Multiplayer?

[Gopher]

I used to play back in the day but the multiplayer scene was super lame. Basically the same players playing all the time banded together vs anyone unknown joining their games and that's just the way it was. Does anyone still play multiplayer now? It's been years since I last played.

[FlameWar]

It still has the same problem nearly any game that takes in this timeframe has:
The asbolute majority of Multiplayer is prearranged wiothin friend or communtiy gorups, because playing with a proper game can easily run you half a dozen or more sessions over multiple days/weeks.
That's just not feasible for random matching, and leads to a small playersbase. Which in turn leads exactly to what you described ususaly, among other things.

[Marquoz]

Yup. EU4 is primarily a single player game. Multiplayer is only viable if you have a dedicated gaming group. Otherwise, good luck getting even a century of play in.

[volbound1700]

I play quite a bit of MP. The games barely make it until mid 1550s with large crowds because you can't really get the group together again. However, EU4 seems to break down after 1600 anyways. Even in SP, it seems like I barely make it to 1700s. The world gets mostly colonized by 1600 (which is dumb) and you start to run out of things to do other than fight large wars.

Typically by 1600, you know who is going to win and most of the time it, in MP games, it is either Austria (if they are allowed to get all of their PUs) or France. France is so overpowered with its Morale ideas. Also a good MP player usually gets military ideas for France such as quality which makes the advantage even greater. Russia and Ottomans are good MP options as well because they are basically in their own world and can expand pretty easily without any diplo help. The only thing that can potentially hold back France, Ottomans, and Russia is Aggressive Expansions and Coalitions.

EU4 team keeps trying to focus on making tribal nations better when their focus should be on cleaning up the experience of playing as the major, recommended European nations listed in the 1444 start which was the original concept of the game. This is why I am excited about the board game as the focus is getting back on the original concept of the game, something the EU4 development team has moved away from.

[Biggus Dickus William]

Public multiplayer games usually dont make it past the 1500's because someone playing a major country either dies or the game doesnt go the way some players want and everyone demands a restart or people just dont show up for a rehost.

If you want a long game, I would try looking for and finding a community that sets up prearranged games. Some of the eu4 youtubers do this, so I'd look into them if you're interested in doing multiplayer.

[volbound1700]

Originally posted by The Hammer of Islam:

Public multiplayer games usually dont make it past the 1500's because someone playing a major country either dies or the game doesnt go the way some players want and everyone demands a restart or people just dont show up for a rehost.

If you want a long game, I would try looking for and finding a community that sets up prearranged games. Some of the eu4 youtubers do this, so I'd look into them if you're interested in doing multiplayer.

I do it somewhat but then even in those groups, 1 player has a conflict and cannot make it which delays it out for a while.

I have one that is in the 1650s that has been going on for months. We might play 1-2 times a month.

I do a lot of 2-3 player games too and those tend to move at a steady pace. IMO, 6-7 players is the right number. I did a 21-player game before as well and it did not go well. (I also got my butt kicked by Morocco as Castile so I played terrible and left early. I would not have been able to stay long anyways. It still was fun and a learning experience).