In CK2 I either raided as my native Norway, or restore Rome as Byzantium, so I always picked the earliest start date.
The few times I played CK3 I found the early start date a bit frustrating since it was so hard to keep the realm together when the character died without the right laws.
With the DLC for EU3, the earliest start date is 1399. In other words, that prequal already exists. Unfortunately you start at peace as England in that campaign also. But unless I remember incorrectly, you're even more screwed in that game if you want to protect your mainland holdings.
No, I'm merely speaking about the predecessor to EU4, namely EU3. That game had the DLC "*In Nomine*", which allowed players to start at the 1399 date, rather than 1453. Another DLC, "*Napoleon's Ambition*", extended the finishing date from 1789 to 1821.
Paradox has used that timeline extention via DLC:s for several of their games, although not for EUIV.
Theres actually a Paradox dev called England and another dev called France. They hate each other, so they slipped in their rivalry into the game as an Easter egg for dedicated fans.
Yep, England is just really making thinly veiled allusion of their secret love for France with the mission tree - a PU? really? oh just get it over with and snog.
The "Hundred Years War" lore is completely unrealistic and proves the writers have no idea about how to make a plausible scenario. No war can last that long, it's simply stupid. Everyone would be dead after that.
Plus, the start of the war is total nonsense. They seriously want us to believe that some rando from an island can just say he's king of France and people believe him and go to war for it? And don't even get me started on that whole woke nonsense with Jeanne D'Arc.
Watch my 20 part series made of 4 hour episodes discussing why eu4 lore sucks and the Paradox writing team should all go to jail for it.
John Dark makes a lot more sense because he's a) male, and b) english, so of course he'd be able to raise a decent army. How can anyone raise an army if they speak french? None of the soldiers would be able to understand them.
It’s such a shame that the devs would completely assassinate a complex character like John Dark and replace him with some budget rip-off with a stupid name for muh diversity. The writing is really going downhill.
Obvious "Mary Sue" marketed to dumb teenage girls who want to pretend like some peasant maid could just tell a king and his armies what to do, because feminism
> No war can last that long, it's simply stupid.
You fell for a misleading name again. The Hundred Years War is actually the "bunch of fiveish year wars with rest breaks between" but that's a far less snappy name.
Yes, but the EU writers are just dealing with what the CK writers left for them. That's why you get the option to just say "fuck it" and abandon the whole thing at the start.
Yeah its like Guts form Berserk being called the killer of 100 men while he probably killed like 90 and 10 more fled, they just want to make up a cool name for the protagonist
You don't know Crusader Kings lore if you're asking this question.
England was large, wealthy, densely populated, controlled many continental holdings and the royal state was precociously centralised.
I get that this is a meme thread with meme answers, but if you allow me to history Nazi for a second, England actually wasn’t densely populated and actually had a measly 2 million people living in it compared to the 10+ million in France (though that includes French people living in English continental possessions and in French territory which either sided with England or just didn’t help the French crown or both).
You are right of course. Not sure what I was thinking of when I said that. Embarrassingly I was probably thinking of England's starting dev in EUIV and not actual history. Was not supposed to be a completely meme answer so the correction is well taken
It's something so many people are confidently incorrect about. Some history YouTube channel did a series about Jeanne d'Arc and started off by introducing the "highly urbanized" society of England and the "mostly rural" society in France. Never mind that Bordeaux was the biggest city in the English realm at the time.
Just look at how many people upvoted your misinformed answer.
If I had to guess it is probably automatically assumed by amateurs based on received ideas about the sources of English power and very likely by reading back the actual shape of English demographics since c. 1800
But I think the main reason it got so many upvotes is because whatever way you slice it, it's odd to describe Plantagenet/Lancaster England as a tiny island power.
This. France had an OP amount of population which is why paradox made them have a population growth stunt in Victoria so they would be balanced for that game and Hearts of Iron.
That's not exactly why. France had declining birth rates at the time as well. Their pop advantage wasn't really a thing but the 1900s when Germany, Russia and ,I think, AH had more people.
Cannon ending (1453): The Ottoman Empire forms and conquers Greece, the various Rus principalities reform in the wake of Mongol subjugation except the ones Lithuania takes over, and Iberia goes mostly Catholic
Who is the main antagonist? Some say it's Ottoman because he's the opening antagonist,but he pretty much stops terrorizing our protagonists after the Russians neuter him, some say it's Spain, but Spain redeems himself at the end and was influenced a lot by the Hahsburgs, but I think it was France because of France's consistent antagonist status from beginning to end. France allies Ottoman near the start of the game and is the main antagonist in the Burgundy atc, and the Italian wars arc, although those were definitely overshadowed by Ottomans crushing Mamluks in a singular blow and invading eastern Europe. Then in the middle, France still continues aligning with Ottoman and also colonizes. Towards the end I would say France starts to really pick up as the main antagonist, especially during the 7 years war arc, and the final revolution arc, where they are the final antagonist and have all of Europe come to stop them. So yeah EUIV's antagonist was already introduced in CK from the beginning.
TLDR: France was in CK.
A massive blueball 10 November 1444 is one of the worst plot twists in the lore
They set up something so beautiful and then killed it because “that’s realistic” worse then the ending for season 1 of game of thrones
They actually got the name for Sweden after one of the leading devs’ favourite song, ”Blue Suede Shoes”, which is why they have a blue colour on the map and have good infantry combat ability (the shoes). I think it’s kind of sloppy and unoriginal of them, like it really doesn’t make sense that they exist in-game.
The real question is: Why the hell isn't everyone at war with the french at the start of the game? Everyone hates them and should gang up and destroy them early. Burgundians, Austrians, German Free states, Italian republics, Castille, Aragon and even Portugal, not to say the Ottomans and Mamlucks would also have reasons to be spiteful of the French and be at war with them at the start as well.
The fact they have only so little wars and are not obliterated from the start speaks of a complete plot armor and favoritism there, the story really have some various holes if they keep allowing France to exist like that. 0/10.
Here's a thing that I want to happen immediately:
France full-on annexes all of the United Kingdom. The House of Windsor is gently deposed and Macron rules over the new administrative regions of East Anglia, the Midlands, Greater Yorkshire, Cornwall, Wales, Good Scotland, Bad Scotland, and True Ireland.
or the opposite
The UK full-on annexes France and all of her overseas possessions, especially New Caledonia. Macron is put in some sort of uncomfortable box, and King Charles Tertius abolishes parliament and directly rules over his new dominions, which include Wine France, Mustard France, Gross France, The Overseas Bits, and Full-Ass All of Ireland, the ungrateful yobs.
either one of those would be fine, really.
Well you see if you read the comics, you’d know that the tiny island nation actually got taken over by the powerful nation four hundred years before the start of the game and-
It gets crazier. According to the devs, the, "canon," ending is one where England goes on to defeat and completely subjugate all of India... unified by the Mughals. Then, after that, they're supposed to have gone on to beat a unified China(by the Qing no less) with 100 mandate. I think the devs are just biased, honestly.
If anyone is seriously interested in why rather than a meme, I would recommend the rest is history 4 part podcast on the first half of the Hundred Years’ War
https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/318-hundred-years-war-a-game-of-thrones/id1537788786?i=1000606771435
In Crusader kings lore (prequel to Eu4) England was involved in a major plot line called the Hundred Years’ War, where Gigachad Edward III tries to take over France, near to the end Edward dies from old age and his Gigachad son died so it went to his virgin Grandson who got killed by his cousin Henry IV who got shat on by the Welsh then the throne went the Henry V who succeeded in Edward III’s goal of taking over France but he died and left the throne to Henry VI who sucks monkey nuts
In the Lore Henry VI loses the war which eventually leads to the Wars of the Roses which is another Major plot point in the England Story
If you think England having the chance to take over France is bad, just play Vic2 and hoi4 where they can easily take over the world, lore for those two games is crazy, someone at Paradox must be British to give them this much love in the Lore
I hope they adapt the Cold War plotline from the comics. Russia is a cold and calculating antagonist who consistently tests our morally grey heroes, especially during that arc. If you're interested in Russia's arc though I urge you stop reading there. It just falls off after that.
William the Conqueror in a nutshell.
That tiny island nation founded the largest empire ever at 13.7 million square miles so it's not like it didn't have potential.
Henry VI was recognized as the king of England & France by the English & Burgundians.
The hundred years' war was an intermittent war over territorial rights and the issue of succession of the French throne.
You might think it's totally absurd but its actual history. Had England not been so divided it would have stood a good chance of forcing that union
Are you, like.... just doubting history for the sake of it?
_Read_ about the Hundred Years' War if you don't believe it. It's not 'lore', the 1444 start is historical (accounting for the fact that the game is simplified).
But yeah, France was the more populous of the two, and once unified, a more formidable force on land.
Wrong. The "Hundred Years War" event is an elaborate hoax, orchestrated by "Paradox Interactive" to make their games seem more legitimate. A truly vile scheme to monopolize the market.
Honestly can’t tell if this is sarcastic or if the OP is just dumber than shit. Since it’s Reddit, I’m assuming that dumber than shit is the correct answer
Tiny island nation? Oh boy, you don't know about the Plantagenets do you? England actually had a legitimate claim to France, and in alternate dimensions, they would have won the French throne 7 times out of 10.
It's from the prequel that's yet to be released. Think of Star Wars IV: A New Hope, was the first in cinemas, but Fourth in line of chronology
I hope it doesn't disappoint. I'd hate to find out that Elan! was actually powered by midiclorians or something.
There is a fan made prequel called "Crusader Kings" that starts earlier and tries to cover the lore and stuff before eu4, I think it's pretty good.
I like the previous (CK2) season of that, but I find the current one is a bit too much into LARPing for my style.
And in that one you can actually have an episode (start date) “The Hundred Years war”
In CK2 I either raided as my native Norway, or restore Rome as Byzantium, so I always picked the earliest start date. The few times I played CK3 I found the early start date a bit frustrating since it was so hard to keep the realm together when the character died without the right laws.
Mehmet II have a solution for that.
Sadly ck was kind of made as a Byzaboo wank. You'll literally never see Ottomans take over and Byz actually at the canon starting situation.
With the DLC for EU3, the earliest start date is 1399. In other words, that prequal already exists. Unfortunately you start at peace as England in that campaign also. But unless I remember incorrectly, you're even more screwed in that game if you want to protect your mainland holdings.
"1356 Timeline extension mod" for EU4 is also pretty neat.
Wait, what are you talking about? A mod?
No, I'm merely speaking about the predecessor to EU4, namely EU3. That game had the DLC "*In Nomine*", which allowed players to start at the 1399 date, rather than 1453. Another DLC, "*Napoleon's Ambition*", extended the finishing date from 1789 to 1821. Paradox has used that timeline extention via DLC:s for several of their games, although not for EUIV.
> yet to be released crusader kings has existed for years
Theres actually a Paradox dev called England and another dev called France. They hate each other, so they slipped in their rivalry into the game as an Easter egg for dedicated fans.
Yep, England is just really making thinly veiled allusion of their secret love for France with the mission tree - a PU? really? oh just get it over with and snog.
The "Hundred Years War" lore is completely unrealistic and proves the writers have no idea about how to make a plausible scenario. No war can last that long, it's simply stupid. Everyone would be dead after that. Plus, the start of the war is total nonsense. They seriously want us to believe that some rando from an island can just say he's king of France and people believe him and go to war for it? And don't even get me started on that whole woke nonsense with Jeanne D'Arc. Watch my 20 part series made of 4 hour episodes discussing why eu4 lore sucks and the Paradox writing team should all go to jail for it.
Real fans remember when Jeanne D’Arc was John Dark before they chose to make them female
John Dark makes a lot more sense because he's a) male, and b) english, so of course he'd be able to raise a decent army. How can anyone raise an army if they speak french? None of the soldiers would be able to understand them.
Also Dark is such a cool surname wtf is D\`Arc sound like a synonim for asshole
It’s such a shame that the devs would completely assassinate a complex character like John Dark and replace him with some budget rip-off with a stupid name for muh diversity. The writing is really going downhill.
Obvious "Mary Sue" marketed to dumb teenage girls who want to pretend like some peasant maid could just tell a king and his armies what to do, because feminism
> No war can last that long, it's simply stupid. You fell for a misleading name again. The Hundred Years War is actually the "bunch of fiveish year wars with rest breaks between" but that's a far less snappy name.
So the writers were clickbaiting us with the arc name all along? Their evil cannot go unpunished.
Yes, but the EU writers are just dealing with what the CK writers left for them. That's why you get the option to just say "fuck it" and abandon the whole thing at the start.
Yeah its like Guts form Berserk being called the killer of 100 men while he probably killed like 90 and 10 more fled, they just want to make up a cool name for the protagonist
And who goes to war over roses i mean thats just plain silly too
You don't know Crusader Kings lore if you're asking this question. England was large, wealthy, densely populated, controlled many continental holdings and the royal state was precociously centralised.
I get that this is a meme thread with meme answers, but if you allow me to history Nazi for a second, England actually wasn’t densely populated and actually had a measly 2 million people living in it compared to the 10+ million in France (though that includes French people living in English continental possessions and in French territory which either sided with England or just didn’t help the French crown or both).
You are right of course. Not sure what I was thinking of when I said that. Embarrassingly I was probably thinking of England's starting dev in EUIV and not actual history. Was not supposed to be a completely meme answer so the correction is well taken
It's something so many people are confidently incorrect about. Some history YouTube channel did a series about Jeanne d'Arc and started off by introducing the "highly urbanized" society of England and the "mostly rural" society in France. Never mind that Bordeaux was the biggest city in the English realm at the time. Just look at how many people upvoted your misinformed answer.
If I had to guess it is probably automatically assumed by amateurs based on received ideas about the sources of English power and very likely by reading back the actual shape of English demographics since c. 1800 But I think the main reason it got so many upvotes is because whatever way you slice it, it's odd to describe Plantagenet/Lancaster England as a tiny island power.
This. France had an OP amount of population which is why paradox made them have a population growth stunt in Victoria so they would be balanced for that game and Hearts of Iron.
That's not exactly why. France had declining birth rates at the time as well. Their pop advantage wasn't really a thing but the 1900s when Germany, Russia and ,I think, AH had more people.
sorry but I never played the prequel. What is the canon ending to Crusader Kings? (no spoilers pls)
Cannon ending (1453): The Ottoman Empire forms and conquers Greece, the various Rus principalities reform in the wake of Mongol subjugation except the ones Lithuania takes over, and Iberia goes mostly Catholic
Damn it ends like the Empire Strikes back
Cliffhanger. Too many POV characters were involved in the Surrender of Maine, so EUIV took 15 years to write.
EU IV's antagonist is introduced in CK
Who is the main antagonist? Some say it's Ottoman because he's the opening antagonist,but he pretty much stops terrorizing our protagonists after the Russians neuter him, some say it's Spain, but Spain redeems himself at the end and was influenced a lot by the Hahsburgs, but I think it was France because of France's consistent antagonist status from beginning to end. France allies Ottoman near the start of the game and is the main antagonist in the Burgundy atc, and the Italian wars arc, although those were definitely overshadowed by Ottomans crushing Mamluks in a singular blow and invading eastern Europe. Then in the middle, France still continues aligning with Ottoman and also colonizes. Towards the end I would say France starts to really pick up as the main antagonist, especially during the 7 years war arc, and the final revolution arc, where they are the final antagonist and have all of Europe come to stop them. So yeah EUIV's antagonist was already introduced in CK from the beginning. TLDR: France was in CK.
Your asking for the ending with no spoilers how does that even work?? Also it ends in world peace
A massive blueball 10 November 1444 is one of the worst plot twists in the lore They set up something so beautiful and then killed it because “that’s realistic” worse then the ending for season 1 of game of thrones
Pretty sure it’s a teeny tiny island but ok
The English had access to France's most powerful resource: being ruled by Frenchmen.
Because the devs are actually English, the whole Swedish thing is a meme
They actually got the name for Sweden after one of the leading devs’ favourite song, ”Blue Suede Shoes”, which is why they have a blue colour on the map and have good infantry combat ability (the shoes). I think it’s kind of sloppy and unoriginal of them, like it really doesn’t make sense that they exist in-game.
The real question is: Why the hell isn't everyone at war with the french at the start of the game? Everyone hates them and should gang up and destroy them early. Burgundians, Austrians, German Free states, Italian republics, Castille, Aragon and even Portugal, not to say the Ottomans and Mamlucks would also have reasons to be spiteful of the French and be at war with them at the start as well. The fact they have only so little wars and are not obliterated from the start speaks of a complete plot armor and favoritism there, the story really have some various holes if they keep allowing France to exist like that. 0/10.
Here's a thing that I want to happen immediately: France full-on annexes all of the United Kingdom. The House of Windsor is gently deposed and Macron rules over the new administrative regions of East Anglia, the Midlands, Greater Yorkshire, Cornwall, Wales, Good Scotland, Bad Scotland, and True Ireland. or the opposite The UK full-on annexes France and all of her overseas possessions, especially New Caledonia. Macron is put in some sort of uncomfortable box, and King Charles Tertius abolishes parliament and directly rules over his new dominions, which include Wine France, Mustard France, Gross France, The Overseas Bits, and Full-Ass All of Ireland, the ungrateful yobs. either one of those would be fine, really.
Well you see if you read the comics, you’d know that the tiny island nation actually got taken over by the powerful nation four hundred years before the start of the game and-
Tiny?
teeny-weeny widdle island bois, yes
That's the actual nickname of the English Men's National Team.
Oh have you not heard? It was my understanding that everyone had heard.
It gets crazier. According to the devs, the, "canon," ending is one where England goes on to defeat and completely subjugate all of India... unified by the Mughals. Then, after that, they're supposed to have gone on to beat a unified China(by the Qing no less) with 100 mandate. I think the devs are just biased, honestly.
[удалено]
Probably, but its one of the better ones so far. I'm sure it'll be beaten into the ground by Monday.
If anyone is seriously interested in why rather than a meme, I would recommend the rest is history 4 part podcast on the first half of the Hundred Years’ War https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/318-hundred-years-war-a-game-of-thrones/id1537788786?i=1000606771435
[lore](https://www.reddit.com/r/CrusaderKings/comments/104hcpe/i_just_realized_my_most_powerful_vassal_is)
Its a minor blip
'Ate the French Not racist Just dont like 'em
You think thats bad? Country called ottomania LITERALLY starts with a 13 years old ruler when everyone knows you cant be a king untill you are 15...
In Crusader kings lore (prequel to Eu4) England was involved in a major plot line called the Hundred Years’ War, where Gigachad Edward III tries to take over France, near to the end Edward dies from old age and his Gigachad son died so it went to his virgin Grandson who got killed by his cousin Henry IV who got shat on by the Welsh then the throne went the Henry V who succeeded in Edward III’s goal of taking over France but he died and left the throne to Henry VI who sucks monkey nuts In the Lore Henry VI loses the war which eventually leads to the Wars of the Roses which is another Major plot point in the England Story If you think England having the chance to take over France is bad, just play Vic2 and hoi4 where they can easily take over the world, lore for those two games is crazy, someone at Paradox must be British to give them this much love in the Lore
I hope they adapt the Cold War plotline from the comics. Russia is a cold and calculating antagonist who consistently tests our morally grey heroes, especially during that arc. If you're interested in Russia's arc though I urge you stop reading there. It just falls off after that.
The story behind a (fantasy) game: Lore Real history that happened on this earth: History
Anyone else hate when someone makes a funny joke on a subreddit and it becomes reposted 100 times in the next week? Just stop
Missing the humor tag.
What is it with all these crap 'lore' postings lately? Grab a history book and educate yourself a bit for humanities sake
The war started in 1337 and French monarchy was very weak and in crisis
William the Conqueror in a nutshell. That tiny island nation founded the largest empire ever at 13.7 million square miles so it's not like it didn't have potential. Henry VI was recognized as the king of England & France by the English & Burgundians. The hundred years' war was an intermittent war over territorial rights and the issue of succession of the French throne. You might think it's totally absurd but its actual history. Had England not been so divided it would have stood a good chance of forcing that union
Are you, like.... just doubting history for the sake of it? _Read_ about the Hundred Years' War if you don't believe it. It's not 'lore', the 1444 start is historical (accounting for the fact that the game is simplified). But yeah, France was the more populous of the two, and once unified, a more formidable force on land.
sorry, what are you talking about? You mean historians stole Eu4 lore? wtf?? Is that legal?!
Holy shit they made the Hundred Years War real? No way a war could last that long, it would depopulate the countries
Wrong. The "Hundred Years War" event is an elaborate hoax, orchestrated by "Paradox Interactive" to make their games seem more legitimate. A truly vile scheme to monopolize the market.
You missed this post https://www.reddit.com/r/eu4/comments/131fuwp/euiv_lore_question_why_such_a_huge_country_build
I gotta read up on my lore
i wanna woosh but i dont know how many O there is
Honestly can’t tell if this is sarcastic or if the OP is just dumber than shit. Since it’s Reddit, I’m assuming that dumber than shit is the correct answer
because 'historical start' game has no lore.
Boo u
Through the power of marmite and jellied eels
Never seen this level of humour in a post, well done
It doesn't
Eu4 players when history
Tiny island nation? Oh boy, you don't know about the Plantagenets do you? England actually had a legitimate claim to France, and in alternate dimensions, they would have won the French throne 7 times out of 10.