• 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.

Rocketboy

Corporal
75 Badges
Sep 2, 2008
41
8
  • Magicka
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • Magicka 2
  • Stellaris
  • Surviving Mars
  • The Showdown Effect
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • War of the Roses
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • BATTLETECH
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Prison Architect
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Steel Division: Normand 44 - Second Wave
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
While I know the time periods of the two games are not the same, I would like to ask a questions about them. First a little bit about me...I am 42, love History and What if's, enjoyed the Total War games(mostly), and have played the heck out of HoI2 and the assorted mods of it. I am thinking about investing my time and money in one of those two games but want to know this: Are they conquer the world type games or self imposed goal vs some sort of game imposed rule/victory conditions?

Rocketboy
 
Both are self-imposed goals games. There are achievements that can work as some kind of goal, but the game doesn't end when you reach them. Only reaching end dates, losing your lands or your dynasty becomes landless(in CK2) will end the game.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Depends on which era you like more. Personally, I like CK2 more. I think it is rather original, has nice RPG elements and feels more "organic" But EU4 is also an amazing game, albeit the most "gamey" of the Paradox bunch (i.e. it has loads of streamlining-focus mechanics). CK2 is geographically restricted to Western and Central Eurasia (including India and parts of Africa).
 
  • 7
Reactions:
Depends on which era you like more. Personally, I like CK2 more. I think it is rather original, has nice RPG elements and feels more "organic" But EU4 is also an amazing game, albeit the most "gamey" of the Paradox bunch (i.e. it has loads of streamlining-focus mechanics). CK2 is geographically restricted to Western and Central Eurasia (including India and parts of Africa).

I agree with this: If you're like me and you mainly want to immerse yourself into an atmospheric sandbox, I recommend CK2. In EU4, you have a clearer idea which overall goal you have (grabbing land), so if you play for victory rather than for role-playing, this might be for you.

Both countries have numeric scores which measure your success, but it's more fun to set your own goals. EU4 is more of a world conquest game because the game mechanics don't limit your expansion permanently: The more you conquer, the stronger you get, the more you can conquer (unless some recent patch changes that). In CK2, large empires become harder to manage, so instead of expanding all the time, you do feudal stuff like marriage politics.
So the biggest difference is what the gameplay consists of: In EU4 you wage wars or colonise most of the time, in CK2 you do all kinds of stuff
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
As a total war player myself I'd say Europa Universalis. I couldn't get into Crusader Kings the mountain of information, the feudal terminology and the lack of direction made it very difficult.

Europa universalis is still in a different league of complexity to your total war and civ but I found it easier to get into. You don't need Wikipedia to understand the tooltips and the basics of building up your economy and conquering land is more familiar to your total war player than all the family politics of crusader kings.

Keep in mind there is little tactics in either game it's all about strategy and decisions so you don't get fine grained control over units in battle. It's kind of similar to total wars strategic map but infinitely deeper.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
It looks like you bought CK2 Complete -75% off, nice:cool: There is so much content in the bundle you purchased, you'll have plently to occupy you until the next big sale for EU4 complete. I love both, though I like EU4 better you can't go wrong with either.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
CK2 was my first Paradox game and I still prefer it because I enjoy role-playing a fair bit when playing strategy games and EU4 is a bit too gamey for me, that said I have still enjoyed imagining the alternative history I have created when playing EU4. CK2 is also a much easier game to cheese but I prefer role-playing to map painting so that isn't an issue.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Both games are good, one thing that I would advise you, especialy since you are a lot into history (like myself) is to check out the mods. For Crusader Kings 2 the best possible mod out there (in my opinion) is "Historical Immersion Project" (HIP). It enchances the map, the cultures, the visuals, the events and makes it all into a massive accurate Historical feast. Not even to mention that it adds another 500 provinces to the map. For Europa Universalis that would be the "Historical Additions: Borders +". I'd just like to remind you not to forget about them, 3000+ hours on CK2 and keep coming back to it, no other game does that.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
EU4 is more strategic while in CK2 you take care about your dynasty, not country per se. Got more RPG elements as you have characters. In fact, you are portrait as one of them. Usually head of your family. But you can end up landless and in prison and die there without children. Then you loose ;)
 
While I know the time periods of the two games are not the same, I would like to ask a questions about them. First a little bit about me...I am 42, love History and What if's, enjoyed the Total War games(mostly), and have played the heck out of HoI2 and the assorted mods of it. I am thinking about investing my time and money in one of those two games but want to know this: Are they conquer the world type games or self imposed goal vs some sort of game imposed rule/victory conditions?

Rocketboy

Really what it boils down to is either a 'dynasty manager' or 'country manager' Pro's and Con's to both. Personally I enjoyed CK2 more, but that is because it feels a bit more like a rpg (traits, abilities of your characters, with events to them etc). I also enjoy the Overhaul mods in CK2 (Game of Thrones, Elder Kings, etc)
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm thinking about getting one of them. CK2 seems like something I would enjoy more, but it seems like there's a huge learning cirve. Any tips?

Start as a minor ruler, maybe a vassal of a larger realm, and just set yourself the goal to survive. This limits your options, and you won't be overwhelmed by the plethora of things you can do. Later, you can aim higher, play as a independent ruler and try to expand or whatever you feel like.
 
I'm thinking about getting one of them. CK2 seems like something I would enjoy more, but it seems like there's a huge learning cirve. Any tips?

Start as a count in Ireland, No one typically invades Ireland, giving you a ton of time to figure things out. And because everyone is Independant ruler on that island (for the most part), you can manage to attack without having some large army on your door step.
 
I like both. Probably played more EUIV, but enjoyed more CK2.

I'm thinking about getting one of them. CK2 seems like something I would enjoy more, but it seems like there's a huge learning cirve. Any tips?

Don't play with Sunset Invasion.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
As other posters have said, EU4 is "gamier" and more suitable for min-maxing, competitive playstyles. It's a lot of fun and has a lot of strategic options but it boils down to straightforward inter-state competition, like a Total War game.

CK2 is much more about feudal politics than about unified countries smashing into each other. Internal power struggles are often more important and more interesting than wars. And the fact that you play as an individual person who has relationships with all these other thousands of individuals makes for more RPG-type content that can be really immersive.

So, personally I like CK2 much more and have invested a lot more time in it, but sometimes I do just want a more direct and competitive type of game and in that case EU4 is my go-to. They're both excellent, just different approaches.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Ck2 is more immersive. EUIV is more strategic( and thus rewarding) .both have awesome sound tracks


Pick one and get all the music dlc. Play on full blast . Forget reality is a thing
 
  • 2
Reactions:
The latter.

And I recommend EU4 over CK2. CK2 is mind-numbingly easy game with good concepts. There is literally no challenge whatsoever. The game's ideas are good but the difficulty levels are simply laughable.

One example: You can have an imbecile, inbred character on throne and have 90% of your vassals hate you, and still do whatever the hack you want because vassals will rise up bit by bit in multiple factions for you to divide and conquer with 10% of your support + your own strength + mercs. This was a continuous design choice changed from how it used to work differently to cater for casuals.

So yeah, while in theory CK2 is much of internal politics simulator in practice it's just a map painter even simpler than EU4 with the lack of challenges. I even like CK2's scopes better; it's just not executed in a way that I like.
 
Last edited:
  • 7
  • 1
Reactions: