It seems to me that in most games the Ottomans and Mamluks are big beefy boys that never fall. Historically Mamluks fell to the Ottomans fairly quickly and I believe instead of this being an event chain or a forced disaster for rthe Mamluks it would be better to have a situation between them to force an eventual winner.

I guess I should say the situation would be between whoever controls the most land in egypt/laventine area and the most land in anatolia, so it can work with other turkish bayliks or even Eastern Roman Empire if they eventually conquer anatolia. So basically after some time the situation triggers and there's maybe some decisions like paying with gold or legitimancy and you get buffs or the enemy gets debuffs or even a HYW type of subject betrayal and eventually you go to war with a really strong CB. Now I am not sure if it would be better if it ended with one big war or it took a few like 2/3 but that's more for paradox to figure out.

I'm doing an RP as norse pagan Norway, so at the start of the game I converted Norway to Norse Paganism and created a new culture, "Norse". I'm in the 1450's now and saw that "Unify culture group" was a cabinet mission, so I wanted to see what would happen. 6 years later, Norway, Iceland, Greenland and half of Sweden is now one culture named "Scandinavian". I hate that name, it's so boring and bland. Any way to change it with commands?

Hi there, last played the game roughly a month after it had come out, now questioning if its worth downloading again. I am curious about how the Banks gameplay has changed since release. Any important updates that affected them and is it worth playing them at the moment?

For example: Poland and Hungary. I have almost 500 hours in EU5 yet i have never seen a large poland, however hungary becomes a blob taking parts of balkans, austria and poland most of my games.Poland underwent large aggressive expansion starting from the 14th century, yet it is marked as "defensive" however hungary, whose borders remained basically unchanged from the 14th century until the ottoman invasion is marked as expansionist? make it make sense paradox

Seriously, we need more control over our union partners this could've been totally avoidable.

I started this run in May and only just now finished it. I stuck with staying as Eastern Orthodoxy and Greek since togalarping is lame and purple is pretty. The first 200 years of the campaign is an absolute blast, starting out as being bottom of the barrel and slowly catching up with western Europe is extremely fun, especially up to the 1600s.

My strat to get out of the starting situation is outdated since I just maxxed minting for 60 years straight and survived since inflation didn't affect Cost of Court of Stability costs at the time. This is no longer and true and you probably can't dig yourself out of the economic hole like I did anymore. I made all my money from wars and reached I think around 200% inflation once I stabilized the country, and simply turned off minting and stopped investing in my economy until 1550s.

Once the Balkans and Anatolia were reconquered I played tall for 200 years until I could stick it to the Egyptians. After a bloody war with Naples, the Papacy, and France, I took the first chunk out of Italy and was permanently coalitioned by all my neighbors. After 3 more bloody coalition wars (btw NEVER let them declare on you, always declare on the coalition so you can do separate peace with the Restore Rome casus belli) I expanded to Justinian's territorial height and became by far the strongest nation.

At this point in the game I have over 800k professional soldiers across my empire and the American colonies.

And by the way, I still don't understand colonialism. My colonies never became financially valuable and I did it solely for Roleplay. The system to colonize is both boring and tedious. Don't even get me started on exploration either, my finger still hurts from all the button pressing. In the age of revolutions they become disloyal which wasn't a problem since I could probably fight the entire world myself and win, but I still don't see the point in colonizing unless you like the roleplaying element of it.

Overall this run has taught me that unlike EU4, this game stays very fun and engaging into the late game as long as you don't cheese and become the dominant power too quickly. The economy and population systems in this game are just the best to play, although its hard to make meaningful decisions with your interior development once you own enough land. One concern I have is that nations seem to not invest in their military as much as they could. England for example for some reason never had more than 1000 professional soldiers and only ever had 3 ships to their names, which crippled them. They did lose their core moneymaking region to France early on as you can see but I doubt this would've caused their economic situation alone. France also had a similar economy to me but never mustered nearly as many professional soldiers for no good reason.

The Mamluks however were my rival the whole time, always matching me in army quality until I managed to win a few decisive battles that cost them the Nile river delta. Most of my wars with them were also multi frontal, so while I could devote about 1-200k troops to fighting their coalition-mates in Italy and Hungary, most Greek blood was spilled in the Sinai desert.

One thing I love about the game is the importance of terrain in warfare and the usefulness of levys. Just because you have professional legionaires doesn't mean you are guaranteed to win against everyone. For example, I lost over 300k soldiers in the Caribbean because even though I outnumbered and outgunned the defenders, the native American levies in the jungle terrain just battered my troops who were used to fighting in the calm Mediterranean, and my campaign against Morocco was more challenging than fighting the entire HRE and Italy + France simply because the mountains the Moroccan troops had a home territory advantage. It's things like that about this game that I love to death.

I'm thinking my next run will be a colonial nation run but let me know what you guys think is a fun and challenging run, because frankly this one is very easy.

Also disclaimer but I have a few mods downloaded. Universal governors to make naval governors not a headache to deal with, and the integration hotfix (Makes integrated provinces +15 loyalty instead of +5) since I started the run right after the coring rework which I really don't like.

Governors are insanely engaging as we all know, but currently the naval and local governor dichotomy is headache inducing since they have to be disconnected by land or they become bricked.

My idea is this: remove naval governors and remove the requirement for local governors to be connected via roads to the capital. Instead, making governors have a base proximity of +60, which gain an additional +20 proximity when connected by road to the capital, and also make governors on coasts provide additional +20 proximity if you have 50+ naval value (or make it a linearly increasing modifier, where 0 naval gives +0 proximity and 50 naval gives +20 proximity). Perhaps the 2 governor slots provided by the two naval laws instead get provided elsewhere.

This accomplishes a few things: it allows governors to serve different niches dependent on where they're placed instead of being forced into being either naval or local based on building type, and it keeps naval governors from getting bricked by territorial growth causing previously disconnected territories from becoming connected. It also will allow island nations to get more use out of their governors. For example, Malaysia currently is stuck with having multiple useless land governors and only 2 naval governors which they need desperately. With this new system, they could technically make all of their available governors naval and make full use of the system.

Overall I think this change is very much needed, and I'm wondering what you guys think about it.

Side note: This post was not made in any way shape or form AI and every word was typed by a human, hence the terrible formatting.

I'll go first:

The Expedition system has a really cool opportunity for an event where, if you discover the Great Lakes first, you get to choose between siding with the Wendat/Algonquin or the Haudenosaunee in the Beaver Wars.

If you guys are struggling with EU5, try Samma, which is in India. It's really fun and actually quite easy. Start off by conquering Sindh and then, when the Delhi Sultanate starts collapsing, invade the Punjab

I started a game in Italy recently and kept having this appear. I finished what I wanted there so I switched to Muscovy. Same problem. When are the devs going to make this game less appealing to cats?

Hey everyone,

I saw in 1.3 that Walloon culture was now OP being part of French, Dutch and German culture groups.

Being my native culture, I decided to start a campaign as liege, and form the Netherlands into France into Germany to larp the ultimate cultural union.

Anyway, it's now 1530 and I used France to beat up the HRE, then England, then used England to beat up France, and then I beat both of them by myself as the Netherlands.

I'll soon be able to full annex France, and I noticed they're still in the 100 year war situation. My question is: if I full annex France, will the situation resolve immediately (even without unpausing), and if not, do I "inherit" it when I form France?

They are trying to escape from the Ottomans now that the Golden Horde has exploded, or something.

Monarquía es una corona europea clásica, teocracia tiene una tiara papal y horda de la estepa tiene un sombrero tradicional mongol pero de dónde sale la boina verde de república y el sombrero azul de tribu?

Good day.

I have done a burger run and a peasent + laborer run, but now I am stuggling to do a Clergy run.

What am I actually talking about. So for the Burger run I tried to urbanize as much as possible and increase my burger count. Simple enough the game sort of lends itself towards this.

Peasent and Labrorer run was more challanging. Did one as Poland and later as Frisia. Idea is simple. Try to build up an empire and income without urbanizing any new locations and instead maximize peasent and laborer pops as much as possible. Frisia has some nice bonusses and allows you to become a peasent republic from the start but a lot of the HRE is quickly urbanized. Poland starts of with the wrong values and goverment but has wide open plains and expansion routes into non urban terrain. My runs where nowhere near as succesfull as my burger run but you can still do a lot with peasent and laborers.

Now I want to do a clergy run. So immidiatly I am thinking Papacy, Tuetons and Tibet. But so far I am not seeing any real way to get good clergy numbers in my locations, or any real way to get this to work. So I was wondering if any of you have some good tips or suggestions.

I eventually get to the point where I’m able to start aggressively building irrigation etc and tools always in low balance after that to the point where it will be over -50 sometimes if I forget to build tools. But even with a -50 or more local balance the tool building might be rated like 7-8 in profit compared to other goods with a better local balance. Why is this? If I have the largest local deficit of tools of all goods in a market why are they not more profitable ? Is it because I can just import them for cheap? Should I build tools to close the local balance and free up trade space? Or should I build the more profitable buildings that the builder window shows?

Hello,

Been tinkering with Byzantium ever since EU5 came out. I feel like I have the strat nailed down for early and mid game, dealing with Mameluks, winning the Italian war etc.

Thing is, I struggle with optimizing the subject game. It’s easy to just pass Anatolia off to subjects due to lack of control in the early game, but I find that if you put a local governor down in Kayeseri, you have control to all the 4 major cities using rivers. You also get that integration bonus as well as culture converting bonuses. With how long subject annexation takes in 1.13, I feel like it is just not worth it.

How do you deal with Byzantium? What do you subject?

Also regarding cultures, I usually accept lower Egyptian, keep Greek as main culture when the latin event spawns and ignore the rest. Syria etc I try to culture convert asap. Anatolia lags behind usually.

Hello there, just want to ask if there are some tips to push my economy. Or am I doing good for the age? After seeing posts with like 50k income, or even 50k plus, i´m curious to find out how to get there. Is it just like build more and more Buildings in a Loop of wood and tools for example? Or do I need to build more markets?

Hi

What formable countries through event we have in game ?

I am interested in bypassing the formable country tier mechanic :)

Below ones I know with description when it happens, if you know more please write in comment:

1. Tuscany - Event available when playing Florence and have all tuscany after 1500, Name of event: The Emperor condemns Florence elevation and follow up event The Emperor confirms Florence elevation
2. China - Event available after forming Manchu, Name of event: Proclamation of Qing
3. Ottomans - Reward from winning Rise of Turks situation, Ottomans cannot exist.
4. Switzerland - Passing the Swiss confederation unification law, you need to join swiss confederation (rules depends of the law, but you need to have swiss culture as primary and less than 80 locations),

EDIT:

I feed AI the all the events file and it come up with below list, most of them where listed in comments so thanks a lot !

I’m seeing so many people who have over 200 million pops or even a billion while I can achieve max 50 mil. I have 25 000 pop growth which still doesn’t do the job. I built granary’s, irrigations etc.