Which era would you consider EU4 if CK2 is "Medieval"?

[Gunn]

I tend to be able to associate a time period with the Paradox games we have but CK2 and EU4 kind of confuse me. Stellaris is obviously space, HoI is obviously 1930's - 1950's or WW2, Crusader Kings 2 does give the Dark Ages and Medieval era vibe, but so does EU4. Are they both considered Medieval? What truly sets them apart in terms of their time frame?

If someone said "I want to play a medieval era strategy game" I wouldn't know if I should suggest CK2 or EU4!

Appreciate any help clearing this up. I just can't figure out where EU4 stands, if CK2 is our "medieval era" paradox game.

[Sirsucksalot]

I would say 'early modern' is probably the best fit, but the game is set in the final days of the mediaeval period, either 9 or around 50 years of it left, depending on who you ask. The mediaeval period doesn't have much representation in actual game mechanics. If one wants to feel like a feudal lord and play out all that entails, definitely CKII.

[Malvastor]

I'd say Renaissance through early Modern. Or just Early Modern, according to Wikipedia[en.wikipedia.org].

[runequester]

It covers multiple periods.


"Late medieval to Napoleonic" is the term I use when talking to wargamers.

[kaiyl_kariashi]

Eu4 only barely scraps the tail end of the medieval era.

It's mostly the colonial period.

Vicky is industrial revolution.

[Gerfreckle]

The vast majority of EU4 takes place within what could be called the Early Modern period, which spanned the 16th century to the early 18th, while briefly stradling earlier and later periods like the medieval era (15th century) and the Napoleonic era (19th century).

The game begins in 1444, which is the very late medieval era (which is considered to unofficially end at several dates near then, such as 1453 or 1492), and during these 10-50 years the medieval era as we know it is not well represented at all, since the mechanics are basically identical to what they are in 1821, i.e. professional standing armies and highly centralised states. CK2, on the other hand, covers basically the entire medieval era if you have two of the major DLC, from 769 to 1453. It's incredibly in-depth, immersive and relatively accurate in terms of its depiction of feudalism (essentially lords below lords below lords, all ruling in their own right). CK2 accurately represents how decentralised countries were, as well as how expensive it was to maintain armies (thus you must raise levies when at war and disband them afterwards, rather than keeping a standing army present at all times).

CK2 is a considerably harder game to 'get into', in my opinion, since the feudal/vassal mechanics take a lot of getting used to and since you play as individual characters rather than the nation as a whole it's generally a lot harder and more complicated to get things done (as was the intention, and it's why the game is so historically authentic).

If you specifically want a medieval game, get CK2. I personally prefer EU4 because it's more accessible, but CK2 is the definitive medieval gaming experience.