It really depends on my mood and how long it has been since I played any one specifically. If I absolutely had to pick one though? I'd probably go with EU. It was the first paradox game I played and I've put more hours into that series than any other. CK and Vicky would tie for second than HOI would come in at third/fourth but as I said it depends on my mood.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Victoria 2. Its the one I've had the most fun, and probably is the best grand strategy game out there, considering how many people have already chosen Vicky 2 here in this thread.
I still don't have any of its expansions, but after reading those comments, I'm thinking about buying them, specially HOD.
I still don't have any of its expansions, but after reading those comments, I'm thinking about buying them, specially HOD.
The V2 expansions are nigh on compulsory. They're not EU4 style "eh, could do, could not", they really improve the base game so much. Would definitely recommend.
Well, the difference between Vanilla Vicky2 and Vicky 2 with all expansions (better if PoD is also there), almost feels like a full new game.
Vicky2 because of the economy and Pops. It's the closest thing we've had to a real supply and demand curve (EU4 has none), and there are a lot more options of amassing influence than direct conquest. Sphering countries for monopoly of a good was just as effective as controlling that province yourself.
I know it's rather ahistorical and harder to manage, but all the other games need Pop mechanics. Having a larger army meant having more soldier pops, which meant less people working your fields and factories. Then you enlist your reserves, and you go into debt because now nobody is working so you can't collect taxes. And when you lost people in war, that took a direct toll on your entire country. Imagine if that was how CK2 was modeled... it would really put a soft-cap on warfare. Enlisting 100% of your peasants would mean having nobody working the fields, and drive your cost up while having no income. Would really show you why fighting wars was hard.
I know it's rather ahistorical and harder to manage, but all the other games need Pop mechanics. Having a larger army meant having more soldier pops, which meant less people working your fields and factories. Then you enlist your reserves, and you go into debt because now nobody is working so you can't collect taxes. And when you lost people in war, that took a direct toll on your entire country. Imagine if that was how CK2 was modeled... it would really put a soft-cap on warfare. Enlisting 100% of your peasants would mean having nobody working the fields, and drive your cost up while having no income. Would really show you why fighting wars was hard.
Last edited:
I've been thinking about this question for a while, and I keep bouncing back and forth between CK2 + DLC/EXP and VIC2 + DLC/EXP. Both are great games, it's hard to pick between them. I like the RPG element of CK2, since its about the people and their interactions behind the throne. I like VIC2 since it's not about painting the map with your color, instead it's about politics, industry, people, and social classes.
I'll just add my voice to all the people saying Victoria II with CK2 a close second.
Hypothetical best: Rome II featuring mixed features from CK2 and VICII. Let's hope monarch points go the way of the dinosaurs.
Hypothetical best: Rome II featuring mixed features from CK2 and VICII. Let's hope monarch points go the way of the dinosaurs.
Vic2 then EU3 and EU4. I think I would try something like HoI3 or MotE before even thinking about CKII.
Crusaders kings 2. For me is the real "sandbox" game becouse you cant change your culture and religion easily, start as a mighty emperor and get your dinasty destroyed or the opposite. And it is not so pretty unbalanced as the others, where there is countries never can fall and you have to worry about extension and colonization.
You need AHD to run HoD.
I am surprised that you mange to enjoy V2 at all without AHD. I struggled with a lot of annoying supply bugs and such when I first started out. As far as I am concerned AHD fixed the game and is pretty much a must.
You should try EU4. It gives the player a good well rounded timeline and in general it's less focus orientated, unlike CK2, HOI and Vicky2 which are all focused on specific things. EU4 eventually will give you a better understanding and yearning for the other Paradox games. EU4 isn't as complex so getting in depth is pretty easy and considering you don't have a specific time period EU4 gives you the most range in the timeline. I think that EU4 is a general introduction into Paradox games and it's a really great game, some would argue better than Crusader Kings 2.