Paradox Studio Thread

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

What are your expectations for the EU5 release?

  • Total voters
    83
  • Poll closed .
Sooty Soot said:
Get massacred how? Can one Men-At-Arms regiment take out a 1000 peasant levies?
Click to expand...
More like 3k regulars defeating 30k levies. This is just a couple decades into the game too, not mid-late game. Here's an example from the EU5 reddit of this.
ppylnpkjcy1g1.png
Redditor Said:


EDIT: Okay we figured out what they did. They were trying to clarify and update tooltips to show levy combat effectiveness only worked 5% as much against regulars. Instead, they made it so levies did 5% damage against regulars. We're testing what else is going on, but I'm really hoping this gets hotfixed today. It's hard to know precisely what "Reworked how the levy combat power works, and exposed the values in more interfaces." meant.

Hello, I play a lot of MP. I spend a lot of time looking in to the files. I try to get any advantage I can on other players in order to make sure I don't spend my weekend dying in MP games. Regulars were, in the past, the most important part of any game. They were so monstrously powerful that players rushed to get them. The forums and reddit talked about them as if they were weak, but they were never weak. The developers have rebalanced regulars around the opinions of the people who did not understand the system.

With the changes to the regular/levy balance, regulars now break the game's balance.

I will explain how:

In age 2, where most of the fighting is, Levies will take 125% bonus damage from regulars (if they're up to date. If they're not up to date, they just die. There is a SLIGHT moment when you can get your peasant levies up to date before you can get professional armies.)

In age 2, the common man-at-arms has -10% damage taken, and 3 combat speed instead of the generic 2 from most infantry. Regulars can also drill, which SUBSTANTIALLY reduces damage taken. You also get experience from battle. Levies lose almost all their experience instantly, while regulars do not. This is ~30-40% damage reduction as well.

Retreat timer was just increased.

Armies are also a net positive on your income. They make you money. Not building an army is actually throwing away free money.

Levy combat efficiency was just reduced to a mere 5% of what it once was, if they're dealing damage to regulars. With auxilium + common militias alone that's +50% levy combat. High noble power also gives levy combat, so lets say about 25% there. Noble levies ALSO give 25% levy combat, so that's about 100% levy combat.

So levies just went from dealing 200% damage, to dealing 105% damage against regulars. They still have -10% discipline. -10% discipline will apply another -10% total damage done modifier on to them, and a +10% total damage taken modifier on to them.

Regulars were already going laughably positive in to levies doing ~3:1 casualties to them. If you had 200 man at arms (1 stack of men at arms) that were drilled up you would do ~5:1 casualties in to them. This mean a well drilled stack of men at arms matched about 1 stack of levies, despite needing 1/5th the actual pops to exist.

With this new balance, due to the fact that levies ate almost a 50% damage nerf, they can not actually deal enough damage to regulars to get them to die in reasonable numbers, causing the regulars to always fight at high strength and do absolutely COMICAL levels of damage to the levies. There also appears to be some other shenanigans going on that I can't quite figure out.

In addition to everything I just said: Cannons were made significantly stronger in this patch.

From the testing we've done, a well made regular army does ~500:1 casualties to levies. In age 3.

By age 3, in the current balance, raising your levies AT ALL causes you to basically just murder your populace for free. By age 2 raising your levies is a last ditch effort to try to stall off losing a war. This means you have until professional armies hit the field to use levies, at which time (in the mid 1300s) levying your armies is actually just doomed.

This also means anyone who has obtained professional armies can INSTANTLY declare war on their neighbor and destroy them, as there's effectively nothing you can do to try to close the gap in power.

This is not only ridiculously ahistorical, but also absolutely breaks the balance of the game. Not only does the AI not understand that the levies are now useless, but MP games are just doomed because whoever gets prof armies SLIGHTLY behind is now basically guaranteed to get 100%'d in a war.

As an aside I'm going to leave a comment that really bad takes by reddit/the forums from people who haven't bothered to learn the game should be ignored. If you did not bother to learn the warfare system then why are you loudly giving your opinion on it?

Upvote588Downvote228
Click to expand...
 
Sooty Soot said:
Get massacred how? Can one Men-At-Arms regiment take out a 1000 peasant levies?
Click to expand...

Bobbobson said:
This would explain why my 30k stacks of regulars would repeatedly insta wipe 36k enemy stacks. Battles didn't even take a single tick.
Click to expand...

1.0.6 Hotfix is out
  • Trade Expenses are now calculated correctly
  • Restored Merchant Maintenance to 1.0.4 levels
  • Food stockpiles now deplete properly when no maintenance for food.
  • Antipiracy Warfare is now applied correctly
  • Fix crash related to bankrupcy
  • Fix crash when clicking on alerts for Cassus Bellis and Lacking food
  • Fix crash related to write coat of arms data into save file
  • Fixed depopulation alert not showing correctly the needed information.
  • Fixed a crash related to the dominant language
  • Fixed Military Panel overview Stats overflowed due to brand new added Levy Combat Efficiency.
 
Having regulars defeat levies so handily is fine and all but doesnt that actually severely disadvantage the AI who apparently dont know the difference? Gonna make wars even more of a cakewalk than usual with players just regularmaxxing.
 
Blackstar said:
1.0.6 Hotfix is out
  • Trade Expenses are now calculated correctly
  • Restored Merchant Maintenance to 1.0.4 levels
  • Food stockpiles now deplete properly when no maintenance for food.
  • Antipiracy Warfare is now applied correctly
  • Fix crash related to bankrupcy
  • Fix crash when clicking on alerts for Cassus Bellis and Lacking food
  • Fix crash related to write coat of arms data into save file
  • Fixed depopulation alert not showing correctly the needed information.
  • Fixed a crash related to the dominant language
  • Fixed Military Panel overview Stats overflowed due to brand new added Levy Combat Efficiency.
Click to expand...
They only changed the economy, unfortunately. Levies will continue to be made of paper until the next big patch.
Screenshot_20251118_084235_Chrome.jpg
I'm guessing too many retards were bitching about regular armies but now they're ridiculously strong. I found men-at-arms (age 2 regular infantry) to be underwhelming but that was before I understood how combat worked. They've dumbed it down into "regulars always win" but it will definitely get rebalanced soon. The combat strength difference is so massive that >10k levy stacks get deleted instantly all the time.
 
Kane Lives said:
Having regulars defeat levies so handily is fine and all but doesnt that actually severely disadvantage the AI who apparently dont know the difference? Gonna make wars even more of a cakewalk than usual with players just regularmaxxing.
Click to expand...
The pre-patch version seemed to work just fine. Initially in the first two ages I had to rely on levies and would use regulars to supplement them. Then gradually my professional army would increase in size and combat ability, and levies were left behind. By 1600s I would use mostly regulars unless fighting against opponents with large armies where I needed levies' help. There was a good flow to it with a great sense of progression as you modernise your country. Now it seems you can dominate early game by tech rushing regulars.

Ayynon69 said:
They only changed the economy, unfortunately. Levies will continue to be made of paper until the next big patch.
Screenshot_20251118_084235_Chrome.jpg
I'm guessing too many retards were bitching about regular armies but now they're ridiculously strong. I found men-at-arms (age 2 regular infantry) to be underwhelming but that was before I understood how combat worked. They've dumbed it down into "regulars always win" but it will definitely get rebalanced soon. The combat strength difference is so massive that >10k levy stacks get deleted instantly all the time.
Click to expand...
I'm inclined to agree with reddit post cited earlier in this thread that it must have been made by mistake and is not intended (at least to this extent). I intend to play out my current campaign till 1830's, if my shitty laptop allows, before I start a new game. I'm in 1700's so levies are less of an issue and judging by my progress so far I'll get about a week of gameplay out of it so I'm fine waiting for the next patch.
 
Bobbobson said:
He just needs to release I:R 2 after he's done with EU V
Click to expand...
True. But hold on a second, I think there's something wrong with my copy of EU5.

Johan, you've done it again!
10 seconds in Microsoft paint
Kane Lives said:
Having regulars defeat levies so handily is fine and all but doesnt that actually severely disadvantage the AI who apparently dont know the difference? Gonna make wars even more of a cakewalk than usual with players just regularmaxxing.
Click to expand...
Most of the bugs I take issue with are primarily ai-based. I hate it when shit's too easy. I haven't found the AI too bad, it's clearly making calculations when it decides to do or don't do something, but it not knowing something's fucked with a system it's still viewing as normal like you said just gimps it.

The trade changes ought to encourage organically a sort of mercantilism since pops clamouring for locally produced goods over non-locally produced goods might encourage the AI to import fewer things but export more to increase the value of domestic goods to ensure certain pops are still making returns on investment. That's the sort of thinking I like.

The AI issues with levies might become less awful with the progression of in-game time as regulars grow in number but for the time being just don't blob I guess. I prefer tall gameplay anyway so it doesn't affect me that much but still. This'll naturally favour larger countries since they're the only ones with economies and manpower capabilities so in terms of map behaviour I don't think people will notice too much awry compared to before. France will still trounce England for the most part, Bohemia and such will be far stronger than their peers. Rhodes might actually expand/survive now since I think they get some sort of manpower bonus from being sponsored but I could be wrong.
 
Meh, with all these rapid-fire changes, I think I'll wait for a few more patch before restarting my ERE run.

Main things I want to see fixed before I deep dive again:
- Vassals being absurdly loyal -> Yes this is BBB related, but also Jalayarids and Golden Horde (and probably a few more vassal heavy nations I missed) never get vassal rebellions either and its annoying when they stay stable as fuck despite undergoing multiple bankruptcies and 100% warscore losses
- Johan making up his mind on whether he wants levies to be useful or not. I don't see the problem with 1.0.4 levies vs regulars balance, this new shit about regulars shitting on levies 10:1 is just immersion breaking in the extreme and throws balance out of whack, privileges the player a lot. (And it's not like the game is hard if you're playing a remotely medium sized country.)
- FIX THE FUCKING PAPAL STATES COLONISING EVERYTHING
- Pop needs and trade need a second look; I think 1.0.4 trade is "fine" if you leave it automated but the UI is awful and the way slider and event costs scale with trade "value" double dipping on your "economic" base is stupid, considering you dont even get the full profit of any trade. Also fucking give me an option to disallow the jews from selling off all my goods before my pops can fulfill their needs, thanks.
- Personal unions being broken.
- Courtiers not marrying and you having to play matchmaker to get a bench of retards to populate your cabinet is dumb as fuck. This ain't CK2, I shouldn't be needing to marry off my generals and landed nobles just to get them breeding. Autopopulate my courtiers if you don't want to deal with that, Johan.

EDIT: One more, culture opinion shifting is fucking jank. You either stockpile 50 favours somehow, or you vassalise the biggest nation of that culture to demand that they dont hate you but you can only do it once every 50 years, which is dumb. It's a big deal too, because it affects the amount of culture capacity you need to get them to accepted.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if Paradox will just go back to using unit pips for progression like in Eu4. Having regiment size be the primary advancement is the root cause of the ping-pong between space marine regulars and useless until age 4 regulars. The other option is making levy regiment size scale with ages similar to regulars but this would make early game battles take forever. It's evident from the logistics stats like food consumption that levies did scale in this way.

I suppose the space marine levies does model Cortes' victory over the Tlaxcalans, and survival of the Noche Triste though.

Also I found something dumber about having to matchmake courtiers. If you play a republic "marry a noble" costs Republican tradition, and if you reform into a kingdom it still costs legitimacy. So if you're Milan you pretty much have to rely on your dynasty and randomly generated characters.
 
Last edited:
If Tinto's "fixed 620 bugs, made 500 more" pattern holds, I guess mainland Spaniards are just like their colonials after all. They work fast and leave a huge repair bill afterwards.
 
Jarolleon said:
If Tinto's "fixed 620 bugs, made 500 more" pattern holds, I guess mainland Spaniards are just like their colonials after all. They work fast and leave a huge repair bill afterwards.
Click to expand...
I'll take it over Stockholm's bi-yearly "Fixed 0 bugs, introduced terrible performance, and changed literally everything, fuck you" pattern.
 
>IMPLYING said:
True. But hold on a second, I think there's something wrong with my copy of EU5.
IMPERATORROME2BABEeee.mp4
Johan, you've done it again!
10 seconds in Microsoft paint
Click to expand...
It's surprising how little the game is being compared to Imperator.
From the roadbuilding to the gradual but inevitable progression from levies to regulars, a branching tech tree with enough options that you can't get them all instead of a linear upgrade one, the same sun-based religion interface, three-tier urbanization, the limited use of simple 3D character portraits, and the social class divisions - EU5, to me, is one of those newborns who fully resemble their fathers.
 
Knud Lavard said:
It's surprising how little the game is being compared to Imperator.
From the roadbuilding to the gradual but inevitable progression from levies to regulars, a branching tech tree with enough options that you can't get them all instead of a linear upgrade one, the same sun-based religion interface, three-tier urbanization, the limited use of simple 3D character portraits, and the social class divisions - EU5, to me, is one of those newborns who fully resemble their fathers.
Click to expand...
It also has a population-based levy system, though unlike Imperator pop growth is exponential. Character wages in Imperator also resembles the income-based slider costs in Eu5.
 
Knud Lavard said:
It's surprising how little the game is being compared to Imperator.
From the roadbuilding to the gradual but inevitable progression from levies to regulars, a branching tech tree with enough options that you can't get them all instead of a linear upgrade one, the same sun-based religion interface, three-tier urbanization, the limited use of simple 3D character portraits, and the social class divisions - EU5, to me, is one of those newborns who fully resemble their fathers.
Click to expand...
Because Imperator on day one felt empty and unfinished while EU 5 feels fully featured (how fully featured it really is does depend but it's hands down the best Paradox developed release since like CK2)
 
Smashed & Slamed said:
Because Imperator on day one felt empty and unfinished while EU 5 feels fully featured (how fully featured it really is does depend but it's hands down the best Paradox developed release since like CK2)
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't think Johan would personally take well to EU5 being compared to Imperator despite the obvious dna just given how much of a personal failure it was for him. Imperator was a byword for disaster in the Paradox community the past half-decade, EU5 has been a success.

It should also be remembered that Imperator had mana on day one and despite all the updates it got could never fully decouple itself from that. EU5 wasn't afraid to fully detach itself from being arcadey.
 
Smashed & Slamed said:
Because Imperator on day one felt empty and unfinished while EU 5 feels fully featured (how fully featured it really is does depend but it's hands down the best Paradox developed release since like CK2)
Click to expand...
Imperator played badly because it tried out tons of new stuff, some of which was good and some of which was bad. EU5 plays well because it adopted what worked well in Imperator, while leaving the rest at the wayside. It's a case of Sengoku/CK2 the way I see it - throw shit at the wall in a tight-budget game, and whatever sticks you bring over to the main release.
 
Knud Lavard said:
Imperator played badly because it tried out tons of new stuff, some of which was good and some of which was bad.
Click to expand...

Speaking of Imperator I've been playing it for the first time (with the Invictus mod) while I'm waiting for EU5 to polish up a bit.

There isn't anything in the way of balance. Rome, be it AI or human controlled, snowballs so easily that they have no real opponents. The only limiting factor is our Aggressive Expansion getting too high. I've done a full Mediterranean expansion run and nothing can stop you, it's just not that fun.

Playing as a minor is more fun but the main problem is that if you are playing in Europe you'll eventually run smack into Rome and there's no way to hold them back. I had a very fun Iceni campaign that ended once my borders came up to Romes and that was all she wrote.

It can be a fun game, but I can see why people were so divided on it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom