I WAS RIGHT !! EU5 Starts in 1337 & First Screenshots HERE !!!
Vložit
- čas přidán 13. 03. 2024
- Everything we know so far about EUROPA UNIVERSALIS V and it's potential start date !
✅ EU4 Guides: ✅
✅ EU5 prediction video - • EU5 Is Here & Starts i... ✅
✅ Estates Guide - • Knowing This EU4 Estat... ✅
✅ Army Composition - • The Army Composition P... ✅
✅ Trade Guide - • The Complete Beginner'... ✅
Link to pdx forum post forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...
johan post - forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...
❤️ PATREON ► / ludiethistoria
💻 TWITCH► / ludiethistoria
👑 DISCORD ► / discord
Vods Channel☑️ @LudiClips ☑️
Personal Channel ☑️ @Ludisan ☑️
Europa Universalis IV is a grand strategy games published by Paradox Interactive. All rights reserved. This is an unofficial video, not endorsed by Paradox Interactive.
The following DLC is used in this series:
Eu4 Domination Lions of the North Origins leviathan Emperor DLC, Dharma, Rule Britannia, Cradle of Civilization, Third Rome, Mandate of Heaven, Rights of Man, Mare Nostrum, The Cossacks, Common Sense, El Dorado, Art of War, Res Publica, Wealth of Nations, and Conquest of Paradise.
#eu5 #europauniversalis - Hry
I WAS WRONG! JOHAN CONFIRMED It's 1st April 1337 and here's the BREAK DOWN WHY from the LATEST DEV DIARY - czcams.com/video/jie5pc4qd2w/video.html
Oh man, I forgot that existed... And that was a Johan game, wasn't it? Don't dash my hopes!
just like real rome, imperator rome can NEVER fall!
The whole giving access to creators for Vicky was quite cringe having so many video's online for a game no one else could play.
Rather have them do closed beta testing earlier under NDA, than closed beta testing later and shown on CZcams.
Nah
I do. installed Invictus mod and went to build the Kingdom of Cessetania, waiting to be gobbled up by the Romans. :-D
German Empire borders by 1380 as Brandenburg!? - Future Ludi EU5 content
Hell yeah brudah
Nah bro it's gonna be Byz first playthrough it's a tradition my man
"Restoring the Roman empire by or as" it's an older meme 😂
Its either gonna be that, or paradox would actually balance and historialise the game.
But its always the first, because it generates a ton of content. Certainly not because devs cant...
@@LudietHistoriano german here please. Dont get them started
EU5 could be a mega successful title for PDX, let's hope they don't fumble the launch like Vicky 3, Skylines 2, and Imperator.
true, it can be the best game they ever made
You know how Paradox work, the game will be release too soon and it will take 1 year or more to fix it. This is Paradox scheme now.
Its hard to release a game with a similar depth of content to a game you made for over 10 years.
There's a lot of hype on VIC3, even early streams by the devs but it's still a flop. I'm not too hopeful.
They 100% will. Paradox sucks. The only reason anyone buys anything from them is becuase nobody else makes niche games like this.
I'm sure EU5 will be a decent game in a couple years.
Having the start date in the 1300s would be interesting to see as Byzantium wouldn't be on death's door and the Northern crusades/Lithuania's expansion was at its height
Hey broski, bout damn time they brought Lithuanian paganism back huh?
1356 it's not a great period for Byzantium. In fact it will be fun to start at this date with them cause there's a lot of issues, like losing almost all land in Anatolia and deal with some cataclysm, like the plague wich kill 1/3 of the population of Constantinople.
As a Bulgarian, unfortunately for us and the Byzantines, they are pretty much at death's door. Problem is that we and partially the Black death itself opened that door for you-know-who. It's a mixture of bad period for the states in Eastern Europe, the Black Death and, undoubtedly, the excellent military structure of the Ottomans.
@@hristiyanhristov2480 black death infected us Turks as well, most cities were depopulated as a result and trade halted. Remember, Ottoman was just a small Turkish tribal state at that point.
Let's be honest, about half of us, are going to be playing Byzantium in EU5, more then any other state.. cause it's why we play Paradox games, lol.
Hopefully it's nice.
What I would like in EUV
1) Versatile builings - more customization options
lighthouses, wells, infrastructure, drydock, factory, bridges, barracks, watchtowers etc.
the point of these is to be able to build some of them without screwing up "optimization" or "meta"
make coastal defense a real thing instead of RP or flavour
2) versatility with units
not just inf cav and arty but what kind of ...
create regiments - not as detailed like HOI but add something
make armies a little bit more permanent not just a collection of ad hoc units together or advance to this stage through tech
like flagships - add some special things
3) same with ships lot more flagship type mods for anything
4) population and detailed economy
development = they are happy ?
low dev = low pop ?
5) more controll of government institution
how police work, how the borders work, universities
Id like some more strategy in war and be able to do more damage to your opponents land. And population rises and declines.
so basically EU4 with some similar Elemnts from several other Paradox Games, like Trade, Pop and Economy from Vic3, Army Management from Hoi4 and the Building system from Ck3 but of course all of them adapted to fit into EU and into the Time period
an engine that can use every core of my processor would be nice
OMG YES
Recent PDX games have gotten quite good at multithreading.
I love having more cores for every other application, not paradox.
Paradox watching Ludi video: "This isn't what we meant! That's not what we envisioned for the trading system... Now we have to make it. He made people believe this is what they get"
And I hope they fucking deliver it!
sounds like terrible micro management if the trading system is like Civ 5 etc games with trading carts
@@karlisbergs It would be nice if there was a certain level of automation that you could do, like in Vicky 2 if you just don't want to deal with it. Maybe you get the option to control the trade more and more as your state solidifies it's power over the estates? I think there's ways to make it work AND still be fun.
@@karlisbergs Maybe more like Total War traderoutes where you can step on the route anywhere along its path with an army to plunder or interupt said trade.
I would really love to see eu5 effectively depict the rise of the merchant class during this period and for players to have some agency in empowering them (for economic benefit) or suppressing them for control. The burghers in the 15th century were very different from the ones in the 18th century but I always felt they were stagnant in eu4.
The revolution is pretty much all about them although the game doesn't exactly say so
1. changing vegetation. Even older cultures were able to dry marches, cut woods and make farmlands.
2. army organisation. At leas 3 levels with some customization (icon, role, type of professionalism, etc.).
3. customizable subjects. Make it somewhat modular, so I can create my own type by creating "vasal contract" with some points and less autonomy would be harder to enact.
4. change of goods or have goods histogram. Changing vegetation, building specialized buildings, technology, discoveries, should enable change of produced goods in location.
5. distinguish cities to be centers of services. With time more and more services can be simulated in city to impack populations.
6. communications simulation. Make it hard to administrate farther parts of country. Building roads making it more effective to administer cities from capital. Making city a regional hub (province capital), making administration hierarchy.
7. supply chain for warfare. So blocking supplies from storage to army can make it inefficient.
8. great works. A lot of rulers spent huge amount of money/time/power to build greater works, cathedral, capital city, harbor, etc.
9. government reform that works like code of law. Better simulate transition from feudal hierarchy to centralised administration. From person/dynasty/religion being the unifying aspect to nation state.
10. dynamic regional/situation missions. Like in Imperator if I establish presence in some region, enable missions that are unique (for example due to its natural resources) to it. Like if trade rout to Orient is blocked and have access to sea, enable missions "discovering new trade routs". Than if new world is discovered the "new world" missions will start. Or if in Levant and being Catholic have the missions to create Kingdom of Jerusalem. etc. etc.
Man, March of the Eagles 2 is looking great!
They should really call it that
napoleon's slave estate goes crazy
oh nah@@unitedstates4912
Proper Reconquista of Iberia leading up to the new world exploration is a very exciting prospect! Imagine having the Reconquista failing and Spain never being a thing!!
omg I will play the shit out of the spanish kingdoms when this drops
By that point the bulk of the reconquista was over
For that itd need to start in the 11th century at least
The borders of Iberia were mostly the same. After 1250 the reconquista apart from the conquest of Granada was already finished
@@LudietHistoria you will play the snaps out of everything when it comes out
The borders in Spain are the same as in 1444. If you want proper reconquista play CK2 or 3
Basically, what I want most in EU5 building on top the great things EU4 does,
- more interactions and detail with my dynasty, like I should have a whole family tree, get to pick who is married off, have my dynasty in my court, etc
- more interactions and options for my advisors, generals, and admirals. Playing off the above, I shouldn't just have generals slapped on to my armies, I want to have an officer corp I can manage. My advisors should be expanded to be my entire court with multiple positions that I can arrange and setup, possibly interacting with my estates. Fill some positions with hirelings and fill others with members of my dynasty or hanger ons or important people in my estates.
- more dynamic trade, ie, if there is going to be trade nodes like EU4, I want to be able to reverse the flow of them, or just have them be bidirectional. Nothing is sillier than playing as Japan, being the world's foremost great power, yet every single trade node flows away from you. All trade just ending up in three spots in the world is kind of silly too. It should spread out into the world where those goods are wanted.
- I want army supply to be more important where you have to have logistics and army supply routes, this would make wars so much more strategic/tactical. Like, if I am invaded by a large army, I should be able to beat it without fighting it, by targeting its supply routes. Or if I fail to supply my army, I have the option to pillage the country side which would cause tonnes of devastation.
- more fog of war, and reliance on spies. Like, if I have an army in a province, I do not think I should be able to see all army movements in neighbouring provinces by default. IRL, many times, armies were right beside each other without either knowing about the other's presence. Same with being able to right click on a nation and see how many troops they are fielding. Make me work for that information.
- more army movement options, like, instead of just stacks moving from province to province, I would like the armys to actually be located in a specific spot in a province. This way we could make terrain even more important, and include envelopment, etc which would make army positioning more important and tactical
- more disasters being a core part of the game, both individually in countries and spreading to neighbouring countries. Civil wars are an important part of history and not really fleshed out in EU4. Some disasters should be inevitable. Some should require careful manipulation of your court. They should not be telegraphed as much as they are in EU4, and more a result of your choices. Like for example, if I have an annoying cousin in my dynasty, and expel them from my country, perhaps they come back to haunt me at the head of a foreign army looking to restore their father's line to the throne.
- more detailed siege system, perhaps giving the player more choices during the siege (parallels, mines, etc), force players to invest in the siege, allow fortifications to have more specialized defences, make rivers more important, etc If a fort is in a marsh or swamp the mines option shouldn't be there. Fort locations should be more important. Many a important fort IRL were made completely useless do to surrounding hills that artillery could sit on. The style and design of forts should be more closely tied to advances in artillery and design.
- technology shouldn't just be investing points into something and out pops tech, it can be partially about that, but technology should be invented by use cases. Like, a country that is fighting more wars with infantry should get better ideas for guns which leads to development of improved rifles. A country shouldn't just make up the idea of star forts, they should come out of the usage of previous fort designs, and seeing them fail to more modern artillery and tactics.
- overall, remember that constraints to the gamer is part of the fun of EU4. When you become strong enough that the game is just a sandbox, it stops being fun. I like being constrained in my actions because I have to consider how my neighbours will react, my manpower, etc.
+100000 (maybe except that fog of war thing: totally makes sense in theory but i'm afraid it would very negatively impact the playability of a gameplay - but more expanded spies system? - TOTALLY HOT WOULD SMASH THAT)
I like what you said about trade especially
Allot of that seems like ck2/3
@@wpjohn91 yeah, like ck2 with an option to manipulate trade...
If anything, i'd keep EU in EU's focus on countries, not royal families...
But some more details to court could be done. Like setting aside unfaithful wife, could sometimes lead to a War with her brother ruling nearby country... beheading that lutheran advisor, who's been stealing gold from treasury might lead to rebels rising in cities/locations with large lutheran pops.
Trade should be complately route'able... with default routes being symetric and originaly connecting bigger cities, or locations producing particulary interesting goods... now if trade centers are still a concept, ambitious rules should be able to create new ones- by investing enough time and resources into making one...
F.e. first province settled by European in New World should become one by default... others might spawn naturaly too. As a result, other, less popular trade centers should fall from grace and lose their status- that would be way of keeping it somewhat balance and avoiding creation of to dense network of trade centers
@@kacperarmata6221 imagine you go to invade a country. You have done your prep work and know the disposition of the enemy army and your spies have returned their key objectives in a war. You build up your army and declare war. Meanwhile, you know they have an army roughly the same size as yours but a little smaller. You knew it was in their capitol and that their primary objective is to counter attack into your lands to force you out of the war.
Now instead of you just beelining for their forts and the war goal, you now have to slowly enter their lands. Send out scouts to locate their army or use spies. Once you locate it, you can decide if a pitched battle is what you want. If so you can place your army in their path or circle around and hit its supply lines. You decide for the later.
But wait, your scouts were wrong or too late to notice the enemy change its movements. Now instead of in front of you, they are on your flank threatening your supply lines. You have more troops though, the spy reports seem to be correct. You decide that while the enemy is in a bettwr postion, you have more troops and a fight now is better than letting their army slip away again.
Those are the kind of decisions I want. Right now war in EU4 is just sending enough armies to sit on forts and then wait. I want to be worried because I dont know how big or where their army is. I want the possibility that my spies and scouts were wrong. I want my preparations and planning to matter.
Please keep making this kind of video, I love the additional context/predictions you provide on top of the blog content itself.
More to come!
@@LudietHistoria Amazing
What I want in EU5? Armies that work like Imperator Rome, where you can set them on autonomous movement, set them to priorities sieges or chasing enemy armies without you having to always micromanage them, you still can and should sometimes but when you have like 5+ armies I just want them to be automated.
There already is a button of "autonomous sieging" though
@@Purple-nn8id Yeah but you have to manual tag the provinces, and if any hostile army is wandering the provinces you've set they don't engage under any circumstance, and when you try and pull that army away from sieging you get popup that just feels out of place.
@@Purple-nn8id Yeah but it kind sucks lol. Imperator Autonomous army AI is decent and it's a godsent when dealing with multiple tiny armies. I just like the idea of sending my generals to deal with stuff while I focus on the main battle
That would be great, especially for bigger nations. It was always one of my biggest issues with playing Russia in Vic2, so much time spent trying to organize armies, sending them to every province of relevance, having to micro all of them, it's just not what one tends to find fun.
It would also allow you to focus more on trade and colonialism, if you're playing as England, Portugal or Castille, you can just leave some armies in faraway places while you micro navy.
@@Purple-nn8idit’s horrible, clunky
One of the things I really love to see in eu5 is the food and supply system and the impact it has on both population and warfare. Like what happens if you are at war with a country and you just block them from supply and food and weapons.
Or sell these supplies and weapons to countries that are at war with others. Or influence other countries to go to war with someone by helping them with money and supplies and weapons and all these things. Ohhhh so many possibilities.
That should not be that hard for them as Imperator Rome had proto-mechanics like that. Be really intresting to see and make months liek winter even more important.
That would also make "encircling" a country or dividing a country extremely advantageous (as it was irl)@@colink563
Vicky 3 got that already...
Something i would like to see is, that the supplylines are following a simalar concept like the trade system you explained. For example, when you push deep into enemy terretory its harder for you to bring fresh men to the frontline, but when you push along a navigable river or a very popular trade line its easyer to resupply your armys. This could give you the oportunity to cut off enemy supply lines. Historicly Armys often plundert the local inhabitens to supply themself, so its easier to supply your troops while they march through "fresh" land but harder to supply them during a siege or when they retreat through plundert lands
I'm incredibly hyped for EU5. I just wanted to write down a few features I'd like to see and eventually it became a dev diary itself... Or rather a wish diary.
tl ; don’t wanna read
1. Multi-sided treaties, treaties at any time (not just at end of wars), "Issue-specific" alliances as example of such treaties (like the Holy League against the Ottomans)
2. Expensive wars that countries commit strongly, transition from levies to standing armies, much more mechanics concerning sieges making them much more impactful, supply system for armies and sieges, dynamic great historical events
3. Rebellions with flavour
4. Europe’s dominant role shouldn’t be set; not all trade should flow to them from the start of the game
not too long ; I always read starting screens, event texts, mission descriptions etc.
1. Treaties:
a) Having not only one-sided treaties (demand or offers only but no combinations) would give a lot of flavour to diplomacy. Two-sided treaties would be nice and multi-sided even more amazing.
b) Treaties can be made at any time not only when ending a war.
c) "Issue-specific" alliances that may be dissolved after reaching their goals should be formable. It's similar to a coalition in EU4 but shouldn't focus on undo your conquests but prevent them. E.g. the Holy League of 1684 formed by the Pope against the Ottomans is an example of this and a multi-sided treaty. This would make the diplomatic system much more dynamic and prevent overpowered nations to grow even stronger easily. This would contribute to the balance of power mechanic working in the background of EU4
2. War:
a) War must be EXPENSIVE! There shouldn't be positive balances in wars with both sides similar in strength. Countries must commit in wars important for them (going over their force limit, recruiting mercenaries etc.)
b) Transition from levies to standing armies over the centuries. Some countries have standing armies earlier thus a benefit (like the Ottomans with their Janissaries)
c) Occupying larger countries entirely makes no sense. Whenever you win over France as Austria, you'll siege them down entirely so they accept 100% peace deal. Every time. Did this ever happen in reality? Countries were very willing to accept a lot of demands even if their capital was only threatened to be besieged.
d) For example, conquering the Aegean islands of Venice / Genoa as the Ottomans or Byzantium could require you to take their capital, which would not have been necessary or realistic in terms of being able to supply these armies properly in reality.
--> Points c and d would require a supply system for armies, which would make unrealistically deep incursions into larger countries as difficult as they would have been in reality
e) It should be possible to garrison armies in forts at the cost of faster drain of supplies
g) In EU4 if you have too few men for a siege it doesn't progress because you close of all supply roots (I guess that's the explanation). However coastal forts/towns can be supplied by sea. So if you don't close this off as well why should your siege progress (unless you can bomb the fort to ruins with your artillery)? The Ottoman siege of Candia took 20 years and caused 120k Ottoman casualties. Assaulting might be the only way to conquer it which would make defensive gameplay much more interesting and campaigns more challenging. Taking Constantinople shouldn't be a walk in the park (taking 600 days) but an action that might result in a Ottoman defeat (as a white peace would be) when all assaults are unsuccessful. Failing to take important forts has often changed turned the fate of an (inferior) nation.
g) Supplying sieges could be an active feature. During a siege you can strengthen the garrison and refill supplies and other nations can do so as well. This could even be part of treaties: Pope asks Italian trade republics to supply Constantinople when it is sieged by the Ottomans as it happened in reality.
h) It would be amazing if Paradox could find a way to make events like the total annexation of Hungary and the Mamluks by the Ottoman NOT unique (via scripting) but having it as feature to decide how you deal with the land you occupied. I know this will be extremely hard to balance but Paradox has balanced many other features that seemed to be OP very well. Doing such full annexations could have several requirements (instability etc.) and cause a lot of trouble for you (besides massive overextension and AE).
3. Rebellions:
a) Rebels shouldn't be brain dead. Their armies should be able to reinforce another (if they have multiple armies) and move to better defensive positions (or garrison in forts) if you attack them
b) Rebellions could start with parts the region they want to free already occupied (sometimes even forts), especially if you don't have enough control over these territories
c) Rebellions should act somewhat like rebellious subjects (that you can reannex for free when defeating them)
d) These rebel states can be supported by foreign powers as it often was the case (with money or even men) especially in case of pretenders
e) In return, a rebellion of the same interest group should occur less often
4. Role of Europe:
a) If the trade system is somewhat comparable to EU4 with ways the trade flow, Europe should not be the (only) end of trade flow (especially not at the start of the game)
b) Europeans should conquer colonies in India (and other parts of Asia and Africa) as it happened in earlier versions of EU4 (from what I remember). This would require that other parts of the world fall behind more and more in technology from a certain point in time on as it was with the old institution system of EU4. If this happens or if the spread of technology is rather balanced than nowadays in EU4 should be the choice of the player when initiating a new game.
c) Even who will get role of the dominating continent could be the choice of the player (including random). Of course, Europe is most likely to become it because of its proximity to the New World (compared to Asia) and should thus be the default continent for this role.
This really is an entire diary 😂 But very nice thoughts. I very like the ideas for sieges.
this
what I've always wanted from eu5 since eu4 came out was population. looks like they are adding that tho. its just way more immersive when you have a population mechanic that can go up and down based on devastation or development or whatever. even if it doesn't do much it just makes the world more believable at least
Like imperator rome?
Try the Meiou mod for eu4, they readded population to eu4
@@wotanvonedelsburg1610 imperator rome is good but the pops are so abstract that it doesnt feel as immersive as it could. I like cities to have tens of thousands of people not 34 pop units
meiou is more of a lag simulator...@@aqvamarek5316
Yup. Finally. If I create a stable empire with a capital that controls almost an entire continent, I don't want it to be some mud huts in the desolation steppes.
Seems to me like they’re taking the best parts of vic2 and eu4 sprinkled with lessons from imperator rome and vic3. What is extremely significant is the hiring of eu4 flavour modders, which means that we might get a base game that isnt stale.
I also want nobel families like in ck3 and imperator. A country was not just the king and heir
@@florianhock4155 Certainly if the game starts in 1356 It needs that. In my opinion one of the most significant changes between 1356 and 1820 was the development of the nation state and transition from feudalism to capitalism. EU4 throws you in with a fully formed nation state
I haven't been this optimistic about a Paradox game in a long time. Flavour, immersion and historical plausibility are things that I have sorely missed from their most recent grand strategy titles and the Tinto team seems to be very dedicated to including all three in -EU5- 'Project Caesar' in abundance.
Nice to see Ludi so enthousiastic!
And my respect for your knowledge and deductions to get to your predictions!
Extra focus on how settler populations moved into the new world would be a really cool step up from the old colonial system!
The thing that worries me about a ~1356 start date is that it will definitely require more in depth feudal mechanics (which i believe already have their place in CK3, really not needed again here) that will weigh down the games performance and add a lot of bloat that is only needed for a small part of the timeline.
Additionally, there is so much potential for the game to be even more derailed from history in 1356 compared to 1444, and if the game’s amount of historical focus is no better than EU4, then it’s likely that in most games the Ottomans will never rise, China will be stuck in the Yuan era or be fragmented forever, and Russia will remain under the Golden Horde. Personally I would like to watch historical events happen in most games, though I know a lot of EU4 players only care about the sandbox alternate history elements of the game. Maybe a soft historical AI option like the one from HOI4 would be a nice middle ground.
Or the become scripted events, the lucky Nation modiefier? Perhaps there are also two start dates. Day new and the old 1444 start date
There will definitely have to be more mechanics that break up empires and create new countries. The Mongol Empire was very much present at that point, and if its successors remain longer than they should Asia will literally look nothing like real history.
@user-un5qv3dc9n I hope so. So many empires rose and fell during the eu4 Era, and it never actually happens. If they make eu5 harder, while actually adding rise and fall mechanics that are present in the game, ill be extremely happy
I’d imagine that there would be some existing mechanics to permit historical nations to exist, like the Eastern Romans being a mess for a while, which will let the Beyliks attempt to unify
A soft historical option would be great.
Super helpful video ludi. Keep em coming, and thanks
A few things i would like to see implemented:
1) Better trade routes and in-depth trade system. Maybe you could select which cities you want your caravans to visit. Same with trade ships and you selecting which ports you want them to visit along a route. Said routes would be set up by you also and would have a distance limit. With this you could better represent the Triangular trade of slavery or the spice and rug trades along the silk route. This would be an insane addition. Also special trade missions to the east to gain port grants for commerce.
2) Noble title grants like nominal dukes and counts.
3) Use the ck3 map layout to show duchies under a kingdom instead of showing them as something apart. More duchies under kingdoms since they still existed in that time although diminished in power.
4) A better way of exemplifying land control among the different factions in a kingdom instead of simply showing a percentage. It could be assigned by province instead so you can better manage the resources affected by lack of central control.
5) Implement Imperators army composition management and different unit types.
6) All ships can carry soldiers, the difference is how many they can carry, which would depend on the type of ship.
7) More flavor when it comes to the route to the east by the Portuguese or whoever gets there first. Exploration is too simple in EU4 considering that it's suppose to be uncharted territory.
8) Accurate Japan.
9) More trade goods.
10) More control over rulers education, a hybrid between ck3 and eu4. I don't like the impersonality of EU4 when it comes to rulers.
11) Better visual representation of climate and it's effects on soldiers. In EU4 it doesn't really matter in what time of the year you declare war, when in real life there was a "campaigning season" for a reason.
12) Since professional armies weren't really a thing until Napoleon and the Prussians came along, war should not only affect pops but the time of the year you declare war should affect harvest and sowing seasons. In this way you could better represent famine, which was a common occurrence back then.
13) Use the ck3 map representation of epidemics, also representation of the last remnants of the Black dead in Europe.
14) Knight orders and land grants.
I think that would be it for me.
for 4, isn't that just the old estate system where you granted individual provinces to different estates and that was how you managed them
God I pray anything but ck3 map modes
@@cosmicelectron I prefer this way of managing states, yes. Given that we will hace territories that form a province and so on, you can do this in a better, more controlled way.
I'm glad they are bringing some of the pop ideas from victoria 3 to EU5, can't wait for Stellaris 2 to get the same system!
Ayo Montu?
1 is still going strong and it feels like Stellaris 2 is decades out :(
The war system needs to be done right. Please bring back stacks, maybe with an addition of some sort of automation toggle and smart orders like in Imperator. I really like to move my armies around manually and the stategic depth it brings to the game, but I dislike the amount of micromanagement needed with a huge amount of stacks in the lategame.
I would also like to tackle the late game problem with eu4, where everything becomes way too easy and micro intensive to the point where it becomes not fun. Managing to keep a large empire togheter should be non trivial, and here I would also like to see the option to automate some stuff.
agreed!
With the ethnicity piechart they could have nationalism in later game, meaning homogenic empires have an easier time staying together.
The reason why it feels easy in EU4 is because all land is good. All land gives more troops, more manpower recovery. A building provides a permanent bonus, there is never a time where you have setbacks, except if losing lands in wars (and once you have a little experience in the game you pretty much never lose wars). In real life it didn't work that way.
But diversity is our strength they can't have that be a negative feature@@iplaygames8090
Hi Ludi, thank you again for your content, I love it. Talking about suggestions for EU5, I have 2 ideas.
1- I think supply chain, logistics and attrition is too much underrated in EU4. Historically a lot of great generals won a lot of victories but faced the terrible challenge of managing a reliable supply chain at some point (Alexander, Karl XII, Napoleon, just to name a few). I would love to see a supply chain management system when at war, something like we have in HOI4, but of course with the mean available at that time, the most common ways being foraging, wagon trains and supply depots. Thus, the distance from allied territory (and supply depots) would be key when considering a military operation. Today in EU4, you can just no CB whatever you want and have no specific supply chain disruption, like for instance, as Castille you no CB Byzantium which is faaaar away from homeland and should require a sustainable and well organized maritime supply chain on top of that. No specific attrition for besieging Constantinople... which does not make any sense to me.
2- Coallition system and the way it works should be change so that we cannot just "dodge coallition" as simple as we use to do. For instance, even at truce, AI should be able to declare on you if you misconduct or become too weak. The sixth coallition against Napoleon did not wait for the truce to end to declare on him again ;-).
Great video! Love it!
Finally Yuan empire will be saved, not restored. Also If I'm right it is culmination of brutal civil war in Byzantium.
All start dates have their own intersting staff so I'm not dissapointed. More little shnapple-dups for Ludi videos.
Hell yeah man, I'm so hyped to play ANY DATE in the 1300s to be honest
@@LudietHistoriadidn’t EU3 In Nomine Start in 1399?
Also the devastating plauges that caused by people not keeping hygiene, and I am hoping the game gets disease/medicine mechanics where it will afect the amount of army quality and population growth.
Gigapeasant Zhu Yuanzheng will crush the ooga boogas and restore light to China
Please! Dont hide the mathematical modifiers!!! This is a mathematical game!
Also dont prioritize terrain map. We like maps!!
What I would like to see is a system that takes into account an area's loyalty to the central authority. This could allow fast conquests like the ones of alexander the great as an example given, if the conquered area is willing to align with the conqueror, or even declare independence if central authority is disturbed by the conqueror but the conqueror does not bother conquering that area.
Such a good idea
Something like this would be good for the ottomans, which in eu4 take decades to defeat and subjugate the mamlukes if at all when irl to my knowledge they conceded entirely in a matter of years
@@redacted9280 they can do it one war now.
i think they way they can make this work is you get a special claim or goal that you can conquer a whole nation or at least break them apart
nice, exactly - maybe we could see some more action going on that frontier. If you look at EU4 and for example support rebels mechanic. It's there sure, but doesn't really work at all (has close to zero practical utility).
It would be soo cool to be able to destabilize other countries in other ways than just simple counquer. It has a ton of roleplaying posibilities. Would love to see that mechanic expanded!
So good to see how enthusiastic you are, now you got me enthusiastic as well :D
I found your "analysis" of the dev diary really interesting and would love to see you make videos about future ones!
Hi Ludi, In EU5, I would like to see a mechanic where when we shoot down a fortress, we would either need to quickly repair it for money to restore its function, or wait for a specified time for the walls to rebuild themselves.
Yes
And maybe have the rebuild time based on military funding
Last pic isn't about Constantinople but about whole Byzantium, so it even further confirms 14th century start date. Also, banner pic shows huge Delhi sultanate, so it is 14th century. Miaphysitism still exists, it was just called Coptic in EU4, they settled for more accurate name since only Egyptian Miaphysites are called Copts, but Armenians ans Syriacs aren't (Ethiopians were part of Coptic Church until 1960's when they became autocephalous), so Miaphysites represent Armenian population . My suggestion is that we should be able to expel some population, like, how else would Iberian peninsula get rid of muslims and jews.
Dynamic trade directions is on top of my feature list for EU5, so happy we might be getting that! Time to start saving for a new computer.
The pop system is so similar with the imperator Rome and I love it
farmlands in arid places is basically land in a hot desert area next to a river for irrigation. think nile, mesopotamia, indus valley. hot arid/semi arid areas, but rivers for irrigation
1356 seems highly unlikely for the start to me because of a couple of reasons. The biggest thing here is that the Bahmani Sultanate hasn't revolted against the Tughlaq dynasty in Delhi yet which Bahmanis historically revolted in 1347. Another thing is the fact that country just north of Vijayanagar exists which is more than likely the Hoysala Kingdom (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoysala_Kingdom) Which collapsed in the mid 1350s. Another reason is the fact Bengal is split into 3 separate countries. The region of Bengal wasn't consolidated into a single sultanate until 1352. These 3 Bengal countries are more than likely going to be called Sonargoan, Gauda, and Satgoan and were established in 1325 as separate administrative regions under Delhi so they are most likely going to be vassals of Delhi with high liberty desire. Due to these reasons I think the most likely start date is 1337 at the start of the Hundred Years war or at the very least the start date is somewhere between 1336(Start of the Vijayanagar Empire) and 1347(Start of Bahmani sultanate).
Why would the biggest thing holding back the 1356 start date be a random nation in India that isn’t on the top nations played? tf? It makes no sense
@@Da__goatHistory.
@@Da__goat Bahmanis isnt a random nation in India it is the 2nd most powerful country in india at the start of eu4 lol
Also byzantine population is too high for 1356, no way they had 1 million after black death and civil wars. There's also a large amount of bulgarians most of which the territory they lost right after 1340
The game is "europa universalis" not "india universalis"
Your enthusiasm is totally contagious! Love it :)
Hey Ludi I would like to see in eu5 a Transition between CK3 country management and Eu4 country management. You should have way more intern problems with your territory which should be controlled by some types of vassals that could rebel against you. Governing capacity should not be your only limit to manage a large territory, also this will be a key to blobbing issue.
+ Way more non persistent army, more mercenaries and plagues.
1: Weapon types: Just like in EU IV, when you tech up and get to choose between 1-3 different types of troops that you can upgrade to, depending on your cultural group; you can select a certain weapon type for your soldiers. For example: if you can upgrade your spear line troops, you can choose between: a): a long pike for extra reach; b): a halberd for a more well rounded weapon; or c): a short spear for cheaper units. Do the same for the sword line, musket line, archer line, light and heavy cavalry lines, etc.
2: Literacy rates: Based on the best info that we have for the time, most countries around the world had between 10-25% of the total population could read and write in their native tongue. The Nobility, the clergy, and the wealthy merchants had the highest rates of literacy, with the populous learning how to read if their situation called for it. Maybe having a system where having a higher literacy rate can help increase the assimilation rate of other groups, while also adding additional religious pressure for your nation's main/approved religion(s). If such a thing is added, maybe having the rate double when a "location"/province gets the printing print introduced there.
3: Roads/highways: Imperator gave us the idea of being able to build roads wherever we want, at the cost of some time and patience for the player. Maybe revisiting it and making a way to streamline it similar to the railroad tool in HOI 4. Give certain bonuses for nations that have such a road network, like: faster movement speed for home nation armies, a slight increase in trade goods moved through your lands, less attrition for friendly troops, etc. Plus if you have a port that gets blockaded, you should be given the option to trade overland to other cities with a slight malus due to the higher transport cost, instead of the EU IV situation of lose 25 diplo or a complete city malus for a short while regardless of what happens the day after you click the button.
4: Potential early techs: When you had the fall of Constantinople in 1453, you had the scholars leave and go to wherever they could find refuge. And they brought with them the knowledge once lost of Rome a millennium before. If there was a way of getting one or more of those techs to be brought back, even if it could by a very rare event (less than 5% over the course of the entire game), you grant the player base the opportunity that they can rebuild the world into a better world much sooner than they thought. For examples: a): better quality black powder that makes firearms viable 30 years earlier in say India, now that country that got it has become a stronger military power; b): the first patented steam engine was in 1698 in England, what would happen if it happened in 1689 in the Ruhr valley; c): Greek fire is not lost to time and it gives additional attack to galley combat to the nation that has it; d): relearning the secrets of Roman concrete makes buildings faster and cheaper to build, on top of giving slightly better bonuses that the building already gives; e): Portuguese caravels made deep sea exploration possible, opening up the rest of the world to those that had access to them, but what would happen if they were made even a decade sooner?
There is more that I could add to each point, but you can find what you like and add to it later.
DEEP SEA EXPLORATION 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
@@GaiusCaligula234 He doesn't mean going under water lol He's using it synonymously with "open ocean" exploration.
I have only one question, pal - when have you seen the sunlight last time? Seems like decades ago.
@@tigrosabertooth4757 you seem awfully bitter
@@Mars_junior the original author seems awfully lonely
i really hope they look at MEIOU and TAXES and replicate some mechanics with all these "pops"
I think it's safe to say they have if they picked 1356, as that's the signing of the golden bull, which you can't really go before then and have the HRE function. I *believe* one of the former meiou devs moved to tinto so that's a thing.
Yet, what i've seen with the pops dev diary looks awesome. It's exactly what i was missing in euIV.
Few reflexions for the Tinto team :
- Missions : huge improvement from the beginning of euIV, missions have becomed part of the core game and i expect them to be developed even further. Missions create uniqueness when playing a country and therefore a huge incentive to launch another game with another country. The UI should be super smooth, to let experienced players be able to look to the end of the tree, and make it easy (less apparent choices) for beginners.
- Events : It would be awesome to see represented (way) more historical events (and also random generated events !) from rebellion to migrations or diseases. Events should be a little bit more impactful than today. But, because of development issues i (sadly) don't expect them to be that much developed at the release...
- Colonization : today it's boring and redundant. The system could be a bit more abstract and requiring less intervention with a way to send expeditions, define politics (encouraging / forcing emigration of some pops or send subsidies) and let the pops develop naturally. (with more interactions with natives, specially at the beginning for exemple by allowing marriage between colonist and natives)
Curious to see the next dev diaries, especially the one explaining the system that is going to replace mana points.
thanks for your work ludi
Aside of adding and expanding mechanics such as population and trade, I'm hoping to see a more fleshed out diplomatic system. EU4 does have pretty good diplomatic options to begin with but a more nuanced system would allow the game to more realistically portray large conflicts involving several powers with different interests, and really improve the game's roleplay potential. Basically the game could use more options for influencing other nations that aren't just enforced through peace deals.
If the start date is so early they definitely need to improve the vassal and pu subject types. I hope they introduce different kinds of vassals
Man I am so excited, I couldn't help but smile to myself like a psycho watching this. I love your input and historical knowledge so keep making more of these!
Great video! Please continue! :)
I hope they take the time to make this great, EU4 is still popular, and I would rather have them make this a success, instead of something that needs to be patched to be playable
EU4 was always the flagship, although ck2 was too.
EU4 is so feature complete it makes me wonder if EU5 is even necessary. It almost has to be a downgrade at launch given with how Paradox does their games. It will be barren day 1 and will be fleshed out with DLC for years. New is fun though.
@@resmarted I disagree
This
Ludi, I'm a rather new subscriber. I discovered EU4 through your vids, thank you so much for that. You seem a bit tired in the latest vid, please take care! Big love from your neighbor Bulgaria!
Thanks for the sub! Will do brother, my allergies been kicking my ass too this month Q_Q
@@LudietHistoriame too, your way of talking like a tennager while already far as an adult.brings comfort and nostalgia
What I would like to see for eu5 is more "alternate history" paths for countries, such as holy horde for the teutonics or also mabe on the mechanics of the game with perhaps a gallicanisim faith for the french region (obviosly with a large amount of unrest due to the nature of fervent carholics they were)
In my opinion having more internal focused actions, like consilidating your powers, or dealing with estates. So peacetime is not just preparing for another war
I would like to see a system where you could negotiate diplomatic actions with more depth, for example giving away land in order to get royal marriages. Also, it would be cool if there was a hostage system where you could swap hostages from wars for money or something else
Or just more diplo options in general.
Hostages? Yeah that’s probably too topical for them
Yes please cover these dev diaries!!! This is really exciting
Idk about the game it self, but as a streamer, i love to see your energy on this gideo. Keep up brother. 🎉
It would be cool if the battles would start once both armies are in one province, and the terrain and battlefield would be the location where the army that arrived first in that province is, basically choosing the battlefield to better suit your troops or general traits, it would also reduce the annoying army chasing from ck3s small tiles, and you could issue commands to a stationed army to build fortifications or set up an ambush or whatever like in the total war games to add more variables to the battles than bigger numbers
that's actually a great idea.
*started, learn grammar before commenting.
Ludi on his way to put "guys eu5 is coming out soon" in his video title
All the jokes aside you are videos are great as always keep it up😊
meow
Yes continue to cover. Super excited about EUV
Why? Need I remind you of all the media over the past 10 years that people got super hyped for and then turned out to be garbage? There’s a big one that just came out a couple days ago actually
eu3 was my introduction to paradox and eu4 came out the day before my family moved across the country so it was the only game i played when we moved to see eu5 coem out and just see how much paradox has grown and how many new fans there are is just so surreal
A lot of people are talking about what they think might be the start date. 1356 I think is very good, however, I feel like with CK3 having two start dates that maybe we could see the same for EU5? I feel like having both 1356 and then 1444 could be nice options. 1356 allowing for a more pre-Renaissance experience while 1444 allows you to get quicker into that colonization and Renaissance part of the game
I think by 1356 the renaissance had already began, general the time after the black death Is considered the beginning of the renaissance. A good pre renaissance start date would be 1337,1312 or even 1294.
@@someguysomeone3543 the proper renaissance (the art movement) traditionally starts in 1401. By 1356 humanism (which is sometimes confused with the renaissance) was definitely emerging. Sadly "renaissance" is a pretty vague term in some contexts and it can mean a lot of things
IMO it should have 3 separate start dates. One in the 14th century, one in the 15th century, and one in the 17th century (ideally right at the start or end of the 30 years war). If they go with 1356 I think it would be more likely for them to have a 1453 start date, because 1444 only exists to give the player some control over alt history, and 1356 kind of already fits that role. Besides 1453 is a much more iconic date.
@sirflasm3456 Didn't those both start at 1434, with cosimo medici coming to power. 1356 is more known for the Golden bull by the hr emperor.
@@someguysomeone3543 the renaissance starts in 1401 with the contest for the door of the baptistery of florence (first example of renaissance art). It can't start in 1434 bc Masaccio, the founder of Renaissance painting, is already dead. Humanism starts in the XIV century with the rediscovery of aristotle's works and other stuff
We need a population system obviously but I think that the assimilation of a province could be chosen in different ways like complete moustache man type thing, sending them to the new world like we have or more interestingly is a mestizaje mechanic which boosts to the Spanish like basically sending the desired population to one area already inhabited and the populations mix but you keep sending more so they convert and it could take the population up and mix it with the CK3 system but more dynamic and I wish we could just create new languages and stuff but I think that’s too far. We also could get very good history lessons that makes everything as historically accurate and guides you in the most historical way. New world flavour for post colonial nations because yes. Could also add the anti massive blobbing mechanic from some mods to have the most chaos and make empires fall. Something extra could be like pressing a button to view actual information about the historical culture and religion, that’s just for immersion but I would like it. I hope to not have everything based on mana or not have mana system but that’s just my thoughts
I forgot but I would like to see ruler portraits just for aesthetic 💖💖💀
Nvm no mana I think
And we need races to be added to pops because ofc it became pretty important in those times and I wonder how the African slave trade will work🤔
There should be systems that make it hard to snowball, with a large empire facing increasing difficulty in its ability to manage itself. It would be cool to see unique challenges and disasters that arise with large empires to mirror the challenges faced by such sizable polities in our own history
This means we get to play with even more of the 100 years war! That will be really fun to see how they make it a game mechanic, and dealing with the aftermath of the black plague will be interesting.
I really liked Victoria 2's foreign investment option (industrial or infrastructure building) as it allowed for a more realistic earning of influence in other countries besides just through diplomatic or military means and I think it could be quite enjoyable in late game scenarios of project Caesar.
I think it is a bit out of scope. There was the option of devving subjects in EU4.
Damn! Here we gooooooo!
Everything I've seen looks great (even the video itself, gg Ludi). The only thing I would add would be the possibility of attacking coastal locations and troops stationed there with both, as can be done with forts in EU4. I hope that you'll make more videos on this topic.
And perhaps ships that are in a location adjacent to an enemy fort could take attrition (symbolizing the defenses of the fort)
If there is EU5 i want the trade to shift and that it chances its roads whenever you build roads and markets. Basically that the end nodes are dinamic and can change though the course of the game. (Im not a english native so sorry for any error)
Ludi playing eu5: Roman empire borders in 1444!!!!
true
Thanks for keep us in the loop ludi!
Please keep covering these Tinto Talks, I am also very excited for Eu5. Something i am really hoping to see is completely different game mechanics for different nations, at the moment pretty much all Nations play exactly the same and a lot of the replay-ability comes from RNG. I would love to see actually different gameplay systems for relevant historical nations and different government types.
Maybe having levies? Like in imperator, i think many nations in this time period still didn’t have fully standing armies, maybe make it like imperator 2.0 and you can change laws dictating if you have a standing army or a levy-based army, or maybe a mercenary army, would also be cool to maybe have mercenary revolts?
Hope it will have nice mission trees, as this also shapes EU4 for me.
One thing I would love to see is decisions impacting missions like in the England tree. Also having culture/region specific missions/modifiers would really spice up the game
20:11 farmland in an arid place, well 1st through this centre pivot irrigation in Saudi, but more time appropriate is salt marsh reclamation (kinda Dutch style) in Basra/Kuwait on the gulf. And even more appropriate Spain is very arid but plenty of farms and vineyards are only farmed by creating aqueducts. I am so excited to see how and to what Extent I can terraform the Netherlands into farms, plant forests in western Russia, or maybe even excessive deforestation extends the steppe into Poland.
Thanks for sharing. Kindly ask you to continue this type of video.
With those kinds of naval borders I would love to see some sort of spreading out your navy mechanic (Something like a defensive line from hearts of iron but for a fleet) in a way that it could make a menacing blocade.
i liked how we could deny resources in trade, like in imperator! wish they implement this in EU5
Hi Ludi, My take regarding starts is between 1335 - 1345 to have the begining of the hundred years war (which would be evitable with diplomatic actions early on) and great plague in Europe.
I love flavorful mission trees in EU4, but I imagine they will be very different in EU5.
What I would like to see is maybe different types of mission trees (expansion, development, culture) for one country and also shared mission trees for countries in the same area to boost competition and give rewards for achieving an objective before your neighbours !
Congrats for the content as always Ludi 🎉
Hi Ludi, i would like to see in EU5 - dynamic base missions. Based on what idea group you chose, joining the HRE, what religion you have or the strength of the neighbor you border.
Love the impact vic 2 and imperator has
A very big point for me is calculatable RNG.
It forces one to use the brainpower to calculate statistics and judge a situation based on potential outcomes based on the probability.
I.e. Leader Life Span in EU4, meaning when to disinherit a leader or an heir, using it as general (so he might die sooner) and so on.
Generally speaking having a bell curve (or some other statistic distributor) about what is likely and what might happen with different outcomes that have a bigger impact on the country.
Military wise i wish to see a direct system close to the one in EU4. This direct system might also then be able to interact with some kind of indirect trade system (blocking trade), refugees (devastations) etc.
Keep us updated and Thank you very much for all the Schmogagadabu!
Funny, I kind of disagree. I think one thing that could make EU4 better is if some of the disasters were not telegraphed as much as they are now. Like, most disasters IRL, you do not realize it is a disaster until you are in the midst of it. There can be signs, but I want to be surprised. I think that if there is information provided to player that you should have to work for it a bit more. For example, in EU4 you can just open the ledger and see the EXACT military counts of every nation on the planet. I think that info should be potentially wrong but also only populated via your spies and interactions with that country. As Spain in the 1500s there is zero reason why I would know what the army stats for Japan are unless I went out of my way to learn that information. Same thing internally, while it is nice to pull of a ledger and see my countries exact economic stats, that isn't that realistic. I should have a general idea of how the economy of my country is doing, but should not have an exact display of it. It should be fuzzy and there should be unknowns (black market) unless I specifically spend effort or resources gaining that information.
I hope they explore more the use of waterways, both for trade and ferrying troops and moving fleets. I hate seeing big rivers in EU4 that are navigable IRL (Congo, Nile, Danube, Mekong, Yangtse, Indus) being treated as only -1 die roll for the attacker and maybe a center of trade, when it could be more similar to crossing the bosphorus or gibraltar, or having a very defendable place to keep your fleet and a faster way to move troops encircling an enemy. Also, it would open the option to other (smaller) canal projects that would be a way to increase trade, defensibility and navegability.
Keep this content coming!
I would like 2 start dates. One in 1356 as you suggest, and then another in 1521 with the protestant reformation. It would be nice to get 2 different start dates, for players who like different outlooks, just like CK3.
I feel like the protestant reformation is a good start, because it shifted power balances in Europe and later plunged the continent into a huge war that has everlasting impacts.
Agree
Can't wait!!!
In eu4 i would love to see more impactful battles, anti blobbing or scaling mechanics, and a more fun late game
agreed!
It is nice to see Johan come at this with humility. For that reason, I won't bring up the past in detail. However, it is nice to see him acknowledge some places where things could have been done differently.
Looks great, but i swear to god. If you mess with my EUIV warfare system, I'm gonna come for you Johan
So True! Johan I be watching you!!!
I wish they would add an option to "remove" certain pops like in stelaris.
It will make the game realistic and fun.
A consequence could be other pops disliking you, based on similarities (maybe relations) with the removed pop. Meaning removing catholic priests could anger catholic peasants, make protestant nobles happy, and have any effect on protestant priests (since different religion but same estate) maybe reducing their influence (if something like that will exist)
expel! not remove...
I’d really like a empire collapse mechanic where any empire can collapse like the Ming does if a enough bad events happen or they lose enough wars. Like how Spain’s empire collapsed due to Napoleons occupation. It would be cool to stop AI blobbing or even player blobbing too quickly.
A reroll mechanic that allows you to easily reroll starting game things like rivalrys, cuz you can just keep creating a new game until you get something you like. Or make starting stuff like that much more predetermined, even more starting alliances and such
Btw the pop pie chart definitely isnt just constantinople, the pops are much too large. It is probably the entirety of byzantium in maybe the mid 1300s which would essentially be thrace plus most of modern greece.
yes, keep covering these. love hearing your takes
thank u man i really appreciate it
Hope they make Ai not do border gore
So the prophecies were true... Ludi is the prophet!
I love pops mechanics everywhere. It keeps me playing Imperator for example
Hello paradox Developers
One of my favorite aspects of EU4 is the many start dates I understand that that much may not be possible, but having more than two would be fantastic
thanks ludi for the vid!
There we have the clickbaity video I recommended on stream yesterday, nice Ludi.
Hell yeah brother ^^