Reloading the game when going back to main menu, going to miss that s/
Last edited:
- 32
- 1
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Automation comes to the rescue. Take trade for example. In EU4, you just had to make sure that you have as much trade power as possible to profit from trade. In EU5, you will sort of have to do the same but via different means, i.e. market access and proximity. On top of that, you can control trade in detail, only control selected trade routes (via locking them) or just delegate it all to the AI. When delegated to the AI, at the fundamental level, you have to take care of the same aspects of trade as in EU4, i.e. providing the "bandwidth" but not controlling individual trade.
- 3
- 1
But then you would unlock them all after just three idea groups of eight, which definitely didn't help make the later game feel less empty.
Plus as a meta thing it incentived weird tag switching shenanigans.
- 4
- 2
It's kinda crazy how I either fully agree or disagree with your takes. I've never seen you post anything that just has me go "eh, sure". I suppose it's that influencer instinct for engagement.
Anyways, to answer the topic on hand; I can't really think of anything off the top of my head, except for the start date. Even though it looks interesting, I think starting a game that's primarily set in the Age of Sail this long before it actually begins is a bit of a miss. The collapse of the Golden Horde, the Ilkhanate, Yuan, the rise of the Habsburgs... I just feel like more dominant factors of the age are left up to chance than I'd like, and I worry too many remnants of the Middle Ages will drag on far into the 1600s. I'll happily be proven wrong, though.
- 9
- 3
- 3
- 2
CK3 has the best launch in PDX's history. CK2 boomers always like to spread revisionism to make things fit their narrative. CK3, with its blandness and lack of Mission Trees, currently has a slightly larger active player amount than supposed flavourful EU4 with its Mission Trees.
- 16
- 7
- 6
- 2
- 1
You mean eu4 which hasn't had an update in 1.5 years and is 12 years old? That eu4?
- 17
- 2
If blockade actually hurts in this game that +40% can be very juicy
- 3
The level of modding in eu4.
With the last EU4 patch, they fully unlocked the ability of modders to make a completely changed game.
The GUI is now customizable and there's a million more modifiers.
They won't give the same flexibility to eu5 modding because mods will cut into their ability to make money.
With the last EU4 patch, they fully unlocked the ability of modders to make a completely changed game.
The GUI is now customizable and there's a million more modifiers.
They won't give the same flexibility to eu5 modding because mods will cut into their ability to make money.
- 20
- 1
- 1
That is simply not true. Pdx lives off mods and would never hurt themselves like that.
And just look at CK3 and V3. All modern PDX games have fully moddable UI as a default. EU4 did not not have it because of some greed conspiracy but because the code was old af and it was much more difficult to allow it.
As I said, all IR, V3 and CK3 had full modding capabilities as default.
- 25
- 3
I didn't want to make this thread about other games, but I knew this would come up, so might as well address it right now:
I did not mean in terms of quality or sales, but of mechanics.
You may think whatever you want about CK3 and Vic3, and for sure, they did implement new and improved some mechanics on their predecessors, but on release they had "noticeable omissions and downgrades" (quoting myself here to make it clear what I mean) compared to CK2 and Vic2.
CK3 released without many of their government forms, only recently getting Admin and Nomads, MRs are still nowhere in sight.
Vicky 3 release without foreign investments, spheres of influence, and even autonomous investments, only getting them after a while. And then there was the war system debacle, which after some polish has become quite alright imo, but for some people it never will be acceptable, and at release it was quite bad indeed.
It boils down to: If you played CK2 for a proper nomad, byzantine or MR gameplay, you wouldn't be interested in CK3 at release, and if you played Vic2 for warfare, laissez-faire economics and imposing political and economic dominance over smaller nations peacefully, you wouldn't be interested in Vic3.
There's no revisionism in these facts, and this comes from someone who has been in love with Vicky 3 for the past year, and who thinks CK3 is indeed better than CK2.
Now, back on topic for EU5, I suppose I had my question answered, if you played EU4 for world conquests and mission trees, yeah, I can see you not moving over to EU5.
As I personally don't fit either of these (quite the opposite in fact), it doesn't apply to me, but I can see the argument.
- 15
In regards to that, a lot of it comes down to CK2 having years of DLC that expanded tons of mechanics. CK3 had a very strong launch (at least player-count-wise).
Normally I would not be surprised if EU5 was missing things from EU4, however there is SO much stuff going into EU5 that I think the game will be overall more complex with more systems.
That said, EU5 will have less flavour/country-specific content at launch as it doesn't have over a decade of flavour content updates.
- 5
That's the point really, even when comparing to its predecessor with all the DLCs, EU5 (at realease) is showing itself to be an almost unanimous upgrade.
The same couldn't be said for CK3 and Vic3 (at release), or at the very least it was far more contentious for them.
- 5
- 4
- 1
Agreed, though EU5 is feeling more like a Magnum Opus kind of project and not just a regular sequel. The only thing I see it "lacking" behind is in the flavour department, just because writing new content for as many nations as EU4 has gotten over the years would be absurd.
- 4
- 2
Yeah, and it's turning out to be a great comeback story after what happened to Imperator (RIP).
EU5 was built on IR's blood, but its sacrifice was not in vain.
- 11
- 4
I agree.
National Ideas are more or less equivalent to unique advances, but their presentation in the Country Selection screen is much better for NIs in EU4.
I think they can make it better tho; the only drawback is that not every country has unique advances, so what would you show in those cases?
- 3
- 2
- 1
Some people might prefer researching ALL the techs in EU4, and picking up ALL your national ideas. You won't get everything in EU5.
Last edited:
- 8
I hope so too considering that otherwise Eu5's tech tree is my second favorite thing about the game right after pops and right before the granularity of the map.
It won't have nearly as many differentiated mechanics between different regions and cultures. In some cases that will be good (EUIV got quite bloated that way and some mechanics and such weren't that great), but in others I suspect heavily it will make everything feel kind of samey. Most unique advances and such we've seen are just modifiers, which won't dramatically impact how you play. I suspect for all the talk of having the same level of content as EUIV and more, a lot of people will still (somewhat unreasonably) complain it feels bare-bones compared to EUIV with it's over a decade of work and dozens of dlcs. It actually seems reminiscent of CK3 to me right now in that it seems like there's tons there but a lot of the differences and theoretically unique bits won't really MATTER that much in gameplay. Could be wrong, ofc.
Beyond that it's hard to say because I haven't played it, but history suggests hyping yourself to high heaven before a game releases is likely to lead to a big crash when reality collides with those lofty expectations.
Beyond that it's hard to say because I haven't played it, but history suggests hyping yourself to high heaven before a game releases is likely to lead to a big crash when reality collides with those lofty expectations.
- 5
This was true when EU4 had initially launched, the national ideas were the things that differentiated various tags and they truly mattered. Something like 20% morale on France or 35% CCR on Ottomans felt gamechanging. However starting with Mandate of Heaven and especially after Cradle of Civilization and Dharma then with endless mission tree content patches they became mostly irrelevant, just another piece in the endless stackable modifiers and bonuses. So I don't think EU4 as it is now necessarily has national ideas that are more front and center compared to Advances that will be present in EU5 which can truly define gameplay without being stackable. That is something that Johan also said they are aware of and will try to avoid.
- 4
- 1
- 1
- 1