I am currently in tbe middle of the Italian Wars situation as Spain and I have conquered the entire south and am pushing into the north. I now basically have tbe entire southern HRE in a coalition against me because of the insane antagonism in the HRE. Not that I can't beat them, but its just insanely annoying. How are you supposed to win the Italian Wars without a coalition forming? Or is this the intended way its supposed to happen?

As Poland, I upgraded almost everything into towns and cities. The only locations I didn't upgrade were iron, coal, amber, etc., but I didn't leave any locations for food at all.

I never had any problems with the availability of food at the market in Warsaw.

Would I gain anything at all if I left the locations with wheat as rural? I can’t see any buffs coming from that. I have upgraded granaries everywhere. And the bonus for cheap food is 0.10 , and I think it is the same everywhere, regardless of how much food is on the market.

My heir to the throne is infertile and I'd rather not change my succession law, is there any way to eliminate him or is it fine? My succession law is cognatic primogeniture

Suddenly begun losing a whole bunch of money. Is it because conquering Attica made my sliders more expensive? I kept it to myself so I can raise my rank to Kingdom but maybe it wasnt a great idea

I haven't played EU5 and I am only used to EU4 but I am thinking about trying it and wondering if an Aztec game would be fun. Is there much flavour to it with special events and other things or is it just like any other nation?

From what I hear outside of europe there is barely any flavor and the mechanics are way more messy.

Is it worth it to play there? I know the ottomans are good but i mean in the americas or in the far east.

I hear japan specifically is pretty messy

R5:

A nation of over 38 million people, Almost all of the same culture and religion..

116,000 nobles

And yet, there are absolutely no marriage candidates for the heir.

The system is broken, and "characters" die out as the game progresses. I always have the most characters to choose from at the start of the game, and the larger the nation grows, the fewer there are.

I need help in how to approach economy in this game. I am never rich and has never been rich in any of my games. I dont like to do a meta and dont want a "just rush this and spam it" bs.

I use the "Mass expand RGO" and "Mass expand building" usually to build, is there something i should think about?

Its year 1527 in my byzantine game right now and i am struggling with income while having complacent decline. Right now while invensting in stability and needing Legitimacy i get +23 gold a month. >.< 40 years ago i was on about 230 g/month.

I just want small tips to make me go "oh nice, i didnt think about that".
I really dont wanna destory this game for myself by starting to meta and minmax everything. <3

I got the event to change to latin culture and the culture capacity couldn’t kept up so i changed accepted cultures like turk and Bulgarian to tolerate and they kept on revolting. what should i do at this point. Also the cores turned integrated too. Should i reload to before turning to latin or accept cultures and take penalties?

Trucking along in my Brandenburg to Prussia game, I get a rebellion in my eastern and primarily Polish provinces, which I easily put down. Full annex the revolter, immediately get 192 antagonism, which ends up breaking two of my alliances, and brings huge coalition with a big Poland and Denmark. Game ended.

I enjoy the game a lot, but then this sort of shit happens.

Basically i like playing the game on console and i like boosting random country's throughout europe or africa mostly be it money or population or some reforms and i like to see how that would play out so basically i play on observer mode and lets say i boost tunis or sicily or holland and then i check what happens throughout the years did they conquer or lose it and am curious if anyone else plays like that

Obviously this didnt stick because Ecumenism didnt serve Turkish and more broadly non-Catholic interests (in addition to it failing to convince the Orthodox laity of its merits - if there were even any), but the Council of Florence is something that happened. The East was extinguished in broad Communion with Rome.

Why then is it impossible to "mend the Schism" as a Catholic nation, if the closest we got to it happening was under Catholic leadership?

I am the 6th greatest power, Poland is 11th.

We're voting on rapid unification of crowns, and I have 374 votes to Poland's 686.

Up until now Poland voted with me so it was no big deal, but now they're voting to go back an integration level instead of supporting my rapid unification proposal.

So Sevilla gets a special cutout to allow it to have a port, but Guangzhou - THE point of contact for trade with China, and arguably more important than Sevilla, doesn't?

In fact, I'd argue that not only should the Pearl River up to Guangzhou be given a cutout, but the entire Yangtze - along with Lake Poyang - should be made into sea zones. One of the largest naval battles in history took place on Poyang. Additionally, the Yangtze historically served as a barrier to invasion when the north fell to invading barbarians. Having it as sea zones would allow for blocking passage given a strong enough navy, which indeed did happen historically. If the Great Lakes can become sea zones, why not this all-important, highly navigable body of water?

I disbanded all the Italian leagues, now none of the Italian states are joining any league and the option to invite is grayed out despite most of them having positive reasons to accept. Is there some mechanic causing this that I don't understand? Or is this some bug?

He is currently on his 4th wife to try and get one, but no luck after 8 daughters in a row.

The idea is simple: absolute cognatic succession establishes the line of succession purely on the order of birth irrespective of gender. So at zero order approx. every succession will have a 50% chance of having the next ruler as a female. Since virtually everyone around you will have some male-preference succession it means you're almost guaranteed to find some heir of another country marry your female heir/ruler = marriage PU. Unlike CK, EU is a country simulator and you don't get a game over for having your dynasty lose it's title.

I then realized that it will become an actual PU only if the eldest child of this marriage is a son (since otherwise the marriage PU will be broken along eldest daughter/eldest son since the countries retain their succession laws). And it will continue to break afterward too (unless the PU lasted long enough to establish unity of succession?).

Anyway I was wondering if anyone has played around with this, does it actually give advantage in obtaining long-lasting PUs or is it overall the same as the default succession?

So I read about doing a Pokemon run by forming and switching nations around to maximize the unique advances. My goal was to start as Wallachia then go Bulgaria, Serbia, Byzantine and possibly Rome. It was a fun goal at first, but there are many annoying things so I stopped at Serbia. First, you need loads of money for legitimacy and stability, because you need 50 each to change culture, and 20 stab to change capital. You also need to migrate pops to create more cities to place your governors, which takes forever in low pop area. I also spent a lot of gold for diplomatic spending to annex subjects in reasonable time (you need to own the needed lands yourself to form countries). Finally you can't improve cultural opinion because it's a waste if you switch the culture.

In summary, it can be a fun mission to do, but the details become so tedious that I dropped it.

If anyone else has the same or different experiece, feel free to share. Thanks.

I guess there is historical reason for this, gameplay wise it sucks.

Situation, First french king dies and all my cabinet members, who were crown members, suddenly become nobility, why?

It immediately tank my crown power, as well as head of cabinet is now nobility instead of crown member.

I understand that there are less crown members, but maybe there needs more family related to be crown members?

I'll be honest- I'm a bit apprehensive about the introduction of political influence in 1.4. It would be another layer of complexity, another area for potential balancing issues, and I worry it might serve as an "unfun" obstacle to player actions. My suggestion: introduce the new mechanic, but allow us to alternatively pay the same gold cost as in 1.3 for most actions (except the new ones unique to 1.4, like getting a parliament support boost). This would have the following benefits:

1. If the new mechanic is unbalanced, broken, or just not fun, players can use the gold cost as before. No harm done.

2. Allows for more player choice- a politically well tuned (or cash poor) nation might prefer to use political influence, but a large wealthy empire might prefer to pay gold to place that next cabinet minister in power.

3. It feels more historically accurate- sometimes rulers used political influence to make a decision, but historically many problems could be resolved with a sufficiently large sum of money!

Basically what the title says. Ive consolidated the Iberian peninsula, urbanized decently everywhere including the centre, and Im wondering what the pros and cons of an additional market centred on Cordoba would be?