EU4: first impression
 

Starting the game as I write this. First impression: the map is butt-ugly, as is the UI. It looks like EU3 and not really like CK2.

http://cloud-2.steampowered.com/ugc/...F7AE25A3B5D83/

That's right.

I made my first stupid mistake today. I fabricated a claim on Tangiers, but when I got it, it turns out that didn't mean I'd get a core on it. I should've known that. But Tangiers has "berber traditions", which means coring it costs +200% admin power.

Oops.

In other news: what's the opposite of subjugation? I think this war will be known henceforth as the First Aragonese Superjugation War.

http://cloud-4.steampowered.com/ugc/...DF5E60C702BDD/

it does look very similar to CK2 imo but I dont know the EU series.. how does it differ?

I ve picked up CK2 on sale to play but I dont like the interface so far. still in the tutorial phase..

Well, CK II and EU IV use the same engine and as both games start on a european map so that explains the twin like look and obviously both are strategy games. The games are quite different though

CK II revolves around building a dynasty that survives through the ages. You'll be busy marrying yourself, producing off-spring, ditching unwanted sons, marrying off your daughters for good alliance and off course you'll use some covert action to assassinate a few opponents. You'll be fighting wars but warfare is much more limited in CKII then in EU IV. Also it's almost impossible to gain more provinces than you have a claim on.


EU IV revolves around taking over the world. You'll have a king but he's more of a 'stat-stick'. Dynasties are hardly important in EU IV, when your dynasty dies off, some other king will take his place and you'll continu with that new king. In CK II that would have meant game over.

EU IV revolves around warfare and colonization. This means it's easier to conquer other nations and you can do that even when you lack a claim or a casus belli. You'll pay a high price for it though. In EU IV you can discover the world, while in CK II the starting Europe map is the entier board for the game.EU IV has more military options, you'll get better troops when you discover appropiate techs for example.


EU IV is more 'civ' like than CK II but with more emphasise on diplo imo. In Civ you can just run over as many opponents as your military allows without to much penalty. Try that in EU IV and everybody and their dog will turn against you.

CK II is hard to compare to civ or any other strategy game I know. The dynasty take is unique and CK II is crazy funny in it's event as well.

I do understand your problems with the interface, that's Paradox for you plain and simple. CK II was much better then EU III and I think EU IV is an improvement again but still it's quite a cluttered mess of information overload.

But both games are really good though! I'll do a more extensive write up on my EU IV experiences so far this weekend. I:m really enthusiastic about it, imo they managed to stamp out a lot of the 'spam/repeat' actions of EU III making it even better then EU III to play.

CKII is a game with great immersion: it's a bit of rpg, and it's easy to identify with your character. EU is like civ, but without victory conditions and within a smaller timeframe (only 400 years). EU is like the hardcore version of Civ.

Well, I lost my first war. My ally Naples dragged me into a war with the Ottomans. The kebab army is no match for my tapas army, but the problem is getting my army at the battlefield: apparently the national Ottoman pasttime is galley spam. And as you all know from your history lessons, galleys get a 100% bonus in the mediterranean. There'll be a time when my tech lead over their puny tech group will be large enough that my armada will crush them, and if/when there's still a foreign core anywhere in their territory, they'll regret it.

There is some stuff that's quite annoying, but mainly because the description of the button you're about to push is incorrect. Like this:

This won't let you hire another advisor. Grmbl. But what's really bugging me is the spread of protestantism, this seems bugged. This is ripped out the config file (you can open the files and read them, even edit them):

Then you get a list of factors. Some of them are lower than 1, so with a MTT and a factor of a half, you'd expect a 1:1250 chance each month a province will convert. Now, behold this multiplier:

As Spain I would never see a province flip, but the flip rate seems higher than in EU3. This is just wrong. Not that it has a devastating effect, but it's annoying nevertheless.

I dont quite get the problem with the reformatin. Can you explain what's wrong a bit more

With a MTT of 1000 months and a multiplier of 6 I shouldn't see a converted province, ever.

Apparently it's a bug. I've found several so far, luckily Paradox is quick with patching stuff and they have a very active community the devs are participating in themselves. Maybe a good lesson for Firaxis.

Something that puzzled me is why trade didn't leave the Cape of good hope trade node, as it's unidirectional. Once I send a trader there to kickstart it, the problem was solved and I could recall the merchant.

This bug is quite funny:

http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/61...FDFAB6363BD7A/

My ships are on a mission in the Gulf of Aden, but they want to repair in Malta since that's the closest province from the Red Sea. Did I mention I hate AI pathfinding in about every game? It's the reason I stopped playing Total War games, I can't stand microing every unit through the city gate.