Paradox Development Studio and Paradox Interactive today announced Europa Universalis IV: Emperor to release on June 9.
The next in a long list of expansions, this one opens up three central game systems, offering new gameplay opportunities for the Papacy, the Holy Roman Empire and Revolutionary movements, as well as a host of other changes. Story trailer viewable below:
YouTube videos require cookies, you must accept their cookies to view. View cookie preferences.
Direct Link
Direct Link
Feature Highlight:
- A Powerful Pope: Appoint cardinals, publish Papal Bulls and gather tithes. The Vatican and Papal Controller now have new abilities to sway the souls of Christendom.
- New Holy Roman Empire Systems: Imperial Incidents provide new challenges to the Emperor's power and authority. Will your empire follow a course to a centralized monarchy or decentralized federation?
- Revolutions Revamped: The spirit of Revolution is a contagion that must be either embraced or vigorously opposed. Use the zeal of revolutionary guard units to fight reactionaries at home and abroad.
- The Hussite Faith: Bohemia has an early game chance to embrace heresy and stand alone against the Pope until The Reformation.
- Hegemonies: Seize the mantle of global leadership if you accumulate great wealth and armies, but be prepared to face great opposition from those who question your right to rule.
- New Missions: Over 20 new unique mission trees for a variety of European nations
- Defender of Faith: With great responsibility comes great power. Defending a major religion should be different from defending an insignificant one. Now it is!
- The Council of Trent and Counter-Reformation: Join other Catholic rulers to slow down the spread of the Reformation by making concessions to the unruly mob or harshly imposing the will of God.
- Provoke Rebellions: Risk a larger rebellion now while you think you can manage it instead of waiting for discontent to take its course
You can pre-purchase on Steam for $19.99 / £15.49 / €19.99.
As always for Paradox titles, we're expecting a hefty free patch for everyone to drop around the same time. The question is, what nation will you be picking to have a fresh game with Europa Universalis IV: Emperor? Do let us know in the comments and why you've chosen them in particular!
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
All posts need to follow our rules. For users logged in: please hit the Report Flag icon on any post that breaks the rules or contains illegal / harmful content. Guest readers can email us for any issues.
6 comments
You can have a Council of Trent . . . but can you have a better Diet than Worms?
1 Likes, Who?
My personal opinion of the game:
On the one hand I love the game. I enjoy the process of playing the game a lot. I also like that a lot of geography and some history rubs off on me.
But for me personally I enjoy the simulation aspect a lot and the frequent railroading is sometimes annoying. Even if I change the initial conditions (for example by using the console commands or by importing a CK2 save) the game tends to still play out too much in the same way despite my efforts. Renaissance has to spawn in Europe, all trade flows to Europe, some of the strongest nations in the game have unavoidable bonuses (age bonuses). I guess all of these complaints can be addressed by modding, but I would counter-argue that that is a high barrier. I'd like if a more sandbox-y version would be easier to achieve.
My second gripe with the game is the conflict between my values and the game's aesthetics. When I think about what some of the most enjoyable activities in the game (for me anyway) actually depict, I'm kind of horrified - cultural and religious purges, forcing my vision of the world on others through military might, scheming to destroy anyone else standing in my way. Also this game is largely about inter-country conflicts of arbitrary ambitions with a heavy side of colonialism. Both of which are again quite horrific to me. To be fair, I feel that simulations of horrible things do not invalidate my enjoyment of the game as long as it remains extremely clear where I stand in regards to those topics.
Thirdly I feel that it is kind of (unintentionally) grotesque imitation of the lovable, extremely diverse, awesome, made of chance and coincidence, thing - that is the history of the world. Rich computer simulations still remain woefully limited in the face of the colorful real thing. It really makes the rules for the world from a really western European perspective. So much of the richness gets lost in the process. Those parts that I value the most. To give a very random, but solid (I feel) example: I heard that Inca not only lacked money, but also any kind of market economy - central planning ran a highly successful empire that was destroyed by chance. And meso-Americans were puzzled why Europeans cared so much for that shiny metal that is only useful for making trinkets and jewelry (gold). But in the game everyone everywhere buys and sells with gold.
In regards to this issue of mine, I completely understand the devs. Practical limitations to the degree of simulation. But I'm not saying this is one of the three reasons why this game is bad and you shouldn't play it. It is why I, despite loving and enjoying the game a lot, don't enjoy playing it.
Last edited by chr on 13 May 2020 at 10:13 pm UTC
Spoiler, click me
On the one hand I love the game. I enjoy the process of playing the game a lot. I also like that a lot of geography and some history rubs off on me.
But for me personally I enjoy the simulation aspect a lot and the frequent railroading is sometimes annoying. Even if I change the initial conditions (for example by using the console commands or by importing a CK2 save) the game tends to still play out too much in the same way despite my efforts. Renaissance has to spawn in Europe, all trade flows to Europe, some of the strongest nations in the game have unavoidable bonuses (age bonuses). I guess all of these complaints can be addressed by modding, but I would counter-argue that that is a high barrier. I'd like if a more sandbox-y version would be easier to achieve.
My second gripe with the game is the conflict between my values and the game's aesthetics. When I think about what some of the most enjoyable activities in the game (for me anyway) actually depict, I'm kind of horrified - cultural and religious purges, forcing my vision of the world on others through military might, scheming to destroy anyone else standing in my way. Also this game is largely about inter-country conflicts of arbitrary ambitions with a heavy side of colonialism. Both of which are again quite horrific to me. To be fair, I feel that simulations of horrible things do not invalidate my enjoyment of the game as long as it remains extremely clear where I stand in regards to those topics.
Thirdly I feel that it is kind of (unintentionally) grotesque imitation of the lovable, extremely diverse, awesome, made of chance and coincidence, thing - that is the history of the world. Rich computer simulations still remain woefully limited in the face of the colorful real thing. It really makes the rules for the world from a really western European perspective. So much of the richness gets lost in the process. Those parts that I value the most. To give a very random, but solid (I feel) example: I heard that Inca not only lacked money, but also any kind of market economy - central planning ran a highly successful empire that was destroyed by chance. And meso-Americans were puzzled why Europeans cared so much for that shiny metal that is only useful for making trinkets and jewelry (gold). But in the game everyone everywhere buys and sells with gold.
In regards to this issue of mine, I completely understand the devs. Practical limitations to the degree of simulation. But I'm not saying this is one of the three reasons why this game is bad and you shouldn't play it. It is why I, despite loving and enjoying the game a lot, don't enjoy playing it.
Last edited by chr on 13 May 2020 at 10:13 pm UTC
1 Likes, Who?
Massinissa May 13, 2020
My personal opinion of the game:
Spoiler, click me
On the one hand I love the game. I enjoy the process of playing the game a lot. I also like that a lot of geography and some history rubs off on me.
But for me personally I enjoy the simulation aspect a lot and the frequent railroading is sometimes annoying. Even if I change the initial conditions (for example by using the console commands or by importing a CK2 save) the game tends to still play out too much in the same way despite my efforts. Renaissance has to spawn in Europe, all trade flows to Europe, some of the strongest nations in the game have unavoidable bonuses (age bonuses). I guess all of these complaints can be addressed by modding, but I would counter-argue that that is a high barrier. I'd like if a more sandbox-y version would be easier to achieve.
My second gripe with the game is the conflict between my values and the game's aesthetics. When I think about what some of the most enjoyable activities in the game (for me anyway) actually depict, I'm kind of horrified - cultural and religious purges, forcing my vision of the world on others through military might, scheming to destroy anyone else standing in my way. Also this game is largely about inter-country conflicts of arbitrary ambitions with a heavy side of colonialism. Both of which are again quite horrific to me. To be fair, I feel that simulations of horrible things do not invalidate my enjoyment of the game as long as it remains extremely clear where I stand in regards to those topics.
Thirdly I feel that it is kind of (unintentionally) grotesque imitation of the lovable, extremely diverse, awesome, made of chance and coincidence, thing - that is the history of the world. Rich computer simulations still remain woefully limited in the face of the colorful real thing. It really makes the rules for the world from a really western European perspective. So much of the richness gets lost in the process. Those parts that I value the most. To give a very random, but solid (I feel) example: I heard that Inca not only lacked money, but also any kind of market economy - central planning ran a highly successful empire that was destroyed by chance. And meso-Americans were puzzled why Europeans cared so much for that shiny metal that is only useful for making trinkets and jewelry (gold). But in the game everyone everywhere buys and sells with gold.
In regards to this issue of mine, I completely understand the devs. Practical limitations to the degree of simulation. But I'm not saying this is one of the three reasons why this game is bad and you shouldn't play it. It is why I, despite loving and enjoying the game a lot, don't enjoy playing it.
With what they are doing with CK3, maybe they are building a better base for EU5 ? They seem way less centered on Europe for CK3, there are like 90 religions playable and they said they'll have flavour, not like in CK2.
1 Likes, Who?
Philadelphus May 16, 2020
Maybe it's time to finally try that Prince of Egypt achievement run by forming Egypt as Florence. I started it once a few years ago but petered out; now with all the improvements to Catholicism and Europe, and what I've heard is a slight nerfing of the Ottomans, it might be time to give it another go. Getting the Lucky Lucca (owning the Indian province of Lucknow as Lucca, a one-province nation in Italy) achievement was one of my funnest games, where I actually migrated to southern Africa, abandoned Italy entirely, built up over a few centuries, then ended up conquering all of India (and getting the achievement for doing so as a European nation in the process!). :D
0 Likes
Maybe it's time to finally try that Prince of Egypt achievement run by forming Egypt as Florence. I started it once a few years ago but petered out; now with all the improvements to Catholicism and Europe, and what I've heard is a slight nerfing of the Ottomans, it might be time to give it another go. Getting the Lucky Lucca (owning the Indian province of Lucknow as Lucca, a one-province nation in Italy) achievement was one of my funnest games, where I actually migrated to southern Africa, abandoned Italy entirely, built up over a few centuries, then ended up conquering all of India (and getting the achievement for doing so as a European nation in the process!). :D
How did you manage to get out as Lucca? Got strong allies and beelined for colonies? Then took over Kilwa and the rest of African south-west? Or only the southern tip?
0 Likes
Philadelphus May 18, 2020
How did you manage to get out as Lucca? Got strong allies and beelined for colonies? Then took over Kilwa and the rest of African south-west? Or only the southern tip?It was a few years ago now so I had to go back and check for any screen shots, but yeah, I think I basically held on in Italy as long as possible with allies while gunning for colonization as quickly as I could. I colonized in western Africa as soon as possible to give me a backup, then it looks like I conquered/colonized my way down the coast into Kongo, slightly. I also colonized south Africa (and I think I moved my capital there when I sold off my Italian possessions to stop getting dragged into wars), and conquered Madagascar (I think this was very soon after Madagascar had been filled out with playable countries). That's the last screenshot I could find other then the one showing my one-province snake into Lucknow from the coast, but I probably expanded in central and eastern Africa as well after that before slowly conquering India.
1 Likes, Who?
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me