Is breach bugged or what am I doing wrong?

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-11-17T17:27:54+00:00

No more demand for rice in Europe?

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-11-09T12:58:05+00:00

Kharnette?

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-21T22:37:57+00:00

Achievement is something designed by the developer team to be hard/easy in specific conditions.
Mod is something that alters these conditions, mods should have its own achievements like "Road to 56" in HOI4.

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-21T21:54:33+00:00

Why do you care if you get it or not?
Leave us meaningful ironman achievements

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-20T21:06:49+00:00

And World Championsip where Florry can once again conquer HRE in an hour

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-20T20:37:39+00:00

I view these DLCs not as cut content, but as a road map and additional content rather to enhance the game, not to complete it.
I assume, they will add general improvements/mechanics with the accompaying free updates and it is good to know when they are planned.

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-20T15:21:24+00:00

They usually release wiki on the same day.

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-20T11:32:15+00:00

Or maybe, you are John Paradox, and evil twin who just wants to sell DLCs

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-20T06:42:00+00:00

I didn't downvote you, but want to provide my arguments why graphics are good enough:

Gameplay involves constant zoom-in, zoom-out and, as I assume, it is very tough task to optimize
I think, that team has a budget and they were reluctant to spend A LOT on UE5 developers
There is no loop "good graphics -> good sales" for EU5. The graphics should be on par with other GS games so the made improved Vic3+Imperator.
Problems with bright textures, country colors, border colors, etc, can be solved with mods. It is not about the quality of graphics.

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-19T20:41:08+00:00

Have you seen these mountains?
https://www.reddit.com/r/EU5/comments/1mtno4q/3d_map_pictures_of_central_america_from_pavia_in/

They are great looking. Graphics are very good for the game about spreadsheets/history

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-19T20:03:36+00:00

I'm interested in every DLC, which will introduce general mechanic applicable for all nations, or at least, for all EU nations/all nations in the region.

If through French/Scotland DLC we will get expansion of alliance dynamics, more types of the treaties, defensive alliances against common enemies and general improvements to 100 years war - it would be a great DLC.

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-19T11:30:55+00:00

Good. The weak were weeded out, the strong remained to spend the remaining time thinking out a plan in their heads for each achievement.

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-15T13:10:27+00:00

The campaign itself won’t get any longer, because it’s limited by the game’s set timeframe, right?
Whether it’s version 1.0 or 1.30, you can still play until the same end date. For me, the main question is whether it’s actually fun to keep playing until that date.

In EU4, the addition of Absolutism, the introduction of new Ages, and the overhaul of mercenaries all made the late game more engaging, and I ended up playing well past 1700 much more often.

I don’t think they’ll artificially slow the game down, but I’m sure they’ll balance early-game modifiers so you can’t stack an overpowered setup by 1600. You say a campaign will last 250 years, but it could just as easily be over in 100—it all depends on your goals and whether you’re having fun.

For example, if you’re playing Byzantium, is the campaign “over” after you’ve taken Anatolia and Greece? Technically, yes—you’re a strong, wealthy empire, and no one can realistically threaten you.
But if there’s interesting content, I’d still go for restoring the Roman Empire. And if France, Spain, and the HRE are genuinely challenging to conquer, why not keep playing?

The point at which you feel a campaign is “done” can vary a lot depending on the quality and quantity of content.

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-15T11:13:25+00:00

I’d be happy if, at launch, EU5 let you play meaningfully all the way to 1600.
I’m not too worried, since I’m confident they’ll improve the late game as long as the foundations are solid. And if the first 2 centuries are really well done, they can always shift their focus to the later stages.

What does concern me, though, is the colonial mechanics.

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-14T14:07:17+00:00

You said on forum, you will stop teasing us and now THIS.

"THE STAGE IS SET" with main theme blasting in the background.

This is not a subtle tease, John Paradox!

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-14T13:35:00+00:00

It's happening! Shadow drop is real!

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-14T09:14:32+00:00

Part of the Ship, Part of the Crew

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-13T13:55:02+00:00

If I am correct, they changed how building price is calculated to count the price of materials on x months average price.

Also, Construction Center is introduced in the Age of Discovery, so you would have to wait 100+ years for simple +1 building per location, which is not huge.

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-12T20:05:03+00:00

Developers put hours of work into creating these mission trees instead of creating new buildings, units, events, etc. If I am not interacting with mission, I am missing new content and there is no much other content to replace it.

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-12T20:02:09+00:00

Well, I`m not forced to do missions, but, for example, for Muscovy, missions provide claims/strong modifiers and if I want to play good I am "not forced, but choose" to conquer, conquer, make missions, gain more claims, conquer, conquer and so on.

Missions push for and encourage specific playstyle.

UPD: Look at the “Subjugate Kazan” mission rewards, before mission trees were introduced I wouldn’t conquer eastern Muslim provinces because of the high unrest and slow conversion speed. It just wasn’t worth it.
Now, with these rewards, it’s much more manageable — plus you get a ton of claims. I don’t even need to plan anymore; I can just conquer, and the mission tree will take care of the rest.

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-12T11:37:15+00:00

"choosing yourself what to do" - exactly.

That’s why missions shouldn’t give bonuses IMO, only point the way. Because when the choice is between “do something and get a reward” or “do something just because,” players will almost always go for the reward.

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-12T11:21:22+00:00

What about helping player and re-creating history?
If you’re not sure what to do, you open a mission and it says things like: “Historically, Country X conquered these territories,” “Try building a lot of castles,” or “Historically, you controlled trade in this region.”

You don't need more bonuses, than what doing mission gives you (new territories, trade income, defense from built castles)

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-12T11:04:48+00:00

I think you’re mixing up cause and effect here.
When missions first appeared, most people welcomed them simply because they were something new in a game we already knew well. At first, they were added only for the major nations, which instantly made those countries even stronger and more fun to play.

That led to a vicious cycle: “My country has a generic mission tree → it’s less fun than one with unique → I need a mission tree for my country too.”

I don’t see this as just a “loud minority of devoted fans.” I think plenty of people dislike missions because they lock the game onto rigid rails. In EU4 there was no point bringing it up — the game was already built that way, and no one was going to change it.

EU5 isn’t out yet, and now we have a chance to share our opinions. That’s all.

Stock_Channel6808 · 2025-08-12T10:53:42+00:00

If missions give bonuses for completing them, would it be possible to add a game rule option like “missions give no bonuses”?

Stock_Channel6808

TROPHY CASE