their demand,it was just too insane to pass the option , It is a mystery how they ended with a core in the middle of nowhere.


And here is what i found when saw Europa

Don't ask me how...

 

[Average Manatee]

 

[Agame]

I prefer a emphasis on sandbox/systems, because it places what matters in the forefront: Player agency and game mechanics. If the system is bad, change the system.
EUIV's problems is that its mechanics are simply inferior to all the other Pdox games of the same gen. Its a pretty complex game (not in depth, I mean), but in my opinion it will never transcend its limitations due to being nation and not character based. Essentially, EUIV's problem is that its not CKII and cannot be.

Great summary, my problem with Paradox pushing the sandbox design is most of my PD game time has been spent in the HOI series. Playing HOI4 at release and having the Soviets go to war with the Allies in 39' in a couple of games in a row (with historical setting on) just made me rage quit and regret buying it. I can understand in EU and CK with the scope and time frame of the game that having the whole thing on rails with historical events is bad design.

And you are correct that there is an inherent problem with EU, I am pretty sure they could fix it if/when they ever make a EU5 without just turning it into CK, but odds are they probably wont even bother. Unless you have 100s of hours in these games you would not even begin to see all these problems that we do.

I also think if HOI4 is any indicator then PD are going to start pushing the multiplayer agenda really hard for their new games. HOI4 was completely and utterly designed for multiplayer, most of its game mechanics gutted and stripped back from HOI3 for the sake of speed of play and popamole style RTS combat. And regardless of how much DLC they release its always going to be a hollow shell compared to HOI3.

 

[Norfleet]

And here is what i found when saw Europa

SERBIA STRONK! REMOVE KEBAB FROM THE PREMISES!

 

[Life of the Party]

Marš na Drinu Vislu Volgu Jenisej

 

[thesheeep]

And here is what i found when saw Europa

SERBIA STRONK! REMOVE KEBAB FROM THE PREMISES!

That reminds me, a stickied note on the Paradox forums:

This is a reminder that using "Kebab" and "Remove kebab" when referring to the Ottomans and/or Muslims in general is STRICTLY forbidden.

There has been a recent up-tick in usage of these terms so I am making sure that everyone is very, very aware of Paradox's stance.

Using these terms is considered racism, and so is against the Terms of Service and can result in infractions.

 

[fantadomat]

And here is what i found when saw Europa

SERBIA STRONK! REMOVE KEBAB FROM THE PREMISES!

That reminds me, a stickied note on the Paradox forums:

This is a reminder that using "Kebab" and "Remove kebab" when referring to the Ottomans and/or Muslims in general is STRICTLY forbidden.

There has been a recent up-tick in usage of these terms so I am making sure that everyone is very, very aware of Paradox's stance.

Using these terms is considered racism, and so is against the Terms of Service and can result in infractions.

Yeah,that shit was there for at least a year. They do Sweden justice :D.

 

[Life of the Party]

Someone should really update this thing. By far the best mod for both EUIII and EUIV.

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1283560325

My own personal take on Occultis Orbis Terrestere. Focuses on Atlantis, Lemuria and Mu.

Credits:

• MrTaxman - for the original mod in EU3
  
• [TAB]Mayor - for the original port to EU4
  
• Knut Skallagrim
  
• Jords
  
• Ushanx94

Setting:

During the 15th century the Europeans theorized there were many mystical lands just beyond the known horizon. In this world, their theories are true, with the mythical island of Atlantis and the lost continents of Lemuria and Mu now present in the world.

Atlantis, the ideal state mentioned in Plato's "The Republic", has fallen into decline and has splintered into multiple warring states. Only once Atlantis has re-united can it hope to utilize it's extensive technological potential and conquer to Europeans.

Lemuria, the bridge between Africa and India, is in many ways similar to the Indian subcontinent. A vast continent, there are many riches to be unearthed in Lemuria for those quick enough to secure them.

Mu, a progenitor civilization for the Egyptians and Mesoamericans, is home to the Mu people, who venerate the dragon gods, headed by the Dragon Emperor. The remaining Mu nations are beset by Polynesian tribes who have migrated from the Polynesian islands.

Features

• 3 new continents, Atlantis, Lemuria and Mu. Adds 1000+ new provinces.
  
• 100+ new countries, all with national ideas.
  
• Dragon Empire mechanic
  
• Dragon Religious Schools (Requires Cradle of Civilization)
  
• Philosophical Schools (Requires Cradle of Civilization)

Links

Discord[discord.gg]

Compatibility

This mod is not compatible with other map-editing mods.