• 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.
I stumbled upon PDX games from a box of computer discs I got with EU3 back in 2009 or so. I was (and still am) a huge CIV 3 fan..Yeah..not one you hear most other people talk about. But, I never could get into Civ 4 and so I started looking for another strategy game with somewhat similar mechanics and found EU3.

I immediately fell in love with the depth of the game and how you could change the way history looked. I know a lot of people don't like to compare a game like EU with CIV - but for me, anyway - it was like an upgrade from it. Sure, they are very different games in many ways, but it was still similar enough to be part of the same general genre I had the most interest in. Out came Civ 5 - and while it was better after all the DLCs, it still didn't grab me like EU3 - then EU4 was released and sometime after Art of War was released I was hooked on it.

I own quite a few games from Paradox, but I personally can't get into them like I do with EU - it's just the kind of game I like to play. It's a nice mixture of various mechanics. I know a LOT of people seem to like CK2 - and I can see how it's an amazing game - that has a lot of work put into it - but it just doesn't interest me. I'm not interested in character roleplaying in strategy games involving families and stuff like that.

I've played Stellaris quite a bit as well - and I think it has a solid base for something awesome - but when I play it - it starts to get really tedious and not really as fun to me to play as it looks like it would be. It's really fun for awhile, but doesn't have lasting appeal for me. It has potential to be amazing, but it's just missing something to make it click.

Anyway, my ranking for every PDX title I own would be:

1. EU4
2. EU3
3. Stellaris
4. CK2
5. Sengoku
6. Rome

I'm assuming we aren't counting published games like Cities Skylines or Surviving Mars - as I enjoy those quite a bit and would put those just under Stellaris. I'd like to try HOI someday. It looks pretty fun.
 
Last edited:
personal ranking
out of category: victoria 2
king of the hill: victoria 2
best paradox game in their whole history: victoria 2 even if they hate it nowadays because it is just too much legendary and they prolly hate me also because this is the only real title i am waiting eagerly and i name even when people are talking airplanes

Sooooo

0. Victoria 2
1. Crusader Kings 2
2. EU4 (this is the most played one by me by far)
3-42 Victoria 2 (gentful reminder)
43. Stellaris (sorry)
 
"CK2 x Vic2 x Hoi4 x Eu4"

None of them are bad per se but if I had to choose a least good, EU4. Reason is that Paradox started all this with EU series and carrying the same systems for about 20 years now, it's clearly most outdated. I no longer get as excited playing it. It needs to go through a big overhaul and borrow system from their better games, like character system, economy system and pop system.

If I had to say a true worst game in their history, that would be Sengoku.

Best is CK2 but Vicky2 has a special place in my heart and a close second. I would like to see a Vicky3 after CK3. Just don't go back to EU5 till we have a Vicky3.
 
I'll have to disagree with the Victoria 2 getting high marks here, as it has some of the same lying interface issues of EU IV but none of the outcry from fans (gotta love AI refusing to support you in a war they said they would support you in).
Vicky 2 gets graded as a game from the EU3/HOI3 generation, which it is. It is not entirely fair to put a game whose development ended six years ago with ones who either got their last update this year, or are still getting updated, or even worse which are new. It has a lot of issues Paradox used to have in all its games from that generation, and which it has shed in the years that followed.
 
Vicky 2 is Clausewitz Engine 1.5, EU3 started at 1.0, Sengoku should be a transitional around 1.8, ck2 2.0/2.5 iirc and eu4 3.0. Anyways its an in house engine so they get to choose when its time to make a new version depending on the major overhauls they do to the engine itself which is very modular and if they can keep up the old games using the engine already released up to date.
Yes vicky 2 is very old compared to an I:R but in my opinion it is still one step ahead of eu3 and just half step behind ck2 in its early days, and is so unique that it deserves at least an honorable mention hence my post, ofc i never meant my ranking to be objective or simply an absolute ranking.
If you just want to know which is the game of the paradox studio i still play to this date and played thousands of hours is EUIV and that might be a more shared view i guess but the game which gave me the most thrilling playthroughs even though i played it way less objectively was ck2 due to all the roleplaying aspects of it and how the game uses them
 
Last edited:
Hi guys im doing a new opinion question here...I know that the PDX is suffering a crisis in which is involved in EGS and Tencent Games, and i know that the public opinion of the customers are very low in some games.

For this i will give a opinion try for the customers to say what should be improved in the games and what is the best one and the worse one, this public opinion audiction maybe will work if this post become popular...I wait for that :p

CK2 x Vic2 x Hoi4 x Eu4

What is the best? What is the worse? What should be improved in these games?

I wanted your opinions...

Eu4 (huge amount of content) > Vic2 (realism & depth, but too buggy & a neglected bare-bone) > Ck2 (fun roleplay, but too little strategy) > Hoi4 (boring battle simulation)
 
If we are starting from Vic 2 release then the real losers are Sengoku or March of the Eagles. The best so far for me has been CK2, and the mod support is by far the most fun and interesting.
 
CK2 is the best of the ones I've played. You have to know its limitations, keep the game under <200 years or the AI's idiocy really starts showing up, but it is fun with many different playstyles events, strategies, etc.

Stellaris is the weakest. I like the customizablity, but waaay too many of its mechanics are broken, has the worst micro of all the games (population management, jfc there has to be a way to automate this), and at the end of the day, the strategy is "stack pop growth, run over your enemies". Also the AI is complete garbage. It makes the EU4 AI look like a chess grandmaster..... Stellaris AI can barely survive against itself.
 
CK2- 10 out of 10
Stellaris Pre MegaCorp - 8 out of 10
Victoria 2 -7 out of 10
HoI2 Arsenal of Democracy - 6.8 out of 10
EU4 - 6.5 out of 10
HoI4 - 6.2 out of 10
Imperator Rome at Release- 5 out of 10
Stellaris Currently - 4 out of 10
Imperator Rome Now 3 out of 10
 
I don't play video games much and my total playtime of all paradox games I have played in the last decade is probably less than 1000 hours. So I don't know if I like or dislike a specific paradox game.

I think the truth is that paradox or video games in general don't interest me much other than discussing them which can be seen by looking at my message Count.
 
I've only played CK2, EU4 and Stellaris (and about an hour of Vicky2, haven't really found the motivation yet to really delve into that) and among those, it's pretty decisively EU4 > Stellaris > CK2. The roleplay aspect of CK2 just doesn't appeal to me and in terms of pure barebones mechanics, I think EU4 is just more solid game than CK2. Less "3% chance per year to be able to do something", generally fewer instances where I just have to wait for an extended time period (although this is still present in EU4, as well). I acknowledge that the character-centric gameplay allows CK2 to do some things better than EU4, like Personal Unions for example, but micromanaging my court honestly becomes a nuisance to me rather quickly into the game.

Stellaris' early stages when it's still about exploration and setting up my borders is a really fun 4X game, but (even disregarding performance) doesn't scale that well in the mid-, let alone endgame. Managing 5-10 planets is fun, but when that becomes 20-30 colonies, it really isn't anymore. Outliner alerts often mean that you should've done something half a year ago and getting pops to work the job I want then to as annoying as §%&#. Seriously, I'd LOVE the ability to just tell this pop to work that job instead of messing with disabling and prioritizing jobs. As a result, I keep restarting ~100 years into the game, but I really do enjoy those 100 years. ;)
 
I've only played CK2, EU4 and Stellaris (and about an hour of Vicky2, haven't really found the motivation yet to really delve into that) and among those, it's pretty decisively EU4 > Stellaris > CK2. The roleplay aspect of CK2 just doesn't appeal to me and in terms of pure barebones mechanics, I think EU4 is just more solid game than CK2. Less "3% chance per year to be able to do something", generally fewer instances where I just have to wait for an extended time period (although this is still present in EU4, as well). I acknowledge that the character-centric gameplay allows CK2 to do some things better than EU4, like Personal Unions for example, but micromanaging my court honestly becomes a nuisance to me rather quickly into the game.

Stellaris' early stages when it's still about exploration and setting up my borders is a really fun 4X game, but (even disregarding performance) doesn't scale that well in the mid-, let alone endgame. Managing 5-10 planets is fun, but when that becomes 20-30 colonies, it really isn't anymore. Outliner alerts often mean that you should've done something half a year ago and getting pops to work the job I want then to as annoying as §%&#. Seriously, I'd LOVE the ability to just tell this pop to work that job instead of messing with disabling and prioritizing jobs. As a result, I keep restarting ~100 years into the game, but I really do enjoy those 100 years. ;)
That's why I wish we'd kept the old 1.9 system but with the new DLC content. As it is the AI can't manage crap so no one uses automation willingly. 1.9 at least the AI could keep from going into the negatives economically.
 
EU2 was literally the best thing they ever made. It was simple and sophisticated for it's age of software. Great tool for teaching history. Nothing since has been half as ground breaking. I'm a 30 year old boomer and all but, as I slowly peruse up the Clausewitz ladder things get worse and worse. Strategy computer games are now low brow for profit cartel products.
 
Suuurrrrreeee.....