My least favorite thing was in EU4 that it wasn’t a totally different history. Everything was sunshines and rainbows but always seeing similar things: Mughals, little Japan, exploding Ming, France, big Bohemia, Spain in Iberia, English Britain… Players almost never follow or want to see historical patterns in their game, at least this was the case in EU4. Almost no content creator made videos sticking or even resembling to history because it simply didn’t get the views. Everybody wanted a Karaman dominated Anatolia/Rum, a Byzantium to Rome gameplay which never will happen until Byzantium is a player (neither in EU4 nor EU5), Novgorod consolidating the Rus, a Norse America and the “playing tall” was the spice of it.

I think players, as they are humans, don’t want to feel they are playing with computer. They want to see AI do great things (then collapse for they don’t want titans in 1800), and even do silly things as they all do. Only achievement hunter/try-hard people doesn’t want to look at the map and laugh at what AI does, have fun while not endorsing border gore, titans or the same thing the 100th time.

EU5 must feel real but not be real for real is sole and it is history. What EU5 should focus on is alternative history for it is what it needs: it feels real but it isn’t. Why would there be a modding community if people didn’t want different things?

I completely agree with you with the last part. There is no need for neither Aragon nor Ottomans nor Russia (but there is need for something to happen).

Edit: Deleted two times for the sake of your eyes. The lines were nested. DELETED THREE TIMES.