EU5 Political MAP is HERE & CONFIRMED 1st April 1337 START DATE !!
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 03. 2024
- Everything we know so far about EUROPA UNIVERSALIS V and it's 1337 start date !
✅ EU4 Guides: ✅
✅ First EU5 Dev Diary - • I WAS RIGHT !! EU5 Sta... ✅
✅ 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'... ✅
❤️ PATREON ► / ludiethistoria
💻 TWITCH► / ludiethistoria
👑 DISCORD ► / discord
Vods Channel☑️ @LudiClips ☑️
Personal Channel ☑️ @Ludisan ☑️
Link to pdx forum post forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...
Map forum thread forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...
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. EU5 Political MAP is HERE & THE BORDERS ARE 1337 !! EU5 Political MAP is HERE & It STARTS IN 1337 !!
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
BIG UPDATE! JOHAN JUST CONFIRMED ON THE FORUMS THE START DATE IS 1st April 1337 OMG OMG OMG The previous eu5 dev diaries broken down here - czcams.com/video/857oXWx76S0/video.html
Hi.
Leave it to map painters to pinpoint the date of a 700 years old map.
Probably 24 May 1337, start of the Hundred Years War. Keep in mind that the map could just have errors in its creation and you have to find the most likely start date. One or even a few detail(s) that contradict it probably doesn't mean its completely wrong.
probably may 24 1337, kinda how it starts 11 november 1444 rn instead of 1 january 1444
was thinking that actually @ewadfe3705
If it is 1337 there are a couple of key things that need to be present in the game:
- The Black Death (certainly now that we have population)
- The Greenland colony still existing
- The rise of the Timurids and the fall of the Ilkhnate and golden horde.
- The hundred years war (somehow making it a long conflict in the game)
- The Mali Empire being at its peak (Mansa Musa, the richest person ever, died in 1337)
- the colapse of the Yuan dynasty and the rise of the Ming.
- The collapse of the Delhi sultanate.
- Lithuania still being a bastion of slavic paganism in Europe.
- the early Ming trade fleets /expeditions to India and Africa
Ming? Yuan! That'd be even before the yellow turban rebellion that saw the end of the Yuan in China and the rise of the Ming.
Also Armenia Minor still being around.
I want play as Timur. So hope for proper flavor for him. Also I think majapahit or Songhai disaster for Delhi. Yuan must be probably more like late Timurids
i imagine they will make some kind of mechanic similar to the struggle mechanic in ck3 for the 100 years war
A better colonial system
I wouldn't really call Lithuanian slavic, nor their religion: Romuva. It's pretty much strictly baltic culture and religion. But I agree. All these points need to be focused on and filled with content.
The idea is this: If there is a population system, when you form an army, you take people out of the economy, and accordingly, the development (population) of the regions decreases. This will fight the snowball of expansion militarily, because you will have to lose people.
Yeah, using pops and a more Victoria 3 style economy would be a great way to limit EU4 style blobbing
@@Reid52vic3 economy does not limit you from blobbing... if theres world conquest videos the game does not keep you from blobbing...
Mongols: Then just keep conquering lol
Well , but wouldn't you use useless for economy landlords anyway? And if you can recruit peasants and other population estates, then wouldn't this make genocide of ethnic minorities through conscripting them all to war?
Yeah but normally you would conquer land with thus more people on it right?
Thank god it takes place in 1337 that means playing in the Balkans as anyone other then the Ottomans isnt gonna be basically "get as many friends as possible before the Ottomas decided they want you gone"
the ottomans in 1337 are actually at the peak of their 14th century strength, ready to conquer!
@@LudietHistoria Sure but as the Balkan powers you can try to build up strength by consolidating the Balkans and actually have some semblance of a chance against the Ottomans, which sounds like a whole lot of fun, basically having a Balkan battle royale and the winner gets to fight the big bad Turk.
I'm currently stuck in my first really big Byzanthium run. I realised early on that I won't be doing a World Conquest - just wanted a decent Roman Empire run anyways - but managed to get all the achievements I wanted just 2 days ago.
Currently sitting at I think around 18'500 development. Next highest is Russia with iirc around 2'700, but I did all I wanted, so no real incentive to continue. (Late 1750's by now)
@@BigScreamingBaby true gives you some time to prepare against the invasion. i approve as part balkan part turk. also @ludi i think the countries not being about having certain areas in map will be about dynasties forming said countries rather than owning the land, haven't finished the video yet so idk if you already said it in the vid
@@BigScreamingBaby I dont like it because Ottomans are such a huge part of the historical period and they are basically going to get snuffed out in the beginning of the game by players playing in that region.
I want 50% of the features to not be locked behind DLC but we are dealing with Parastocks here right!!
amen
Well, in German we say: Die Hoffnung stirbt zuletzt
@mertm.995 similar to what we say in Sweden: Hoppet är det sista som överger en
@@mertm.995Aber sie stirbt!
Thats basically guaranteed, Finance people are squeezing profits from everything they can nowadays
EU5 seems to be taking a lot of ideas from the MEIOU & Taxes EU4 mod. Great stuff!
I hope we get communication efficiency in EU5, that was one of the best ways to discourage border gore and gave a lot of depth to expanding your land and building infrastructure.
The main problem with the mod was that eu4’s systems really weren’t built for the depth MEIOU & taxes wanted. I’m sure that if it was build from the ground up in EU5 it could be integrated in a way as to not be as convoluted and quite easy to pick up for more casual players.
1337 is also an elite number 😎
lEET
2137 is still superior
1337x pirate ?
@@jakekn7304no LEET 1337
@@jakekn7304😂
I'd like to see:
Infrastructure expansion through tech. Upgrade your roads from dirt tracks to paved (bonuses for movement/ supply), canales, tunnels, and bridges, lighthouses, etc.
More trade goods.
I would love a total war mechanic like the mod built in!
Yea i want streets too.
I'd really love more in depth building system rather than the barebones one we have right now, find it odd you can't make religious building at 1444 when so much more has been made by that time
Sounds like you are a fellow Civ6 player lol. But I agree it would be good to have that instead of military technology increasing army speed
@orhanefeomerli7217 no, never played it. Its just logical stuff that should be in a historical grand strategy game.
I want a real civil war system in EU5. Rebells are annoying but harmless when you are OP in EU4 but when a Civil war system like Hoi4 exists where parts of your country and army join the civil war side and then you have a real fight and a reason to avoid a civil war or let it happen in other countries per spy action. Also when a outside nation attacks you or you uprising civil war nation and is not the culture or religion of the uprising civil war, the civil war should be temporarily stopped and both sides get a ceasefire to fight the outside nation to prevent the total collapse of the country for balance reason. And of course annexing your uprising civil war nation should give you 0 AE!
I believe combining CK3 style civil war mechanics with estates and population would be best. Like your nobility, armies, peasants, clergy (well, they wouldn't really fight but being disliked by your holy men in this age sucks), taking sides in internal conflicts.
I'm convinced it is 1337. The only reason people were questioning 1337 was that they thought that having it prior to the Black Death would have been weird, but Johan passively confirmed that epidemics are going to be something that happens in EU5 when he said they would be discussed in an upcoming dev diary...which means the Black Death (and the depopulation of the Americas) will be modelled in game. With the black death being capable of being modelled in game using the pop system, 1337 becomes overwhelmingly likely as the starting point for EU5. Can. Not. Wait.
I was questioning 1337 because I hate the Yuan dynasty and 1356 was the year they lost Nanjing
Such a random ancient nation to hate😂@@socialistrepublicofvietnam1500
@@12354rony to be fair, they invaded us 3 times and razed hanoi to the ground (btw they lost all 3 times because vietnam is vietnam)
I mean fair, but tell me what nation never committed war crimes or discriminated against other cultures/populations lol@@socialistrepublicofvietnam1500
@@12354rony i feel there is a bit of a difference between typical warcrimes and being so deadly that your genocides are measured as percentages of the pre-war population (that was a mongol thing, technically not a yuan thing, but the yuan were the best successors to the mongols)
My wants for launch:
1. Map Modes - I don't want to buy DLC's "down the road" just to get map modes like how we had for EU4. If it's already in, we should get it and then some.
2. The QoL changes like automated Missionaries, Core All Province button, Mothball/Unmothball, etc. Again, don't want to wait behind a paywall to get these features.
3. If combat is going to operate 'similar' to EU4, I want to be able to set up army battleline composition manually, and then set up templates based off these custom battle formations.
4. Ability to turn ducats into Manpower or Sailors. The ability to go to Metropolis provinces to "Hire" additional help would be nice
5. AUTOMATIC SETTLERS and EXPLORERS. I don't always want to micro which province to throw my settler at.
Automated missionaries are already a thing?
@@fxailing1201right, he is saying dont take away features
@@fxailing1201in EU4? Yes, and we had to wait a decade for that. I don't want the same thing to happen with EU5
Johan confirmed that they are aiming for the amount of content EU4 presently has, at launch.
wait and see whether it fits with the new mechanics, first
I really want the custom nation designer, and possibly added with the CK3 character designer because EU5 will most likely have 3d characters like all other new Paradox games.
same, i love the custom nation degisner and hope it makes it to the start and doesnt arrive as a dlc
@LudietHistoria i really hope we get some built in modding that'd be easy to use, like what we look like we're getting in cities skylines 2. Id love to be able to make my own custom borders, nations, national ideas, and flavor all in the base vanilla game. Id be able to spend hundreds of hours just designing cool scenarios with that, easily.
@@tuxtitan780 shh do not mention cs 2, you are dooming every paradox project by saying that dreaded name.
Cities skylines II is the demon of bad optimization, rushed development and bland gameplay.
There should be a better Trading Systems. With Roads between Nations that will improve when you trade more Resources. And not all Nations have all Resources. You should try to get all needed Resources through war or trade. And when you dont have certain goods, like iron or Copper, you get debuffs on Military, or when you dont have spices, the nobles dont like you as much etc.
(edited to reduce rant and make more readable) Agree with all this. Trade has always been frustrating. It needs to be reimagined...
The idea of a nation state dictating where to send a merchant is ridiculous. Merchant go wherever they can, whenever they can, to get the best profit.
yes, wars, disease, pirates, embargoes, state policy (mercantilism) etc disrupt and influence the patterns of trade, but like water flowing down, merchants always look for the path of least resistance to get the best profit.
Imagine the following approach:
- Abolish concept of "placing merchants"
- Replace with "merchant population" similar to soldiers & sailors population.
- the number of merchants is influenced at the national policy level (ideas, policies, events etc), provincial modifier level (buildings, trade goods, trade nodes, culture, etc) and events (wars, embargoes, etc)
- Merchants reside at provincial level. when a region is captured trade patterns are disrupted. merchants might stay OR leave based on additional decisions and the extent to which that node is now part of or not part of a wider cultural / political etc bloc.
- As as human player you focus on the STRATEGIC level and then the AI through a dedicated model places & shifts merchants around the map organically (colonies etc).
Sounds fun, right!? Incidentally, this is exactly how it actually functions IRL and historically.
Other fun and related dynamics to layer in:
- Smuggling (during war or otherwise)
- Merchant Colonies (with populations etc). These can be imposed as part of treaties (as they were historically) to force the opening of trade and preferential trade status.
Ah time to collapse as the Italian trading empire because no Iron or Coal for industry
@@Boretheory no they don't need as much of these resources.
First they fight with mercenaries and even them used these resources. Or what did they made their weapons of? Or lit their furnaces with?
@@semeon7925 every country on earth has/had enough iron ore to mass produce weapons, thats a small expense, industry on the other hand is another thing. Thats why iron replaced Bronze, iron could be found everywhere, Tin and Copper nope, cause quality wise a bronze weapon was far superior for centuries after iron took over
@@blackpaint9093 yeah you are right, but I still think my idea is not that bad. If we put this system to another level we get Victoria kind of Trading. Where the prices are dictated after the mass you have.
I just want it as a cool idea why you should trade with other countries and why countries such as Netherlands were so rich, because they had access to spices and other things, that other nations hadn't. In the end Trade is something that you sell, that the other party needed. So yeah maybe Iron is not the best example, but you sure can find some good ones. Like Coal for example. Germany and Britain had a lot of it and because of that they could faster industrialize.
Correct me if I am wrong and I am sorry for my bad English, it is just my second language.
I want them to rework fort sistem. Instead of forts outright blocking troops they should provide opportunity to hide your army inside. With existence of army logistics it will add more subtle blocking system where you can skip sieging a fort, but it will risk with opportunity cost of having your supply cut by army left behind in fort. This sytem will also add ability to differ forts by size(more troops can be stationed inside) and protection(stronger defence), you can have large fort with weak protection or small fort with strong protection, or both. this will add strategy to troop positioning and fort building.
The CK3 attrition for bypassing. Fort would make sense, although perhaps more a tick rather than an upfront cost.
I like eu4's government reform system and that it doesn't just give some modifiers, it unlocks various mechanics.
People like many different icons to customize a country and not some sliders.
Honestly the gov reform system got a massive glow up from mods that led to a lot of the changes we saw. Most of the ones that had mechanics tied to it before domination were all mostly country unique besides the feudal theocracy (but that was religion unique) and general estates and parliament.
Gov reforms are now something interesting and fun to engage with and try out. Hell now they’re something you can base an entire playthrough on. Monarchies used to be kinda bland but now? Do you want to be a plutocratic stratocracy? Do you want to be a parliamentary elective monarchy? Do you want to be a clerical military ruled by a god king?
So many options now besides “+20% manpower”, “+5% CCA”, or “-10%CCC”
True
Came to the same conclusion that it needed to be 1337. It was really fun to search the map for clues 😊
yeah it has to be 1337 or a few years earlier, since Nicomedia fell to the ottomans in january 1337
@@LudietHistoria Exactly;)
@@LudietHistoria You mean Nicea? Nicomedia is something in ancient)
Also, Izmit (Nicomedia/Nicea) was taken in 1337 and as far as I‘m aware, the rest of the peninsula (Üsküdar) in 1338
@@Mineno-fx6biNicaea fell in 1332
The Best feature from eu4 is the mission tree system with different branches and rewards. It makes so big difference in comparison with ck3, for example. I absolutely love mission trees.
AND ACHIEVEMENTS! Definetly achievements in style like eu4
Expell minorities to colony should definetly be a feature ported from eu4, specially now that you have pops
I like the idea of having a hundred years before the renaissance. The idea that this was the era where the concept of nation states and moving away from feudal concepts is pretty cool.
We need Imperator Rome’s automatic army system. Paradox seem to be moving away from micro but are struggling with how to do that (Vic3’s army system keeps changing after all), and IR’s system is perfect for that. It allows for both micro, allowing people to have the battles that they want AND allows you to just let an army do its own thing if you only want to focus on one theatre or one specific theatre.
In such case the ai for the army needs the eu4’s options because the selections in IR are terrible
Yea the wars in these games aren't that fun to micro, I need an option to automate armies.
@@greyfells2829 Something like EU4 armies but with the ability to tell them to do things on their own like turning the AI on, it would already be a pretty big improvement.
Was so annoying that they abandoned imperator just as it was finally getting fixed.
If this game is going to be from 1337 till 1836 its gonna be the most glorius 500 years of playing
should be 1337-1648, EU really doesen't represent beyond that all too well
@@swordshield5592Yeah plus I dont think anyone would even play over 500 years
@@pizzakiep4157 very true, already in eu4 most players stop playing before or around 1700
@@swordshield5592Because it become laggy and wars become an absolute shitshow, if they fix these two things campaigns could very easily go to 1836
@@swordshield5592 1648 is also the arguable creation of the modern nation state and the end of the 30 Years War. Would be a fitting end date
The "coring system" may be inspired on imperators system where you had different cultural groups and you could either integrate them or give them autonomy. there was also a migration system in the game where pops would migrate naturally or you could "forcibly relocate" them. could definitely be a good system if improved and given proper support with other game mechanics
AGREE
I’m reposting my comment from the previous video about EU5 as it wasn’t visible for days due to CZcams’s comment system, and I don’t want the time I put into these thoughts to be wasted:
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.
Make country names even more dynamic, for example nations named after a city should no longer have that name if they don’t own the city their country is named after, it destroys all immersion when Genoa still calls itself as such when all they have left is an outpost in Azov.
It also has the potential for a decision to restore the nation to its former glory by retaking the land and regaining the original name. Motivating you to continue the campaign even if things go badly.
I agree 💯💯
We should tell the Roman empire that called itself Roman empire for 1000 years after Rome fell...they are breaking your historical immersion😂
But eastern Roman empire called itself Roman without Rome u know. And Romania...
@@michaelhaderach277yes, it should vary based on the type of nation, Rome has been around for so long that the name stuck, but the same thing can’t apply to city states like in Italy or the HRE for example.
I disagree it’ll become too confusing to figure out who is who.
The thing I really would love to have is the conquistador exploration: it took me a long time to realize that manually moving armies was wasting A LOT of potential but since I learned about it became WAY MORE FUN
Can't wait for the Tall runs from Ludi in Eu518
Tall guides in 2030.
EU5 feels like a polished Meiou and Taxes. When I heard about estate building stuff, population, religious breakdown of provinces, time period, I immediately thought of that mod.
I'll definitely need a good info ledger and construction tab for EU5, maybe even better than EU4 (where you still can't sort state houses by the overall gov capacity cost decrease for the state, but only for the province). So being able to use army templates and such, is definitely a must.
Also a comprehensive cap system like gov cap and as you said: More government ranks so you don't struggle with gov cap when you're under 1000 dev.
And I'll need achievements to keep the game spicy ^^
I think it will be really funny if everyone thinks it is EU5 but it turns out it will be a completely unrelated game.
Long awaited March of the Eagles Prequel edition
I wouldn't mind at all if they have decided to split EU4 into two games or something like that. It is obviously a successor to EU4 of some kind, even if not "EU5" per se.
I hope the DLC policy for EU5 is kinda like CK3. The base game is enjoyable and a complete game but the DLC enhances the experience instead of DLC basically being required to enjoy the game like EU4
10:58 A mechanic where you could recognise or not recognise countries would be so cool!! It would be so interesting to see countries ISOLATED BY TRADE OR POLITICS, where countries that do not recognise you cannot be interacted with, or if you become powerful enough (or win a war against someone) you have to be recognised!!! So excited for EU5!
Nicomedia is Izmit, which is on this map already owned by Ottomans. It's probably just after it fell, in 1337, and that's why Byz still controls some land around it
ahh, I thought the same thing as well
Byzantine restoration is gonna be so glorious
I would love to see more „unique“ armies.
Specialized units only certain countries or regions can use. Like Janissaries for the Ottomans, Longbowman for the English or Swiss Halberdiers.
Would love that.
And of course more Religions or sects to choose from.
I would really love to see "customizable" heirs and rulers, a bit like republics where rulers get better.
The ability to create custom nations would be awesome to have at launch as I have had so much fun with that in EU4 that I’d love to be able to start with it in EU5.
Who is ready to start a new 450$ DLC adventure ?
the idea of recognition in eu5 sounds so cool, like imagine things like the dutch revolt happening in a campaign and the impact it would have on trade
Two things and two things only that I want:
Trade to propagate all religions (or at least all non-pagan religions), including in colonial regions.
The return to menu button to work.
Great Video like always Ludi, we love you!
If the starting date is really 1377 what I would love to see different nations and government starting with levies instead of professional armies. So at the beginning of the game it would work similar to CK3 where most of your forcelimit will be levies, which you can only raise during war while as you progress you will be able to remove levies and rely completely on professional armies. Or maybe some Nations will allow you to go for a path were decentralize, buff up your levies massively and just rely on them.
Great video as always!!!
I really like whole screen illustrations
I don’t it lags the game sometimes or just makes it slower to play in general, having to switch between screens
I really hope they don't mix the games. If I want deep roleplay, there is CK3, if I want deep economy there is Victoria3. I don't want loyality for example for military leaders. For a mix there is already Imperator Rome.
Thank you for your analyses! I hope you get early access and show us gameplays so that I can learn to play it and not fail within first 10 minutes 😅
I want this Nations Recognition Mechanic from "countries that are not (yet ?) countries" now. You just catch the vibe that would be the icing on the cake of how EU5 will function based on the Dev Di.. wait, Tinto Talks.
This would be a major element of the Diplomacy and gameplay in general.
Yes, Nation Recognition at launch.
So it is not 1356.
So Ludi has to do push ups in front of Tinto's office. :D
I think it is nice that they are merging things from other games. The important thing is to make it work together :D
From CK the detailed management of your royalty would be nice , to get some cheeky alliances , inherit thrones etc. ( tho the latter is in eu4 as well)
Also as you mentioned that you cant use a general who is disloyal , would be very nice feature, as we know there were plenty of them in the history. Which brings me to the point, that maybe you can hire some spies / assassins to try and ´´get rid of these unpleasant people´´ like for example in rome or medieval TW.
Also maybe a trade system more similar to victoria 3 , where you actually can choose the goods you need etc ( because you dont have everything from start )
Aaaand maybe try to somehow do the naval thingy more important. As in EU4 you can completely ignore the navy and still obliterate the UK with 30 transport ships.
Last but not least, if they want to limit blobbing , so be it , but not so much as in Victoria 3 , we should have the right to create more Lebensraum on long weekends.
One thing I've always wanted to see even though it would be entirely a-historical, is the ability to redirect routes of trade (within reason).
Like not changing end nodes per se, but changing where certain trade routes go to said end nodes.
Example; you're playing as Tunis and insted of the trade flowing to the Venice end node (correct me if I am wrong), you can complete missions to change the route to the Genoa node (or vice versa). Or maybe playing as Castille/Spain you can make Seville an end node maybe instead of flowing to Genoa/Bordeaux.
I'm really happy to see them referring to older Paradox titles like Victoria 2, CK2, EU2 and EU3 in these dev diaries. I feel like with EU4 and CK3 they took a lot of steps towards making their games more accessible, sometimes at the expense of granularity of game mechanics (and sometimes for the better). I think it is a really helpful practice to go back to older ways of doing things to look for inspiration.
I can’t wait to see ludi playing EU5 and btw I would like to see battle system like total war in eu5
Well, the total war style battles should be optional as you’ll most likely let battles play out via simulation just like the other Paradox games.
@@scorpionfiresome3834 yeah but I think pdx won’t be able to put such a feature in eu5 cuz Imagine fighting a battle with 50000 men on both side in most total war games we cannot play with more than 3000-4000 men and in pdx games well we can recruit infinite units I mean it will simply blast our pcs as It won’t be able to handle such a heavy game
I'd love to see most of the more major features (especially dlc ones) be already in the base game o eu5.
You sweet summer child
Oh u poor fool. We will probably get something worse than eu4 at the start and it will only be at eu4s levels at half of eu5’s life
If we are talking about things that will never happen, I'd like to see a billion dollars in my savings account.
@@Alex_Fahey so you can buy every paradox dlc?
When you were talking about the way country ranks work, I was just about to comment about Burgundy, but you beat me to it!
Great summary of the dev diary! Please keep them coming!?!
If those background screens are dynamic and reflect where you're at and what you're doing then I'm all for em!
If Paradox is good they would only focus on Bosnia in EU5!
BOSNIAN UNIVERSALIS 5
ARTILLERIA
No computer on earth would be able to handle that tho.
I WANT MINE FIELDS IN EVERY CONTINENT
kosovo is bosnia!
Man I’m so hyped I’ll be playing this from day one!
It's likely that some countries are formable based on controlling a certain percentage of a culture, rather then locations.
We need more formables that are fun and dynamic after you create them!
Yes formables and said formables having further strength points, weaknesses and issues is in my opinion one of the most important things of the game
Ludi im romanian like you. please ask paradox to add a realistic migration system.
romania gets depopulated, italy 80% culture is romanian Kappa
12:40, it might be local governments/regions raising armies like your vassals in eu4 have their own armies, but after a war starts you might get direct control over the unit if you control the province the army was raised from, same could be said for some other estates like clergy raising taxes without your consent and you getting a lower amount until their influence goes down, etc
this games will be insane with all the artwork and menus... but it will be pretty hard aswell... I'm kinda hyped and curious what it will look like at release... great video ludi
As long as the war is fun, please no vic 3 combat.
There absolutely won't be vic3 combat.
I love all the flavor events and mission trees and the texts on each of the national ideas, so I hope we get a lot more of that in EU5!
Great video!
I love your channel :D
The main feature I want is diverging mission trees with all of the flavor that came with them.
Bonus: flagships and being able to rename your units. Felt slighted by Vic3 not allowing me to roleplay naming my warships
yep, I would love to have both historical and non-historical flavour in mission trees or focus trees or whatever they are adding
What I'd love to see in eu5 is, when someone sieges down your provinces, you lose population, so players would finally try to save their land from enemy sieges and wouldn't sactifice half of their nation to win 1 siege. Also military could be a little reworked to somethimg simmilar like in imperator rome, where you need more than just a bigger army. Winning battles in eu4 was mostly on techs, terrain and mostly numbers. There were battles, when only 200 soldiers defeated an army of 2000, just because they had better general and Imperator solves this issue (mostly)
@11:45 Note the use of the plural, heirs. I think they added this to tease a more in-depth dynastic system.
Thank you Ludi! I would like to see Royal Family Trees and their relationships across nations, which would create more interesting succession wars!
I like the way eu4 menu is more than a full screen option
I can suggest that the estates may work something similar as in mod to EU4 "MEIOU and Taxes" when each estate had its budget and could build the building by itself, and you also could ask them for an army in exchange for influence (I could be mistaken with this mechanic in the mod), or they could return old estate system when in one province you had only one estate, so in that one province (or smaller one) they could do stuff by themselves to gain influence in that province or generally in the country
I hope that the papal mechanics are kept for launch and even fleshed out because the influence of the papacy in the 1300s was even more than the 1400s and it would give the opportunity for the crusade mechanics to be fleshed out more, also potentially could be tied to anti reform mechanics as the Lollards and then hussites were significant in this period.
I really want unique flavor for your tech group. Like how cool would it be if the UI/Interface, textures, and names (county/prefecture/municipality ext.) changed depending on where you were.
i really hope they would add some sort of system to make promises to estates and other nations. it would be cool if it was possible to cultivate trust in your words were players could promise something in return for another thing, and depending on the reputation for how often the player holds those promises, the outcome could be different. this could include options to promise help in wars, fulfilling requests given by estates and even as a way to manipulate sieges by drafting an ultimatum for defenders were success could result in immediate surrender or in failure it could result in defenders getting more determined in resisting.
Which would simulate well how Timur expanded so quickly as he always delivered devastation when ppl refused to surrender
Honestly, I don't have much to ask for as of yet.
They are bringing back many of my favorite things from EU2 and 3.
I do hope that they make rulers more impactful akin to CK.
The sentence: "Each country also has a ruler, or they may be in a regency, if there are no possible adult heirs" suggests to me, that there might be some sort of simplified family/heir management. The menu background could also hint at this a little bit.
Yes that’s for sure. Possibly with some countries like Persia and Poland struggling because of it
Personally speaking, I think the eu4 style menus are better because a lot of things can happen in the background. Although the ck3 like menus would be more visually pleasing, for a better game experience, it might be better to use something similar to what we currently have.
sounds to me, in my opinion, that they are moving more towards a victoria 3, crusader kings, imperator rome kind of vibe, but with a EU3 skinjob/paintjob. where instead of direct control you are managing other people/organizations.
after reading the forum, I was thinking what will Ludi see that I haven't and I was not disappointed, great video as always
the segment around 11:00 also could mean a return of mechanics like migratory hordes in imperator rome. possibly an expansion of this since those governments fit both eu5 and imperator, but theres much more that would fit eu5.
19:51 I imagine the slider that got split was Inovativene vs Narrowminded, and that it was split into Humanist vs Religious and something like Invention vs Tradition.
I've got to admit, I hope that in the future things such as succession get revamped. It would be really cool to see civil wars form, or the ability to support rival royal houses directly (that could be friendly or even LOYAL to you, as in they would be more likely to give core provinces etc. to you) as I feel as though this historically happened too.
It would therefore also be cool that you could inherit the throne of certain nobles for some money or a reduction of autonomy in that province!Reply to this comment for any other ideas relating to succession!!!
In ck3 a lot of civil wars make blobbing dangerous if you don’t handle your internal stuff properly. In Eu4 it is much harder for any country to actually die from within (except for Ming).
The disasters can be mitigated quite easily in the later patches, almost never as a player.
I have a feeling that you missed Biga that was a holding of the Byzantines in the map. Yet as well amazing content!
I really want to see the battles be expanded upon.
Ck2 has the 3 battle groups, EU4 has the battle width, and ck3 has the culture specific special unit types.
I want to see a nice blend of these mechanics to make something new and original.
One feature I love in eu4 is the newer mission trees, like the French or the Byzantine. It would be nice if the mission trees evolved or if there were additional generic mini missions after the main one is completed (like the ones you get from the summon diet mechanic, but more fun).
I love trade company mechanism, I'd be happy to see something a bit similar in EU5! Thx!
They need to end support for 720p, to allow more info on screen with fewer clicks/less scrolling. More automation of tedium (tied to technology) in the end game. Smarter troop movements & waypoints. If/then orders, ability to set reminders (ie pause on this date, or pause if my neighbour declares war on their neighbour, etc)
I would love to see a double day feature. The game sometimes progresses really slow and either, everything would be calculated twice as fast and each day would be two, or just two days for every day and only date specific stuff would be tied to it. (I tried the 19th century mod for HoI4 and just the dread of waiting for stuff to finish would really help in all paradox games imo).
About the reform slot, it would be a good idea to have something similar to civ6 where u unlock reforms and ideas through technologies that u can change frequently. It would add a lot more replayabilty and diversity of gameplay for each country i think
Byzantine should be named imperium romanum.
Also it's likely they might do a "infentry" designer like in hoi4 tank designer for the type of tropes you have allowing for the quality vs quantity to take place on the map
The new QOL stuff we got with king of kings, auto exploration Diplo macro
i rly love the feature that the new world can be randomized with new continents etc. would love to keep this
I think having multiple parlaments (diets) that affect a specific region in the same tag could be cool. It could allow to represent equal composite monarchies, like the Aragonese Crown for example.
A thing I mentioned on someone else's video, where they talked about changes made to sea tiles... I would like to see the devs implement a system for 'cold water' and 'warm water' ports, in which some sea provinces become impossible to move through during winter months, or it causes dramatic fluctuations in trade..
It wouldn't be relevant for many nations, but where it is it is rather a serious matter.
The Byzantines also likely control the area around Philadelphia in Anatolia and some islands.
Im not sure about the whole image for a menu thing, but I could see this appear for an event, like in some of ck3's event
With moving armies just wondering if the terrain they're moving through will influence their speed as well as if u can build roads etc to help army movement and trade. Might be a good thing to have.
the "country without land" bit was very interesting. isn't there already a mechanic in victoria for recognition? i imagine something like that in this game could easily translate into decreased war score cost or something similar for nations who don't recognize one another. also, i suspect that the name hasn't been announced yet because they are going to go with a name other than EU5
I like the menu which takes up the whole screen. Feels more immersive
i want to see misions in eu5, tho with some changes. firstly i think there could be a similar system to decisions, where decisions only appear if you have a potential for it, and only later allow you to take the decision if you have the right requirement, something similar to missions, where branches can appear with a potential, say a mission branch is only shown and allowed to be fulfilled if you are england and you dont have a pu over france, so mission could have way more flavour, and stop clogging up in your tab with missions that are just impossible to get anymore
The bengal area i think is like that due to vassals or semi autonumus sultanate, as indeed when bengal get indipendece is much more unified