Dumb question, whats the appeal of EU5?

[iki_balam]

PDX hasnt impressed me with a lot of their recent releases (CK3, V3). I am not confident EU5 will be distinctive enough from EU4, nor a DLC bloated mess within a short time span. I'd enjoy hearing what excites people about the game, I really am open to changing my mind.

[shadowsixalpha]

Really just the idea of something new and different in general

[Marquoz]

There are two things I've said I wanted from EU5 for many years:

1) True multi-core support that takes full advantage of modern chip sets. Project Caesar, which is EU5's working title, will have this feature.

2) Dynamic as opposed to static trade. No fixed arrows, no trade always flowing from node x to node y, etc. Project Caesar will also have this.

Since I'm getting the two things I asked for, I'm provisionally excited. But until I actually play it, I won't know for sure if the core gameplay loop is fun and addictive or dull. Time will tell.

[Malvastor]

Pretty much agree with Marquoz here- I want to see what they can do with an engine designed to better use resources, and I've long thought that a less static trade system would be both more historically accurate and more interesting to master.

I'm also curious to see where they go with a game that essentially has the same mission, but is starting from scratch.

That said, I do somewhat understand where you're coming from. Some people in the fanbase have been saying that we're "overdue" for EU5, or that EU4 "needs" to be replaced, and I don't really agree with that.

[Lasagna]

Hoping and coping that it's not ass.

[Mechenyi]

PDX kind of backed itself into a corner in regards to development/provinces and how AE works in EU4 over the various updates and DLCs, and at this point it's just short of being broken. Hopefully with EU5, since it's going to have an insane amount of provinces, pdx will finally come up with a proper solution.

Personally, I don't expect the performance to be good at all, but I'm used to playing their games at ~15fps

[Nooblington]

If they remove the God awful 'Development' system that EU4 has then they'll necessarily have to make changes that, if implemented correctly, will produce a superior experience. And, if they fail to implement such as system correctly, then at least we'll hopefully have a good base to mod and fix all pdx's failures. It is 2024, I don't expect a game to be fun, finished or fixed when it is released. I expect it to be ♥♥♥♥♥♥, and so should you.

If this 'EU5' has multi-core support, a functional pop. based system and DOESN'T do what V3 did to combat then it MIGHT turn out not ♥♥♥♥. All of their games, and most modern games in general, seem to be released in an intentionally unfinished, shallow form so that the voids can be later filled with DLC, expansions and 'season passes'.

I'm not really bothered about a 'dynamic trade' system because I just know they'll ♥♥♥♥ it up and make it even more 'gamey' than the current implementation.

I hope they don't bring back the 'mission trees'. They're a lame way of dealing with their game's failure to accurately simulate history. However, I would still like so 'alt-history', so some variation would be appreciated. E.g. Different Monarchs/Rulers with differing goals, natural disasters, bad growing seasons effecting commodity prices, etc.

[Jay]

From the outside looking in, a very limited EU4 plauer, it seems they want to take the route of CSGO and make a CS2. Take the framework that clearly is successful, a game they clearly want to continue to update, but do it on a modern engine. So hopefully unlike CK3 and Vik3 they take everything they have done in Eu4 that works and EU5 just keeps building. They should just drop the 5 and make it their mangum opis

[LASci]

There's two things that have never really changed throughout EU4. One is the trade system. I actually liked what they did in EU4, but it's time for a complete overhaul. Like others I'd like to see a system that's much more involved. The second is the war system. It's very boring as it is. Infantry = to your opponents Infantry + cavalry, 4 cavalry for your flanks, fill the backrow with cannons at the appropriate tech level.

Finally, and this might not be popular - and I never imagined I'd say it - but I hope they go with a live service model here. Their DLC policy is already just a convoluted live service so may as well just embrace it.

[Damphair]

I'm just excited for the new map graphics really

[Exarch_Alpha]

Despite being almost as old as EU4 I didn´t like the path HOI 4 went either. Barrage of DLCs adding complexity because it sells to grognards. The logistic and partisan system are complete pain in the ass.

[PossibleTango]

Real population system.

No mana.

[cayenne_spicy]

If you need others to convince you, it's not for you. You won't like it at launch and you won't like it for a couple years after launch. You'll regret buying it and you'll nitpick this reason and that reason for why you aren't into it. Stick to your gut. Try it in 2027.

[Fantastic Fwoosh]

Taking all of the things they've tried and throwing them into one pot as a passion project to try and appeal to the broadest audience and something new by doing much of the same.

Don't forget, Eu3 is wildly different to Eu4, eu4 and eu1 aren't even recognizable, this is probably a step in evolution to stop remaking eu4 every 20 years. (I still think they will end up making eu4 on a new engine in the end, if eu5 and vic flops, commercial logic dicates it would be the only smart thing to do to continue the series with or without Johan.)

[bri]

Honestly it's already a questionable buy at best between the utter disasters of CK and Vic 3, being completely unimpressed with EU IV parches and DLC since at least 1.30, and stupidly moving the start date in entirely the wrong direction. I'll get around to reading the dev diaries and such at some point but atm it's far from the auto-preorder the prior versions from II to IV were.

[Mechenyi]

Originally posted by bri:

Honestly it's already a questionable buy at best between the utter disasters of CK and Vic 3, being completely unimpressed with EU IV parches and DLC since at least 1.30, and stupidly moving the start date in entirely the wrong direction. I'll get around to reading the dev diaries and such at some point but atm it's far from the auto-preorder the prior versions from II to IV were.

I like the start date they chose personally, but I can see a few issues with it. if I’d have to guess, they chose it so ByzHeads can RP easier.