WHERE DO I EVEN ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ START?
Actually, I do know where to start: DO NOT BUY THIS GAME. (Skip to the end to avoid a yap)
To put it bluntly, you might see my first sentence of this review and think, "OP another salty gamer who's going to yap about how the game is bad and completely look over the positives And he's got 100 hours? What a chud."
And I say you're ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ right, because there aren't any positives to speak of regarding this game's foundation, optimization, soundtrack, combat, realism, tactics, gameplay, economic systems, and the BUGS. ECT...
HELL, instead of a beaver, they should get a hairy-ass cockroach to be the game's mascot, because that would truly depict how buggy this game is and the current morale with the player base.
Like I said, there are no positives to the foundation of this game. Some idiot in a boardroom said, "Hey, you know what would be a GOOOOOD idea? Mashing together EU4, CK2/3, and Victoria 3 into one game!!!" Then another guy in the room must have said, "You're a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ genius."
In all seriousness, when I originally saw the early-access footage of this game with different streamers and YouTubers playing it, I thought that was a good idea too. Specifically, the aspect of being able to have a more in-depth look at your economy and buildings, while also being able to see your character and what defines them (perks, appearance, etc.).
Which is a remarkable improvement compared to Europa Universalis IV (with no DLCs—gotta be fair to EU5), which is pretty bare-bones regarding its trade system and characters/rulers.
But that aspect was quickly ruined when I realized that the economy is so absurdly micromanagement-heavy that you're better off automating it for the entire game, while the more in-depth view of rulers and characters had so much potential that wasn't used for anything except vassal spam(RIP). (or atleast until they make a dlc where you can make your character a freak of nature)
But I'm not finished with its optimization, because I was able to run this game pretty well on my computer. However, I'm sure the majority of the EU4/EU5 player base doesn't have the necessary specs to run and play this game well without it crashing on startup (8 MONTHS AFTER ITS RELEASE), or without the game having to strip out parts of itself, like the terrain map mode, just to function.
And don't even get me started on the MAP. You, as the player, are forced into the start date of 1337, and the devs don't plan on adding any other start dates or allowing players to choose their own like they did in EU4, where the player had complete autonomy to choose any date from the aftermath of Varna to the death of Napoleon.
BUT NOT IN EU5.
In EU5 you're stuck with King kazimeirz's crusty old ahh, How is it that EU4 and CK3 allow the player to chose different start dates without editing the games codes or script, but EU5 the most modern of them doesnt?
Hell, even CK2 lets you change the start date from 1066 to 1337, AND THAT GAME IS OLD ENOUGH TO BE IN HIGH SCHOOL AT THIS POINT.
While I can say they did a good job portraying cultures within the time period, especially regarding the geographical map with its depth and historical accuracy, it's still buggy, with reports of people having cultures swapped in places or cultures missing entirely.
But my main gripe with this game's map is that it doesn't feel like a Europa Universalis map and looks more like recycled Crusader Kings slop that they spat onto a canvas.
Moving on, PLEASE change the music or add more songs.
AFTER AN HOUR OF PLAYING, I FEEL LOBOTOMIZED FROM SITTING THERE AND LISTENING TO THE SAME THREE SONGS OVER AND OVER AGAIN, and God willing, I can't be the only one.
the soundtrack is filled with forgettable medieval AI-slop songs. But for some reason, the devs are insistent on shoving them down my ear canals. Please Just change it.
My views on the combat, realism, and tactics of this game are poor.
Frankly, I like the integration of standing armies within the game, because historically countries like France, Castile, Aragon, and even poor Poland had some form of standing army during the game's time period. But their acquisition and maintenance make no sense. Why do I have to wait or build random ♥♥♥♥ to have a standing force of men when the majority of rulers at the time maintained armies through monetary means, such as hiring mercenaries?
More importantly, I liked the levy system in the game because I felt it was a more accurate portrayal of the time period—or at least I think so, because I haven't played any country past 1500, AND NEITHER HAS 90 PERCENT OF THE ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ PLAYER BASE EITHER.
But to go even further on my critique EU5's version of troop management is more like CK2/3's because you have to call up levies instead of producing soldiers, cavalry, and artillery in provinces like in EU4.
Hell, I'm pretty sure the only thing they kept from EU4 is that ♥♥♥♥♥♥ RNG dice system.
However, personally, I didn't have that big of an issue with the levies.
I was more pissed off with troop movement in this game and how indecisive battles are. Not to get into specifics, but I feel like battles should be more decisive, win or lose. You shouldn't be able to lose a battle, retain half of your fighting force, then run hundreds of miles away behind forts. And I know that was in EU4, but it's still ♥♥♥♥.
And without terrain bonuses or disadvantages, battles lack any tactics beyond excessive micromanagement and DICE. I hoped they would improve on this after five ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ games, but apparently not.
As for the gameplay and economic systems of this game, I'm not even going to waste your time (if you're still reading this). It's poorly explained even with tutorial, and most people just automate it, which is similar to the building and administrative systems within the game. These systems are poorly fleshed out while somehow being the biggest part of the game.
(There are much better explanations in other reviews.)
Also PLZ ADD BACK VASSAL SPAM NO-ONE LIKES this new mana free-system, and that was the only way to make it bearable. No one likes a map painter you can't paint in.
But to summarize: this game is filled with bugs and has massive parts of previous games removed in favor of worse interpretations from different titles, that make it less simple like EU4 and more autistic. All in an attempt to replicate and mold EU5 into the image of CK3, Victoria 3, and a little bit of EU4, which ends up creating some abomination of a crack baby.
This game just isn't Europa Universalis , and it shouldn't have been released as such.
Hell, it shouldn't have been released at all.
Players shouldn't have to wait years for a fun and fulfilling product that actually works, and people who bought this game, like me, are the real idiots.
SO DON'T BUY IT... unless you have autism
