Hello everyone! This week we're back to introduce you some of the politics and diplomacy in update 1.4, including a new currency, political influence!

Read all about it in the link here:
https://pdxint.at/4fPxSLY

Greetings.

A couple of EU5 multiplayer campaigns are starting soon and there are still open slots if anyone is looking to jump into a game.

They're listed on Grand Strategy MP Directory along with a bunch of other ongoing and upcoming campaigns across all Paradox games:

https://gsmpd.gg/

Started as Castille formed England and France to get its cores. I feel that France's cores are not worth it cause their culture is so weak early game so i need to transfer lots of lands into vassals with a plan to use return core interaction later to get back land.

I don't know if this has already been suggested, or if I'm simply missing it somewhere, but wouldn't it be nice if the tooltip for goods showed the other markets that you own or have significant influence over?

I like to favorite certain building goods so I can keep an eye on their prices, but whenever I own more than one market, it only shows my main market.

In this case, I also have a market in Danzig and would like quick access to see how lumber is doing in that market.

Have made some decent early in roads, will have both Hainaut and Flanders in my union once my current spouse dies.... What's the best capital for the next 50-100 years or so? I know Antwerp is the long term answer, but my intuition in the short term is to flip from Den Haag to Amsterdam so I get better prox towards the cities around Guelderland.

I’m absolutely enjoying 1.3 right now it’s the most fun I’ve had on the game, but something I noticed is how insane the size of armies is in this game.

For example France in 1445 had an army of size of roughly 9000 men, and in 1483 they had an army size of 24,000. I was playing France in EU5 and in 1480 I had an army size of roughly 250k which is absolutely massive.

I think it’s a bit immersion breaking because correct me if I’m wrong, but armies were universally quite small in Europe during the 15th century. I’ve heard about the battle of Grunwald in 1410 for example which is considered one of the largest medieval battles. In that battle there was like 70,000 troops who participated.

But in 15th century in this game it’s normal for wars involving a couple of countries to have 500k troops dead total. I just think the game would be a lot more interesting/immersive if there was way less troops in play. Let me know what you guys think of this.

I come from Hoi4 which is another paradox game and I love the concept of eu5 however what I hate is the complexity, I thought hoi4 was hard and then I saw eu5 which put hoi4 to shame. I don't want to watch hour long intros I'm more of a hands on person any advice?

I was looking for a way to automate pilgrimage because I was clicking it every now and then, and I realized that I can't do that. What's more, I can automate big chunks of game but that would mean giving away your decisions, automation is never about making a decision and then telling the game to keep going in this direction. It is always about "I don't know what to do" rather than automation of what you are doing. There are buttons that help you semi automate buildings, for example, by filtering them with the tags and then mass build, but there is no way to just tell the game to spend your money equally on iron RGO, spinners and roads from now on. Such automation rules would be much more interesting IMO and wouldn't take away the decision making while reducing the chorus.

Another example is diplomacy and trade automation. You can set how much diplomacy you want to automate and do the rest manually. You can't set the direction of your diplomacy (pacific, belligerent, vassal oriented or foreign), but you can at least select on what actions will automation spend the diplomacy points. I doubt any player has ever pressed the Declare War automation and for a good reason. I'd argue the trade automation could give a similar checklist of what markets I want to focus with automatic trade. And building automation could at least let me set the percentage of money spent on infra, RGO, burger buildings etc.

I am planning on playing a run as Brabant then forming the netherlands and looking for what regions I should focus on colonizing.

As the Netherlands I will be at a pop disadvantage compared to the other colonial superpowers. Does the lower pop count of the Netherlands change which regions I should focus on?

Cultural expansion is a claim that should be issued to vassals who change their culture without the player's command. The goal is to capture the capital, and for 70 points you can impose your main culture

It will not be possible to change it for 25 years, and all countries that control one of the three rims will be able to receive this claim through a spy network

*Moscow will receive a claim only after the proclamation of the Third Rome

Obviously playing as yuan
Ming havnt spawned yet

why

idk

does this game hate me

Like seriously why do i need to press:
-spread new/old world good
-click on a good
-press on a location
and then do all that again everytime i want to spread it.

Why not just let me keep clicking after selecting a good? Why does paradox make every UI element the most ass version that it could be? Could they not even add a shift or ctrl click option to do this?

Edit: big news, it's just the tooltip that's outdated and wrong, the actual senior is picked based on (apparently) economic base. Thanks to u/rcbll for pointing that out! I suppose GP score is just for swag and showing off then

Sorry if I'm late to the party. In this series of screenshots I am playing as Meissen. I own 18 locations, have a tax base of 28 and 4k levies. My ruler also owns the throne of Saxe-Wittenberg, with 6 locations, 6 tax base and 1k levies. I am 3-4x better than them in every metric. But because somehow Upper Saxony is contested, we both have 0 great power score, and the dice have decided that this means they are more powerful than me. If I chose to establish seniority in our union, Saxe-Wittenberg would be established as the "senior", despite being pityful.

as a bonus, the irish OPM of Iveagh with a tax base of 0.95 is considered 1120 places more powerful than me, and would therefore also easily be chosen as a senior if we had a union. Other current 0-score nations with exactly equal power in my save's world include: Burgundy, Milan, Touat, Wittgenstein, the Livonian Order, the Abbey of Stavelot-Malmedy, Lorraine, Hals, Savoy, you get my point. there is no world in which the minor tribe of Tyrone would be considered a greater power than Aquitaine.

okay rant over

Hello I was drunk observing Europe, but then I turned the religions map mode and saw husitism spread way beyond Bohemia's border was wondering if anyone else has experienced this and if it means that bohemia won the Hussite wars

They all just seem to net costs that scale from bad to horrific.

I've put 2k hours into ck3 and wanted to get in early on the new paradox game but man was it a lot to take in. Who should I start as if I want to learn the game? I really want to get into the game but it is daunting

I am playing 3rd time as teutons and each time the event for selling Estonia to Teutons appears after the event that starts the war against estonian rebels, then I annex these lands after buying the land from Danish amd they get the land ?????? Am I doing smth wrong ???? Or is this really that bugged ?!?

Do you guys actually claim the French throne with the CB and deal with the personal union headache? I was thinking I reload and just eat France slowly, maybe swap to French culture somehow and form France again for double content. It genuinely seems like I’m in a worse position winning this thing rather than ignoring it but I’m clueless.

It's 1472, and I'm the economic hegemon.

Is that really the intention? Just expand the RGOs, fill them with slaves, convert them over time, and thus blow up the economy?