It's interesting that 1337 is the start year. I haven't felt like I've missed the 1399 start date of EU3 (with expansions), given the November 1444 start date of EU4. Okay, so I can't play the Jalayarids like in EU3, but if anything it feels like the start date should be later, to better model the leadup to the March of the Eagle/Victoria years, which are so far in the future at the start of an EU4 game. I'm kind of saying they could probably lean into the globalization of trade a bit more than in EU4, and starting a bit later could help with that.
Although, the arguments that 1337 could be interesting are plausible, and that century is right at the "quite late to start in Crusader Kings" threshold (the very last possible year to start in CKII, if I recall?).
Are those... lakes? all over the map in that map screenshot? Mountains? I'm going to assume the graphics aren't final yet. It's also quite muted... on first impression I prefer the EU4 map.
All in all, while I'm not really chomping at the bit for EU5, EU4 has reached the point where I've tried nearly everything in it. And there are some nice things mentioned:
I'd love to see Civ VII not lean so much into the "digitized board game" theme as V/VI did. And pops could be a great way to add more peacetime depth to Project Caesar than EU4 contains.
I'm also heartened to see they're looking at older Paradox games such as Victoria II and EU3 to see if there are good ideas worth bringing forward (the terrain system from Vicky II being cited as an example). I'm still waiting for the average review score on Vicky III to improve before buying it, but fundamentally like what Vicky II did (aside from its UI) and like the idea of a Vicky II pop model/economy + EU4 political system combination, which these posts seem to generally be implying?
