Idk man, while amount of people increased amount of soldiers kept falling down... I hear about Greek, Roman, Parthian and Egyptian armies counting in hundreds of thousands
But you probably never heard of 56M people dead in the XVIIIth century conflict between France, Russia and Switzerland on one side and Sokoto, Bachwezi, Delhi, and China on the second :D
I really like the dev meta, it increase the importance of nation management, especially in MP, and I like that. Does it scale unrealistically? Absolutely, but it is fun as hell.
in single player, i kinda like building tall as a meso american nation than rapidly expanding into worthless provinces. (unless im forced to by colonial wars to shut up the usual crybabys wanting my gold provinces )
I too think it is a lot of fun and don't want it nerfed too much, but I suppose tokeep the game dynamic and more interesting for pro players it should be nerfed.
I totally agree, years ago I felt like the only internal thing I could manage was rebels and a couple numbers that didn’t affect much. Not the case at all now
@@ethanbrown7198 RN as Maya, i got 200k manpower from deving MesoAmerica provinces to 20 alone. (1/9/10) i ignore deving my Caribbeans and former colonial holdings in the Americas since it takes too long to convert culture so i stuck with my hood and the homies like the aztecs and zapotek for example as accepted cullture. (i pretty much accepted all of the mesoamerican cultures except tecos, converted them to purepecha culture. because i love Tarascan ) i ally feed the Incans and the Tupi the colonial nations as a buffer, same with the creek and the Iroquois up north taking over the east of the Mississippi. while i consolidate Colombia and everything west of the Mississippi. so basically i created a United Nations for the AmerIndian people. it fitted with my ideal eu4 roleplay as a native. uniting the nations together and strong like the Iroquois against the gold thirsty europeans
There's a good reason to dev provinces up to 30 when you're Catholic: 30 dev provinces have a very high probability of attracting cardinals. I did this as Poland and got all 7 cardinals pretty quickly, in turn getting me the Curia, with all benefits that gives. Before colonialism fired, I was able to set the Curia power focus to 'cardinals spread institutions' and profited even more. Something to keep in mind!
Also, there's this estate thingy that gives -20% dev costs for all Centers of Trade you own in your home node, can also be pretty powerful. And if you have land in tropical areas, monsoons give -20% dev cost every now and then. Lastly, in Trade Company areas, there's a building that gives -15% dev cost. Later in the game when you can build universities, this makes it actually interesting to sink some diplo power into TC provinces to increase their production, especially if you're not production leader yet, or still need the 'trading in' bonus.
you can get "mansoons bring fertillity" though for those tropical regions in southern asia and that actually gives -20% dev cost which actually outweighs the tropical modifier, so deving is more about waiting for that event and then deving the state that gets it
@@Michaelonyoutub but the only climate where you shouldn't dev is arctic, since its +50% which is massive. A shame since fur and gold can be found en masse in those locations
Even though it’s a little crazy, I do like the fact that deving has become the meta for multiplayer. It almost bridges the gap between the tall vs wide players
@@artemis_fowl44hd92 Oh i thought he meant that he needed the dlc to manually dev, which used to be a thing (absolutely horrendous practice, glad they added manual dev to base game)
@@rileyrose5166 Yeah, luckily they also added some other QoL-Features to the base game, like how you now can create stacks and let them automatically construct!
Thanks for making this, I’ve been watching the MP videos and seeing your dev costs had me completely lost. Even 900 hours I to the game I’d never tried stacking so aggressively and hadn’t realized how much it could stack. I’ll blame this on my last campaign being 1.29, and never playing MP.
If you would like to talk to me, ask some questions and play together, come to my Discord channel: discord.gg/NAys3pf Watch streams with such content live on: www.twitch.tv/zlewikktv
haha its really fun when you play like this against your friends who dont know this. they learn it for the second campaign but that first game is golden.
It always seemed as if paradox wanted to encourage people to play tall, but personally i think that being able to dev this much this easily, allows people to be able to keep up with the players that are able to expand much more rapidly. It also makes playing in HRE a bit easier early game
@@ZlewikkTV im still practically a noob, i only have 300 hours in the game, and for eu4 thats nothing lol, i when my computer gets fixed ill have to try find a game on your discord
Honestly, whatever happens there's gonna be some kind of meta. Even if this isn't perfect, it's fine as far as meta-defining strategies go so I think its fine really.
It's not a problem of any meta beeing out there. Problem of this particular bonuses is that in experienced mps people play as wide as they did in the past, just insanely deving their provinces at the same time (usuall 40-50% of total dev) which ends up with people running around with 1-3M armies and 1-5M manpower
@@ZlewikkTV Yeah but that's ok. No matter what the most prominent strategy is it's going to involve massively stacking bonuses in some way that makes your nation incredibly strong. Whether it's dev meta or something else that doesn't change, so why bother changing the meta?
@@ZlewikkTV I'd say given the fact that you're still making content and clearly enjoying the game to some degree that it *is* playable and functions just fine. Nobody's overpowered if everyone is right? :D Also why ask a notoriously poor development studio to rebalance something that is, for all intents and purposes, already balanced and run the risk of it going badly. We all know what Paradox has done to the AI with the economy and merc changes.
@@ZlewikkTV but but watching the players just spam troops at each other and the minor manouvers that happen from time to time is just too good, you simply get less of it when there are less armies
Zlewikk robisz jeden z niewielu czystych contentów na YouTubie i do każdego twojego filmu zasiadam z ogromną ciekawością, tak było i w tym przypadku - trzymaj tak a zajdziesz dalej niż ci sie wydaje! Z pozdrowieniami od rodaka ^_^
I watched a Ludi video talking about the same subject the same day you dropped this one. Great minds think alike. You guys should stream or post an MP game sometime! Also, I’d love to see what the meta would be for SP, since I think manpower isn’t as important as it is in MP (though still very important for sure).
@@szyna6022 yes it would. Multiplicative modifiers would make stacking less powerful (5 -10%'s stacked becomes -41% instead of -50%) and a higher minimum means no more 1 dev for less than 10 points
Monarch points are already scarce so I don't like the idea of increasing Development cost. What would definitely work (specially in MP) is reducing the manpower scaling. Right now as the video points out you base tax is almost worthless production is ok and soldadesca is too op.
I also thought on having those dev cost modifiers to be mutually exclusive, ex the isolation policy with Japan or the Shogunate could reduce the loyalty of the burgers,
I think, in order to benefit playing tall, it should not be changed with the things you suggested but instead there could be a increase in dev cost when having more provinces, like 2% per province. Meaning that you would only be able to have low cost high development in a few provinces. And to not brake it for wide nations completely so they can't dev, maybe the 2% is only for provinces you change the devolpment in. Meaning you have to choose which 40ish provinces you want to dev.
Ah yes! The fabled OP Dev Meta by Zlewikk! Was waiting for this to begin my next Poland game 😊 For nerfing manpower; how about a hard cap of max MIL based manpower from a province? Like a province can only generate 8x250=2000 ( 8 MIL / province Dev). Any additional MIL spent doesn't impact the manpower, but FL and other things work as normal. That way, the Dev meta can remain for boosting a flourishing tall trade empire and boosting FL with mana still be viable. Basically, rest of the stats from Dev meta are balanced well for fun and roleplay. Just the spiralling manpower exploit needs a soft nerf. A 1600 Poland ( with 2K Dev ) shouldn't be producing like 1 Million army manpower per year! ( which would mean its actual pop base in our times would be atleast 500 million!)
Hi Zlewikk! I've been looking forward to this video for a while now. Personally i don't think they should nerf dev meta too hard, if they nerf at all, because I love playing small nations that have to fight all the giants around them!
I didnt quite realise how many different dev cost modifiers there were that could be used in unison, def going to use some during my current Switzerlake run
Deving provinces is beautiful thing in my opinion. Some people were trash talking me because I usually dont conquer much territories early on since I'm focused on deving. Then I procided to oblirate their big empires with my small nation and I could do that since my army was even in numbers thanks to deving.
@Zlewikk TV english below: więc adm jest po prostu niedoceniony odpowiednimi perkami, tylko podnosi tax i nic więcej... a devki powinny jakoś wpływać wzajemnie na siebie... mil -> więcej producentów, więcej podatników, (populacja prowincji powinna spadać przy tworzeniu wojska) dip -> większe bogactwo do opodatkowania, szybszy wzrost populacji, adm -> usprawnianie administracji redukując koszty dev (które powinny wzrastać z populacją prowincji i ilością dev) i zwiększając potencjalny limit opodatkowania w prowincji (wyokość podatków powinna być ustalana globalnie w menu finansów państwa, a adm dev tylko wpływać na tax %, albo ogólnie % ściągalności z prowincji) So adm dev is simply unapreciated, lacking perks and just straight lines rise of local tax... Devs should have some mutual influence.... mil -> more producers, more taxpayers (which should fall according to army creation). Dip -> provinces riches, faster population growth. adm -> better administration should reduce costs of other devs, (cost of dev should grow also along with population growth) and grow local potential capacity of tax rather than "tax income +1"
I think that this current meta is pretty fun. I mean, deving provinces for 3 or 5 monarch points seems OP, but I always thought that deving is in fact too costly and is should be changed. Also Zlewik, you are the best man, almost everything I learned about EU is from your videos
I love dev meta, but I would love to see more variation. E.g. 21 dev but focus on tax gives an increased amount 1-2 ducat flat. That makes it way more interesting!
I enjoy the Dev Meta very much. I just finished a Prussia game where I just got up to like 30 provinces but still had 2.5k development. I didn't do much with it though, I actually don't really enjoy being at war. Especially when my troops are just walking over everybody else. So yeah, 1M manpower and 700k troops in the field. That was the first time I had an army this big.
@@ZlewikkTV Yep. I'm apparently extraordinarily bad at guessing the number of my provinces. I looked it up. and I had 93 Province. So yeah.. Not that out of the ordinary then
They are still trash compared to other modifiers. Discipline/combat abilities both affect casualties and morale dmg. Land fire dmg only affects casualties (which in this meta is not so important)
Problem is, devcost meta doesnt make mp players not expand. Nope, they expand as much while deving like hell. This way everyone just ends up with 5-10x numbers
I would love a video about when and how to spend your points, at the moment as a new player I feel like I dont understand if Im supposed to dev, keep up with tech or spend it elsewhere.
Except in MP you play with all the DLC owned by the host. If you only own base game and host owns all dlc you get to play with all dlc. If the host doesn't own a dlc then the session is played without the dlc even if some of the players own it.
I feel they could balance it by fixing the way things scale. Owning all of Britain, Africa, France, and India, I deleted every single Church/Cathedral, exploited tax dev in every province, and I lost a total of 12 ducats a month. I took those building slots and threw in manufactures and counting houses, gaining 500 ducats a month. Tax is so stupidly useless that it's actually detrimental. It increases dev cost the more you invest in tax, and takes up building slots.
reduction cost stacking is as broken as cooldown reduction could be in a MOBA, in lol, they capped it at 40% and that was fine, but after awhile they ame up with a better idea, instead of cooldown reduction, you now get ability haste and the ability haste give you cooldown reduction with diminishing return, so it's not cap like before, but you would need a lot more modifer to get further, i think this approache should always be taken when dealing with cost reduction. in eu4, you could simply call it: devellopment efficiency
Well, to fix the dev cost meta i have a suggestion. With no bonuses, every dev click cost 100/100 of original cost which is fifty. Just like every modifier changes this percentage up to 10/100 and every modifier is additive which means every dev dost makes next dev cost modifier more significant. There is one way to fix this, make the bonuses multiplicatively. Now it works like 100-(all modifiers)/100 capped at 10/100. When it's multiplicative it should be calculated like 100/100 x modifier x other modifier... There is also another way to fix if you wanna keep it additive. I always mentioned the upper part of division. If you use additives at bottom part it stops scaling well but doesn't remove it's initial effect. The formula is 100/[100+(all modifiers)] with this formula it doesn't scale to the moon like the original game. For example with university, eco+quantity you get 50/100 cost modifier. With the formula I suggest first it's costs 57.6/100 with the second one it costs 63.1/100. But with some more modifiers that will scale so much it will show it's effect. The second example, you have icon, university, lvl3 CoT, eco+quantity, prosperity, state edict, and %10 from ideas. In original game it costs 10/100 since it's capped. In the first formula it gets 34/100 which is more balanced, in the second formula it costs around 39/100. The only problem is using the addition of modifiers on upper part. Using multiplication on bottom part also brokes the balance. What paradox should do is make it multiplicative and applied to upper part, or make it additive and applied to bottom part. Other two scales to much and needed to be capped, like original game at %90 reduction or 10/100 cost modifier.
First of all I am no MP player so I have no idea how it works in MP. But I love the SP experience of playing tall in 1.30. Clicking a button to get a number from 9 to 20 is not super exciting but I like the stacking of effects and it is much more fun to have a strong small nation than to go wide for the umpteenth time. It might be overpowered but in SP it still feels fair enough and I would readjust many other factors before even looking at the dev costs. From my little experience that I have about EU4 MP I would also argue that infinite manpower is strong but it can't beat infinite army capacity. The army limit is still based on the entire development of the nation and going wide also gives you more regimental camps. So the bigger nation will most likely have a much bigger army limit than the Lubeck player with 100 dev in his one province. It is nice to have 1 million manpower but you can't do much with 100k troops against 200k troops (ignoring terrain and skill). You will get crushed and die with a million manpower in reserve while the enemy carpetsieges you. So maybe it is actually fine the way it is right now?
I am a casual player, I don't stack those modifiers so if the devs nerf this meta by increasing the base cost or increase the cost with each click I won't be able to spawn institutions outside of europe anymore. I think a lot of people actually play like me or just roleplay a bit (I don't see me roleplay and saying "I HAD A DREAM TONIGHT, I WILL STACK MODIFIERS AND..." you know what I mean) and this nerf will just break the game but in an other way. Pretty tricky situation !
We sure need more mapower because people bleed out their ears listening to the current audio setup. Good video though, love it, and i wish quick recovery to your mic.
I think the meta is OK, because tall play synergises well with wide play in order to get large amounts of high-dev provinces and very high dev capital (national dev can reduce capital dev cost massively). I think that although the numbers could do with being turned down a bit, it helps to simulate the increase in population density over the time period, and also it represents the improvements in army standardisation far better than professionalism imo. I do not think that slackening recruitment should be anywhere near as powerful as it is currently. However, I will say that there are probably too many dev cost modifiers, and I think the increase of dev cost per development should be higher (perhaps 5% development cost change per dev after 10, 10% after 20, etc.). This will not hurt players who have lots of bad land who want to make it OK, as much as it will hurt players who want to build massive dev (30+ per province).
I think instead of -90% being the max dev cost reduction, which would give a minimum cost of 5 power points to dev before accounting for dev efficiency, it should instead be nerfed to -80% giving a minimum cost of 10 power points to dev. That way wide nations like russia will struggle more to get their nation deved as they have to pay twice as much on most early clicks in provinces, while taller nations are less affected as they pass that minimum cost fairly quickly and are deving at higher numbers more than they are deving at lower numbers. Dev cost would be less valuable for wide nations as they are doing less of it, yet continues to be essential for tall nations who dev more then 21 as they need as many dev cost reduction modifiers as they can get to dev at a reasonable rate and compete with wide nations
I tried building tall as an Irish minor, but got destroyed by England. Had a chance for a white peace thanks to France, but I was too greedy. This video will help me in the rematch for sure! ;)
I was thinking about it, and if people are able to play wide and still dev that easily it actually is overpowered, though, and with this new update coming out, it seems that playing tall will be boosted even more, all you need is to have your province over 15 dev, and that definitely will make it broken, so all im trying to say is that maybe zlewikk should be on the development team of paradox
I think it's so interesting that we do so much with mana in eu4 while Imperator Rome (after initial release) got a shitstorm for doing so lol Also, I always tought that i would be cool to have like real pops in EU4 like MEIOU has since just spamming a button "to spawn" manpower or other pops is unrealistic.
What about just lowering the dev cost bonus cap to 80% or even 70%? That way you could still use the same bonuses to cancel out negative terrain/climate effects, but not to lower dev cost to ridiculous numbers. Also, this would give a bigger weight to dev efficiency, which modifies base cost - but then again, so would increasing the base cost itself.
Personally a *little* nerf would be fine by me. I'm not a min-maxer nor do I play multiplayer, but I recognize how it is pretty much essential to do this if you don't wanna be absolutely humiliated on an MP game, and it also pretty much trivializes any wars/progress post-midgame SP if you do it well (looking at my own dithsmarchen->germany campaign, that +100% goods produced +devving made my economy a fucking BEAST. Edit: I don't want it nerfed too much because although it's not as much fun, sometimes playing tall is interesting and we shouldn't discourage that too much.
A mechanic if fun when its not worth it in every situation and requires you to think about your circumstances, so I think it should get nerfed to a point where you might consider choosing another bonus instead of the devcost ones.
Could you do a mana point generation guide for how to get the most of mana points and advisors? Especially for expansionist playthroughs, unbalanced research and being behind on admin tech is always an issue.
@@RMadaraPlay lmak when going for sun god achievement i have more dev as inca then all of europe, cool user name btw... pls dont declare on me im a mere hussite bohemia😔😔
I think the problem with nerfing it through lowering manpower modifiers or base dev cost is that means players who don't really dev are punished - I'd say just remove some dev cost bonuses or make it so that the stacking cost is a bit more - so maybe past 20 it increases more per dev than it currently does etc etc - maybe take all the increasing modifiers past 20 and scale them up 50%?
Just played a 1444 random yesterday as timurids. With my 1490's dev cycle I already had 5 dev click cost this early and with that big development boost I had 215 force limit by 1500 with a dev and 250k max manpower
![[EU4] Complete Guide on EU4 Combat & Reinforcements | EU4 ABC](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/G0hI2PKjAoE/mqdefault.jpg)
![[EU4] Complete Guide on EU4 Combat & Reinforcements | EU4 ABC](/img/tr.png)
Something about the fact that you can have more casualties in eu4 wars than hoi4 wars just isnt right
:v
Idk man, while amount of people increased amount of soldiers kept falling down... I hear about Greek, Roman, Parthian and Egyptian armies counting in hundreds of thousands
But you probably never heard of 56M people dead in the XVIIIth century conflict between France, Russia and Switzerland on one side and Sokoto, Bachwezi, Delhi, and China on the second :D
@@kanal2123a that's because they greatly exaggerated the numbers of the armies
@@DavidJimenez-ux2lw and becoase they sometimes took everyone in the army.
Thank You Sensei
Jewjudea99
Your welcome
Nice to see you here,you can do the karaman next,i heard they are so funny
Finally a person who knows the difference between senpai and sensei.
@@user-le4cy9fd7t what's the difference ?
Boys: watch motivational videos before going to the gym
Men: watch Zlewikk's guides before taking part in a MP campaign
Broke: Watching Zlewikk's guides before playing in mp lobby
Based: Listening to zlewikk's guide during workout
@@mikemandalorian9226 Watching motivational videos before an mp match
@@chickendude1695
watching mp matches before filming a motivational video
I really like the dev meta, it increase the importance of nation management, especially in MP, and I like that. Does it scale unrealistically? Absolutely, but it is fun as hell.
in single player, i kinda like building tall as a meso american nation than rapidly expanding into worthless provinces. (unless im forced to by colonial wars to shut up the usual crybabys wanting my gold provinces )
I too think it is a lot of fun and don't want it nerfed too much, but I suppose tokeep the game dynamic and more interesting for pro players it should be nerfed.
I totally agree, years ago I felt like the only internal thing I could manage was rebels and a couple numbers that didn’t affect much. Not the case at all now
@@ethanbrown7198 RN as Maya, i got 200k manpower from deving MesoAmerica provinces to 20 alone. (1/9/10) i ignore deving my Caribbeans and former colonial holdings in the Americas since it takes too long to convert culture so i stuck with my hood and the homies like the aztecs and zapotek for example as accepted cullture. (i pretty much accepted all of the mesoamerican cultures except tecos, converted them to purepecha culture. because i love Tarascan )
i ally feed the Incans and the Tupi the colonial nations as a buffer, same with the creek and the Iroquois up north taking over the east of the Mississippi. while i consolidate Colombia and everything west of the Mississippi.
so basically i created a United Nations for the AmerIndian people. it fitted with my ideal eu4 roleplay as a native. uniting the nations together and strong like the Iroquois against the gold thirsty europeans
Not to mention that the sound of deving is so satisfying
There's a good reason to dev provinces up to 30 when you're Catholic: 30 dev provinces have a very high probability of attracting cardinals. I did this as Poland and got all 7 cardinals pretty quickly, in turn getting me the Curia, with all benefits that gives. Before colonialism fired, I was able to set the Curia power focus to 'cardinals spread institutions' and profited even more. Something to keep in mind!
Also, there's this estate thingy that gives -20% dev costs for all Centers of Trade you own in your home node, can also be pretty powerful. And if you have land in tropical areas, monsoons give -20% dev cost every now and then. Lastly, in Trade Company areas, there's a building that gives -15% dev cost. Later in the game when you can build universities, this makes it actually interesting to sink some diplo power into TC provinces to increase their production, especially if you're not production leader yet, or still need the 'trading in' bonus.
THE CHURCH IS IN BRITISH HANDS
FUCK THE CHURCH
ME REFORMED NAO
The most important part of the Dev meta is that it makes the map look pretty when you surprise your mates with it.
You guys show your friends your EU4 games?
@@daltonmiller5590 We're playing EU4 with our friends. :)
@@deborahroblay4212 damn
I never even knew about the climate modifier. EU4 is like life. You learn something new every day
exactly!
you can get "mansoons bring fertillity" though for those tropical regions in southern asia and that actually gives -20% dev cost which actually outweighs the tropical modifier, so deving is more about waiting for that event and then deving the state that gets it
@@Michaelonyoutub but the only climate where you shouldn't dev is arctic, since its +50% which is massive. A shame since fur and gold can be found en masse in those locations
Gay actor Michael Douglas?
@@Ownage96O yessssssssss
Premiere gang let's go!
hello ludi :)
hey Ludi
goodbye Ludi
Salve ludi et historya
Even though it’s a little crazy, I do like the fact that deving has become the meta for multiplayer. It almost bridges the gap between the tall vs wide players
Great video, as for nerfing:
Tall is love, tall is life.
The dev meta is very cool in my opinion, its just that i need the dlc to do it myself(:
No i think that added it to the base game
@@rileyrose5166 In base game you can't do state edicts and probably a lot more, that is just the one I knew.
@@rileyrose5166 a lot of the bonusses are only avalable with dlc (:
@@artemis_fowl44hd92 Oh i thought he meant that he needed the dlc to manually dev, which used to be a thing (absolutely horrendous practice, glad they added manual dev to base game)
@@rileyrose5166 Yeah, luckily they also added some other QoL-Features to the base game, like how you now can create stacks and let them automatically construct!
5 minutes into the video and I feel that it is getting hot in my room. Give me more of those guides o.O
Let's go! I was waiting for it
Thanks for making this, I’ve been watching the MP videos and seeing your dev costs had me completely lost. Even 900 hours I to the game I’d never tried stacking so aggressively and hadn’t realized how much it could stack.
I’ll blame this on my last campaign being 1.29, and never playing MP.
I'm in the same boat as you
Yes, I was wondering why someone has so much manpower, specially when someone's was owning me as Byzantium
:>
If you would like to talk to me, ask some questions and play together, come to my Discord channel: discord.gg/NAys3pf
Watch streams with such content live on: www.twitch.tv/zlewikktv
I never knew about this! I play a MP campaign with my family, and I think I will surprise them with this.
Good luck then!
haha its really fun when you play like this against your friends who dont know this. they learn it for the second campaign but that first game is golden.
Deving is getting even more help, in the expansion as Paradox want us to play tall, so it won't be nerfed. Overall quality guide. good stuff.
It always seemed as if paradox wanted to encourage people to play tall, but personally i think that being able to dev this much this easily, allows people to be able to keep up with the players that are able to expand much more rapidly. It also makes playing in HRE a bit easier early game
oh no, experienced players do both and blob a lot while having 50%!!!! of their dev from deving
@@ZlewikkTV im still practically a noob, i only have 300 hours in the game, and for eu4 thats nothing lol, i when my computer gets fixed ill have to try find a game on your discord
Honestly, whatever happens there's gonna be some kind of meta. Even if this isn't perfect, it's fine as far as meta-defining strategies go so I think its fine really.
It's not a problem of any meta beeing out there. Problem of this particular bonuses is that in experienced mps people play as wide as they did in the past, just insanely deving their provinces at the same time (usuall 40-50% of total dev) which ends up with people running around with 1-3M armies and 1-5M manpower
@@ZlewikkTV Yeah but that's ok. No matter what the most prominent strategy is it's going to involve massively stacking bonuses in some way that makes your nation incredibly strong. Whether it's dev meta or something else that doesn't change, so why bother changing the meta?
Simply nerfing the meta makes it playable
@@ZlewikkTV I'd say given the fact that you're still making content and clearly enjoying the game to some degree that it *is* playable and functions just fine. Nobody's overpowered if everyone is right? :D
Also why ask a notoriously poor development studio to rebalance something that is, for all intents and purposes, already balanced and run the risk of it going badly. We all know what Paradox has done to the AI with the economy and merc changes.
@@ZlewikkTV but but watching the players just spam troops at each other and the minor manouvers that happen from time to time is just too good, you simply get less of it when there are less armies
Anglican France will rise again, thanks to this awesome tip! Dziękuję for this awesome video dude
Hahahah, nice to see you here Alzabo!
The dev meta seems hilarious tbh, I hope it sticks around for a good while.
Ah, hombre, this is an integral part of the game. I think if Paradox “fixed” it, it’d be substantially worse
Late game wars are annoying. Doesnt make too much sense that player nations will throw 10+ million people at each other every few years
Wow this is great! I wasn't completely on the wrong track but now I know exactly how to develop.
Have fun now!
Zlewikk robisz jeden z niewielu czystych contentów na YouTubie i do każdego twojego filmu zasiadam z ogromną ciekawością, tak było i w tym przypadku - trzymaj tak a zajdziesz dalej niż ci sie wydaje!
Z pozdrowieniami od rodaka ^_^
I watched a Ludi video talking about the same subject the same day you dropped this one. Great minds think alike. You guys should stream or post an MP game sometime!
Also, I’d love to see what the meta would be for SP, since I think manpower isn’t as important as it is in MP (though still very important for sure).
If pdx wants to nerf it, making dev cost modifiers multiplicative or a higher minimum cost would work
Literally no.
@@szyna6022 yes it would. Multiplicative modifiers would make stacking less powerful (5 -10%'s stacked becomes -41% instead of -50%) and a higher minimum means no more 1 dev for less than 10 points
Monarch points are already scarce so I don't like the idea of increasing Development cost. What would definitely work (specially in MP) is reducing the manpower scaling. Right now as the video points out you base tax is almost worthless production is ok and soldadesca is too op.
I also thought on having those dev cost modifiers to be mutually exclusive, ex the isolation policy with Japan or the Shogunate could reduce the loyalty of the burgers,
I think, in order to benefit playing tall, it should not be changed with the things you suggested but instead there could be a increase in dev cost when having more provinces, like 2% per province. Meaning that you would only be able to have low cost high development in a few provinces. And to not brake it for wide nations completely so they can't dev, maybe the 2% is only for provinces you change the devolpment in. Meaning you have to choose which 40ish provinces you want to dev.
Ah yes! The fabled OP Dev Meta by Zlewikk! Was waiting for this to begin my next Poland game 😊
For nerfing manpower; how about a hard cap of max MIL based manpower from a province? Like a province can only generate 8x250=2000 ( 8 MIL / province Dev). Any additional MIL spent doesn't impact the manpower, but FL and other things work as normal.
That way, the Dev meta can remain for boosting a flourishing tall trade empire and boosting FL with mana still be viable.
Basically, rest of the stats from Dev meta are balanced well for fun and roleplay. Just the spiralling manpower exploit needs a soft nerf.
A 1600 Poland ( with 2K Dev ) shouldn't be producing like 1 Million army manpower per year! ( which would mean its actual pop base in our times would be atleast 500 million!)
Thank you for your great video about how to dev provinces right!
Great video! I enjoy playing tall, so I love that you are going to do a series about development
All of my mp series are about that :p
Hi Zlewikk! I've been looking forward to this video for a while now. Personally i don't think they should nerf dev meta too hard, if they nerf at all, because I love playing small nations that have to fight all the giants around them!
Thank you SO much for this guide! Kt really explained everything I need to know.
Just wanted to say this is a wonderfully made video - good work brother
Thanks man!
I personally like this meta, creating an extremely powerful nation in a limited territory is really cool imo.
I appreciate how dev cost makes tall play a viable strategy, but it definitely feels broken as it stands now.
fr I was going to look at your channel for the start after last series but thankfully this video came out lol
i struggled to understand what you said but the text was useful, thanks for the video
i kinda like dev meta even in sp. Gives you the sense of building a proper nation
EXACTLY!
I didnt quite realise how many different dev cost modifiers there were that could be used in unison, def going to use some during my current Switzerlake run
Good luck then!
Deving provinces is beautiful thing in my opinion. Some people were trash talking me because I usually dont conquer much territories early on since I'm focused on deving. Then I procided to oblirate their big empires with my small nation and I could do that since my army was even in numbers thanks to deving.
Problem is, experienced mp players can both blob and dev like crazy, making it just same situation as without deviing, but with 5x bigger numbers
Been waiting for a video like this for a while now, thanks Zel!
I live and breath for this! In any eu4 game my main and entire goal is to have perfect borders and a lime green country on the dev map
i always thought you were just a nice content creator until i saw you on twitch. HOLY COW! keep it going zlewikk :)
as always your guides are really useful! TY Zlewikk!!
Ive always looked for a guide like this, thanks u zlew :))
@Zlewikk TV english below:
więc adm jest po prostu niedoceniony odpowiednimi perkami, tylko podnosi tax i nic więcej... a devki powinny jakoś wpływać wzajemnie na siebie... mil -> więcej producentów, więcej podatników, (populacja prowincji powinna spadać przy tworzeniu wojska) dip -> większe bogactwo do opodatkowania, szybszy wzrost populacji, adm -> usprawnianie administracji redukując koszty dev (które powinny wzrastać z populacją prowincji i ilością dev) i zwiększając potencjalny limit opodatkowania w prowincji (wyokość podatków powinna być ustalana globalnie w menu finansów państwa, a adm dev tylko wpływać na tax %, albo ogólnie % ściągalności z prowincji)
So adm dev is simply unapreciated, lacking perks and just straight lines rise of local tax... Devs should have some mutual influence.... mil -> more producers, more taxpayers (which should fall according to army creation). Dip -> provinces riches, faster population growth. adm -> better administration should reduce costs of other devs, (cost of dev should grow also along with population growth) and grow local potential capacity of tax rather than "tax income +1"
I think that this current meta is pretty fun. I mean, deving provinces for 3 or 5 monarch points seems OP, but I always thought that deving is in fact too costly and is should be changed. Also Zlewik, you are the best man, almost everything I learned about EU is from your videos
Happy that you enjoyed it!
Happy that you made it xd
Honestly I I needed this, playing as Spain right now and need to lay low while my AE goes down.
I love dev meta, but I would love to see more variation. E.g. 21 dev but focus on tax gives an increased amount 1-2 ducat flat. That makes it way more interesting!
I enjoy the Dev Meta very much. I just finished a Prussia game where I just got up to like 30 provinces but still had 2.5k development. I didn't do much with it though, I actually don't really enjoy being at war. Especially when my troops are just walking over everybody else. So yeah, 1M manpower and 700k troops in the field. That was the first time I had an army this big.
Are you sure it was 30? That would mean you had 83 avg dev 😅
@@ZlewikkTV Yep. I'm apparently extraordinarily bad at guessing the number of my provinces. I looked it up. and I had 93 Province. So yeah.. Not that out of the ordinary then
Cant wait for the video :D
Finaly i know how to play tall! This mechanic is sick!
I like the dev meta it makes thinking about the more in dept thing like shock and fire damage reductions more important
They are still trash compared to other modifiers. Discipline/combat abilities both affect casualties and morale dmg. Land fire dmg only affects casualties (which in this meta is not so important)
@@ZlewikkTV Okay but morale is no longer the thing that wins wars but manpower
Considering everyone has infinite amount of manpower then morale is THE thing that wins you wars as you need to get objectives for warscore
@@ZlewikkTV If a player is skilled enough shouldent they be able to pull ut empty stacks so they can rienforce and get back in the fight?
I really enjoy the dev cost meta as it allows you to play tall instead of blobbing.
Problem is, devcost meta doesnt make mp players not expand. Nope, they expand as much while deving like hell. This way everyone just ends up with 5-10x numbers
Waiting for this video to start so i can begin a new campaign like a true blob the builder
paradox announced a new dlc and the dev diary said that there will now be easier ways to play tall
;-;
I was wondering this for 2 weeks thanks for the vid
I would love a video about when and how to spend your points, at the moment as a new player I feel like I dont understand if Im supposed to dev, keep up with tech or spend it elsewhere.
You should come to one of my streams then. Playing 3 mp games right now
Very informative and at the point
Happy to hear that! :)
Love those cheeky faces in the background
Wdym?
@@ZlewikkTV Nah no way I'm just seeing that 🤔
@@osmiphos9061 ah, you mean the these faces!
I didnt notice before there are so many dev cost reduce modifiers BRUH
I learned many things I have never known before thank you
Happy to help!
Almost all dev cost modifiers are dlc content, so it's basically pay to win, thanks paradox
Except in MP you play with all the DLC owned by the host. If you only own base game and host owns all dlc you get to play with all dlc. If the host doesn't own a dlc then the session is played without the dlc even if some of the players own it.
I feel they could balance it by fixing the way things scale. Owning all of Britain, Africa, France, and India, I deleted every single Church/Cathedral, exploited tax dev in every province, and I lost a total of 12 ducats a month. I took those building slots and threw in manufactures and counting houses, gaining 500 ducats a month. Tax is so stupidly useless that it's actually detrimental. It increases dev cost the more you invest in tax, and takes up building slots.
reduction cost stacking is as broken as cooldown reduction could be in a MOBA, in lol, they capped it at 40% and that was fine, but after awhile they ame up with a better idea, instead of cooldown reduction, you now get ability haste and the ability haste give you cooldown reduction with diminishing return, so it's not cap like before, but you would need a lot more modifer to get further, i think this approache should always be taken when dealing with cost reduction. in eu4, you could simply call it: devellopment efficiency
Dev meta is perfectly balanced
Well, to fix the dev cost meta i have a suggestion. With no bonuses, every dev
click cost 100/100 of original cost which is fifty. Just like every modifier changes this percentage up to 10/100 and every modifier is additive which means every dev dost makes next dev cost modifier more significant. There is one way to fix this, make the bonuses multiplicatively. Now it works like 100-(all modifiers)/100 capped at 10/100. When it's multiplicative it should be calculated like 100/100 x modifier x other modifier... There is also another way to fix if you wanna keep it additive. I always mentioned the upper part of division. If you use additives at bottom part it stops scaling well but doesn't remove it's initial effect. The formula is 100/[100+(all modifiers)] with this formula it doesn't scale to the moon like the original game. For example with university, eco+quantity you get 50/100 cost modifier. With the formula I suggest first it's costs 57.6/100 with the second one it costs 63.1/100. But with some more modifiers that will scale so much it will show it's effect. The second example, you have icon, university, lvl3 CoT, eco+quantity, prosperity, state edict, and %10 from ideas. In original game it costs 10/100 since it's capped. In the first formula it gets 34/100 which is more balanced, in the second formula it costs around 39/100. The only problem is using the addition of modifiers on upper part. Using multiplication on bottom part also brokes the balance. What paradox should do is make it multiplicative and applied to upper part, or make it additive and applied to bottom part. Other two scales to much and needed to be capped, like original game at %90 reduction or 10/100 cost modifier.
If anyone gets any problem understanding this I can explain it less confusing.
dev meta is pretty good, it makes you able to hold bigger nations when you are out of expanding areas
In mp... it makes them even stronger as experienced players can both expand and dev (and I mean DEV as he can get 50% of his total dev from devving)
Yea maybe it is a bit to broken when it only costs like 3-4 power per dev. Maybe they should add that minimum dev cost is like 10
This is sick
Everyone needs to watch this and harness the true power of the dev copter
I actually like the dev meta, it rewards those players who take the time to do it perfectly and as such increases the skill cap
Not so good when you play in experienced community and everyone does the same. You just end up with 5-10x numbers on everything
I’m pretty sure Paradox knows, because the dev efficiency techs we have now no longer reduce the total cost. They reduce the base cost.
A pratically non existant nerf, most of the times
Great vid! Should it get nerfed? No. It's not a bug, it's a feature.
First of all I am no MP player so I have no idea how it works in MP.
But I love the SP experience of playing tall in 1.30. Clicking a button to get a number from 9 to 20 is not super exciting but I like the stacking of effects and it is much more fun to have a strong small nation than to go wide for the umpteenth time. It might be overpowered but in SP it still feels fair enough and I would readjust many other factors before even looking at the dev costs.
From my little experience that I have about EU4 MP I would also argue that infinite manpower is strong but it can't beat infinite army capacity. The army limit is still based on the entire development of the nation and going wide also gives you more regimental camps. So the bigger nation will most likely have a much bigger army limit than the Lubeck player with 100 dev in his one province. It is nice to have 1 million manpower but you can't do much with 100k troops against 200k troops (ignoring terrain and skill). You will get crushed and die with a million manpower in reserve while the enemy carpetsieges you. So maybe it is actually fine the way it is right now?
i mean the dev meta makes the map look pretty :P
I am a casual player, I don't stack those modifiers so if the devs nerf this meta by increasing the base cost or increase the cost with each click I won't be able to spawn institutions outside of europe anymore.
I think a lot of people actually play like me or just roleplay a bit (I don't see me roleplay and saying "I HAD A DREAM TONIGHT, I WILL STACK MODIFIERS AND..." you know what I mean) and this nerf will just break the game but in an other way.
Pretty tricky situation !
Zlewikk explaining better than every teacher i ever had
great video, one of the "manpowder meta" nerfs could be mercinary rerework ?:D
New mercs are kinda joke with this meta :D
@@ZlewikkTV actually I like current meta, less blobing means more players are having fun and borders are cleaner.
In fact in experienced mps you have as much blobbing, just way more mo numbers making warfare more messy
see the map on the eu4 wiki "dev potential of each province" which is the sum of all static modifier.
Keep doing great works zlewikk
We sure need more mapower because people bleed out their ears listening to the current audio setup. Good video though, love it, and i wish quick recovery to your mic.
I think the meta is OK, because tall play synergises well with wide play in order to get large amounts of high-dev provinces and very high dev capital (national dev can reduce capital dev cost massively). I think that although the numbers could do with being turned down a bit, it helps to simulate the increase in population density over the time period, and also it represents the improvements in army standardisation far better than professionalism imo. I do not think that slackening recruitment should be anywhere near as powerful as it is currently.
However, I will say that there are probably too many dev cost modifiers, and I think the increase of dev cost per development should be higher (perhaps 5% development cost change per dev after 10, 10% after 20, etc.). This will not hurt players who have lots of bad land who want to make it OK, as much as it will hurt players who want to build massive dev (30+ per province).
Great video man! Just a heads up, "parliament" is pretty much pronounced the same way it is in French, but with a hard T at the end.
I think instead of -90% being the max dev cost reduction, which would give a minimum cost of 5 power points to dev before accounting for dev efficiency, it should instead be nerfed to -80% giving a minimum cost of 10 power points to dev. That way wide nations like russia will struggle more to get their nation deved as they have to pay twice as much on most early clicks in provinces, while taller nations are less affected as they pass that minimum cost fairly quickly and are deving at higher numbers more than they are deving at lower numbers. Dev cost would be less valuable for wide nations as they are doing less of it, yet continues to be essential for tall nations who dev more then 21 as they need as many dev cost reduction modifiers as they can get to dev at a reasonable rate and compete with wide nations
I tried building tall as an Irish minor, but got destroyed by England. Had a chance for a white peace thanks to France, but I was too greedy. This video will help me in the rematch for sure! ;)
I was thinking about it, and if people are able to play wide and still dev that easily it actually is overpowered, though, and with this new update coming out, it seems that playing tall will be boosted even more, all you need is to have your province over 15 dev, and that definitely will make it broken, so all im trying to say is that maybe zlewikk should be on the development team of paradox
Yeah, that's the problem with experienced mp players. They bpth expand and dev like crazy
Like the meta explained. Gonna try playing a tall game now.
Good luck!
I think it's so interesting that we do so much with mana in eu4 while Imperator Rome (after initial release) got a shitstorm for doing so lol
Also, I always tought that i would be cool to have like real pops in EU4 like MEIOU has since just spamming a button "to spawn" manpower or other pops is unrealistic.
I will definitely be trying this
Have fun! :D
What about just lowering the dev cost bonus cap to 80% or even 70%? That way you could still use the same bonuses to cancel out negative terrain/climate effects, but not to lower dev cost to ridiculous numbers. Also, this would give a bigger weight to dev efficiency, which modifies base cost - but then again, so would increasing the base cost itself.
Personally a *little* nerf would be fine by me. I'm not a min-maxer nor do I play multiplayer, but I recognize how it is pretty much essential to do this if you don't wanna be absolutely humiliated on an MP game, and it also pretty much trivializes any wars/progress post-midgame SP if you do it well (looking at my own dithsmarchen->germany campaign, that +100% goods produced +devving made my economy a fucking BEAST.
Edit: I don't want it nerfed too much because although it's not as much fun, sometimes playing tall is interesting and we shouldn't discourage that too much.
A mechanic if fun when its not worth it in every situation and requires you to think about your circumstances, so I think it should get nerfed to a point where you might consider choosing another bonus instead of the devcost ones.
Could you do a mana point generation guide for how to get the most of mana points and advisors? Especially for expansionist playthroughs, unbalanced research and being behind on admin tech is always an issue.
I love dev meta in single player, i love how my country is nice and green and the ai never develops🤣🤣
Same bro :D
I love how as the netherlands my inland africa states have more dev than mainland france
@@RMadaraPlay lmak when going for sun god achievement i have more dev as inca then all of europe, cool user name btw... pls dont declare on me im a mere hussite bohemia😔😔
Wow, I never knew about the climate affecting the dev cost!
We learn this game each day!
the definition of POG
I actually enjoy the dev meta.
I think the problem with nerfing it through lowering manpower modifiers or base dev cost is that means players who don't really dev are punished - I'd say just remove some dev cost bonuses or make it so that the stacking cost is a bit more - so maybe past 20 it increases more per dev than it currently does etc etc - maybe take all the increasing modifiers past 20 and scale them up 50%?
Just played a 1444 random yesterday as timurids. With my 1490's dev cycle I already had 5 dev click cost this early and with that big development boost I had 215 force limit by 1500 with a dev and 250k max manpower