Europa Universalis V (EU5) announced

[The_J]

As speculated last week, Paradox has this week announced Europa Universalis V.
This time the game will start in the year 1337, spanning 500 years.
The info is otherwise scarce, but you can have a look at this article at IGN and the associated screenshots.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Played very little of EU 4; played the heck out of EU3 'way back in the day (didn't have a PC for over 10 years, which severely limited my gaming experience!)

Biggest problem with the EU games for me was that it was impossible to develop any game in anything resembling a historical fashion. Start a game with 100s of tiny states and statelets all over the map, and within a century most of them were gone - swallowed up by a few big whales of major States. In most cases, the only question was which Major State was going to gobble up most of Europe: Spain, Framce, some weird eastern combination (Austro-Lithuania, Bohemia-Sweden, etc) or Ottoman Turks. Unlike the real world, nothing small could survive for long.

The reviewer mentions a 'new administration' mechanic that makes running a wide-spread Empire hard, and that's the part that interests me most. Purty graphics, multiple things going on at once, being able to play as the Dontgiveadamistan Caliphate - those are nice, but being able to play in a realistic environment for the time and place between the 14th and 19th centuries - that is exciting.

Assuming they are pushing for a 2025 release, this year is going to be full of interesting new games for the historically-minded gamer: Anno 117 set in Rome, Farthest Frontier in a Medievalish survival setting, EU V if you want to play Everything Medieval In The Whole Freaking World - and, of course, whatever bells and whistles they add to Civ VII later in the year . . .

 

[Dale]

As speculated last week

This is the worst kept "secret", considering they've been discussing the game publicly since Feb 2024.

Client Challenge

 

[queenpea]

Assuming they are pushing for a 2025 release, this year is going to be full of interesting new games for the historically-minded gamer: Anno 117 set in Rome, Farthest Frontier in a Medievalish survival setting, EU V if you want to play Everything Medieval In The Whole Freaking World - and, of course, whatever bells and whistles they add to Civ VII later in the year . . .

I'm very excited for this new chapter after arriving very late to EU4 but loving it.

From everything that I've read and absorbed, 2026 keeps coming up in conversations about the release timeline. That said, absolutely nothing has been confirmed by the studio.

 

[Quintillus]

Between EU5 and Project Caesar, Paradox will have all sorts of new games this year and next .

I'm looking forward to it, but at the same time feel like I still have mileage I can get out of EU4, despite it possibly having eclipsed Civ3 as my most-played game ever.

 

[Dale]

Between EU5 and Project Caesar, Paradox will have all sorts of new games this year and next .

I'm looking forward to it, but at the same time feel like I still have mileage I can get out of EU4, despite it possibly having eclipsed Civ3 as my most-played game ever.

EU5 == Project Caesar. They aren't two separate games.

 

[Pedro P]

There goes my next 15 years of disposable income I guess. EU is very addictive.

 

[Kyriakos]

It does look pretty cool. Of course in the usual Paradox style, it will take years (and cost many players hundreds of dollars) for it to be in a better state gameplay-wise.
Still, I like the engine improvements.

 

[Quintillus]

EU5 == Project Caesar. They aren't two separate games.

I know, hence the .

Although time-span wise, Project Caesar/EU5 is basically the last CKII start date + EU4. I'm still not sure how I feel about the 1337 start date. I suppose I got used to 1399 in EU3, it just seems... early?

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I know, hence the .

Although time-span wise, Project Caesar/EU5 is basically the last CKII start date + EU4. I'm still not sure how I feel about the 1337 start date. I suppose I got used to 1399 in EU3, it just seems... early?

I believe it is designed to coincide with the first of the Bubonic Plague epidemics to hit Europe, so that you start the game with a major crisis and consequences that affect everything afterwards.

IF that is the case, it's a rather bold move by the game designers, but in line with a lot of the recent scholarship on the plagues and their effects. We shall see how gamers feel about starting the game by losing a large percentage of their population in every province!

 

[Cosmos1985]

I've been following the Tinto Talks, their version of development diaries, and this is seriously looking so good that I fear for my social and professional life when it comes out. I'm even primarily a CKII player when it comes to the Paradox games, but EUV looks like it will basically combine all the best from their IPs so far and be their Magnum Opus. Man, can't wait.

So yeah, guess all I really have to say is: wow.

 

[Verrucosus]

IF that is the case, it's a rather bold move by the game designers, but in line with a lot of the recent scholarship on the plagues and their effects. We shall see how gamers feel about starting the game by losing a large percentage of their population in every province!

It would not be quite as bold if 1337 was not the only start date. I understand Paradox has analysed player data to find out that few people (relatively speaking, I'm assuming it's still quite a lot in absolute numbers) play anything but the 1444 scenario in Europa Universalis IV, so that it doesn't seem worth the trouble to put lots of work into additional scenarios. It's hard to argue with that, and it's not hard to see the downside either:

(1) From all countries becoming playable in Europa Universalis II to the attention non-European countries have received in the various expansions to Europa Universalis IV, the game has become such a rich simulation of history that it seems strange to narrow its entry to such an early start date. Sure, the game lasts 500 years, but funny things tend to happen in Paradox games once the clock starts ticking. Just the option to put yourself into the world of 1492, 1607, 1701 or 1776 as you know it from history books (more or less) was part of that richness, and I suspect it will be missed not just by those to whom browsing the pages of history in the main menu was already half the fun.

(2) For all the variety offered by Europa Universalis IV, the Age of Discovery still feels like the heart of the game. Even if I don't play a colonial game myself, some of my neighbours will and the first 50 years after a 1444 start feel like the prelude to a game that really gets going when Columbus & Co set sail. If you look at it like that, 1337 means a really, really long prelude. The Age of Discovery will wait for those who make it through the 150 long years of feudalism and plague, and it's unlikely to resemble the familiar world of 1492. I would have been thrilled by a 1337 scenario in Crusader Kings III (really happy they added 1178) or even in a game about the 100-years-war (you don't have to call it "Two Thrones Two"), but if Europa Universalis V can only afford a single scenario, I would have preferred 1453 or even 1492.

(3) This is more speculative, but maybe additional start dates would also help with playtesting for the later stages of the game. Then again, maybe player data will show that relatively few people finish a game anyway. Sounds familiar?

Second to the likely lack of decent documentation, the early start date is my main concern for what promises to be splendid game that can draw from decades of experience, passion and ambition.