The three main Paradox history titles are favourites among strategy gamers everywhere, myself included. But the important question that needs answering is, Which is Better?
You mean Victoria 3 (or 2 if you prefer) in the last category. EU4 to me feels like the broad general grand strategy game. It doesn’t really focus on the details of one particular part, but on the overall experience.
eu4 is not really an economic simulator. That would be Vicky 3. I'd say EU4 is Paradoxs jack of all trades and it probably has the most content and flavour out of the ones available.
I'd largely agree, EU4 is disadvantaged by it's age showing and likely nearing the end of it's shelf life, whilst CK3 has had quite a slow start in addition to being quite new, though it's mods are v. impressive considering.
This is a great comparison between the three games. probably the best I've come across. yes with every opinion there is a bias but I believe you kept those in check mostly by ranking each aspect of every game separately. great job!
@@strattom1759 Considering how long TW has ben around and how profitable it is yeah. Also other companies would have some kind of reference in what CA has done right/wrong and what the player base wants, don't want.
@@IceniTotalWar Oh, yeah I never really liked TW but I respect your opinion. Thanks for answering 5 months later, didn't actually expect u to answer, lol.
Thank you for this video. I am a huge fan of Total war series and other strategy games based of history and I was looking for a good starter game from Paradox to try. I was deciding between EU and CK as WW2 does not appeal to me as much from history perspective. I'm gonna give a CK a try. Just out of curiosity I've seen that Victoria 3 does not have that good ratings compared to these 3 games. Would you recommend it or not? Originally I wanted to try that since it is the newest addition.
Vicky 3 is an odd game. The other 3 are different games, but warfare is the main thrust of of the games. With Vicky 3, economics is the main focus. If you want a 19th century market simulator then it's great. However, I've struggled to get into it.
Vic3 is fine, the warfare element is odd, the economics are excellent, and the politics is an interesting work in progress. The game is a bit too raw still to enjoy as much as these 3
For me, CK3. But also I’m playing CK3 for the first time so I guess get back to me after the honeymoon addiction phase is over. Love HOI4 for #2 a lot though
Good video, but I would love to get your opinion on Imperator Rome, what paradox did right what they did wrong, how well did they make the game with update 2 and what do they need to add to allow Rome to be on equal footing with their other grand strategy games.
Also have you play any of the steel division games and company of heroes and if so what's your opinion on them and specifically on Steel division 2 and company of heroes 2
That is a good question about Imperator that I might do a video on. In terms of Steel Division, no I haven't played them, but will check them out. My latest 'Classic Review' video is actually on Company of Heroes and I plan to do one on Company of Heroes 2 soon.
@@tabsforever5692 Steel Division yes, but Company of Heroes is not a strategy game. Is an action game played in a top-down view. Is all about who is clicking and moving the mouse faster. There is no strategic thinking or realism in the game. Having tanks spinning around doing dick jousting with their guns is not very strategic.
@@Greco1114- That’s rts lol, not action/fps… rts is indeed first and foremost about eye-hand coordination and reaction, as well as muscle-memorizing your hands through the relevant keyboard and mouse actions… but once you get through this step it does become very strategic, not like deep strategy but on-the-go constantly maneuvering between few basic meta-strategies, an element you eventually have in deep strategy as well but of course the way of mental focus is divided differently.
It would have been nice if you would also talk about the usability and user interface / menus / options for each game. Also the learning curve, difficulty to get in for beginners.
After seriously giving EU IV a chance i'm curious about this too. I'm familiar with the less complex civ and war games like AoE, Rise of Nations and some board games in a similar genre, which made me curious about the Grand Strategy games with politics, diplomacy and the larger scale. But after spending a few hours in the tutorial, i still had no clue at all on how to start my first Single Player game (ottoman campaign). I was expecting a rough learning curve, but with some form of beginner friendliness. Out of Crusader Kings 3, HoI and EU 4 i decided to go with EU 4 because it seemed the most accessible. Is this considered normal for the learning curve for these Paradox Grand Strategy games? For me as a newbie to these titles they feel very unfriendly to a beginner, simply lost interest in EU IV for not being guided properly through the massive overall game. The tutorial only shows how the segments work, not how it all melts together into ruling an empire, like in the single player campaigns. EU IV to me feels like i need a good teacher and hours and hours to just get a grasp of the basics. HoI even seems harder if i watch this video, which makes me reluctant to try it.. I really don't mind failure, it's what creates learning experiences, but it's very frustrating to not have an idea of whats going on or how to start handling things..
@@rolandboer95 These Paradox games are a part time job, srsly youll get most help from googling your questions and youtube tutorials from other players, ive only started playing them recently cuz of the steep learnign curve, ive only played Imperator Rome and CK3 so far, Imperator was a bit easier i would say but CK is a bit deeper expirience they also had some overlapping mechanics which i assume all these paradox titles have. Keep playing and experimenting and just google/youtube when you hit a wall, that is what i have done so far and its working gr8! never happend that i didnt some tread on some forum for the same questions! Basically 30% of your time will be spent wathing videos or reading forums :)
@@rolandboer95 I know I'm 5 months too late, but EU4 is the worst for new Paradox players in my opinion. Not only there are billions of DLCs adding tons of mechanics you'd have to learn but the UI is in my honest opinion atrocious. As a HOI4 and CK2/3 player I really wanted to learn EU4 but gave up after 10 hours of playtime. CK3 is the best for new players. It has a modern and intuitive UI, the base game has all the needed core mechanics that could be expanded by buying DLCs later and it's generally a fun game that doesn't just focus on map painting. I've started playing Paradox games with HOI4 so I may be biased, but after you learn the basics it's quite easy. There are many mechanics that you can just ignore for your starting games, like the spy system or naval combat. Just pick a larger nation, ally with Germany and try out what works and what doesn't, the pop-up notification system will guide you through. The main advantage of HOI4 is that a single gameplay can be finished in 3-6 hours depending on your goals, compared to several weeks I usually spend on a single CK3 game. This means if something fails you haven't wasted 30 hours, just start a new game 🙂
@@rolandboer95 I am a hoi4 veteran and i just picked up EU4 the last days. I believe that hoi4 is easier to learn from scratch and that it is a better game
I'm torn between getting Eu4 or hoi4. I think I'd like eu4's gameplay more, but I like having a modern timeline. Are there any good modern history mods for eu4? Like at least WWI?
play ck3 until eu4 and hoi4 get updated. the 5th edition of these games is probably 1-2 years away at most. makes no sense to spend lots of money on their DLC's when a sequel is to come soon.
Job good on the video however, I have one small complaint and that’s I don’t believe CK3 is better than EU4 in terms of warfare, in fact I believe CK3’s warfare is the worst out of the 3. You failed to mention the importance of army composition in EU4 as the techs develop, the importance of army tradition professionalism and good generals, army force limit and engagement width, the stages of a battle, army morale and discipline and you completely just left out naval combat. Out of the two CK3’s combat is ultimately who has more numbers with little emphasis on other factors whilst eu4 puts much more emphasis on smaller nuances that heavily effect the combat. Other than that great vid!
Mods are not important to justify the game quality. They are more useful to justify community engagement. So if we remove the mod factor, then all 3 titles earn the same total value.
@@jerico9263 not most people, but only a few. Several thousand players may love mod support. Or maybe tens of thousands. They are indeed many. But if we compare it to 132 million Steam users today, it's not even 1%. Nexusmods claim to have 45 million players. But I doubt players will always use mods for every game they have. Many also love vanila version. So it's not even half the Steam players. So your premise of "most would disagree" is not based on statistics.
@@varniumTalking about statistics, HoI4 consistently has way more active players for all those years than both CK3 and EU4 by over 50%, usually over 100%, most of the time more than CK3 and EU4 combined (see steam charts). So no, not all titles have the same value, which is subjective to start with. HoI4 is for me the better game and the best pdx game so far (and best ww2 grand strategy game) for many different reasons and CK3 does not even come close to that.
All have their merits. Total Wars battles are obviously much better, but lack the political intrigue of any Paradox titles. I wish there was an effective way of combining the two. Civilisation is altogether different beast (which I also love). The Civ games remind me very much of the fact that PC strategy gaming was born from board games. It's very much a board game brought to life.
I had the opposite experience. EU4 felt like it was the easiest paradox game to jump into before CK3 to me. CK2 just felt like it was so hard to find everything you needed to learn
You completely forgot to discuss economy and trade, which is one of the major parts of EU4 and is the best in all of paradox games. HOI4 doesn't even have an economy which is a - and crusader kings is also weak on that standpoint. You also forgot to talk about national focuses and decisions, also the country's achievements,cultures, government types... in which EU4 beats them all down to the ground. Honestly EU4 is by far the best Paradox game, cause it gives you sooo much freedom to do ANYTHING you want with your nation. HOI4 is limited, and there are not much things to do with your nation before WW2, except prepare for it
I know I left those out. It was hard to include them because, as you said, they are either very limited or totally omitted from the other 2 games. I wasn't sure how to make an effective comparison
Total War does nothing particularly well. The "strategy" layer is hollow with mere glancing opportunities to make meaningful decisions. The battles are decently fun, however, once the formula reveals itself the challenge is trivialized, leading to mass auto-resolves.
HOI4 ist way too unrealistc. Every game I had, went completely nonsense at some point with total idiotic wars and alliances. I literaly had at one time: France is at war together with England against the sovjet union. But also at war against England in a seperate war against Italy.....And Bulgaria was part of the japanese prosperity zone. I (as a democratic germany) was at peace for most of the time until at the near end, japan declared war against me. Its complete nonsense-game. Crusader Kings is way more believable even when its spans over several centurys.
The correct answer is: *_All three are shit_* Totalwar is much more fun! Why? Because when you play EU4 and not getting paid it looks like the devs are wasting your time, every campaign takes 200+ hrs to complete, and there is too much reading and less playing, 90% of times you are reading texts and information, instead of playing around with your subjected armies or constructions.
![I found the Path to (almost) INFINITE Developement!! [No Exploits!] @Theplaymaker57](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/w5gTjd_rTUU/mqdefault.jpg)
![[TH] 2024 PMSL SEA GF D2 | Summer | ร่วมส่งแรงใจ เชียร์ไทยไปพร้อมกัน](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dN2gLsCJ0T0/mqdefault.jpg)
hoi4- game focused on fighting
ck3- game focused on politics and cunning
eu4- game focused on economy and domain managing
You mean Victoria 3 (or 2 if you prefer) in the last category. EU4 to me feels like the broad general grand strategy game. It doesn’t really focus on the details of one particular part, but on the overall experience.
eu4 is not really an economic simulator. That would be Vicky 3.
I'd say EU4 is Paradoxs jack of all trades and it probably has the most content and flavour out of the ones available.
so eu4 is the pdx civ?
@@yavantii3615 i never played vic so idk
CK III all the way for me. The roleplaying elements lifts it far above the other two, imo
I'd largely agree, EU4 is disadvantaged by it's age showing and likely nearing the end of it's shelf life, whilst CK3 has had quite a slow start in addition to being quite new, though it's mods are v. impressive considering.
This is a great comparison between the three games. probably the best I've come across. yes with every opinion there is a bias but I believe you kept those in check mostly by ranking each aspect of every game separately. great job!
This video is great, very informative and precise, it is the one that helped me the most to take a decision :)
Thank you from France.
De rien, mon ami
What was your decision?
What was your decision?
I would say that a good thing about EU4 is that I can stand to play it in Vanilla unlike HOI4. Unfortunately I don’t have CK3 though.
By Vanilla do you mean mod free or DLC free? Because yes, without DLC HOI4 is a bit bare bones. I don't necessarily need mods to enjoy it though.
I have all of it but 90% I play Ck3 (Due to really old computer)
I am really curious how would Victoria 3 and Stellaris stack up against those three mentioned in the vid 😊
Can't wait until someone introduces real time battles and gives CA some serious competition.
Definitely. I don't understand why others have not tried to emulate what Total War has done with their battles.
@@strattom1759 Considering how long TW has ben around and how profitable it is yeah.
Also other companies would have some kind of reference in what CA has done right/wrong and what the player base wants, don't want.
Whats CA
@@qe9573 Creative Assembly, the developer of the Total War series of Real Time Strategy games.
@@IceniTotalWar Oh, yeah I never really liked TW but I respect your opinion. Thanks for answering 5 months later, didn't actually expect u to answer, lol.
Thank you for this video. I am a huge fan of Total war series and other strategy games based of history and I was looking for a good starter game from Paradox to try. I was deciding between EU and CK as WW2 does not appeal to me as much from history perspective. I'm gonna give a CK a try. Just out of curiosity I've seen that Victoria 3 does not have that good ratings compared to these 3 games. Would you recommend it or not? Originally I wanted to try that since it is the newest addition.
Vicky 3 is an odd game. The other 3 are different games, but warfare is the main thrust of of the games. With Vicky 3, economics is the main focus. If you want a 19th century market simulator then it's great. However, I've struggled to get into it.
Vic3 is fine, the warfare element is odd, the economics are excellent, and the politics is an interesting work in progress. The game is a bit too raw still to enjoy as much as these 3
For me, CK3. But also I’m playing CK3 for the first time so I guess get back to me after the honeymoon addiction phase is over. Love HOI4 for #2 a lot though
Good video, but I would love to get your opinion on Imperator Rome, what paradox did right what they did wrong, how well did they make the game with update 2 and what do they need to add to allow Rome to be on equal footing with their other grand strategy games.
Also have you play any of the steel division games and company of heroes and if so what's your opinion on them and specifically on Steel division 2 and company of heroes 2
That is a good question about Imperator that I might do a video on. In terms of Steel Division, no I haven't played them, but will check them out. My latest 'Classic Review' video is actually on Company of Heroes and I plan to do one on Company of Heroes 2 soon.
@@tabsforever5692 Steel Division yes, but Company of Heroes is not a strategy game. Is an action game played in a top-down view. Is all about who is clicking and moving the mouse faster. There is no strategic thinking or realism in the game. Having tanks spinning around doing dick jousting with their guns is not very strategic.
@@Greco1114- That’s rts lol, not action/fps… rts is indeed first and foremost about eye-hand coordination and reaction, as well as muscle-memorizing your hands through the relevant keyboard and mouse actions… but once you get through this step it does become very strategic, not like deep strategy but on-the-go constantly maneuvering between few basic meta-strategies, an element you eventually have in deep strategy as well but of course the way of mental focus is divided differently.
Multi-player should have been a category
Great comparison.
Have you tried Stronghold 2? It's a nice game - not nearly as complex though 😅 - but I think I'm going to pick up ck3 during steams summer sale :D
How do I play it in pc?
@@Numidium_ steam
stronghold... the memories 😍
Now that was a classic
The correct answer is Victoria 2
Nah victoria 2 is shit
This
@@qe9573 so what's your favorire?
@@sontung4552 HoI4, but vanilla sucks, I can't play without mods
@@qe9573 which mods?
It would have been nice if you would also talk about the usability and user interface / menus / options for each game.
Also the learning curve, difficulty to get in for beginners.
Yeah that's an interesting take. What would have said about them?
After seriously giving EU IV a chance i'm curious about this too. I'm familiar with the less complex civ and war games like AoE, Rise of Nations and some board games in a similar genre, which made me curious about the Grand Strategy games with politics, diplomacy and the larger scale. But after spending a few hours in the tutorial, i still had no clue at all on how to start my first Single Player game (ottoman campaign). I was expecting a rough learning curve, but with some form of beginner friendliness. Out of Crusader Kings 3, HoI and EU 4 i decided to go with EU 4 because it seemed the most accessible. Is this considered normal for the learning curve for these Paradox Grand Strategy games? For me as a newbie to these titles they feel very unfriendly to a beginner, simply lost interest in EU IV for not being guided properly through the massive overall game. The tutorial only shows how the segments work, not how it all melts together into ruling an empire, like in the single player campaigns. EU IV to me feels like i need a good teacher and hours and hours to just get a grasp of the basics. HoI even seems harder if i watch this video, which makes me reluctant to try it.. I really don't mind failure, it's what creates learning experiences, but it's very frustrating to not have an idea of whats going on or how to start handling things..
@@rolandboer95 These Paradox games are a part time job, srsly youll get most help from googling your questions and youtube tutorials from other players,
ive only started playing them recently cuz of the steep learnign curve, ive only played Imperator Rome and CK3 so far, Imperator was a bit easier i would say but CK is a bit deeper expirience they also had some overlapping mechanics which i assume all these paradox titles have. Keep playing and experimenting and just google/youtube when you hit a wall, that is what i have done so far and its working gr8! never happend that i didnt some tread on some forum for the same questions! Basically 30% of your time will be spent wathing videos or reading forums :)
@@rolandboer95 I know I'm 5 months too late, but EU4 is the worst for new Paradox players in my opinion. Not only there are billions of DLCs adding tons of mechanics you'd have to learn but the UI is in my honest opinion atrocious. As a HOI4 and CK2/3 player I really wanted to learn EU4 but gave up after 10 hours of playtime.
CK3 is the best for new players. It has a modern and intuitive UI, the base game has all the needed core mechanics that could be expanded by buying DLCs later and it's generally a fun game that doesn't just focus on map painting.
I've started playing Paradox games with HOI4 so I may be biased, but after you learn the basics it's quite easy. There are many mechanics that you can just ignore for your starting games, like the spy system or naval combat. Just pick a larger nation, ally with Germany and try out what works and what doesn't, the pop-up notification system will guide you through. The main advantage of HOI4 is that a single gameplay can be finished in 3-6 hours depending on your goals, compared to several weeks I usually spend on a single CK3 game. This means if something fails you haven't wasted 30 hours, just start a new game 🙂
@@rolandboer95 I am a hoi4 veteran and i just picked up EU4 the last days. I believe that hoi4 is easier to learn from scratch and that it is a better game
I'm torn between getting Eu4 or hoi4. I think I'd like eu4's gameplay more, but I like having a modern timeline. Are there any good modern history mods for eu4? Like at least WWI?
I actually prefer the more versatile European and World History environment of EU4, than WW1, or WW2 that HOI4 is exclusively about.
play ck3 until eu4 and hoi4 get updated. the 5th edition of these games is probably 1-2 years away at most. makes no sense to spend lots of money on their DLC's when a sequel is to come soon.
@@lowIQstuff just because it's newer doesn't mean it'll be better.
I think CK & EU are tied for #1 but then I have no interest in WW2 games.
I'm currently playing crusader kings2, I'll try hoi4 later)
They're all great on their own way
i wish they put hoi and eu on xbox i can only play ck3 without dlc and mods
Victoria
Victoria 2
Job good on the video however, I have one small complaint and that’s I don’t believe CK3 is better than EU4 in terms of warfare, in fact I believe CK3’s warfare is the worst out of the 3. You failed to mention the importance of army composition in EU4 as the techs develop, the importance of army tradition professionalism and good generals, army force limit and engagement width, the stages of a battle, army morale and discipline and you completely just left out naval combat. Out of the two CK3’s combat is ultimately who has more numbers with little emphasis on other factors whilst eu4 puts much more emphasis on smaller nuances that heavily effect the combat. Other than that great vid!
Of course, Victoria 2.
Mods are not important to justify the game quality. They are more useful to justify community engagement. So if we remove the mod factor, then all 3 titles earn the same total value.
Wouldn't that have been a nicer video? If they were all just as good as each other
most would disagree some people wont even pick up a game if it dont have modding support its def something i look for for these type of games
@@jerico9263 not most people, but only a few. Several thousand players may love mod support. Or maybe tens of thousands. They are indeed many. But if we compare it to 132 million Steam users today, it's not even 1%. Nexusmods claim to have 45 million players. But I doubt players will always use mods for every game they have. Many also love vanila version. So it's not even half the Steam players. So your premise of "most would disagree" is not based on statistics.
@@varniumTalking about statistics, HoI4 consistently has way more active players for all those years than both CK3 and EU4 by over 50%, usually over 100%, most of the time more than CK3 and EU4 combined (see steam charts). So no, not all titles have the same value, which is subjective to start with. HoI4 is for me the better game and the best pdx game so far (and best ww2 grand strategy game) for many different reasons and CK3 does not even come close to that.
How do you think these Paradox games compare to Civilization and Total War?
All have their merits. Total Wars battles are obviously much better, but lack the political intrigue of any Paradox titles. I wish there was an effective way of combining the two. Civilisation is altogether different beast (which I also love). The Civ games remind me very much of the fact that PC strategy gaming was born from board games. It's very much a board game brought to life.
@@strattom1759 All Paradox games are board games brought to life ;)
@@strattom1759 There is a way to combine Bannerlord and CK3 together
Idk which one to get
at the end of the day i think that EU4 has the most depth and flavour for a genre where you're running a country.
Hearts of Victoria King Universalis 4
HOI4 is by far the best of the 3, and the mods available like Millennium Dawn give it a lot of replay value compared to EU4 or CK3
I just started playing EU4. Hard to get a hang of it unlike Ck2.
I had the opposite experience. EU4 felt like it was the easiest paradox game to jump into before CK3 to me. CK2 just felt like it was so hard to find everything you needed to learn
CK2 is a nightmare for me.
@@Wladyslaw1440yeah I can’t do anything without factions rising against me.
Crusader Kings II > Crusader Kings III. There, I said it.
El título sale en español, pero el vídeo está en algún tipo de idioma africano.
Tanto el título como el video están en inglés.
@@strattom1759 man of culture should know engrish is native african language.
Viendo tu foto...el africano pareces tu😂😂😂(del norte)
Personally my ranking is the other way round lol
march of eagles duh!
yes you did butcher the pronounciation of ``konstantiniye``
My apologies
Correct answer is Hoi3 black ice
VICTORIA II
Hoi4 is the best
Ck2
I give imperator rome the winning grand metal.
Me too
You completely forgot to discuss economy and trade, which is one of the major parts of EU4 and is the best in all of paradox games. HOI4 doesn't even have an economy which is a - and crusader kings is also weak on that standpoint. You also forgot to talk about national focuses and decisions, also the country's achievements,cultures, government types... in which EU4 beats them all down to the ground. Honestly EU4 is by far the best Paradox game, cause it gives you sooo much freedom to do ANYTHING you want with your nation. HOI4 is limited, and there are not much things to do with your nation before WW2, except prepare for it
I know I left those out. It was hard to include them because, as you said, they are either very limited or totally omitted from the other 2 games. I wasn't sure how to make an effective comparison
From what i have heard Victoria 3 does the economy better
But yes, the national focuses and government types seem to be more different in eu4
Crusader kings 3 duh 🎉
Well clearly I wasted my time making a video then
@@strattom1759no need for the witty remark.
@@user-sx4fc6mc6z There's always a need for a witty remark
Neither, lol. Vicky 2 4ever.
Really that good?
Answer: Total War
Total War does nothing particularly well. The "strategy" layer is hollow with mere glancing opportunities to make meaningful decisions. The battles are decently fun, however, once the formula reveals itself the challenge is trivialized, leading to mass auto-resolves.
hoi4 and eu4 need update
I think you should have done content wise which would in fact mean that EU4 would be #1 HOI4 #2 and CK3 #3
I think it's down to a difference of opinion rather than a lack of content
@@strattom1759 personally hoi4 is the worst and eu4 best
@@strattom1759 I think this whole thing was all opinion based when you get down to it lol
Ck2 better
HOI4 ist way too unrealistc. Every game I had, went completely nonsense at some point with total idiotic wars and alliances. I literaly had at one time: France is at war together with England against the sovjet union. But also at war against England in a seperate war against Italy.....And Bulgaria was part of the japanese prosperity zone. I (as a democratic germany) was at peace for most of the time until at the near end, japan declared war against me. Its complete nonsense-game. Crusader Kings is way more believable even when its spans over several centurys.
Just put historical ai on
@@tristanholland1 that's sad
The randomness of hoi4 is fun as hell
@@dingdong5908 no lol
The correct answer is: *_All three are shit_*
Totalwar is much more fun!
Why?
Because when you play EU4 and not getting paid it looks like the devs are wasting your time, every campaign takes 200+ hrs to complete, and there is too much reading and less playing, 90% of times you are reading texts and information, instead of playing around with your subjected armies or constructions.
Total war games and grand strategy games are vastly different and can’t be compared
I don't agree to including mods in the comparaison.
fr its dumb like why does mods and DLCS have to make the base game good and not dry