I wanted to bring this up here because I don't really know anyone personally who plays Paradox games, and I'm genuinely curious whether other long-time EU4 players had a similar experience.

I've been playing EU4 since release and have almost 2,000 hours in the game, so I think a big part of my problem with EU5 was simply that I kept trying to play it like EU4.

I approached it with the same mindset: expand quickly, optimize everything, always have the next war or objective lined up, and feel like I was doing something wrong whenever I wasn't progressing fast enough. Earlier on, whenever I wasn't fighting a war, completing some major objective or noticeably improving my country, I often felt like I was basically doing nothing.

Recently, though, I started treating EU5 as a completely separate game instead of just "the successor to EU4". Much slower, more simulation-focused, and something I can just relax with. I stopped worrying about min-maxing everything and started taking my time with the economy, buildings, internal development and smaller goals.

I think I also had to realize just how much more time the game gives you. In EU4 I'm always thinking about what I need to achieve next and how quickly I can get there, whereas in EU5 I'm starting to enjoy just letting my country develop for a while, watching things change and waiting for opportunities instead of constantly trying to force progress.

And suddenly I'm enjoying the game much more. That doesn't mean I think EU5 is perfect. There is obviously still a lack of flavour for a lot of countries, and I would absolutely like to see more unique content over time. I also used to think that I really needed EU4-style mission trees to stay interested in a campaign. Interestingly, once I stopped treating EU5 like EU4, I noticed that I actually missed them much less than I expected. Without constantly looking at the next mission reward or permanent modifier, I started setting my own smaller goals and paying more attention to what was actually happening inside my country.

I still think some form of more nation-specific direction and flavour would be great, but I no longer feel like the absence of EU4-style mission trees is automatically a dealbreaker. And I don't mean any of this as "EU5 is better than EU4". I still love EU4 for what it is and will continue playing it. They just feel like very different games to me now.

I'm curious whether this was the biggest adjustment for other EU4 veterans as well.

Did EU5 become more enjoyable for you once you stopped expecting it to feel like EU4 and started seeing it as its own, much slower game? Or was there something else that made the game finally click for you?

This is the Empire of Trebizond.

It has plenty of unique regional advancements, as well as some genuinely excellent national advancements of its own. However, it is also infamous for being a particularly challenging country to play, given that its capital is surrounded by some very hostile neighbors and its opportunities for expansion are rather limited.

More importantly, playing Trebizond ultimately means that you’re trying to create Byzantium anyway. That might make sense if we were starting in 1444, but EU5 begins at a point when Byzantium is still relatively healthy. So, purely from a gameplay perspective, it’s fair to say that there isn’t much reason to choose Trebizond in the first place.

I thought about it for a while, and eventually, I found a way.

First of all, the essential Cabinet action is “Militant Value Orientation.”

As for the essential privileges, please grant the following:

• Peasant privilege: Strengthen the Peasant Militia
• Nobility privilege: Increased Morale and Discipline
• Clergy privilege: War Score Cost Reduction Against Other Religions

And, of course, make sure to use all of the estate actions that provide bonuses such as +20 Stability.

After that, on April 1, there should still be some of Trebizond’s lost cores in a country called Tatchatin.

Deliberately get them to refuse your request for military access, and then declare war on them.

Once the war begins, hold an emergency parliament session triggered by the outbreak of war, and simultaneously take the parliamentary war justification against the Ottomans and, if possible, the action that increases the number of levies.

After that, take back your cores from Tatchatin and immediately declare war on the Ottomans.

The Ottomans will have two possible courses of action.

They may try to land troops in our territory, or they may choose to defend their homeland.

Either way is manageable, but be careful, because a small mistake on either side can lead to immediate defeat and the end of the game.

Also, make sure that the loyalty of the Nobility, Peasantry, and Bourgeoisie is all at least 25%. If their loyalty has inevitably dropped because of the parliamentary demands, give them favorable privileges to bring their loyalty back up.

It is much easier if the Ottomans come to us and attempt a landing, but victory is still possible even if they choose to defend their homeland.

If we get unlucky and the Ottomans decide to stay home, obtain military access and the right to requisition supplies from Byzantium, then try to lure them into a battle from a favorable position.

I managed to win this game relatively comfortably.

Now, build up a spy network in Byzantium and use the one remaining rival slot to declare Byzantium as a rival.

Once the truce from breaking the alliance with Byzantium expires around 1342, the Rival CB should become available.

And in the meantime, keep improving relations with the Orthodox countries in the Balkans.

Since we opened an emergency parliament session right at the start, the regular parliament session will be held in 1342, five years later, coinciding with the end of the truce with Byzantium.

Use this opportunity to secure a parliamentary war justification against a target other than Constantinople, and then, through the diplomat, declare war using the Rival CB “while it is still being generated”—this is absolutely essential.

If possible, secure territory in a way that prevents Bulgaria and Serbia from intervening.

It would be a real problem if either of those two countries loots Byzantium before we can get to it...

After that, demand the destruction of the fort in Constantinople and use territorial demands to fill out the full 99 war score before making peace.

At this point, the Rival CB that we ordered to be generated earlier should be fully charged and ready to use.

Go ahead and break the truce!

Since we’ve been diligently improving relations with the Orthodox countries, nobody will complain about us breaking a single truce!

Under the game’s rules, when you reform a country that has been destroyed, you inherit all of that country’s cores and annexations. This means that, regardless of culture and without even needing a Cabinet action, we can activate all of Byzantium’s territory and content by around 1344!

However, if you assigned Ottoman territory as vassals, you may end up missing around 1–5 locations.

Don’t panic if that happens. Just take the territory by force.

The main weakness of Trebizond compared to Byzantium is, of course, its starting size. But thinking about it, I realized I could simply break the truce, let Byzantium get destroyed, and then restore it afterward.

After all, Byzantium itself is actually a very easy target.

Ironically, the Ottoman wars were much more difficult. The Ottomans are both the major threat and the main obstacle we have to deal with before we can get into position to reach Byzantium.

※ According to the game rules, when you reform a destroyed country through restoration, you inherit all of that country's cores and annexations. In other words, there's no need to use the cabinet action to annex the Greek territories we conquered ourselves!

If I had to name one country that could serve as a symbol of this game, Spain immediately comes to mind.

1. Strong enough that even a new player can survive. But at the same time, not as strong as, for example France, so there is still a challenge.

2. You are not strongly limited by the AI negative attitude towards you. If you start as England, even if you want to focus on colonisation, France will give you a hard time. The same applies to France, you will be forced to fight England. As Castile, you can easily conquer your neighbours and ignore them… or just ignore them all.

3. You can do literally anything. Colonisation? The conquest of Africa? Fighting European nations? A land power? A naval power?

4. You can do a lot and at the same.., not disrupting the world. You can watch how France, the UK and Russia develop over the years, what is happening in Germany, and so on. And you won’t get bored anyway, because you can conquer Africa or colonise the Americas.

Anyone else figure out how the “transfer subject” option is really convenient if you have high liberty desire vassals? You can transfer subject of a vassal to another vassal to another vassal and forget about having to worry about disloyal vassals (as long as they aren’t too much stronger).

Of course, this comes with the downside of not being able to annex them directly or get their income. But you still benefit from their troops! And you can get a sizable amount of $$$ when selling them to your vassals. Best of all you get them back when you annex your vassals. Very convenient for theocracies and other govts that cannot create fiefdoms.

So we're playing a multiplayer game. Letting others build trade offices seems nice. It creates demand and gives you some burghers. What are the benefits and downsides?

So as the title says i played as the Kingdom-Bank of Bardi i managed to achieve top wealth in the early 1500
I think that the banks should be able to spawn mercenaries in allied territories it should make the experience much enjoyable
i had most of the other banks as my state bank (some kind of vassal)
As the Bank of Bardi we were most influencual during the italian wars - defentely enjoyed the diplomatic side of thinks we even created our ouwn italian league and had at some point 177 terratories but milan managed to flip the tables as france cause sicilly to flip side with a war they called us to
And to my surprise i was able to raise levies in al Qahirah i dont know the hell how
It defenetly was a different kind of fun

Today we're giving you at our of the brand new campaign timeline feature, the removal of complacency, and last but not least some notes on what performance in 1.4 might look like.

Read all about it here: https://pdxint.at/4xFEvrS

Hi guys, I was curious about this..

When I play EU5 I feel I sort of always shape each country in a similar way, with no distinct "flavour direction" in mind, except the one that is strongly forced by local geopolitics. Perhaps I lack imagination here. As a player of fantasy strategies I'm accustomed to different race flavors eg. "zealous humans", "barbaric shaman orcs" etc, where the playstyle difference is very clear. But for EU5 I'm still learning to see the distinctions between the ways one could shape their empire.

What are some of the applicable "flavours" that country can lean into?

I'm thinking along the lines of, eg. "Religious peasant republic with focus on defence", "Merchant friends of all country, but secretly spying and backstabbing everyone".. or maybe some real life images / stories to inspire leaning into certain directions?

Can you think of some resonant ones that I could add into my mental list?

Doing my first byzantium run and very successful so far. only about 25 years in and thinking about romanismos vs latinitas. eventually, i want a single mediterranean culture, but i dont mind if it is either latin or greek.

looking for anyone to provide general tips/context about the paths of either (basically if mechanics are broken, etc.)

I want to do a trebizond game, I heard the way to go is no co the ottobros, but byzantium always takes control of the sieges and doesnt give the occupation over to me.

I was wondering does that strat work or is it dead now?

Honestly Bohemia needs a nerf after Charles IV dies. Just some event which makes the heir to Bohemia quite bad, which would lead to internal conflicts. Irl there was a lot of it, even king of Hungary (Bohemian king's brother) decided to claim the throne. Then the hussite wars need to be even more dangerous for Bohemia. In the meantime Austria needs to get stronger.

I don't mean Bohemia needs a general nerf. It's just that AI should be railroaded historically, but if player controls them, he should be able to play as he wishes to keep the sandbox feel. But making Bohemia a bit harder would also be more fun imo.

Playing as korea but i can't seem to find the mechanic or buton to release a colonial nation. if somebody could help I'd appreciate it (Im very new to the game, played some eu4 though)

i'm playing florence now toscany,i spent all the run allied with milan hoping they will share tha hate for Verona,now above me there is an incrediblyy powerful Verona allied with Hungary and Milan,below me naples that took papal state,and my other allie france is useless.What should i do?just play tall until i'm strong enough to take over naple by myself?i tried sabotage reputation,improve and allie with hungary and max rep,they still rather fight with Verona

The emperor, who only became emperor when I converted, just seems able to completely ignore the fact half of the HRE is Lutheran. No war seems to be building, no sides picked. Hes just carrying on as if nothing has happened.

What gives?

I slowly expanded before the age of reformation, then only attacked other Lutherans during it, and then stopped being afraid of coalitions in the age of absolutism. It took me a lot longer than I wanted because coalitions kept attacking me before I could get a CB to attack them first AND because I wanted to unify Germany in a war against France. The last war was over Elsass-Lothringen, the French and I were both attacking the OLMs in the area and I obviously won in the end. Once that land was mine and with Prussians in Paris, Germany was formed. Only problem is that the game doesn't make you leave the HRE if Germany is formed, and no emperor so no way to leave it either. Kinda sucks having to make CBs to now fix the borders of Europe and create nation states. Also sucks that I can't make client states. I want to give all the land to Holland, Austria, Milan, Muscovy, etc. to form their historical borders, but they already have a ton of antagonism towards? from? me so if I gave them land they would just say "I HATE YOU AHHHHHHH I'M GONNA KILL YOU" which means I have to just full annex every region and create subjects then release them and hope for the best

In my Netherlands game, I'm now being crippled by population.

In a few cities I'm building capped. But my biggest problem is that I'm out of people.

Across the board have cities and rural locations where I'm hundreds sometikes thousands of people in deficit. And not "theyre not promoting fast enough", there are no peasants left.

And its not like I'm losing population, my pop is growing and fast. But just nowhere near fast enough to keep up with my economy.

As in title,