why not just read the reviews and find out yourself?

>>2318012
I'm not sure what it is about it, but it doesn't format well as a game for repeated play. I like it personally but only in short bursts. Running the game from speed 5 1337-end takes 20 hours non stop on my machine, but there only seems to be about 10 hours of actually engaging with the mechanics in any meaningful way, it's so weird

>>2318040
i want the 4chimps take

>>2318012
it's genuinely too complicated for anyone who didn't take econ 101, meaning that it's actually pretty easy but too hard for eu4 players. EU4 had basically zero genuine attempts at "simulation"

File: zoro.jpg (420 KB, 1920x1080)

420 KB JPG

redditors got filtered. it's half baked and unbalanced but still the best gsg in years

A combination of it genuinely having some serious bugs and issues and mappainters crying that that spreading blurple is slightly harder than in EUIV

File: david-bowie-zoom-in.gif (2.2 MB, 373x284)

2.2 MB GIF

>>2318012
The only game that's more of a meme than Victoria 3.
>Warscore cost +10% because Empire vs Kingdom
Fuck you too, Johan.

>>2318012
What are you all hoping to see from future updates? the free market stuff is a massive meme right now, but the systems are there for some really cool expansions

>>2318165
>zoom-in.gif
Checks out.

>>2318153
It will only get really good with mods, otherwise it will only become decent if no mana or empty mechanic bloat dlc is added.

>>2318166
some form of hard historical railroad game rule. AI prioritizing getting their IRL territories, dynasties, stuff like that.

>>2318173
100% agree. the zeitgheist on the forums has completely changed and they've confirmed that's going to happen. It will be seriously fun when historical counties actually form and mamaluks are finally buck broken
that being said beta testing on the nothing ever happens builds has left a bad taste in my mouth

>>2318173
EU2 AGCEEP bros we're fucking back

Just pirate. No one cares. Even devs pirate.

>>2318126
>it's too complicated
>economy is make green number higher than red number
>war is embrace professional armies and shart out infinite cavalry
>navy just doesn't work lmao
it's got bad reviews because the game is still fundamentally broken.

>>2318012
The starting date is absolutely garbage
No austria, no ottoman, no russia, europe gets divided between naples, france, hungary and bohemia which is super boring

>>2318288
And the mamluks for some bizarre reason are the strongest nation of this game and become a discount eu5 version of the ottomans

if u told grok 'play every ai nation like /gsg/ is playing it', border lels would be solved instantaneously. instead you get 'complacency'
when will gsg's be solved

>>2318316
>rotten brain of the AI obsessed nigger can't understand why we want to simulate decadence of empires

>>2318012
Rapid fire updates nuking running games and post release introduction of ever new punishment mechanics to make sure no fun will ever be had.

The game is kind of unsatisfying to play. The reason is certain rather ill-thought mechanics.
Let's take an example. The costs based DIRECTLY on some arbitrary idea of economic base. Having diminishing returns for taking new land is a good idea. What the game does is give you a direct cost as an aggregate diminishing return. There's more situations where that's stupid than there's situations where that works.

They've fixed that a little, but the issue remains. The AI is stupid at playing around it, the player doesn't feel accomplished playing around it. You have a double whammy right there. Add to it all some design failures (Japan) and you have a complete mess.

>>2318012
when pirating look for newer versions, recent patches balance the game way better than 1.00 found on fitgirl

>>2318012
You get a good bunch of fun if you have low expectations but then all the bugs and issues start to settle and you end up quitting unless you are a content creator and have no other choice. Couple of mods that make the game better too. Ultimately, is definitely a waste of money and the game will run like shit even if you have a good pc
t. Bought on release

Do colonies do anything on their own? I've established a few and none have ever expanded or gone to war with anyone like they did in EU4. They seem to just sit there. They don't even help in my nearby wars. I literally don't see a single thing happening.

>>2318012
Johanness Swedenborg left in a game breaking bug across the christmas break.

>>2318531
I had a colony i refused to help with natives and it got taken over, which i the vassalised.
The revolution war started agaisnt fance, my surrounded south African 1 state started it so the war goal was for france to take its capital dragged me in and ruined my run

>>2318281
>>economy is make green number higher than red number
to be completely fair this isn't really true. If you don't set up production chains properly you'll be wasting a lot of resources and time and playing sub optimally. I'm still critical of a lot of aspects of it, like the fact that the estates really should be building more stuff on their own to seek profits, but just sorting by whatever is most profitable in the goods tab isn't a good idea in the long run

>>2318012
>Selective with the games he pirates for free

Holifucking based gamer.

File: 1764078454055275.jpg (119 KB, 1280x1255)

119 KB JPG

It's ok, but a number of important things haven't been fixed.
1) the combat system needs to start using fixed regiment sizes between standing army and conscripts
2) the trade system does not work the way it should, goods are not making their way around the world
3) the proximity system, while a step in the right direction, is limiting and makes all countries look the same, you're always playing for a big capital, that's also a market centers, surrounded by other cities, this is boring
4) not enough things to use money on, game needs megaprojects that give interesting permanent buffs, like EU4 eventually added, maybe a few more sliders to spend money on (hopefully not scaled with GDP, for fucks sake)

>>2318538
Based Johan. Fuck Paradox purchasers

>>2318531
Last game I gave new York most of the east coast and they expanded into the entirety of the north American continent and attacked the Aztecs for land grabs constantly. Every war they would boat over several thousand troops to me too.

>>2318012
>>2318113
Turns all of us naysayers who told you 1337 was way too early were completely right.

File: file.png (1.4 MB, 1364x612)

1.4 MB PNG

>>2320265
Personally, I think the combat and battle system is one of the more polished parts of the game, what they need to do though is increase maintenance requirements in terms of leather and weapons significantly. Having a situation where you aren't constantly crashing the price of swords through massive oversupply is impossible right now, and unrealistic.
Your other points are good, trade is completely broken right now, the automation (which most people are using) needs to be completely rethought. Europe not importing exotic goods from far away through egpyt and later around Africa is inexcusable and nearly makes it unplayable for me personally.
Proximitiy I feel like the solution is tied up in reworking market access and making the private economy actually function. The crown (you) might not care about industry in far off towns, but the local people do and should develop stuff on their own.
4 is completely true as well.

That being said I'm still playing every day, I find India is a really good region to experiment around and have some fun runs in an area I don't care about at all, so broken historical AI isn't much of a problem.

>>2318012
What a disaster this was
Eu4 still mogs

Every country feels the same. Redditors are shitting their pants over mission trees but that's exactly what this game needs. Situations are alright but I dont see them replacing the good ol' mission trees.

>Economy
you want to get rid of peasants asap. you keep building buildings and they give you money through taxes. RGOs should make every country's situation different, but it's rarely the case. Most RGOs are abundant so you can't really specialize in producing certain goods since they are most likely going to be produces in the markets near you. Only a few RGOs, like gold and silver, are good enough to build your economy around them but unless you are a blobnigger you won't have enough of those unless you've started as a country that has a good amount of them at the game start. Also the demand for goods is so low you can usually just max out 1 city early game and meet the demands without a problem.
Also for some retarded fucking reason you always pay some % of the input goods price and you will most likely have to completely subsidize a lot of your buildings to grow your eco
>Map
I have to say, the enormous amount of locations are detrimental to the actual experience. I'm the kind of player that likes to optimize every single location/province but it's impossible to do so in this game without burning out quickly. It also makes warfare more tedious
>Warfare
It just feels bad, personally. So outside of the huge number of locations I've mentioned the food mechanic makes it even more tedious. If you take a long time to siege a fort, it's very likely that your army is going to start starving at some point. As the game progresses you have some options, like using the auxillary units, but it's very annoying early game. Also spamming cav is the way to go, which is boring, but it will probably get fleshed out at some point.
Also, for some reason, they made manpower an abstract number just like in eu4.
Post is getting to long so I'll finish here

>florry back to playing eu4
it's over

>>2322039
>Redditors are shitting their pants over mission trees but that's exactly what this game needs
The game doesn't need mission trees, the game needs railroading. Mission trees would be, in theory, one potential to produce AI railroading, but in practice, they're just going to bloat up into nonsense.

>>2322039
situations would be a great alternative to mission trees if they added about 50 more and they all worked correctly. Red turban rebellion, and rise of the turks are still completely broken, hundred years war is shit as well, and those are basically the gamestart ones. The later situations are even worse. If there were say 50-100 thought out situations you can easily get consistent historical outcomes but with a scottish UK or some good enough alt his variation thrown in

>>2322331
they would have to add like 10+ situations at least for every country to make it not feel like there is nothing to do, the game span is almost 500 years

>>2318531
colonies definitely expand (colonisation) on their own if they have enough population. They do not ever go to war on their own. they also barely help in wars but your regular allies aren't any better. and since colonies are overseas they won't do anything becuase naval transporting troops is always such a ball ache that even CPUs don't want to do it

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/year-1701-same-institutions-in-somalia-and-borneo-as-in-the-western-europe.1895411/

the problem with the game is all the devs are far leftist and retarded.

they honestly believe somalia would beat france because BBC which is why the studio needs to die.

the simplest solution even from a leftist mindset would be to add cultrual intolerance and isolationist dogma.
eg european ideas have a 20%+ spread to other european hertiages/religion groups
any african or asian have a -100% acceptance of new institutions due to cultural dogma of conforming to traditions.
same with islam have some religion modifier that quran is all. meaning -50% acceptance of christian institutions and tech which would fit the real dogma they have

>>2322527
porn brainrotten tranny

WTF I haven't played in a bit and we really haven't gotten a patch for a whole month now

File: 1768583967388.jpg (303 KB, 1271x1058)

303 KB JPG

>>2322527
>they honestly believe somalia would beat france because BBC which is why the studio needs to die.
Shut the fuck up tranny

>>2318012
I pirated it and I'm absolutely addicted, give it a go
Reviews are bad because we're desperately waiting on a big patch which should happen in February (which you can wait for, as well)

>>2318179
>they've confirmed that's going to happen.
It's going to be a shitshow for a long time, possibly forever. I know it's a different dev team, but just look at how slow CK3's DLCs come out and how few of them contain any substantial number of historical events. EUV was not designed with railroading in mind and they probably have a bunch of low-effort DLCs queued up and ready to go. Even the railroading in EU4 was pretty bad in a lot of cases like China never reuniting under a single dynasty ever again after blowing up. EUV is going to be worse. I genuinely believe that it's a structural problem with modern Paradox, that their devs don't understand the engine enough to make games with it.

EU5 will be the last time Paradox ever considers listening to the tryhard crowd, you finally got your pops and lack of missions/railroading and the game is shit for it.

>>2322840
Trvke

>>2322527
>geographical exceptionalism
wtf am I reading? it's racist to say europeans had an advantage over subsaharans because of climate?

>>2322840
I wanted both pops and the mission trees. The "people" hating mission trees are normalfags parroting some goytuber's opinion who most likely haven't even played the other paradox games outside of meme shit like stellaris and ck.
Ever thought about the "map painting" meme being talked about everywhere? That's because those games are just that to them. For me, and probably the majority of the core playerbase, those game are a cool way to both experience and learn history of certain countries and regions and even re-write it. Without mission trees it's just a sandbox where a country is just a colour on the map. Many of those dogshit dynamic historical events need you to know the requirements beforehand to even fire, which is completely contradictory to the ability to learn the country's history I've mentioned.
These subhuman retards also seem to think that it's possible to make the game interesting and have historical outcomes just by working on the core game mechanics. I would pity these low IQ nigger-tier redditors if they weren't actively fucking the development of the game over with their dogshit opinions

>>2318430
lol same, bought it on release, played a campaign as England and I'm going back to EU IV, the game is not awful but once you understand the core mechanics it gets boring and repetitive very quickly. Right now it just feels shallow and not fun imho.

That's what I feared. A technically impressive simulator that's actually boring as fuck to play

>we need mission trees for flavor
Every mission tree is just a collection of rewards for blobbing you would have been doing anyway as well as for dumping your excess monarch points when you hit the cap into development. The only """"interesting"""" mission trees are retarded ones like Persia's Zoroastrian revival which are stupid on the level of GoY4's alt-history trees no one likes. People pretending they liked it because it somehow differentiated countries and added flavor and not because they like the affirmation from the computer that they're doing a good job and the slot machine sound effects they probably added because their gambling exec CEO at the time told them to are lying.

>>2323379
But I loved getting 6 million free PUs in 4 missions as Austria

>>2318012
EU4 casualized the series so much that the civ 5 players who hopped on in 2013 got filtered hard by Johan deciding to take EU back to its roots.

Mana was a mistake.

>>2322527
>NOOO WHY THOSE CHINKS AND NOGS HAVE SAME TECH I WANNA LARP AS LE EVROPEAN CONQUISTADOR AND CRUSH THEM

>>2323379
go back

>>2320638
I don't care much about the start date, but it's made even more clear that the time frame of 500 years is way too long. I'm 100% on team "split into two games" now.
EU4 was borderline too long, 17xx would be a good date for casuals and role players, with the earlier start date, 2 games should be a given now.

>>2322840
simulation fags should have been btfo'd by pdx and be told to stay with their vic3 slop.
EU was never that. It needs railroading, it needs a certain rigidity in its machanics, since it's a game about growing as a nation, mostly through war. Everything else is auxillary and that being flashed out somewhat is nice to have.

>>2323409
EU's roots isn't a simulation. It's a boardgame adaption and eu4 was very boardgamey albeit different than the OG game.
I'd say that the boardgameyness of EU4 made the players demand a hard 180 into sim territory and pdx showed time and time again, that simulations are outside of their expertise.

>>2323580
eu4 is garbage because theres nothing to do during peace time

>>2322527
This is why I stopped playing EU4. Institutions and the mess that removing cultural conversion in colonies without DLC was, and abbos conquering Australia. And adding several different flavours of protestantism for no reason. And everything else really. The game was probably at its best somewhere before estates were added.

>Pellucid
>and make every culture feel the same in the end without TAG magic.
Huhhhhhh. A paradox game making... every culture... feeel the ssaaaaame?

>Abnormalmind
>Week after: Paradox wants to fix Hungary "blackhole" institution issue. Institutions spread increased through trade (buy and sell orders).
lmao

>>2322646
>it wasn't intended for the darkest africa to become enlightened
>it was just intended for the darkest africa to spawn the enlightment
I'm guessing he doesn't mean it that way?

File: GjXLs6HWEAAsbu4.jpg (200 KB, 1024x768)

200 KB JPG

>>2323493
Yes.

>>2323493
unironically yes, I still remember early EU IV (and III IIRC) there was a tech penalty based on culture group which caused western countries to become increasingly superior compared to everyone else, especially china and South America, it was helluva fun sending a 10k army as Britain to China and stack wiping 30k armies one by one lmao
making everything equal makes the game less fun, not more. Not to mention breaking the immersion when I see some tribesmen in Manchuria or Congo being on the same tech level as Britain or France in 1700s and spamming universities and furnaces in some shithole provinces at the edge of the world.

>>2322527
>There was certainly something unique to the culture of science in Europe in the lead up to the industrial revolution (1500s to 1800s), but it's a complex issue. I wouldn't call it "exceptionalism" because it had nothing to do with europeans themselves, but the historical conditions present to europe at the time.

>there was something unique to Europe, its culture, and its history
>but it's not racist because it had nothing to do with Europeans
If it's magic soil, aka material condition such as technology, resources and infrastructure, why does he only mention humanitarian conditions that remain the same for the people even if you picked them up and put them on Mars?

>>2323409
>deciding to take EU back to its roots.
It's roots are EU 1 and 2, both insanely scripted games that aren't simulationist in the least.

has /vst/ always been full of redditors and I just haven't noticed? the game desperately needs mission trees, jesus christ

>>2323900
The redditor cries out in pain even as he is reddit

>>2318040
>read the reviews and find out yourself?
>look it up
>the first negative review is by some fag who thinks having 300 hours in Victoria 3 is something to be proud of and argues that features from said game and HoI4 should have been included with EU5
Normies truly do ruin everything.

>>2323900
r*ddit was always pro-mission-tree, and 4chuds mocked them for it and called them casuals

https://arch.b4k.dev/vst/search/text/mission%20trees/end/2025-04-11/

https://www.reddit.com/r/eu4/comments/11l1s1z/why_do_people_look_down_upon_or_dislike_mission/

>>2324171
both reddit and 4chan kept parroting the "no-mission trees" narrative at start, it's been slowly changing over time

File: 1739978564802816.png (22 KB, 662x521)

22 KB PNG

>have a surplus of building materials
>export them to colonies
>make a huge amount because they have no buildings to produce anything and everything costs 3 times as much as its base price
oh

>everyone i don't agree with is leddit