The Paradox Grand Strategy Games

[LoPan]

Specifically, which in the trough should I engage myself with.

I tried Europa Universalis 3: Divine Wind (because it was the newest of the Universalis), but try as I might the game refused to do anything but crash. The taste for this sort of game remains, however, and between Hearts of Iron, Victoria, Europa Universalis and their sequels, expansions, mods and whichever other Paradox wargame I am not aware, I am rather bewildered which to attempt.

Suppose I wonder if there is some particularity between the titles or if they've gotten softer recently; I don't like 'em soft.

 

[Destroid]

Hearts of Iron is the most detailed in war.
Europa Universalis is probably the simplest and easiest to get into, and also covers the longest time period.
Victoria has the most detailed economic and political model.
Crusader Kings places a high importance on characters.

Personally, I still think it's probably easiest to get started with EU3 (I personally recommend the Magna Mundi mod). But otherwise, pick your game based on what aspects or time period interest you the most.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Depends on what you like, because beyond basic interface and engine, there's quite a lot of variety between the games. If you want the largest amount of detail, there's no contest for Hearts of Iron 3 being the choice, as it's got the most detailed tech system and warfare, but bear in mind the game is designed around WW2 happening historically. Hearts of Iron 2 is lighter in some aspects and less balanced, but it's got better mods and the Darkest Hour remake is great at those (particularly Kaiserreich and Fallout). For nation-building, it'd be Victoria 1/2, which have the most detailed economy and domestic mechanics (Vicky 2 in particular). Crusader Kings, Sengoku and EU: Rome are RPG/Strategy hybrids that are made interesting because of the character system and internal power politics. I for one am really stoked for the release of Crusader Kings 2.


Also, Divine Wind is an expansion, just making sure you got the base game and the other expansions too, because without those it'll obviously crash since it isn't stand-alone.

 

[LoPan]

What about the sequeling? Ought I to stick to the latest, is it a bad idea to play the first ones, are the later ones dubious in comparison to the predecessors? Suppose I'm asking if there is some one game in the franchises I should not be wasting my time on as they all sound rather appealing.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

So far Paradox sequels have always been a step forward for the franchise, but earlier games like Hearts of Iron 2 and Victoria 1 are great too.

 

[LoPan]

Fair enough, suppose I can't truly go wrong on this one, like buying Age of Wonders 2 over Age of Wonders 1.

 

[Kane]

Sengoku is the game with the most competitive appeal of the bunch.

 

[LoPan]

Personally, I really enjoy Europa Universalis II, Crusader Kings: Deus Vult and Victoria: Revolutions. Arsenal of Democracy is also pretty fun, although the fact that the AI cheats so much in terms of naval range is quite bothersome.

I have not tried the newer titles, but I am sure that most of them are good. The one thing I dislike about them is that they all seem to favour some kind of 3D graphics, whereas the older titles all have lovely 2D maps. I suppose I shall have to conform fairly soon though, Crusader Kings 2 seems too interesting to pass by.

I much prefer 2D in these games as well, thought EU3 looked a wee bit crummy in comparison to that lovely 2D look I saw in the older titles. There's a part of me still that wishes the Creative Assembly never did a 3D overworld map, thought the old 2D ones with the board-game piece had a far superior aesthetic. Though I suppose there may be benefits to a 3D overworld map that I am not aware of.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

The thing is though that the 3D engine they have is way better than the old Europa engine. And the 3D graphics are also much more partial to extensive modding, like other aspects of the Clausewitz engine games.

 

[20 Eyes]

EU3 is a great starting point. Crusader Kings 2 sounds like it'll be a GOTY candidate. Vicky 2 is great, but I'd wait for the expansion (and probably a patch or two after that) before getting too into it.

The first Crusader Kings is a lot of fun, and it should run on just about any computer.

 

[GarfunkeL]

Almost all the Pdox games are different enough from each other to justify trying them out, the only exception being Hoi1 - Hoi2 and Hoi3 are better in any/every aspect.

 

[MasterSmithFandango]

Sengoku is the game with the most competitive appeal of the bunch.

Eh... Sengoku just wasn't enough of a game, really. It reminds me a lot of EU: Rome, except without the potential but with a lot more polish.

 

[Tigranes]

Hearts of Iron is the most detailed in war.
Europa Universalis is probably the simplest and easiest to get into, and also covers the longest time period.
Victoria has the most detailed economic and political model.
Crusader Kings places a high importance on characters.

This is good. Go with this. Start with EU3 - I'd say with NA & IN expansions, but some might say HTTT's changes are for the better (pretty much, faster battles). Then, depending on which parts of the game you like most and would like to see expanded, go to the others. HoI is for crazier micromanagement of armies and logistics, Victoria for economics and supply chains, etc., Crusader Kings for characters.

Alternatively, EU:Rome is pretty much EU but slightly simpler, and integrates some of the fun character stuff from Crusader Kings. Not bad.

 

[Spectacle]

The thing is though that the 3D engine they have is way better than the old Europa engine. And the 3D graphics are also much more partial to extensive modding, like other aspects of the Clausewitz engine games.

They've improved their 3D graphics with experience too. EU3 on release was seriously ugly, but Victoria 2 is lovely, looking much better than the old games. The 3D engine also gives better performance, since rendering can be unloaded to the GPU, leaving the CPU for simulations and AI.

Now I just want to see EU 4 with a fully multithreaded engine.

 

[XenomorphII]

They've improved their 3D graphics with experience too. EU3 on release was seriously ugly, but Victoria 2 is lovely, looking much better than the old games. The 3D engine also gives better performance, since rendering can be unloaded to the GPU, leaving the CPU for simulations and AI.

Now I just want to see EU 4 with a fully multithreaded engine.

I was under the impression that multithreading had been taught to the Clausewitz engine with the latest expansions (I know FtM and DW run amazingly for me now).

 

[Spectacle]

They've moved some elements to separate threads, but an engine constructed from the ground up to be multithreaded will perform much better.

 

[fizzelopeguss]

They've improved their 3D graphics with experience too. EU3 on release was seriously ugly.

Ohh god i remember, the map visuals were a disgrace.

 

[MasterSmithFandango]

Vicky 2 looks absolutely gorgeous, though, and EU3 has improved quite a bit. Plus, MM's map looks pretty good too (although some of the fonts were pretty fucked).

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

I was under the impression that multithreading had been taught to the Clausewitz engine with the latest expansions (I know FtM and DW run amazingly for me now).

Yea, I recently played FtM again, and I was just amazed at how fast it runs now, didn't remember it could handle full speed without a hitch even at full Axis vs Comintern phase.

I also take back what I said about Soviets being a pushover, it has by far the best representation of AI Germany vs AI Soviet Union so far, since the initially fast German advance did get turned back after Stalingrad and Germany was crushed in 1946. Though it was kind of depressing to notice the AI Germans simply couldn't win despite the war going to well for them all the way to 1944 (with small contributions by yours truly leading Finland). Oh well, at least the campaign ended with an unbreakable Greater Finland holding back both the Comintern and the Allies at its borders as I kept transforming the entire country into a land-air-sea fortress.

 

[LoPan]

This thread makes 3D sound rather lovely; I forgot that technology can't possibly be universally abused.

This is good. Go with this. Start with EU3 - I'd say with NA & IN expansions, but some might say HTTT's changes are for the better (pretty much, faster battles). Then, depending on which parts of the game you like most and would like to see expanded, go to the others. HoI is for crazier micromanagement of armies and logistics, Victoria for economics and supply chains, etc., Crusader Kings for characters.

Alternatively, EU:Rome is pretty much EU but slightly simpler, and integrates some of the fun character stuff from Crusader Kings. Not bad.

I'll take that as good advice; however, I have gotten myself into HoI3. I am not much for the World War time periods, find them usually to be rather glorified and indulgent, but the game is exceptionally interesting despite my general prejudice to the time period. It is nice to be in the playing of a game that doesn't make your brain feel like its crusting up from disuse, and its good to know I probably won't be running out of them any time soon.

 

[Tigranes]

Well, if you can get into HoI3 even when you're not a WW nut, that's probably a good sign - you'll eventually end up liking most of the core Paradox games. Personally, I don't like the era and it's always seemed the most 'scary' of the bunch, learning curve wise.

I'm personally refraining and waiting for CK2.

 

[Destroid]

This thread makes 3D sound rather lovely; I forgot that technology can't possibly be universally abused.



I'll take that as good advice; however, I have gotten myself into HoI3. I am not much for the World War time periods, find them usually to be rather glorified and indulgent, but the game is exceptionally interesting despite my general prejudice to the time period. It is nice to be in the playing of a game that doesn't make your brain feel like its crusting up from disuse, and its good to know I probably won't be running out of them any time soon.

Be sure to let us know how your game goes, and what you like/don't like about HoI3.

 

[MasterSmithFandango]

This thread makes 3D sound rather lovely; I forgot that technology can't possibly be universally abused.



I'll take that as good advice; however, I have gotten myself into HoI3. I am not much for the World War time periods, find them usually to be rather glorified and indulgent, but the game is exceptionally interesting despite my general prejudice to the time period. It is nice to be in the playing of a game that doesn't make your brain feel like its crusting up from disuse, and its good to know I probably won't be running out of them any time soon.

Yeah, if you can get into HOI3, you're already there, my man. Blitz those bastards!

And while there is no doubt that HOI3 is better than 2, there is something charming about the research system in 2. It's not as balanced and doesn't make a ton of sense gameplay/balance wise, but it does add another level of personality.

 

[fizzelopeguss]

HOI 3, like EU III is one of those games that was released as an absolute dogs-dinner shitpile of a game that ended up turning into a masterpiece through expansions.

 

[LundB]

I've finally decided to start playing some of these, starting with Crusader Kings, since the character-centric nature of the game interests me. I figure my first attempt will pretty much be me just getting a basic handle on the mechanics, and I'll almost certainly be savagely crushed by the AI. With that said, is there any general advice that will help delay the destruction, rape, and looting my kingdom will suffer?

Or should I just abort, and start out with EU3 instead, as some people here have mentioned?

 

[GarfunkeL]

I never caught the CK-fever that many people have, so I'd say go straight to EU3 and perhaps wait for CK2 to arrive.

 

[Spectacle]

I've finally decided to start playing some of these, starting with Crusader Kings, since the character-centric nature of the game interests me. I figure my first attempt will pretty much be me just getting a basic handle on the mechanics, and I'll almost certainly be savagely crushed by the AI. With that said, is there any general advice that will help delay the destruction, rape, and looting my kingdom will suffer?

The easiest way to get completely fucked in CK is to expand too fast, particularly at the expense of other Christian lords. Every time you conquer new provinces you gain infamy (aka "badboy points"), your infamy decreases slowly over time. If your infamy gets too high all your vassals loyalty will decrease every month, which means you'll soon have a ton of rebellions. It's not that hard to crush each rebellion, but retaking the rebel's land nets you more infamy, putting you deeper into the infamy hole that you won't get out of until you finally lose most of your land.