Europa Universalis V confirmed

[Solmyr]

One thing that bugs me is how to manage the size of the court. Obviously the bigger the court the more likely you can find great people to put in the cabinet or be in charge of military units.

On the other hand having to manage the personal lives of over 1,000 inbred nobles takes up way too much time.

I have no idea how to manage this going forward.

Manage their lives? I don't really bother with anybody who's not a direct descendant. Who cares why my cousin's nephew is up to?

Well because I want high stat people, so a lot of courtiers is good. Also I was worried too much inbreeding might have bad effects but...maybe that is just a CK thing.

Don't think there is any inbreeding, I was marrying cousins and nieces all the time as the Ottomans (because at some point there was nothing but Ottomans and their cousins available for royal marriages ), and there were never any ill effects that I could see.

[Valmy]

Unlike CK3 you can't play Finland in EU 5 

[crazy canuck]

It's made by a Swede

[Tamas]

I feel like Johan is tying himself into a completely unnecessary knot with this extremely convoluted levy vs regular combat system. Make them start equal, give regulars buffs through some stuff if you have to, but come on they are superior to levies just on account of not emptying your production buildings when at war.

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/levy-vs-regulars-some-information-from-tinto.1876702/

[Tamas]

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/tinto-talks-89-19th-of-november-2025.1876786/

So tomorrow we will have radical re-rework of combat values and then next week the radical recalculation of the economic base which as I understand is a key metric informing several scaling systems.

Also next week's patch is going to be a major overhaul of vassal management,inckudingns rework of the centralisation-decentralisation axis.

Now apart from the ridiculously convoluted levy values the rest of the changes sound like good improvements, but I also feel frustrated I am in this very very familiar Paradox situation where I feel I want to play but I shouldn't because major changes are just a week away. And obviously next week's patch will break something brand new and then I will be waiting for the next fix etc.

[Josephus]

However, I think over a long enough period of time it is inevitable you will have a giant court.

I've heard on the P'dox forum, that a giant court can bloat things and really slow down your game.

[Josephus]

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/tinto-talks-89-19th-of-november-2025.1876786/

So tomorrow we will have radical re-rework of combat values and then next week the radical recalculation of the economic base which as I understand is a key metric informing several scaling systems.

Also next week's patch is going to be a major overhaul of vassal management,inckudingns rework of the centralisation-decentralisation axis.

Now apart from the ridiculously convoluted levy values the rest of the changes sound like good improvements, but I also feel frustrated I am in this very very familiar Paradox situation where I feel I want to play but I shouldn't because major changes are just a week away. And obviously next week's patch will break something brand new and then I will be waiting for the next fix etc.

Yes. And also, just as soon as you figure something out, they change it. And all the YouTube tutorials become obsolete.

[The Minsky Moment]

I didn't get that deep into the game yet but it seemed like things were balanced OK on release.  Levies were stronger in the first 2 ages and maybe the 3rd but that mapped well on to the historical period when levies were dominant and standing armies non-existent to very rare. I think its perfectly OK if during the earlier period, the standing armies are basically there as royal bodyguards or small groups of specialists to be used in reserve or for sieges and such until you get to the 1600s or so.  Now maybe the balance on release was due in part to some coding mistake but then don't fix the mistake in a way that totally undoes that balance.

[Zanza]

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/tinto-talks-89-19th-of-november-2025.1876786/

So tomorrow we will have radical re-rework of combat values and then next week the radical recalculation of the economic base which as I understand is a key metric informing several scaling systems.

Also next week's patch is going to be a major overhaul of vassal management,inckudingns rework of the centralisation-decentralisation axis.

Now apart from the ridiculously convoluted levy values the rest of the changes sound like good improvements, but I also feel frustrated I am in this very very familiar Paradox situation where I feel I want to play but I shouldn't because major changes are just a week away. And obviously next week's patch will break something brand new and then I will be waiting for the next fix etc.

I will just play Anno 117 for a while and then play EU V when it has matured a bit.

[crazy canuck]

I didn't get that deep into the game yet but it seemed like things were balanced OK on release.  Levies were stronger in the first 2 ages and maybe the 3rd but that mapped well on to the historical period when levies were dominant and standing armies non-existent to very rare. I think its perfectly OK if during the earlier period, the standing armies are basically there as royal bodyguards or small groups of specialists to be used in reserve or for sieges and such until you get to the 1600s or so.  Now maybe the balance on release was due in part to some coding mistake but then don't fix the mistake in a way that totally undoes that balance.

Agreed

[Syt]

Now apart from the ridiculously convoluted levy values the rest of the changes sound like good improvements, but I also feel frustrated I am in this very very familiar Paradox situation where I feel I want to play but I shouldn't because major changes are just a week away. And obviously next week's patch will break something brand new and then I will be waiting for the next fix etc.

Yes. I mind it a lot less in Vic3 because it's campaigns are much shorter, i.e., you can get one in between patches.

Much less so with EU5, which also raises concerns how these rapid-fire balance changes affect gameplay 300 years into a run.

And I agree that while there were a few things that seemed off, at launch the game seemed reasonably playable (passive AI notwithstanding). That they're now taking massive swings at the balance of core systems like this is a bit concerning to me. I think I'd rather they juice up AI a bit and take their time carefully adjusting the balance of trade, economy instead of launching patches that swing back and forth like this. Not to mention that part of me worries that they end up balancing it to a point where the game becomes either too easy or too difficult (unless you relentlessly min/max), or that the simulation mechanics become irrelevant because they've been balanced into a grey formless mush.

[Syt]

In case you were wondering (I for sure have) why there's been no music mods yet, like re-adding EU4 soundtrack:

https://www.reddit.com/r/EU5/s/2XvURNjbjC

[Richard Hakluyt]

The patching policy seems to be too reactive, I think they should take their time and avoid quickfire and ill thought out changes.

I've rolled back to the 1.04 patch, which seemed perfectly playable to me. I will advance my version as and when I hear good things about some future build.

[Syt]

I will probably play some Anno 117 or Victoria 3 instead (esp. as there'll be new content for V3 soon and it will need a few patches to get sorted again ). Though maybe CK3.