Why I still think EU is the worst one of PI's 4 major series

[Jokolytic]

The name was ripped off of the original board game. Also, Crusader Kings have a far longer timeline than the actual crusades. Same with Victoria.

The meaning of Crusader can be abstracted quite a bit to refer to most of Christendom.

 

[highsis]

EU4 = too artificial
CK2 = too easy
Victoria 2 = too tedious
HOI 3 = WTF

EU4 uses too many artificial mechanics to substitute for historical plausibility. Many things feel completely absurd from perspectives of someone who is versed in history.
Ck2 has no challenges.
Vicotria 2 is the best Paradox game by its advanced simulation of economy, but doing anything is just too tedious. I got burned out after few campaigns and moved back to EU4.
HOI 3 is a micromanagement nightmare to the point it became choir.

IMO

Victoria 2 > CK2 > EU4 > HOI 3

 

[Mikalos]

The name was ripped off of the original board game. Also, Crusader Kings have a far longer timeline than the actual crusades. Same with Victoria.

the timeline of victoria and victoria 2 is the reign of victoria, plus 20 some years. hardly "far longer"

Eu's main problem is that it has to try and cover a bunch of countries across the world and thus cannot have to many differing things without also crippling gameplay. people want to be able to have fun playing ROTW and so everything needs ot be leveled out.

in vicky you're either a European power or you aspire to become a european power. the mechanics outside of being a european power are effectively non existent and what is there serves to make you stop being non-european.

in Ck2 the map is small enough, especially when it first came out, that the mechanics for its core stuff work well, though some groups are more uebermensch than others.

HOI either you're a major world power or you pretty much just sit there til a major world power cares about you.