I like this idea, the mostly one dimensional trade in eu4 has always bugged me, with some tweaks I think something like this could make the game more interesting and divergent
I think the flow of trade should be dynamic and depend on the total trade power, or maybe provincial trade power, of the nodes. E.g. English Channel in the current game gets trade from Champagne, North Sea, Ivory Coast and Lubeck, and gives it to none (it's an end node). In my idea if Champagne had higher trade power than English Channel, then the flow of trade would reverse and Champagne become the new end node, unless one of the nodes it connects to had even greater trade power. I think this makes much more sense than just having static unchanging trade nodes throughout the game. Trade power should attract trade
There should definitely be some kind of mechanic where a country with enough trade power in two nodes can reverse the direction. Or maybe create new connections in certain situations via event or mission tree.
Very interesting results in view of Austria & the almost complete HRE reforms (I think 10 more years would have done it), Ottomans winning against Russia, and Aq-Qoyunlu surviving and thriving.
Thanks for exploring this question. This was a very different timelapse, in that the traditional land powers (with the exception of France for some strange reason) are all doing very well. For as much as the 'trade' system in EUIV is flawed, it's also clear how much maritime powers like the UK were being propped up by it in game. Obviously modern free-trade as an idea in an era when every prince in the HRE would levy their own tolls and borders is problematic, and there ought to be another way to represent mercantilism. Without redesigning the entire system from scratch though, trade as it stands in EUIV is at design pareto optimum.
I disagree. Portugal and Spain had great games, and the former, in particular, is primarily a naval/colonial power. As for England, they were doing fine as well. They conquered the British isles, formed Great Britain, and had two sizable colonies on the go. They just got Hapsburg'd, and that PU > annexation, plus the lucky Burgundian inheritance, seems to be what put Austria on the path to dominance. I was shocked at how *little* difference this ultimately made, with the big three colonial powers all doing so well. Presumably, their control over trade power via light ships allowed them to "double up" on trade control and steer it where it benefited them.
Sorry for my bad English. How about a timelapse, where all trade nodes are on the one line, one chain? Each node (expect initial and final) have one ingoing node and one outgoing node. Something like: California -> Polynesia -> Japan -> [all other 74 nodes] -> Champagne -> Genoa -> Venice
theoretically it might make trade a bit more realistic this way although some trade directions should probably have a large nerf to the way it works, If I think about this right there are 2 types of trade nodes just one set of them go in reverse instead of going forward and don't directly touch or else you get an infinite money loop exploit or something. A realistic setting is if certain trade nodes can't automatically push trade power in a direction that isn't historically possible yet. So from the start lets say the trade power from Spains trade nodes can't back push into the carribean, until either a new world nation can see a trade node and put a merchant there to direct trade home, this would honestly help with all the times my colonies are always deep in debt in the late game when i am controlling all the trade power directed towards me. However if you still have all the trade power it probably would still prevent the trade from backflowing unless you had a different trade power lets just call it "Backwards trade Power" for ease, this backward trade power would actually cause a huge push in trade power in the opposite direction depending on the value of the end node which end to end would mean there could be 2 very wealthy trade nations on 2 different ends of the world greatly benefiting from trade. You could probably also include some influence where having friendly relations or alliances with nations who's focuses are opposing types of trade power could benefit both sides. Portugal
Damnit I wrote a big thing and it all got deleted when posted somehow but left the word "Portugal" as the only part about my thesis on how it would work where i used an example of portugal making an alliance in india to gain trade power and india getting the backward trade power in return. Now i don't even remember my specifics enough to rewrite it because it was fairly long
Yoo shoutout to Gascony, Austria had a hell of a game for sure but when was the last time you saw Gascony take over all of Southern France like that and hold onto it for 200 years?
Do this please. Every state bordering (1444 only) with China is in the HRE, and every chinese emperor have militarist personality and conqueror, strict and inspiring leader traits. Also for China is disabled gov. capacity, and the Crisis of the Ming Dynasty disaster
EU4 timelapse but each culture group has its own country EU4 timelapse but each culture has its own country EU4 timelapse but colonialism is disabled (colonial range is set to minimum so you can only colonise neighboring provinces)
I really have a hard time reading the smaller text on the map. Names of countries, provinces and religions are very difficult to read. The small, thin black text lines often are obscured by the topologic features and country colors. Even when I maximize the CZcams view. I know this is due to the way the game is written, but it makes it hard for me to follow an otherwise excellent concept in videos.
Is it just me or is Portugal way stronger in this patch. Ive even see them rival castille in alot of my games and over all consolidate eastern africa and maghreb way more. Portugal AI seems to colonise alot more aggresively
I noticed too. In my current game, Spain can't form because Portugal took Grenada, and not only is Portugal stronger than Castille and Aragon combined, but Portugal is allied to them.
Possibly a stupid question but can someone explain to me, a dumbass, why a loop would be bad? I understand that the AI might default to steering a lot and that could cause issues but; 1. Isn't trade linked to and therefore limited by production 2. Every capital city or trade node of significant value you'd want to collect on, prevent infinite 3. Isn't it more realistic to have trade ebb and flow based on locaon in the scale?
Idk why ottomans every time allied with aq qoyunlu but never timurids. Then its impossible bcs ottos and timurids are historicaly enemy(that makes senses actualy) but also have cores on all anatolia and that also makes sense. And theyr much stronger but I think if ottomans kill aq qoyunlu and ally with france or mughals theyr much stronger and its What they need
"So hey guys in this time-lapse the Ottomans and Austria take a big hit of cocaine and never stop."
so like every timelapse?
I like this idea, the mostly one dimensional trade in eu4 has always bugged me, with some tweaks I think something like this could make the game more interesting and divergent
I think the flow of trade should be dynamic and depend on the total trade power, or maybe provincial trade power, of the nodes. E.g. English Channel in the current game gets trade from Champagne, North Sea, Ivory Coast and Lubeck, and gives it to none (it's an end node). In my idea if Champagne had higher trade power than English Channel, then the flow of trade would reverse and Champagne become the new end node, unless one of the nodes it connects to had even greater trade power. I think this makes much more sense than just having static unchanging trade nodes throughout the game. Trade power should attract trade
There should definitely be some kind of mechanic where a country with enough trade power in two nodes can reverse the direction. Or maybe create new connections in certain situations via event or mission tree.
Here's to that one Portuguese province in Ireland. You truly made the island's OPM culture your own.
You’re one of the only EU4 Timelapse channels that keeps me interested with every upload. Keep up the good work!
And then he disappeared...
Very interesting results in view of Austria & the almost complete HRE reforms (I think 10 more years would have done it), Ottomans winning against Russia, and Aq-Qoyunlu surviving and thriving.
The Mughals were definitely “playing tall”
What a shame that this channel died, it was certainly the best EU4 Timelapse channel on CZcams. 😔
Why did it die??
@@electrickeese236 nobody knows
Not anymore!
When will you release a new video?
Thanks for exploring this question. This was a very different timelapse, in that the traditional land powers (with the exception of France for some strange reason) are all doing very well. For as much as the 'trade' system in EUIV is flawed, it's also clear how much maritime powers like the UK were being propped up by it in game. Obviously modern free-trade as an idea in an era when every prince in the HRE would levy their own tolls and borders is problematic, and there ought to be another way to represent mercantilism. Without redesigning the entire system from scratch though, trade as it stands in EUIV is at design pareto optimum.
I disagree. Portugal and Spain had great games, and the former, in particular, is primarily a naval/colonial power.
As for England, they were doing fine as well. They conquered the British isles, formed Great Britain, and had two sizable colonies on the go. They just got Hapsburg'd, and that PU > annexation, plus the lucky Burgundian inheritance, seems to be what put Austria on the path to dominance.
I was shocked at how *little* difference this ultimately made, with the big three colonial powers all doing so well. Presumably, their control over trade power via light ships allowed them to "double up" on trade control and steer it where it benefited them.
Huh, my bad. It seemed I jumped to conclusions too quickly. Either way, that still answers the question, it's just a different answer.
@@MoogleEmpMog I actually think Austria got that personal union much earlier and used that to bonk France over the head repeatedly.
Sorry for my bad English.
How about a timelapse, where all trade nodes are on the one line, one chain? Each node (expect initial and final) have one ingoing node and one outgoing node.
Something like:
California -> Polynesia -> Japan -> [all other 74 nodes] -> Champagne -> Genoa -> Venice
If you mean a literal loop than trade steering would make an infinite trade value, but if you mean line, that would work
@@andriusgimbutas3723, of course I mean line. Loop doesn't have initial and final nodes.
And sorry for my bad English ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Your English is fine
That would be pretty funny to see how much you could pile up into the last trade node. I’m imagining thousands of ducats lol
This is one of the coolest ideas for EU4. One directional trade has always been stupid
Nice to see the ottmans and austrians never change
>Tries to make complicated mods for the AI to do a WC, takes several attempts
>Reverse Trade Nodes go brrrr
i dont know why but i really appreciate this channel's works, one of my favs. please make chat controls the game stuff again sometime
Austrian Thirteen colonies is so cursed
Are we gonna ignore that sunni rome?
Nothing to see here 😅
Cursed af
It's always Sunni in Rome
sir, this is madness and I have no idea how it works, but it is mind-boggling
Hey man is everything ok out there? What happened to your channel, why don't you post videos? I hope you and your family are alright my guy
It was a pain to see the Mughals get killed by everyone around them... F
theoretically it might make trade a bit more realistic this way although some trade directions should probably have a large nerf to the way it works, If I think about this right there are 2 types of trade nodes just one set of them go in reverse instead of going forward and don't directly touch or else you get an infinite money loop exploit or something.
A realistic setting is if certain trade nodes can't automatically push trade power in a direction that isn't historically possible yet. So from the start lets say the trade power from Spains trade nodes can't back push into the carribean, until either a new world nation can see a trade node and put a merchant there to direct trade home, this would honestly help with all the times my colonies are always deep in debt in the late game when i am controlling all the trade power directed towards me.
However if you still have all the trade power it probably would still prevent the trade from backflowing unless you had a different trade power lets just call it "Backwards trade Power" for ease, this backward trade power would actually cause a huge push in trade power in the opposite direction depending on the value of the end node which end to end would mean there could be 2 very wealthy trade nations on 2 different ends of the world greatly benefiting from trade.
You could probably also include some influence where having friendly relations or alliances with nations who's focuses are opposing types of trade power could benefit both sides.
Portugal
Damnit I wrote a big thing and it all got deleted when posted somehow but left the word "Portugal" as the only part about my thesis on how it would work where i used an example of portugal making an alliance in india to gain trade power and india getting the backward trade power in return.
Now i don't even remember my specifics enough to rewrite it because it was fairly long
I counted 4 commas in total from this essay
I've never been great at my comma use in comment sections, something about the tighter column that we write in throws off my proofreading
Why did Aq Qoyunlu not form Persia?
I would assume that they culture-shifted to Armenian or Kurdish because of a bankruptcy early on.
Kurds can form
RIP.
Austria secretly a player? 🙃
This would have been even more interesting if you showed the trade map mode and the node values at the end.
Great video!
Plz come back I have an idea for a timelapse :(
Yoo shoutout to Gascony, Austria had a hell of a game for sure but when was the last time you saw Gascony take over all of Southern France like that and hold onto it for 200 years?
someone should do EU4 but the new world nations have western tech and europe has primitive tech groups
The Ottomans this game like
"Look at me. I'm Russia now."
@EU Timelapses
Can you do a timelapse where all nations are released and all cores returned? That should show some rare nations.
What about EU4 but everyone has exploration+expansion ideas? I think it would be interesting to see Ming fight Ottomans for colonies :D
Oh my god this would be hilarious
Do this please.
Every state bordering (1444 only) with China is in the HRE, and every chinese emperor have militarist personality and conqueror, strict and inspiring leader traits. Also for China is disabled gov. capacity, and the Crisis of the Ming Dynasty disaster
How you do those timelapses i rlly want to know help
EU4 timelapse but each culture group has its own country
EU4 timelapse but each culture has its own country
EU4 timelapse but colonialism is disabled (colonial range is set to minimum so you can only colonise neighboring provinces)
How sad that channel is dead
Those North American borders are smoother than usual
Me, rooting for AQ to form Persia before Ottos destroy them in one war
I have never seen Ethiopia take over West Africa...
How does Austria get so good every time
Poland: *gets clapped*
Me: shocking
Ottomans: "Hey guys, wanna destory Russia in less than a decade?"
Every country in the east: "You didn't have to ask"
The ai manage to past 6 hre reforms? What
Make a timelapse of every country is in HRE!
I really have a hard time reading the smaller text on the map. Names of countries, provinces and religions are very difficult to read. The small, thin black text lines often are obscured by the topologic features and country colors. Even when I maximize the CZcams view. I know this is due to the way the game is written, but it makes it hard for me to follow an otherwise excellent concept in videos.
Why didn't AKK form Persia?
Is it just me or is Portugal way stronger in this patch. Ive even see them rival castille in alot of my games and over all consolidate eastern africa and maghreb way more. Portugal AI seems to colonise alot more aggresively
I noticed too. In my current game, Spain can't form because Portugal took Grenada, and not only is Portugal stronger than Castille and Aragon combined, but Portugal is allied to them.
Possibly a stupid question but can someone explain to me, a dumbass, why a loop would be bad?
I understand that the AI might default to steering a lot and that could cause issues but;
1. Isn't trade linked to and therefore limited by production
2. Every capital city or trade node of significant value you'd want to collect on, prevent infinite
3. Isn't it more realistic to have trade ebb and flow based on locaon in the scale?
The problem with a loop is that trade value increases every node, so a loop will cause an infinite increase
BUT ENTIRE WORLD IS PEGAN??
Cool
wow
otto aq qoyunlu alliance is a classic
Idk why ottomans every time allied with aq qoyunlu but never timurids. Then its impossible bcs ottos and timurids are historicaly enemy(that makes senses actualy) but also have cores on all anatolia and that also makes sense. And theyr much stronger but I think if ottomans kill aq qoyunlu and ally with france or mughals theyr much stronger and its What they need
Hi