Paradox, im tired of your decisions and inconsistency

[Noname]

This game is almost one year old and still plays like an early beta build. You change things by 180 degrees every major patch and can't keep anything as a constant value.

How about you stop experimenting with your build, choose how you want this game to look, and commit to it?

I don't think that there is even one mechanic in this game that wasn't changed, castrated, or deleted from the game in the last months.

You sold us product as a full release, and now you are changing things like its beta builds. Stop that. Choose your direction and commit to it for the love of God.

I bought this game because I found it interesting and wanted it to be the way that it was first envisioned. Now I have a completely different title that I can't appreciate anymore.

Tried it every major patch, trying to play around 100 hours each time to feel this game and learn mechanics from scratch every time, but I'm not going to do it again. I'm tired of that.

You landed on 51% positive reviews as of the date of this comment, so I'm not alone in thinking that you are not doing good job.

After over 1k hours with this game, I feel like your main focus is to make this game to punish players for playing it. In the first releases, expansion on the map was hard but manageable, but over this one year you limited it so much that forming things like PLC is just a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ nightmare.

First destroying the subject meta of expanding, then centralization/decentralization values, speed of integration, and now freaking political influence that makes you sit and do nothing, waiting for it to fill up, so you can do basic things in your country. On top of that, Bohemia is still an undestructable powerhouse in the east with 2 or 3 times more levies than its neighbors. Tried to play Poland, and it's a nightmare now. Bohemia ally every major country in HRE and declare war on me every freaking time they have 100k troops on their side before 1400. And my AI allies are as dumb as they were at the start of this game year ago. They throw their 10k stacks at enemies until they have nothing left.

What is your aim with all those changes? Where are you going? What is your end goal?

I still hope that you will make the game playable and fun for everyone, but for now it is not, and Steam reviews show that. Looks like I need to wait another year or two and check it again, but then this game will probably look as something different again. I didn't pay to be part of forever beta tests so I'm out for now.

[PDXRyagi]

So would you say political influence is the biggest change you dislike in 1.4 beta? And if so, is it the gain itself or the spending that you have the most issue with?

Thanks for the feedback!

[Nats]

Originally posted by PDXRyagi:

So would you say political influence is the biggest change you dislike in 1.4 beta? And if so, is it the gain itself or the spending that you have the most issue with?

Thanks for the feedback!

NO!

Did you even read what he said? He said for you (Paradox) to choose a direction and stick to it, and stop changing things after that. Use your own skills and creativity to make this into a great game.

And I agree with him.

Stop asking players what they want. Everyone has a different opinion lol. You would think you would have realised that from the hourly/daily ticks fiasco that is going on.

[AesopTock]

OP has it right. Instead of trying to refine and improve your already existing structures, it feels that the devs keep caving to the this constant pressure to pull the game towards a simpler EU4 base. Your team needs to make a decision, are you reskinning an old product or actually trying to make something new. Why do you think your player base is so split, its because people who play the game also see this and its affecting their opinions and thoughts as to where all of this is headed. I've got 2k hours into this game and I still have no ******* clue what this game is actually trying to be. Ponder that for a minute. Stick to a vision, make clear your intent, and don't cave to simplicity. Also stop with the gas lighting, people who pay attention know that it was the constant background checks that were going on that were the optimization issue not whether it was hourly or daily. Fixing those was the real sauce behind making the game run better, maybe actually tell the players that.

[KroganCharr]

Originally posted by AesopTock:

OP has it right. Instead of trying to refine and improve your already existing structures, it feels that the devs keep caving to the this constant pressure to pull the game towards a simpler EU4 base.

EU4 is more complex than EU5.

EU4 is a game you can play in many different ways and need to cultivate many different skills to get really good at. There are still people in 2026 who figure out new and creative ways to play EU4. EU5 has exactly 1 dimension: economic micromanagement. Everything in EU5 rises and falls with how patiently you keep tweaking the economy of every single location over and over and over.

Originally posted by AesopTock:

I've got 2k hours into this game and I still have no ******* clue what this game is actually trying to be.

It's trying to be an economy simulator. Every system in this game is designed to either feed into the economy, or trivialized if your economy is stronger than anyone else's.

[AesopTock]

Originally posted by KroganCharr:

Originally posted by AesopTock:

OP has it right. Instead of trying to refine and improve your already existing structures, it feels that the devs keep caving to the this constant pressure to pull the game towards a simpler EU4 base.

EU4 is more complex than EU5.

EU4 is a game you can play in many different ways and need to cultivate many different skills to get really good at. There are still people in 2026 who figure out new and creative ways to play EU4. EU5 has exactly 1 dimension: economic micromanagement. Everything in EU5 rises and falls with how patiently you keep tweaking the economy of every single location over and over and over.

Originally posted by AesopTock:

I've got 2k hours into this game and I still have no ******* clue what this game is actually trying to be.

It's trying to be an economy simulator. Every system in this game is designed to either feed into the economy, or trivialized if your economy is stronger than anyone else's.

You can see my play time, I don't need an explainer. Put some time in the game and get back to me with your opinion. Or show your playtime, cause hard to take anyone seriously without proof of experience. Anyone can talk on these forums, I want to hear from other players please.

[AesopTock]

EU5 is game with a width of systems an ocean wide but a puddle deep, which is why its hard to understand what this game wants to be. People fixate on the economy because its the one system that has a slight bit of depth, that people don't like, but just needs refining. Its the lack of depth in the other content that is infuriating and needs clarification of "are they more than just placeholder mechanics for future DLC content".
I don't want to litigate over aspects of EU4, if that's your jam go there. I've put my time in there I'm good. How dare I want a new experience, shame on me for having expectations for a released product/misguided faith that Tinto's experienced team wouldn't screw this up so bad. I complain because I think that the bones of this software has a good game in it, but slapping EU4 over the top of it isn't that. Neither is porting CK3 or Vic3 either, I just want to know where the **** this is headed.
OP thank you for pointing this out, helped me wade through the finer points to see the bigger picture again.

[Marquoz]

Originally posted by Noname:

This game is almost one year old and still plays like an early beta build. You change things by 180 degrees every major patch and can't keep anything as a constant value.

How about you stop experimenting with your build, choose how you want this game to look, and commit to it?

I made multiple posts on the official forums during the first months after release saying exactly this. They did no good whatsoever.

[ABoxFullOfKittens]

Originally posted by AesopTock:

OP has it right. Instead of trying to refine and improve your already existing structures, it feels that the devs keep caving to the this constant pressure to pull the game towards a simpler EU4 base.

This.

[KroganCharr]

Originally posted by AesopTock:

Originally posted by KroganCharr:

EU4 is more complex than EU5.

EU4 is a game you can play in many different ways and need to cultivate many different skills to get really good at. There are still people in 2026 who figure out new and creative ways to play EU4. EU5 has exactly 1 dimension: economic micromanagement. Everything in EU5 rises and falls with how patiently you keep tweaking the economy of every single location over and over and over.



It's trying to be an economy simulator. Every system in this game is designed to either feed into the economy, or trivialized if your economy is stronger than anyone else's.

You can see my play time, I don't need an explainer. Put some time in the game and get back to me with your opinion. Or show your playtime, cause hard to take anyone seriously without proof of experience. Anyone can talk on these forums, I want to hear from other players please.

It wasn't my intention to explain the game to you. I was disagreeing with the idea that EU5 is more complex than EU4, which you implied with "simpler EU4 base", and the second thing was me saying what the focus of the game very clearly is in my experience.

Regarding playtime, I have 5456 hours of EU4 and 65 hours of EU5. And no, anticipating your objection, I do not at all feel 65 hours is not enough. I had this game figured out in about 30 hours, the second half of my playtime was just reinforcing that yes, that is all there is to the game.

[mikemonger]

Originally posted by Nats:

Originally posted by PDXRyagi:

So would you say political influence is the biggest change you dislike in 1.4 beta? And if so, is it the gain itself or the spending that you have the most issue with?

Thanks for the feedback!

NO!

Did you even read what he said? He said for you (Paradox) to choose a direction and stick to it, and stop changing things after that. Use your own skills and creativity to make this into a great game.

And I agree with him.

Stop asking players what they want. Everyone has a different opinion lol. You would think you would have realised that from the hourly/daily ticks fiasco that is going on.

"Stop asking players what they want. "

Because that's the best way to create a product with broad appeal.

Apparently.

Ironically, does that mean they should ignore you when you say they should ignore the player base?

[ABoxFullOfKittens]

Originally posted by mikemonger:

Originally posted by Nats:

NO!

Did you even read what he said? He said for you (Paradox) to choose a direction and stick to it, and stop changing things after that. Use your own skills and creativity to make this into a great game.

And I agree with him.

Stop asking players what they want. Everyone has a different opinion lol. You would think you would have realised that from the hourly/daily ticks fiasco that is going on.

"Stop asking players what they want. "

Because that's the best way to create a product with broad appeal.

Apparently.

Ironically, does that mean they should ignore you when you say they should ignore the player base?

He means.. stop listening to the EU4 purists. They should commit on a vision and stick with it.. EU4 complainers aside. Us EU5 fans, IE fans of the more sim like game they originally came out with, don't want that diluted to appease a broader audience (EU4 players, I:R players and Johan haters). They will never be happy regardless.

[Mindzen]

Who was asking for mana? What segment of the player bases was pounding their fist about mana, i dont remember that happening.

Yet they put it in.

I have 0 faith in the development of this game now.

[Medicles]

Originally posted by Mindzen:

Who was asking for mana? What segment of the player bases was pounding their fist about mana, i dont remember that happening.

Yet they put it in.

I have 0 faith in the development of this game now.

Ok, i think we should determine what exactly mana is in this game. Because if Political Influence is mana, then Legitimacy, Stability, Prestige and Ducats are also mana.

[KroganCharr]

Originally posted by Mindzen:

Who was asking for mana? What segment of the player bases was pounding their fist about mana, i dont remember that happening.

Yet they put it in.

I have 0 faith in the development of this game now.

That surprised me too. I always thought mana was a near universally disliked concept.

Originally posted by Medicles:

Ok, i think we should determine what exactly mana is in this game. Because if Political Influence is mana, then Legitimacy, Stability, Prestige and Ducats are also mana.

Paradox themselves described it as bringing back mana.

[ABoxFullOfKittens]

Originally posted by Medicles:

Originally posted by Mindzen:

Who was asking for mana? What segment of the player bases was pounding their fist about mana, i dont remember that happening.

Yet they put it in.

I have 0 faith in the development of this game now.

Ok, i think we should determine what exactly mana is in this game. Because if Political Influence is mana, then Legitimacy, Stability, Prestige and Ducats are also mana.

Yes, they traded multiple different manas for one. But you're right, we did already have manas. Still though, to his point, it is a simplification change, like adding supply to Stellaris. Feels like PDX is forever watering their visions down to chase broader more general audiences. Everything moves towards lighter versions... Ck2 to 3, EU5 1.3 to 1.4, Stellaris 4.0 and everything beyond. I want deep realistic GSGs. They haven't even retooled events for it properly. So here we are... 1.3 to 1.4 adds jank.. and who did we appease? Rooster, golden talon, anyone? I doubt it. I never though Generalist was a shill till I saw him cover 1.4, but now it's clear.