Europa Universalis V

It advertises itself as a nation-building simulator, but in reality it is a commodity trading simulator that could have just been a spreadsheet. In EU4 I had fun playing as Oman and building an indian ocean trading empire. I tried to do the same in EU5 but it was just so dull. EU4's trading system was nonsensical but fun. EU5's is more realistic I guess but incredibly tedious to deal with.

Dieses Spiel nimmt eine ganz komische Richtung mit den bisherigen Patches wurden einige Probleme in Angriff genommen, aber dabei haben sich andere Probleme einfach verstärkt. Die Ai ist als Bündnispartner selbst bei einer numerischen Überlegenheit von 1:50 sowie besserer Technologiestufe heillos überfordert und rennt durchgehend 0 Moral Stacks (trotz keinem Fog of War) in den Fleischwolf und bricht jede Besetzung einen Tag vor dem Erfolg ab, wodurch der Kriegspunktestand quasi in jedem Krieg einen festen -50% Modifikator und einen dauerhaft hohen Kriegseifer beim Gegner hat. Dadurch ist es einfach unmöglich manche essentielle Kriege wo man von Verbündeten abhängig ist (wie Befreiungskriege) als Vassal zu gewinnen.

КАЖДЫЙ. ГРЁБАННЫЙ. ПАТЧ. РЕВОРКАЮТ ЕБУЧУЮ ЭКОНОМИКУ. Это просто уже невозможно, что не патч, то ♥♥♥♥♥♥, сидишь лутаешь бабосики на +700 голдишки и в ♥♥♥ не дуешь, а потом хуяк обнова и теперь ты супер нищий, который не сможет даже булку хлеба купить. У игры много проблем и вместо того, чтобы их решать разрабы ещё и добавляют штук 10 проблем на 1 решённую. 1000 нищих бомжей из 5

The game feels...wrong. Please listen in that I don't mean it's bad, I just struggle to enjoy it. As a longtime fan of PDX and specifically the Europa Universalis series I don't enjoy giving a negative review. If my opinion changes I will change this to a recommendation in future. Below is a slightly longer breakdown of my current viewpoint. The most pressing issue for me right now is the pacing and core gameplay loop. It is oftentimes focused on exponential economic growth instead of taking a country through the changes of the Early Modern Period as its predecessor did. I find myself more often micromanaging some local industry in the 14th century than developing the state apparatus in the 15th and later centuries. By the 100 year mark I've often spent numerous real life hours building up my country only for the tedium to make the experience no longer enjoyable; not to mention outright hostile mechanics like complacency. I act more like a middle manager always taking the 'most efficient option' than some King/Assembly making both good and poor choices. When each playthrough is said and done I feel more like the victim of the systems in the game than the one shaping and playing with them. These feelings are compounded by the flagship idea of the age: Colonization, being an even more tedious and nonsensical mess. In most games you will have European run colonies with millions of people conquering the heart of Africa in the 16th century, the exploration system is needlessly draining, and above all - it's just not fun. You will commit vast resources and population to foreign lands, get endless spam events, and fight grueling invasions of Spain for artic wasteland in northern Alaska and nothing else. Then, hoping to see some semblance of a unique world, you will look at generic colonies wiping out all diversity, no dynamic placenames, and little to no actual benefit with the systems you worked so hard to overcome. At the end of the day the saving graces for this title, and most other Paradox titles, is multiplayer, modding, and the development cycle. The former two can help distract and smooth over the worst issues for now while the latter promises to eventually give something better...at regular financial cost of course. If you can manage to create an environment of friendly modded multiplayer this ambitious game can still be a genuinely enjoyable experience in limited doses. These are just my own views as someone who has deeply enjoyed the expansive world that Europa Universalis creates. Hell, if you are invested in economic affairs you may even find many of my personal complaints to be something you enjoy. For now though I must leave a negative review given the state of the game and how it's progressed since release. I hope to eventually change this review for the better.

Currently unplayable. Country starts in massive deficits and subjects revolt immediately. I started with France and less than a year all subjects revolt for 100k manpower while I have like 17k. I went from 403 hours to 0.8 in the last two weeks.

After the tenth patch where things are completely different than they were just a patch ago AND it broke things that were previously working, I can't in good faith recommend anyone new buy this. Especially when there's a perfectly fine game that actually works in EU4.

This game needs about a years worth of intensive development and patches before I'll consider spending another dime on it. I pre-ordered this game and did so with Victoria 3. The difference between the two is that in Victoria 3 version 1.0 there was a satisfying core game loop that drew me in and a creative vision I could believe in. Here, neither is present. I hate to say this, but this is the roughest paradox launch I've yet seen. Lastly, it was a very bad design decision to make ticks hourly instead of daily. The increase in ticks seems to have a large detrimental impact on performance. Caveat: This review is based on my impressions of the game at launch, so versions 1.0 and 1.1. I will need to hear about major positive changes to the game's core systems to consider returning to it

개벼ㅑㅇ신같은 좆고아 아스퍼거들이 만든 최악의 게임

Patch 1.3 is a giant step in a great direction. The game is stable and the world feels much more active than in previous patches. I think the current state of the game is positive and I encourage former players to return to the game and new players to give it a try.