Europa Universalis V confirmed

[Valmy]

Yes. Yes, we are.

Wild. I would have thought that would be more of CK's speed.

That should make the Byzanteens happy (though I guess they are all now Byzan30somthings.)

[Norgy]

1337 is the starting date, and that means that for most countries catastrophe will strike within 8-10 years with the Black Death. So managing that will probably be the first hurdle.

I've been reading some dev diaries and watching a few vids, and there is little doubt that Paradox wants this to be a magnum opus of grand strategy.

I like that the further from the capital, the less control you have over a province. I am, however, scared by how many layers that the game will bring. I, for one, will sit confusedly and wonder what happened in the first 20 hours.

The player now needs the right resources available to build buildings (an inheritance from Vic3, I suppose), and with the new antagonism system, it is certainly not sure that you can manage to trade them.

[Syt]

The devs also argued that having the Black Death hit early on is meant to teach the player that setbacks are fine and can be overcome.

[Tamas]

1337 is the starting date, and that means that for most countries catastrophe will strike within 8-10 years with the Black Death. So managing that will probably be the first hurdle.

I've been reading some dev diaries and watching a few vids, and there is little doubt that Paradox wants this to be a magnum opus of grand strategy.

I like that the further from the capital, the less control you have over a province. I am, however, scared by how many layers that the game will bring. I, for one, will sit confusedly and wonder what happened in the first 20 hours.

The player now needs the right resources available to build buildings (an inheritance from Vic3, I suppose), and with the new antagonism system, it is certainly not sure that you can manage to trade them.

Yeah, it's either going to be a big flop or the next evolution in historical strategy games, like EU1 was.

I don't mind "vibe" playing games with barely understanding what's going on but there's a substantial subset of strategy game players who need to have a complete understanding of every variable at game start or they get freaked out. Those might have a problem with this game.

[crazy canuck]

1337 is the starting date, and that means that for most countries catastrophe will strike within 8-10 years with the Black Death. So managing that will probably be the first hurdle.

I've been reading some dev diaries and watching a few vids, and there is little doubt that Paradox wants this to be a magnum opus of grand strategy.

I like that the further from the capital, the less control you have over a province. I am, however, scared by how many layers that the game will bring. I, for one, will sit confusedly and wonder what happened in the first 20 hours.

The player now needs the right resources available to build buildings (an inheritance from Vic3, I suppose), and with the new antagonism system, it is certainly not sure that you can manage to trade them.

Yeah, it's either going to be a big flop or the next evolution in historical strategy games, like EU1 was.

I don't mind "vibe" playing games with barely understanding what's going on but there's a substantial subset of strategy game players who need to have a complete understanding of every variable at game start or they get freaked out. Those might have a problem with this game.

They can play board games

[Tamas]

Yeah I am not too bothered about dumbing down games for their sake.  But they sure can be loud.

BTW, although a minority, my "favourites" on the Paradox boards are the ones treating all of their games like they have to be a balanced option-fest like Stellaris. Just the other a guy opened a Victoria 3 thread complaining that slavery isn't really a viable option for a country in the game (as in, not balanced against non-slavery options).

[Josquius]

I've heard about non-territory holding entities like samurai clans, banks ( ) and the Hanseatic League being playable.
Really hope they can make this fun- I've heard in CK3 its not really- as that is seriously what the genre needs. A step away from paint the map means all.  :

[Tamas]

I've heard about non-territory holding entities like samurai clans, banks ( ) and the Hanseatic League being playable.
Really hope they can make this fun- I've heard in CK3 its not really- as that is seriously what the genre needs. A step away from paint the map means all.  :

Yes that sounds very interesting but also I haven't spotted a single Youtuber playing them, so they are probably a hot mess.

[Valmy]

I feel like by starting in 1337, when important early modern states like the Ottomans and Muscovy and Austria are in a precarious early state we are basically just guaranteeing the game we play will be some bizarro fantasy land even more than your typical EU4 game. I do hope there is an option for a 1492 start just so we can see something dealing with the actual great powers of that era.

[Josephus]

I feel like by starting in 1337, when important early modern states like the Ottomans and Muscovy and Austria are in a precarious early state we are basically just guaranteeing the game we play will be some bizarro fantasy land even more than your typical EU4 game. I do hope there is an option for a 1492 start just so we can see something dealing with the actual great powers of that era.

Yeah, I agree....I get that this, as the fanbois would say, is not a history book; but you do like to have the "feel" of history, particularly for a game that plays over 400 years. I get that the EU4 way of having any date open to play is too cumbersome; but I'd like to have several options. In ALL EUs that I've played I always preferred the 1492 start game.

[Valmy]

I feel like by starting in 1337, when important early modern states like the Ottomans and Muscovy and Austria are in a precarious early state we are basically just guaranteeing the game we play will be some bizarro fantasy land even more than your typical EU4 game. I do hope there is an option for a 1492 start just so we can see something dealing with the actual great powers of that era.

Yeah, I agree....I get that this, as the fanbois would say, is not a history book; but you do like to have the "feel" of history, particularly for a game that plays over 400 years. I get that the EU4 way of having any date open to play is too cumbersome; but I'd like to have several options. In ALL EUs that I've played I always preferred the 1492 start game.

I have railed against this "history book" attitude from way back in the EU2 days. Sure the game is not just a replay of history but Paradox games have a HUGE role in teaching people about history. My son, for example. Virtually everything he knows about the 20th century and Europe and everywhere that is not the US and Texas is from Paradox games. Our Public Schools don't have the time or mandate to teach him about pre-colonial India...or even British controlled India...or even modern day India. So I would like to see some balance in their approach. Hell an embarrassing amount of what I know about India started from playing the EU series.

And granted they do this for the start dates. Having all 20,624 "sovereign" states of the HRE is a great thing...except for your computers ability to run the game.

And as much as I love the Byzanteens...er...Byzanretirees I don't think an EU game should have the Byzantine Empire in it. That is a medieval state. It is just some weird alt hist stuff to have the Balkans being ruled by the Byzantines and not the Ottomans. It is like a game where the Samnites won the war and now rule Rome and we are doing a game taking place during the time of Julius Caesar.

[Baron von Schtinkenbutt]

They clearly chose 1337 to demonstrate the dev team is entirely composed of l33t hax0rz. 

[Valmy]

They clearly chose 1337 to demonstrate the dev team is entirely composed of l33t hax0rz. 

 

Only 2000s kids will get this

[Norgy]

I feel like by starting in 1337, when important early modern states like the Ottomans and Muscovy and Austria are in a precarious early state we are basically just guaranteeing the game we play will be some bizarro fantasy land even more than your typical EU4 game. I do hope there is an option for a 1492 start just so we can see something dealing with the actual great powers of that era.

I watched one YouTuber, Ludi et Historia, play Eastern Roman Empire. It looks rather railroaded towards failure through events.

There is a community AAR on P'dox's YouTube channel about how to form Russia as Muscovy. In 1337, Novgorod seems like the more viable option.
But yeah, on release, I am fairly certain you will see a lot of things that will make even alt-hist fans cringe.

From what I saw, Byzantium starts with a lot more land than in EU4 (as it was historically), but with at least three guaranteed civil wars already in the 14th century.