What is the most challenging Paradox grand strategy game?

[matthew49]

"Real Strategy Requires Cunning", as it says in the CK3 ad right at the top of this page.

I'm relatively new to Paradox games (bough a bunch during sales but hardly played them). CK3 is the only one I've played enough to understand. It's just too easy, as people are discussing here. It's still a really nice change from games like total war or Civ which just feel so basic in retrospect. But CK3 still doesn't really require that much cunning.

I'm wondering if I should move on to another paradox game. I don't really care about graphics or how new the game is that much, mainly just depth of the simulation and AI and difficulty. I wanted to post a poll but I'm not sure if this site supports it or how I would make one.

So to the veteran Paradox players, which game has given you:

• the most thrill from overcoming a deep and complex system that is designed to make you fail?
• the most "game overs" or difficulty?
• the greatest sense of accomplishment when you did actually accomplish your goal?

Also, if there is a particular mod of a particular game that comes to mind, I'd be curious to hear about that too!

 

[durbal]

Probably EU4. Especially right around when Cossacks came out. Game is easier now because of AI ineptitude.

Pretty much all Paradox games have inept AI. I blame the dev multiplayer clashes that they tend to do and often balance the games around -- they're playing massive dev clashes so AI is a secondary concern.

 

[alexti]

In depth of simulation Vic2 is clearly a winner.

AI isn't going to offer much challenge in any, but it's good enough for few dozen hours until you learn the game. EU4 and Vic2 offer some rather difficult starting positions where you start with a massive disadvantage vs aggressive AI. Otherwise the challenge usually comes from setting yourself an artificial goal that is difficult to achieve within the game system.

 

[Kovax]

Otherwise the challenge usually comes from setting yourself an artificial goal that is difficult to achieve within the game system.

This is true in several Paradox games. The major countries are cakewalks, as soon as you understand how to use the tools available to the player, because the AI doesn't understand how to utilize them to good effect, or synergize between several different tools. Playing as a minor country, you've got to maintain alliances or keep on the good side of more powerful neighbors to avoid being gobbled up like the tender morsel you are.

Victoria 2 would be my suggestion. It's generally not that difficult to survive for most countries (very difficult for a few others), but can be hard to expand in many situations, so challenge depends on WHO you play. This is (or was) true for several other titles, such as HOI3 (not so much HOI4, where a minor country can spam massive armies) or EU(3 or 4). Several of the later titles have watered down gameplay to avoid failure by the player, so they're not very challenging.

For many of the games, mod developers have increased the level of challenge.

 

[ThePHD]

For me it's EU4. There are so many mechanics in the game that it's kind of overwhelming. There's just a lot you have to learn. The rest of their games are relatively easy IMO.

 

[Grzegorz Grzybek]

For me Victoria 2 was not that hard. I liked the ideas, the pops, the time period, but even first US campaign was successful.
Unlike EU4 where I needed hundreds of hours to start thinking that I'm aware of most of the mechanics (which still doesn't mean I can use them efficiently).
HoI4 is a bit different - easier (for me) than EU4, but enormously satisfying.

 

[Tormodius]

I have played all of the Paradox historical grand strategy titles since EU1, except the latest CK3.
EU1 and EU2 were such a long time ago I can't really remember how it felt playing it or how easy or hard they were.

EU4 and EU3 are both great games and challenging depending on what country you play. Even kingdoms and empires with "easy start" could be challenging at some point. I think perhaps EU3 is slightly more challenging, but it's a long time since I played it, and EU4 is somewhat different in mechanics but in terms of overall strategy require you to think cunningly as well. Some mistakes might be fatal while other mistakes just setbacks that you can recover from. Makes me wonder if it's the best strategy game Paradox have, but that is a hard choice to make, because they have many good ones.


The two Victoria games are not so challenging for the most part I think and strategics are somewhat static and not so flexible, and it all depends on the country you pick to play. Vicky 2 is the one I played most, and I think it's fun and very sandboxy, allthough lacking in many aspects so I'm hoping to one day see Vicky 3 with some more dynamics to strategy play so that playing British Empire might give some challenges too.

CK1 and CK2 were also challenging when playing a small county or duchy, and even some kingdoms that could fall apart and you had to unify again. CK2 is one of my favourites and very fun and different from anything else I have played.
I have a friend who said it's the most challenging game he ever played. I am not sure if I agree with that, but I had my problems with some situations especially funny thing when I played Vikings in Russia and after much back and forth formed an ortodox Rus Empire just to see mongol invasion cutting it in half before they themselves divided up and settled for khanates making me able to deal with them in both war and peace. The cool thing with CK2 is you can still play if you lose much land and such because its the dynasty that has to survive. I think CK2 was challenging in it's cool ways, so I am sad to hear the news here about CK3 not being challenging.

The old Heart of Iron games were somewhat challenging, especially HOI2 and it's spinoffs that were really unforgiving to mistakes.
HOI4 is also challenging I think, at least if you play small/medium nations. Or with historical focus turned off, creating unpredictable world situation might be challenging sometimes also to major powers. It depends. It's a very dynamic game and complex military stuff that has potential for creating some challenging situations if you do not plan ahead sufficiently.

Stellaris used to be challenging at one point but reached it prime some years ago, but they changed the game so much with patches it's totally different and too easy now. It's a cool game and I had much fun with it, but have given up because they changed it in ways I do not think is for the better.

Imperator is not challenging I think. That game should need some more attention and could potentially be great if they do not just expand and expand like with Stellaris but fix the silly stuff that makes it too easy.

 

[matthew49]

I have played all of the Paradox historical grand strategy titles [...]

Thank you so much for the detailed response. I'll definitely use this as a reference.. also since you and others have recommended EU4 I'll probably try that one first.

And thanks to everyone else as well.

 

[Kazanov]

Crusader Kings 2 has less "press a button to win" mechanics, and has a lot more layers of complexity, flavor and customization than CK3 but as some already say, EU4 is a good game once you get the basics, and Vicky2 is literally the best of all PDX games.

To play EU4 i recommend getting a subscription because of all these DLC.