Something that could be interesting about generals is if they fought many times the same general from another nation. That would be nice to imagine those "rivalries"
I like doing RP runs with self-imposed restrictions. I remember before they added the Knights mission tree, I did a Knights island-only run where I only took island provinces and tried to weaken the Ottomans enough for other Christian powers to push to the holy land. I basically spent centuries engaging in absolute piratical malarky, doing hit and run strikes on the Ottomans, Mamlukes, barbary corsairs e.t.c., successfully driving the Ottomans to bankruptcy, allowing the Hungarians, Poles and Venetians to push to Anatolia. My run was devastated when my British ally joined a war on the side of the Dutch in a war my Spanish ally dragged me into. I looked away for a short moment and the British destroyed the Spanish fleet, annihilated my entire navy and then just went home. This devastated my state -_-
i do this since forever, but to me seems the ottomans cannot be left alone, it feels they have a magic shield, almost never any AI is pouncing on them, driven to bankrupcy, rebels, no army, nope, memeluks just sit waiting to be conquered, poland always going into east or west, attack the turks? NO i will fight a long and hard war instead somewhere so they can recover so every time i have to do the job myself and, my favourite is the zombie useless byzantines, even if you give them back all their cores, a hundred years later they are part of the ottoblob again
As to more flavour for generals/admirals, I think it'd be quite cool if there was like a notable/legendary general mechanic, like if a general does very well throughout their life they become notorious to the world and therefore your country gets a bit of yearly prestige. Like if they have won over a hundred battles in their life time, (maybe excluding rebels or very small armies) you get the modifier for as long as they are alive and maybe a few years after
On the first point, one thing I like doing with my cooler generals is naming cities and provinces after them so that I have some way of commemorating their service to my country. I really like your proposal for general statistics though. I've always thought leaders are super overlooked as potential spices in the overall flavoring of EU4
I think it would be cool if your colonies can get named after your rulers/generals/admirals. It's pretty stupid how you can play Ireland or Scotland, you colonize North America and your colonies get named after English cities that you don't even own.
CK is quite good at the ruler and nation chronicle, and Stellaris gives a small bit of identity to the leaders, so it’s not outlandish to implement these things.
I have little idea if this turned out to work in the practice, but CK3 dev diary about Stress was praised for potentially creating situations where the "minmax option" and "roleplay choice" are the same thing.
As a huge RP player I loved Al the suggestions, specifically the ledger. Also liked how the suggestions are basically: be more like CK3, be more like civ and be more like Victoria
King rng the 3rd inherited a mess. Several states were looking to break away. The economy was in tatters and the army gor crushed in the ill-conceived seige of . And his majesty RNG the 3rd turned it all around. He brought peace, stability and prosperity to our lands by embracing colonialism and discovering the printing press. He reformed our african holdings into a group of trade companies and paid off our debt. He passified the provinces and forged a new alliance with Spain. We're looking forward to actualizing our claims on Italy. Today starts the reign of king RNG the 4th, a great military strategist, ready to take our troops into Napels!
I think what would also be nice in events to have a tool tip of what a choice our ruler would make with their current traits, personality type and monarch points.
It also helps provide features and reference points for those really wanting to worldbuild for some campaign storytelling (grand campaign or otherwise).
As a software engineer I think the reason most of these features are not realized not only because of unwillingness to make them but also because of the enormous bloat it will cause to the save file and the system itself. Most of the features mentioned will require some sort of logging to each province in multiple ways. So how many killed on each province, how much the province produced and so on. When each event has happened and in which country, so it can be later viewed in the timeline. And it just multiplies and multiples. Comparing the pressure it will cause to the significance of these features, I think it is not reasonable to have them. Although I do agree, they would be very cool to have. Maybe just a mod would be a better idea.
If my generals win a battle against all odds, or manage to reinforce other stack 1 tick before morale runs out, siege a 7% fort in crucial moment, I name a province after them (usually the one in which they achieved the feat). Not really RP, but still I hope they will keep renaming rulers/generals/provinces/cities in a game
The country history also contains missleading or incorrect Information. In my last Mali run it said "The brutal Malian Conquest of Timbuktu ended in victory. The war was clearly decided when the Timbuktu army destroyed the Songhai army in the battle of..." Like what? I won the war decisively in the battle where my ally lost half his troops and I didn't even participate?
If you converted Saxony to orthodox. King somebody was known for this conversion of the area of people of Saxony to the orthodox religion, so many ways to spin the rulers chronicle
I remember about this one british general in the crimean war, that still thought they were fighting frenchmen. Probably countless more examples in the early modern period
The feature I want to see most is 'average siege ticks/percentage to take forts' over a campaign. Maybe include attrition taken on sieges vs. attrition from travelling and total time spent sieging.
what if instead of europa universalis 4 it was called freaky universalis 4 and instead of conquering other countries we got freaky with other countries?
Leader and Ruler stuff you say should be a combined point imho. The time period lends itself to Rulers being Leaders. And of course more different ways to sort the spreadsheet document is always better. But should that really, really be a focus? What you want for RP is consistency in your playthrough. A decision 100 years ago having its side-effects come bite you sort of thing.
You know I read the title as "5 roleplay feature EU*5* needs" which reminded me,when are you going to do a video on project Caesar and your opinion of it so far?
most of the things you mentioned are contextual statistics which they surely can add but they'll have to add each individual aspect manually. I wonder when we'll be able to use AI to not just reply to our prompts, but to monitor a game and randomly take in a few sets of data, make a relationship and bring back a fun event. That is certainly a possibility right now but can't be one on individual scale, some gaming giant has to make a deal with Google or OpenAI to implement this feature. I expect there to be an extra microtransaction fee to enable this feature as it is going to be slightly expensive.
Honestly though AI is a touch… overkill for this? Most of the things mentioned are already tracked in the save files, it’s more rebranding that info and presenting it. I am asking for cool stats not a mini essay :)
@@MrTohawk You have to stack damage and army quality difference to an insane degree, and also ensure the enemy doesn't run out of moral. Furthermore, you have to do all of that damage on tick one of the battle. Practically speaking, it can't be achieved, but theoretically possible.
Honestly the only viable roleplay is by mid game you already act like you're the second coming of Mongol itself and plot to conquer the world. EU4 personally speaking lack the excitement if you're not planning on conquering. Much of the gameplay done is by doing the preparation of war, winning the war and then dealing with the overextension or rowdy subject that follows or simply rob them of cash and monarch point for further preparation then rinse and repeat. I play the game following the story i could created and in EU4 the only worth while story are rising power conquest that never stop. Speaking of General i find it funny they're 100% loyal to you when historicly(but especially Roman) if they get too much glory they might break away and create their own realm or worst try to usrup you. I guess that doesn't count though as it's basicly asking for new content. A more reasonable would simply ask for "Heroic victory" feature like in Total War and have it forever engraved in the map if you could achieve it. Btw almost 20k, so i guess i subscribe.
A tw province thing could be cool although in my experience in tw the actual cool battles don’t get one, but when you route 4 units of peasants with a general bodyguard, you get one earned so it’s a bit of a weird one.
While these are things I would like to see in the game, I would also argue vehemently against them actually being added. The simple reason for this is performance and data bloat, as while the game today runs far faster than during its worst period some years ago now, it still can get quite sluggish during large wars (particularly for HRE/Daimyo swarms) and through the late game. Adding history to every general, tracking additional changes to every province, and similar suggestions would only compound these problems unfortunately.
The thing is, outside leader sieges won and the game already tracks this: this how save game lookers like Skanderbeg are able to give you casualty heatmaps etc.
I found out from a new video that the student made that apparently sortition is basically always better than normal elections in eu4. But that made me think of something. which is better for sortition, political dynasties or Italian signoria?
Its not Italian Signoria, those 12 year terms suck. Otherwise I find that Sortition is pretty underrated in fairness, but I still prefer normal republics with re-elections every 2 years as a build personally.
I can understand. However the reason why Italian signoria is viable with sortition isn't about the election time (sortition overwrites the election time of all tier 1 republic reforms that don't rule for life). You can do royal marriages for a chance at getting a pu. Italian signoria gives an extra candidate option that normally has at least 3 in each stat. And the fact that the candidate is cheap in regards to Republican tradition. However with sortition all candidates have +1 added to all stats (at least in regards to what they potentially could have) and are guaranteed +1 to all stats after being elected. In addition to the additional candidate still being cheap and (usually) young. What political dynasties gives is basically all of the stuff from Italian signoria but without royal marriages and the candidate has -2 applied to there stats when being calculated in return for not being a tier 1 reform and all candidates receiving an additional +1 to a random stat upon being elected, I know that normal elections and sortition are valid options I'm just explaining so you can better understand the difference
@@christianwhite8877 no fair, I mean I know how it works and I have seen the video by Student too, I mean I watch his stuff we even collabed twice. Its more that I still prefer traditional republic builds
I'd say I'm more open minded in regards to both of those republic play styles. I can see the reason why someone would chose either of them. I'm not trying to get you to change your mind about your play style or anything, I'm just unsure which is the better choice (I do however think that sortition and political dynasties could be worth it with the Ambrosian republic, after the republic is stable and you have a safe amount of Republican tradition you are probably safe to switch to political dynasties)
@@christianwhite8877 I think that a lot of people play republics and kind of play re-election based ones as the only option; you should consider the others to be honest but having done that personally I still enjoy the 2 year term re-election builds.
Hmm, I wouldn't be hurt if these features exist but it's so useless that I would rather have the developer not spent resources on this, that could create content instead
EU4 doesn't really need roleplay features. It isn't what it's made for. If you want a million random events that decrease/increase relations with an irrelevant random AI, play CK3
Are you an RP enjoyer in Eu4? Tell me about it here: discord.gg/HaRWvm37Gu
Something that could be interesting about generals is if they fought many times the same general from another nation. That would be nice to imagine those "rivalries"
oh you havent had the 89 year old general yet
I don't keep track of them usually
I like doing RP runs with self-imposed restrictions. I remember before they added the Knights mission tree, I did a Knights island-only run where I only took island provinces and tried to weaken the Ottomans enough for other Christian powers to push to the holy land. I basically spent centuries engaging in absolute piratical malarky, doing hit and run strikes on the Ottomans, Mamlukes, barbary corsairs e.t.c., successfully driving the Ottomans to bankruptcy, allowing the Hungarians, Poles and Venetians to push to Anatolia.
My run was devastated when my British ally joined a war on the side of the Dutch in a war my Spanish ally dragged me into. I looked away for a short moment and the British destroyed the Spanish fleet, annihilated my entire navy and then just went home. This devastated my state -_-
I do that in CK3
Sounds incredibly in-character for the British.
Sounds like an accurate British AI
i do this since forever, but to me seems the ottomans cannot be left alone, it feels they have a magic shield, almost never any AI is pouncing on them, driven to bankrupcy, rebels, no army, nope, memeluks just sit waiting to be conquered, poland always going into east or west, attack the turks? NO i will fight a long and hard war instead somewhere so they can recover so every time i have to do the job myself and, my favourite is the zombie useless byzantines, even if you give them back all their cores, a hundred years later they are part of the ottoblob again
Basically Trafalgar
My favourite RP feature is the achievement screen. its a shame its empty.
Roleplay EU4 best EU4
But funni modifier stacking...
I was soo disapointed in country history when i discovered it. Reading it was giving vibe that is was made by intern last day before official launch.
Definitely the 'mood' of the feature.
I think it looks and behaves exactly as it did in EU3, it's possible no one's touched it for over 15 years
As to more flavour for generals/admirals, I think it'd be quite cool if there was like a notable/legendary general mechanic, like if a general does very well throughout their life they become notorious to the world and therefore your country gets a bit of yearly prestige. Like if they have won over a hundred battles in their life time, (maybe excluding rebels or very small armies) you get the modifier for as long as they are alive and maybe a few years after
Sort of like HOI4 division medals?
Can we stop for a second to appreciate that Revolutionary Korea turned itself, China and Japan into Albania?
On the first point, one thing I like doing with my cooler generals is naming cities and provinces after them so that I have some way of commemorating their service to my country. I really like your proposal for general statistics though. I've always thought leaders are super overlooked as potential spices in the overall flavoring of EU4
I think it would be cool if your colonies can get named after your rulers/generals/admirals. It's pretty stupid how you can play Ireland or Scotland, you colonize North America and your colonies get named after English cities that you don't even own.
CK is quite good at the ruler and nation chronicle, and Stellaris gives a small bit of identity to the leaders, so it’s not outlandish to implement these things.
I have little idea if this turned out to work in the practice, but CK3 dev diary about Stress was praised for potentially creating situations where the "minmax option" and "roleplay choice" are the same thing.
It would be really neat for the Generals and leaders to get nicknames as well like in CK
As a huge RP player I loved Al the suggestions, specifically the ledger.
Also liked how the suggestions are basically: be more like CK3, be more like civ and be more like Victoria
shh
King rng the 3rd inherited a mess. Several states were looking to break away. The economy was in tatters and the army gor crushed in the ill-conceived seige of . And his majesty RNG the 3rd turned it all around. He brought peace, stability and prosperity to our lands by embracing colonialism and discovering the printing press. He reformed our african holdings into a group of trade companies and paid off our debt. He passified the provinces and forged a new alliance with Spain. We're looking forward to actualizing our claims on Italy. Today starts the reign of king RNG the 4th, a great military strategist, ready to take our troops into Napels!
CK3 type biography after ruler death.
He has brought peace, freedom, justice, and security to his new Empire!
RPG Universalis 4
I think what would also be nice in events to have a tool tip of what a choice our ruler would make with their current traits, personality type and monarch points.
It also helps provide features and reference points for those really wanting to worldbuild for some campaign storytelling (grand campaign or otherwise).
As a software engineer I think the reason most of these features are not realized not only because of unwillingness to make them but also because of the enormous bloat it will cause to the save file and the system itself.
Most of the features mentioned will require some sort of logging to each province in multiple ways. So how many killed on each province, how much the province produced and so on. When each event has happened and in which country, so it can be later viewed in the timeline. And it just multiplies and multiples.
Comparing the pressure it will cause to the significance of these features, I think it is not reasonable to have them. Although I do agree, they would be very cool to have. Maybe just a mod would be a better idea.
Congrats on 20k bro ❤
Thanks, has been a grind!
I've wanted a CIV 5 style roleplay ledger since I first started playing EU4. Id kill for that and the extra statistics too.
If my generals win a battle against all odds, or manage to reinforce other stack 1 tick before morale runs out, siege a 7% fort in crucial moment, I name a province after them (usually the one in which they achieved the feat).
Not really RP, but still I hope they will keep renaming rulers/generals/provinces/cities in a game
Thats a pretty cool shout, like you can think of them 'retiring' there
The country history also contains missleading or incorrect Information.
In my last Mali run it said "The brutal Malian Conquest of Timbuktu ended in victory. The war was clearly decided when the Timbuktu army destroyed the Songhai army in the battle of..."
Like what? I won the war decisively in the battle where my ally lost half his troops and I didn't even participate?
If you converted Saxony to orthodox. King somebody was known for this conversion of the area of people of Saxony to the orthodox religion, so many ways to spin the rulers chronicle
I remember about this one british general in the crimean war, that still thought they were fighting frenchmen. Probably countless more examples in the early modern period
The feature I want to see most is 'average siege ticks/percentage to take forts' over a campaign. Maybe include attrition taken on sieges vs. attrition from travelling and total time spent sieging.
Lemon you should do a scornful insult tier list!!
I think it would be cool with a regiment history tab that would let you see which battles your regiments have fought
Lemon ill show you some roleplay features ;)
👀👀👀
what if instead of europa universalis 4 it was called freaky universalis 4 and instead of conquering other countries we got freaky with other countries?
These are really good ideas that can be implemented into Eu5 as well. It would be cool if someone can make this into a mod for eu4
3:30 How about a ruler personality icon is given to your ruler after they die based on what they did?
That would be cool
9:07 related, i would love to see something like "battle of ..." for provinces which saw big battles, like in total war shogun 2
Leader and Ruler stuff you say should be a combined point imho. The time period lends itself to Rulers being Leaders.
And of course more different ways to sort the spreadsheet document is always better. But should that really, really be a focus?
What you want for RP is consistency in your playthrough. A decision 100 years ago having its side-effects come bite you sort of thing.
Could be combined? But I mentioned it separately since it can be implemented separately.
@@LemonCake101 But it could and should be combined. It is the same thing.
@@dakapo8985 I mean I would be happy with just a general version to be honest, and also what about non general rulers?
@@LemonCake101 Republics are gay...
Sorry. But I do feel something intermediate between the 2 are better from a RP POV.
Is this the final DLC idea for EU4?
PURE COSMETICS - The feel good DLC for your final EU4 game (for now)
I like to roleplay as a modifier stacker
Diet options tier list when?
You know I read the title as "5 roleplay feature EU*5* needs" which reminded me,when are you going to do a video on project Caesar and your opinion of it so far?
Ideally when we have a lot more information, so far we have ‘plans’ and a couple map screenshots.
Ruler History is used to
be there in EU3
Comment for YT gods
StatTrak™ general
YES YES YES
most of the things you mentioned are contextual statistics which they surely can add but they'll have to add each individual aspect manually. I wonder when we'll be able to use AI to not just reply to our prompts, but to monitor a game and randomly take in a few sets of data, make a relationship and bring back a fun event. That is certainly a possibility right now but can't be one on individual scale, some gaming giant has to make a deal with Google or OpenAI to implement this feature. I expect there to be an extra microtransaction fee to enable this feature as it is going to be slightly expensive.
Honestly though AI is a touch… overkill for this? Most of the things mentioned are already tracked in the save files, it’s more rebranding that info and presenting it. I am asking for cool stats not a mini essay :)
Hey guys I have a question can you assign a key to the armies button manage autonomous sieging option?
I don’t think so? Never looked at since the button is a pretty bad one to press :(
How do you access the country history?
Bottom right, next to the ledger button
Thanks @@LemonCake101
What is the highest amount of casualties one side can take in one battle phase?
Full Frontline/Backrow wipe in 1 day with max combat width, so 80k
@@LemonCake101 and how can this be achieved?
@@MrTohawk You have to stack damage and army quality difference to an insane degree, and also ensure the enemy doesn't run out of moral. Furthermore, you have to do all of that damage on tick one of the battle. Practically speaking, it can't be achieved, but theoretically possible.
Honestly the only viable roleplay is by mid game you already act like you're the second coming of Mongol itself and plot to conquer the world. EU4 personally speaking lack the excitement if you're not planning on conquering. Much of the gameplay done is by doing the preparation of war, winning the war and then dealing with the overextension or rowdy subject that follows or simply rob them of cash and monarch point for further preparation then rinse and repeat. I play the game following the story i could created and in EU4 the only worth while story are rising power conquest that never stop.
Speaking of General i find it funny they're 100% loyal to you when historicly(but especially Roman) if they get too much glory they might break away and create their own realm or worst try to usrup you. I guess that doesn't count though as it's basicly asking for new content. A more reasonable would simply ask for "Heroic victory" feature like in Total War and have it forever engraved in the map if you could achieve it.
Btw almost 20k, so i guess i subscribe.
A tw province thing could be cool although in my experience in tw the actual cool battles don’t get one, but when you route 4 units of peasants with a general bodyguard, you get one earned so it’s a bit of a weird one.
While these are things I would like to see in the game, I would also argue vehemently against them actually being added. The simple reason for this is performance and data bloat, as while the game today runs far faster than during its worst period some years ago now, it still can get quite sluggish during large wars (particularly for HRE/Daimyo swarms) and through the late game. Adding history to every general, tracking additional changes to every province, and similar suggestions would only compound these problems unfortunately.
The thing is, outside leader sieges won and the game already tracks this: this how save game lookers like Skanderbeg are able to give you casualty heatmaps etc.
I found out from a new video that the student made that apparently sortition is basically always better than normal elections in eu4. But that made me think of something. which is better for sortition, political dynasties or Italian signoria?
Its not Italian Signoria, those 12 year terms suck. Otherwise I find that Sortition is pretty underrated in fairness, but I still prefer normal republics with re-elections every 2 years as a build personally.
I can understand. However the reason why Italian signoria is viable with sortition isn't about the election time (sortition overwrites the election time of all tier 1 republic reforms that don't rule for life). You can do royal marriages for a chance at getting a pu. Italian signoria gives an extra candidate option that normally has at least 3 in each stat. And the fact that the candidate is cheap in regards to Republican tradition. However with sortition all candidates have +1 added to all stats (at least in regards to what they potentially could have) and are guaranteed +1 to all stats after being elected. In addition to the additional candidate still being cheap and (usually) young. What political dynasties gives is basically all of the stuff from Italian signoria but without royal marriages and the candidate has -2 applied to there stats when being calculated in return for not being a tier 1 reform and all candidates receiving an additional +1 to a random stat upon being elected, I know that normal elections and sortition are valid options I'm just explaining so you can better understand the difference
@@christianwhite8877 no fair, I mean I know how it works and I have seen the video by Student too, I mean I watch his stuff we even collabed twice. Its more that I still prefer traditional republic builds
I'd say I'm more open minded in regards to both of those republic play styles. I can see the reason why someone would chose either of them. I'm not trying to get you to change your mind about your play style or anything, I'm just unsure which is the better choice (I do however think that sortition and political dynasties could be worth it with the Ambrosian republic, after the republic is stable and you have a safe amount of Republican tradition you are probably safe to switch to political dynasties)
@@christianwhite8877 I think that a lot of people play republics and kind of play re-election based ones as the only option; you should consider the others to be honest but having done that personally I still enjoy the 2 year term re-election builds.
This is my first lelonlemon ckae video amd i hate tryhard and roleplay. Unsubbing
Hmm, I wouldn't be hurt if these features exist but it's so useless that I would rather have the developer not spent resources on this, that could create content instead
EU4 doesn't really need roleplay features. It isn't what it's made for. If you want a million random events that decrease/increase relations with an irrelevant random AI, play CK3
Not asking for events, specifically asking for side things that can be ignored but can add that little bit of extra RP kick
What a thoroughly disingenuous comment.