Better than HOI4?

[Animal Mother]

Well with the current HOI4 AI issues i decided to move in EU-4, good idea? Or same crap?

[Marquoz]

Here's how I break down the main Paradox grand strategy game. TLDR, in my opinion HOI4 is both very inferior to and very different from EU4.

EU: The Baseline. EU came first, and every subsequent game has had to distinguish itself from both the EU series and each other. Why play HOI, or Vicky, or whatever if it's just an EU reskin? Over time, EU has gotten deeper and more complicated (which I love) and has also become more of a sandbox (which I have mixed feelings about). The earlier titles forced both players and the AI down a more historical path than EU4 does. I personally feel the balance has tilted too far in the sandbox direction, but I'm clearly in the minority. We'll see how EU5 works.

HOI: The Wargame. Given its setting and short time frame, what else could it be? HOI, too, has embraced alt history in its current iteration, which I think is a mistake. There isn't enough time for many of its possible political changes and alliances to make sense. But the focus remains war on a grand scale. You're not a field commander--you're the Pentagon or Stalin or whoever--but you prepare for war for a few years and then you fight like crazy for the rest of the game.

Crusader Kings: The RPG Hybrid. I also refer to it as EU for Dummies. Economics, trade, warfare, and most forms of diplomacy were massively over-simplified in order to focus on dynastic roleplay instead. Some complexity seems to be creeping into the series, though. Perhaps I'll like a future version, but for now, it's just too easy.

Victoria: The Pop Game. Vicky 1 didn't stand out enough. It covered the time between EU and HOI but had few compelling mechanics differences from either. Vicky 2 changed all that and was the most important title from Paradox since the original EU. This is where Johan and his team first introduced the Pop mechanic, which has since spread to many other titles. By comparison, Vicky 3 is a dumbed-down failure. Taking control of the military out of player hands proved to be its largest (but not only) error. Note that Johan was not involved with Vicky 3 and has said that EU5 (Project Caesar) will NOT follow its warfare model.

Stellaris: The Traditional 4x. Stellaris launched as a standard space 4x, and a good one. Note that it was later reworked to include pops, a feature that some enjoy and others loathe. I'm indifferent to them in this setting, myself.

Though all these franchises initially tried to be different from one another, they're starting to lose that distinctiveness. Pops were introduced in Vicky, spread to Stellaris, got incorporated into Imperium Romanum from the start, and will be a big part of EU5. Alt history has spread from EU4 to pretty much every title. Some CK dynasty-style mechanics will appear in EU5. And so on.

Finally, the EU series is by far my favorite. It has (to me) the perfect balance of warfare, diplomacy, nation building, and history.

[SaD-82]

Two completely different beasts (you could almost say: genres).
While the HoI-series is all about warfare and managing the OOB; the EU series is about...well, warfare and managing your nation. The emphasis being on the nation management part, though.

If you're head over heels into the warfare part of HoI, chances are that you will be bored with EU 4. If you, on the other hand, think that HoI could need more nation management stuff (be it developing your country the way you see fit or engaging into diplomacy, colonizing, trade and religion), then you should give this game a try.

Not to mention, that, in my opinion, HoI4 is the weakest part of the HoI series and thus naturally inferior to EU 4, but that comes down to being spoiled by HoI 2.

Ah, and btw: Liked your acting in Full Metal Jacket.

[Narrowmind]

I've barely played HOIIV, but I will say it seems a lot more arcadey in comparision to EUIV. A campaign could be over with in like 10 hours for the first, and you'll have 10s to hundreds of hours of campaign for the second.

[Ashling]

Paradox isn't known for its outstanding ai. EU4's ai is probably better just on the basis that it doesn't have to try and customize each soldier down to their breeches. Plus, line warfare like in HoI/Vicky 3 is neat, but I don't think it's ever been done perfectly (or even, debatably, satisfactorily).

For Paradox games I'd really just go for the time period you enjoy the most/the core mechanic you're interested in (HoI for modern war, EU4 for global exploration & expansion, Vicky for the economy)

CK is weird. I wouldn't even really call it a successful dynasty or RPG series (although it has both). To me, CK shines by being the most random grand strategy games where things can simply happen without a lot of reason. It's the only Paradox game (outside of HoI) where I've seen the ai take over all of Europe and it felt like it happened purely by accident.

Originally posted by Marquoz:

I personally feel the balance has tilted too far in the sandbox direction, but I'm clearly in the minority. We'll see how EU5 works.

This is how I feel too

[Nats]

I think EU4 is better than HoI4 but thats because I like the period of history better. WW2 is overused in games. But I think Victoria 3 is probably the best game Paradox have made to date.

EU4 is quite repetitive you can play the missions and the empire building they are fun but its very slow, and the estates are annoying. Its mainly a game about conquest as there is very little to do otherwise. And you still have the annoying ping ponging armies to deal with.

Victoria 3 is very immersive dealing with the economy, politics, pops and the laws. And Vict 3 remains the only Paradox game that is still fun when you are not at war. And Vict 3 doesnt have the same combat mechanics as all the other games so its refreshingly different.

[Dumah]

Originally posted by Animal Mother:

Well with the current HOI4 AI issues i decided to move in EU-4, good idea? Or same crap?

- way better. In 2016 Pdx released two badly designed and hollow games - Stellaris and HoI4. One of them actually became good with time, and its not a HoI4. HoI4 actually somehow managed to become worse, a real testament to abilities of its development team and... and to its lowbrow community that allowed that to happen by constantly consuming trash that Pdx put out in their DLC's for HoI4. And now the same community is somehow surprised by all recent events. Real geniuses.

I turned myself in to a Habsburg empire in WW2! Im Habsburg empire in WW2! Just be impressed!

[grognardgary]

i loved EU 1-3. I find four irritating the over powering of the RC Church the nerfing of the impact of Protestantism especially in England and the low country where it is now little more than an annoyance to be brushed aside rather than word changing event that under pinned the rise of England to world spanning empire, HOI is interesting right up until it is time to go to war. Stellaris finish the damn game and leave it alone. As far as AI none of them are rocket science material. You are basically trying to substiture if then sequences and priority codes for human intelligence, it works great for chess, But chess is relatively simple and the computer has the same time limit as the player 50 moves in 2 hours, So basically and it has access to every bit of chess literature ever written which handicaps the player tremendously. For the rest of it however the more complicated the game and the convoluted the choices the less well the AI will do in the maybe 5 secs it has to make a move for the currently active provinces, countries and lets not forget that in the end it is the RNG that choose between the various weight possibilities a given non player state makes, Note in all games the player's primary goal is to limit the ways in which the RNG can ruin your life. The AI is an RNG

[Narrowmind]

Originally posted by Nats:

I think EU4 is better than HoI4 but thats because I like the period of history better..

And you, know, years ago, when I got started, I liked the medieval era far more than the early modern period, but there's something about Eu that put is higher than Ck. I don't know what it is, but I was able to detect it under the surface. They look like the same game from the outside, so it was really troubling to me to realize Eu was better, but I couldn't find the words to actually express why.

[grognardgary]

Originally posted by Narrowmind:

Originally posted by Nats:

I think EU4 is better than HoI4 but thats because I like the period of history better..

And you, know, years ago, when I got started, I liked the medieval era far more than the early modern period, but there's something about Eu that put is higher than Ck. I don't know what it is, but I was able to detect it under the surface. They look like the same game from the outside, so it was really troubling to me to realize Eu was better, but I couldn't find the words to actually express why.

For me it is the tedium the constantly hunting through lists of prospective suitors for the best political match that also wasn't likely to produce kids that couldn't figure out which end of a sword to hold after the third time they cut their hand. I played a maximum length run as Connacht and amassed a crap load of points and was never so happy as when that game came to an end and haven't been back since.

[BlueBangkok]

One thing I would especially like to mention in favor of EU4 would be its diplomacy gameplay. It's one of the few strategies where diplomatic play is actually possible and viable. Alliance nets, friendships, rivalries, claim throne, PUs, interesting and many types of vassals, all affect the gameplay and can be played around in a meaningful way. No other pdx game (or any strategy game for that matter) can hold a distant candle to it.

Civ? Friends for 1/2 the game and then denounced for stupid reasons.
Endless series? Shallow.
AoW? Don't even get me started. xD

[Nats]

Originally posted by BlueBangkok:

One thing I would especially like to mention in favor of EU4 would be its diplomacy gameplay. It's one of the few strategies where diplomatic play is actually possible and viable. Alliance nets, friendships, rivalries, claim throne, PUs, interesting and many types of vassals, all affect the gameplay and can be played around in a meaningful way. No other pdx game (or any strategy game for that matter) can hold a distant candle to it.

Yes take a look at this list its pretty damn extensive but its taken a heck of a long time for the game to get there:
https://eu4.paradoxwikis.com/Diplomacy

I would say that Vict 3 has it at least equalled in the diplomacy stakes, and without the myriad of dlc. I dont think you can do royal marriages (I dont think they were so much of a thing in the 19th Century) but everything above plus tariffs, foreign development agreements, stating interests in countries. You dont create casus belli but you do create diplomatic plays that then can get other countries involved on either side and develop gradually into war. It's a pretty deep and rewarding system.

[DaliusLTU]

Stay away. Imagine late-game HOI4, but that's the entire game. Remember the time you had to micromanage into Siberia in the 1950s? Remember that world conquest grind that felt like forever? That’s this game — plus a 1000-hour tutorial. HOI4 and EU4 don’t match.

[Nats]

As if anyone believes anything Donald Trump says .... you should have said 'Lets make EU4 great again'

[bri]

Originally posted by Nats:

As if anyone believes anything Donald Trump says .... you should have said 'Lets make EU4 great again'

Easy enough, just roll back at least as far as 1.30, if not further...

Or play mods.