Europa Universalis V confirmed

[Sheilbh]

I think EUIV's start in the immediate aftermath of the Battle of Varna makes sense.  1453 would take Byzantium off the board and piss off all the Byzanteens.

Good

[garbon]

CK2 allowed any start date, which was a great feature. . .

Obviously, the problems with Muscovy and the Ottomans are linked to the start date.  From the standpoint of 1337, there is really no reason to believe those two polities would emerge as great powers.  It is just as likely to have been any of a number of other states.  P-dx is caught between a rock and a hard place: they give some special content to boost them, but not enough so that the AI will reliably bring them to full power.  Give too much, and and it trivializes them for the human player.

As I said earlier, I think it has been a tension for them for sometime. Perhaps since creation of the series.

I would think best might just be to encourage some state in each region to vaguely do what historically happened. So Golden Horde should fall and one of the Russian principalities should often gain power.

It wouldn't always be the historical one nor would it always happen but some broad strokes of history would be nice to see.

[garbon]

I think EUIV's start in the immediate aftermath of the Battle of Varna makes sense.  1453 would take Byzantium off the board and piss off all the Byzanteens.

Good

[Baron von Schtinkenbutt]

Good

I had a feeling you were going to say that.

[Valmy]

I just want it as an option. The Byzanteens can always play 1337 

Unfortunately, multiple start dates don't seem to work now that Paradox has taken the approach of expanding a game for years via DLC and free updates.  I haven't tried the "bookmarks" in EU IV that don't start in 1444, but in HOI 4 for instance the 1939 start has been effectively unplayable for years due to the major changes to the game since release, and the start not having been adjusted to account for them.

Also the resources needed to make multiple start dates didn't make sense since so few players used the alternative dates.

  other players are always ruining everything.

[Solmyr]

In EU4 starting at a later date famously could also screw up lots of things in the game. Even selecting a later date in the new game and then selecting 1444 again would mess things up.

[garbon]

In EU4 starting at a later date famously could also screw up lots of things in the game. Even selecting a later date in the new game and then selecting 1444 again would mess things up.

Okay so the latter would simply be an example of shitty coding by Paradox?

[crazy canuck]

Or it is just needlessly complicated to code to cater to a niche group.  Better to spend those resources elsewhere.

[garbon]

Or it is just needlessly complicated to code to cater to a niche group.  Better to spend those resources elsewhere.

No it is pretty shitty coding if clicking between start dates causes the game to load improperly.

I totally understood their stance that maintaining many little used start dates (let alone history of everyday in the period) was not worth the resource. But if you do have more than one, game shouldn't break as you browse the different scenarios.

For EUV, I think time will tell if they need to budge or not. Difference with EUV is it picked only start date in a century none of the others covered. Could possibly be there are enough legacy fans who would actually play a 15th century start date.

[Tamas]

The combined strenght of my vassals is weighing down their loyalty more and more. But annexing any of the strong ones would significantly hurt my income. Gonna' have to start doing it, though.

[Josquius]

Or it is just needlessly complicated to code to cater to a niche group.  Better to spend those resources elsewhere.

No it is pretty shitty coding if clicking between start dates causes the game to load improperly.

I totally understood their stance that maintaining many little used start dates (let alone history of everyday in the period) was not worth the resource. But if you do have more than one, game shouldn't break as you browse the different scenarios.

For EUV, I think time will tell if they need to budge or not. Difference with EUV is it picked only start date in a century none of the others covered. Could possibly be there are enough legacy fans who would actually play a 15th century start date.

Pretty sure I do remember a dev report where they looked at the data and said basically nobody chooses any dates but the earliest ones.

[garbon]

Or it is just needlessly complicated to code to cater to a niche group.  Better to spend those resources elsewhere.

No it is pretty shitty coding if clicking between start dates causes the game to load improperly.

I totally understood their stance that maintaining many little used start dates (let alone history of everyday in the period) was not worth the resource. But if you do have more than one, game shouldn't break as you browse the different scenarios.

For EUV, I think time will tell if they need to budge or not. Difference with EUV is it picked only start date in a century none of the others covered. Could possibly be there are enough legacy fans who would actually play a 15th century start date.

Pretty sure I do remember a dev report where they looked at the data and said basically nobody chooses any dates but the earliest ones.

I doubt they said any such thing about EUV.

[Syt]

On the work required to add another start date, Johan said in 2024:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/adding-at-least-one-secondary-start-date-should-be-a-long-term-goal.1659213/page-3#post-29540751

Another start date, well.. I really don't know.. But I would probably say its an insane amount of man-months.

[The Minsky Moment]

It seems hopeless for EU5; there are a couple thousand polities and quite of bit data associated with each.

[The Minsky Moment]

Pretty sure I do remember a dev report where they looked at the data and said basically nobody chooses any dates but the earliest ones.

I haven't played a lot of CK3, but I *never* did the 867 date. Mostly 1066 and one game in 1178.