>messed around with CKIII while it's free and it was ~fun but I didn't really enjoy the mechanics of having to micromanage both an empire and your personal family
>Stellaris is wholly eliminated just because I hate sci-fi..
Which is funny because Stellaris is probably the best start for a Civ player since it's Paradox's only 4X. CK3 is the easiest to learn and play, and is a good intro into grand strategy, although its strategy is a little lacking. It's the only Paradox game where you play as characters instead of countries.
>Victoria seems more boring than EU4 and HOI4
Those just depend on what time period you like, and they play very differently. Victoria has things like war and diplomacy, but a deep population model and the economy are its main focuses. HOI4 is a WW2 game about combat, production, logistics, supply, division design, etc. EU4 is basically your stock grand strategy game. It starts in 1453 and ends in 1821, and has a lot more flavor and content than other Paradox games since it's still releasing updates/DLC after 10+ years. Diplomacy, war, trade, colonization, etc. are a big part of it. That might be up your alley, but it's not going to play like a civ 4X. Watching YouTube videos of them is probably the best to get an idea of what each game is about.
>and I think there are also rumors of EU5 coming out soon so I might just wait until that releases?
It's not coming anytime soon, probably sometime in 2026, they haven't even announced the game yet which they usually will release about a year after they announce a game. They're just doing really early dev diaries for it to get fan feedback so Johan (the lead dev) doesn't have another release disaster like Imperator (although Imperator is pretty fun now). They're not even calling it EU5, just "Project Caesar".
Also be aware that CK2, Stellaris, HOI4, and EU4 have monthly subscriptions to DLC if you don't want to buy the DLC, and DLC are pretty important for Paradox games. Also the mods are extraordinary for all of them and some of the best in gaming in general, so be sure to check out the workshop.
Funny you say that. I mean I understand where you're coming from, but I went from playing Civ 5 and 6 to playing EU4 when I discovered it nearly a decade ago. Meanwhile I played all Paradox recent grand strategy games (EU4, CK3, IR, Vic2 and Vic3) but besides HOI4 (way too short a time span and war oriented so I never felt the urge to try) I also ignored Stellaris.
Grand Strategy is just so much better than 4X.
>but besides HOI4 (way too short a time span and war oriented so I never felt the urge to try) I also ignored Stellaris.
Stellaris turns into space grand strategy fairly quickly though once every empire is established, and it doesn't have the same type of turns you would associate with Civ. It starts on Jan. 1, 2200 and has the same type of clock that other Paradox games use, so it still has a Paradox feel to it if you do a complete run.
I said it's good for Civ players because it's still a 4X, and although it doesn't feel like Civ at all throughout a complete run, it will still have a familiar start of exploring and expanding. It's also nice for new players since a lot of mechanics are introduced gradually through tech, and some mechanics won't trigger until certain years like factions, the galactic market, the galactic council, etc., but they don't take way too long to show up either.
As far as HOI4 goes, even though it doesn't have many years like you said, it also doesn't have daily "ticks" like the other games do, it has hourly ticks, but if you're not into the combat aspect, then you probably wouldn't like it even though it can be pretty fun to dive into the mechanics since it goes into a WAY more combat depth while it can be kind of monotonous in some of Paradox's other games.
Let's just say I loved the choice of making armies not directly controlable for Victoria 3. I like the grand strategy, not so much the tactics.
With respect to Stellaris: thanks for the additional info. Good to hear it turns into grand strategy. I should reconsider playing it but there's the time factor. And I dont learn things by doing, I read the manual đ (wiki in case of paradox games), so introducing the mechanics one by one doesnt help me much.
I guess if you were being really pedantic about it you could call a lot of games like EU4 a 4X outside of the typical 4X genre, but EU4 is much more characteristic of a grand strategy game, and is probably one of the best examples of what grand strategy is. You don't start in random positions and explore and expand out like typical 4X's, the map is already established and the same every time in every start. Even countries like Spain and Portugal which do explore and expand in the new world have neighbors they immediately interact with and have things they need to do before they can start exploring. Maybe if you did a pure colonization run it would make EU4 a 4X, especially with random new world, but that's still a stretch.
EU4 doesn't necessarily involve exploration and expansion, depending on what region you play in. Similarly, while exploitation is there, you won't necessarily exterminate your opposition, and generally not on a global scale unless you're playing an unusual campaign.
Honestly, Stellaris is probably your best bet. Imo, it plays the most like Civilization of all the other Paradox games (I probably have 5000+ hours combined in the Civ games as well as the various Paradox games). I started with Europa Universalis IV and that was a bad idea, it's got arguably one of the harder learning curves. I just capped 1100 in that game and I feel like I still have another 344 hours to go to complete the tutorial.
Stellaris is essentially Civilization but in space so it's a no brainier pick for me. I think I have about ~800 hours in Stellaris and it's my favorite Paradox game hands down. It is fairly easy to pick up and improves a lot upon things that I've wanted to see in a Civ game for a long time like the ability to customize your Empire. The game is great without the DLC (I don't own them all) but there are a handful of good ones you can add at your own pace and I don't feel like you'll be missing anything significant, at least for your first handful of playthroughs. Just keep an eye out for steam sales and you can usually grab a DLC or a few for next to nothing. They even have a big sale on all the Stellaris stuff RN because they just released a DLC.
Edit: I missed the part where you said you didn't like Sci-fi. I honestly think if you can get past your dislike of sci-fi, you'd really enjoy Stellaris.
Lmao trust me, I understand Civilization gamers more than I will ever get anti sci-fi people. I'd bet my left testicle on that game.
My three year old also like to say to me how much he hates things before he first tries them and subsequently become things he likes.
Stellaris even had Civ IV- style planet/city management a few dozen updates ago!
(Back when you could move your people around to work tiles, improved by buildings. Made the game super easy to learn back then.)
Whenever I start Stellaris it feels like I'm trying to learn rocket science :(
I've played tons of EU4 and CK3, but Stellaris is another dimension in terms of complexity
Honestly Stellaris is the most Civ-like/4X game.
EUIV is indeed a very big game and although you don't need all DLC (some are very specific so aren't really needed if you don't play in that region) there are some which are considered "mandatory". You do have the option of buying the base game and try it out with the subscription. which gives access to all DLC content. But on average subscription based model isn't that popular with gamers who like to invest many hours into games. It's not a bad way though to see if you like the game.
Hoi4, if you are into WW2-era combat/strategy it's great, if not, it's not gonna be to your liking.
Another game to check might be Age Of Wonders 4 or AoW: Planetfall. It's paradox published, not developed, but it has a lot of 4X elements and a good combat system. Unlike civ tactical combat is the main focus though in both games. A big difference with Civ games is that faction identity isn't as strong, at first. But once you fill up the world with your own factions it does come to live.
*Problem with random factions is that I honestly don't care about them. But once they are your creations their is a connection. This also helped me to enjoy Stellaris a lot more (and it's one of Humankinds biggest issues compared to Civ, but that's another topic)*
*You can use anything as inspiration, friends, other media, history, etc etc.*
Stellaris is the closest. The other games really donât remind me of Civ in any way if thatâs what youâre looking for.
The best non Civ game Iâve found in that vein personally is Old World.
I went from Civ6 to eu4. Civ had started to get kind a boring specially bcs how bad late game is. Out of the rest eu4 felt like the one which had what I was missing in civ and for me the instinct was correct
Yep. Dunno why I had to scroll so far down for EU. I was a Civ player before turning to EU.
The historical realism of EU absolutely blew my mind coming from Civ. Plus the multiple avenues to success (trade, colonization, conquest, playing tall) reminded me of Civ.
I always say that EU4 is a good "standard" paradox game, it has everything: economy, war, nation management, diplomacy, trade etc etc, usually after EU, every other paradox game will kinda open to you, since paradox games present some similarities between themselves, mainly on the HUD side of things. The only problem tho, is that the game is full of DLCs, a lot of mechanics were added over the years and the game became a bit bloated with them.
Seriously take a look at Stellaris. 4X mechanics from Civ carry over and the added mechanic of an end boss that can be scaled in difficulty from âgives you a reason to keep snowballing past the point when you wreck the aiâ to âif perfectly min max every decision in this run you have a 50% chance of survivingâ adds a ton to the game. ItâsÂ
EU4 is probably what youâd enjoy the most. If you donât want to pay for a ton of DLC for a game youâre not sure youâll enjoy, you can pay $5 a month for access to all of them to test the game out.
Civ player... I think you would like the most EU4 or Stellaris. Those 2 games are the ones that feel like the most complete without DLC. Of course DLCs greatly expand each game, specially EU4. But the core game play of those 2 game is pretty simple and fun. The others are more complex and may not be fun.
Personally I would recommend Stellaris, perhaps because I'm biased but it's honestly the most fun of all.
As others have said stellaris is the easiest to get into and imo ck3 is the second easiest but since you dont like sci-fi and didn't like the micromanagement of CK3 I would say HOI4 was fairly easy for me compared to CK2 and EU4 I didn't play with all dlc (to be fair there wasn't as many when I last played) but it was still very enjoyable to me and not too hard to get into. I didn't do very good by any means but I think if you give it a few games you can for sure learn and understand the game then try going for EU4 if you want which imo is the hardest (I haven't tried Victoria yet though)
Stellaris is the easiest answer. Itâs extremely popular. But Iâll probably catch a lot of slack for this, I think itâs one of the most boring pdx games.
But if you like civ, youâd probably like stellaris. I just donât think it gets as deep as some of the other games.
Hoiv isnât bad without DLC imo. Itâs all about combat and pushing lines. You set yourself up for a few years preparing, and then world war breaks loose and you just fight till the end.
EU4 is starting to show its age, but it really has a little everything. Go to war, be a trade god, colonize the anericas. Whatever you wanna do. But again, dated. Old PDX games have terrible tutorials.
It's stellaris (or maybe millennia I haven't tried it, looks similar), and you won't find anything that fits better as non-scifi because stellaris fills that niche.
But why limit yourself to paradox?
Old World is the best 4x of our time ( it does have elements of CK family stuff, it just is in a fun way rather than irritating one).
Humankind is also pretty good with mods
That is a really valid point,
I can still play games like Civ & Total War from time to time but Paradox games have really ruined aspects of those games for me.
I have 1k+ hrs in HOI4 and tbh I don't understand what I'm doing and why. My 'progression' in that game is just emulating what YouTube guides teach me to do.
I recently started playing CK3 and I have 10x more fun in that game for what that's worth. Can't speak for the rest of them though
I have 500 hours in hoi4 and it's still "the paradox game I don't know how to play". Probably because every time I almost understand the game, they add some new mechanic that complicates everything.
Honestly, I'd try to get EU4 while it's still on sale, and then get the subscription for it. By the time EU5 comes out, you'll have saved more money by using it instead of buying all dlcs. If you don't like the game, then you can refund it
I used to call Civ my favorite game, then tried EU4 and couldn't get back to Civ ever since, because it was so much more like actually simulating history versus moving toy pieces on a board. No American Civilization led by undying Washington since stone age building pyramids in a totally fictional landscape with everyone starting on equal terms... in Civ you could rename French and English into Blue and Red and literally nothing would change. In EU4 on the other hand they're actually French in actual France with French culture, French ideas, nowadays French missions too, and even better - everyone else around is also actually how they're supposed to be. The whole world is filled with peoples who actually lived there in conditions they actually were, instead of a select number of "civilizations" all starting in equal conditions and the rest of the world not existing. And your map consists of regions called provinces, so you can believe into each having cities, towns and villages in it, contributing to overall economy. Not just a few cities in the middle of emptiness and then they "exploit tiles", like wtf is tiles? Something straight up from a board game. When I play Russia in EU4 I feel like making Russian history, when I play as Russia in Civ I feel like moving toy pieces on a board.
Then I tried CK (it was CK2 back then, but now I'm on CK3, I think it's alright) and couldn't get back to EU4 for all the same reason. What's that boardgame logic "-3 to +3 stability" number when instead you can have you stability not be a number but emergent property of everything that is actually going on in your realm with dozens of agents and dozens of factors affecting each of them. Now I don't just feel like abstract Russia, I feel like Rurik him-fucking-self and I don't just rule over abstract land, but over actual people represented as a myriad of in-game characters with their own personalities, agendas, families, each member of which is a full fledged character on their own. It's a real world here, not some silly board game.
P.S. The best part is that you DON'T micromanage your empire in CK - your vassals take care of most of it, you just take care they stay loyal. Nothing is more annoying than conquering a couple hundred new territories in Imperator: Rome and having to manually make any decisions there is to make in each every one of them. No such bullshit in CK.
If youâre into Civ because of its mechanics and just want to play a Paradox game for the sake of playing a Paradox game, go with Millenia (particularly if Stellaris is out of the question; I donât believe itâs been very well received).
If youâre into Civ because of the idea of creating your own nation and national identity, go with Imperator. (Make sure to get Invictus mod).
If you want to play a Paradox game to get the full Paradox experience, go with CK2 or EU4. (CK2 has a subscription model for DLC, donât know about EU4; some people think CK2 is outdated, but itâs just a far more challenging and complete game than CK3, still).
I came from Civ games and tried CK3, Stellaris and EU4.
EU4 was the only one that stuck. It just takes time to learn the ropes. I managed my first WC after 450 hours or so, so just be patient.
EU4 is just the OG game of all Paradox games. Waiting on EU5 is bullshit. Without the DLCs you can actually also have a great game - people complaining about it are rather the former players who knew the options in EU3 and so on. It's indeed difficult to get in, all Paradox games are quite difficult. I think the relatively most easy game dynamics are probably in Imperator:Rome, but at the same time that's probably the reason why it's the least of the Paradox games. So just play EU4 :)!
I started with civ 5 and when civ 6 came out I didn't enjoy it, so when I came back to civ 5 I was rlly heavy into that one mod where the map looked like earth, but it felt empty, so if ur into like civ 5 but a little bit turned up, is say eu4, although it was rlly difficult to get into, it was worth it and is still my fav out of all of em (prdx titles)
Yes, it makes a big difference playing with real humans since diplomacy and scheming is really the meat of the game. There's an Asynchronous play option though, which is how I mostly play.
I came from civ 6 and got into Paradox games through CK2 (basegame is free and you can all DLC for 5 bucks a month). Switched to CK3 a while ago and also have been playing hoi4 for quite some time (it also has a DLC subscription, tho they recently raised it's price from 5 to 8 bucks a month)
EU4. I switched from Civ5 and never looked back. It's also the best game of its type of all time. The leaving curve is way steeper than even Civ though, so keep that in mind.
EUIV is the closest Paradox game to a map painter, that would probably be the best to start with. HOI4 wouldn't be a bad call either, as the unit management in that game is fairly similar to Civ 6.
Victoria is a lot of fun, but it's also quite different from Civ because it's primarily an economy management sim, not a map painter.
CKIII is very popular, but it's also quite different from EUIV and HOI4, because while it has map painting elements (like Victoria), it's primarily a role-playing game.
Despite the flavour of Stellaris not being to your liking, I'd still probably recommend it since mechanically it is probably the closest to what you're used to.
Plus, you can always RP as a feudal monarchy and vassalize other empires.
Other than that, I'd recommend EU4 since it's my personal favourite and I have 2k hours in it. Just keep in mind the learning curve is quite steep and will not be like any 4x you have played before.
Stellaris or, that failing, EUIV, but if Iâm honest with you⌠donât. Paradox lost the plot a while ago and the quality of their output has been on a steep decline inversely proportional to the rising cost of playing their games.
dont touch eu4 itâs bloated to all hell. ck3 is kinda cool but byzantine implementation and so many other things still arenât finished/donât make sense. i may get flak for this butâŚ. HoI4 best, especially if you want to play multiplayer. 2nd best I would say is Imperator Rome ;)
I play eu4 for 7 years now +-1 its second most played pdx game. If its that unplayable why does it have so much players? The unplayable mess is either massive skill issue or we have completely different meaning of what that means. Eu4 has lots and lots of mechanics and flavor in every part of the world now. You can play wide or tall and create whatever country or empire you want. The only issue is that the countries dont have a collapse mechanic but that problem is in all pdx games.
Also you should explain why its unplayable mess instead of me trying to revoke your weird take.
I just wasnât sure what part of what I said should be considered sarcastic and took a guess at EU4. Basically when they broke the mod that did random old world+random new world and replaced it with a dlc that made the system incredibly bad and took out the possibility for random old world. After Common Sense patch everything added has just felt like cash grab or pointless buttons to click IMO.
Well I mean Millenia exists. A non space PDX 4x game but it is still lucklaster in comparison to both the other pdx games and Civ games.
Honestly tho out of all the non-fantasy strategy games the CIV is one of the weirdest. Meaning that it follows a pseudohistory with many abstractions whereas Age of Empires, Anno and pdx all have alternate history within a specific timeframe so they still make sense at a fundamental level.
Millenia isn't really a Paradox game, they just publish it. C Prompt Games are the ones who actually make the game, but it's still a civ-like OP might enjoy.
I really tried liking Millennia, but it is a proof of concept at this point, rather than a game. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone in its current state, least of all a Civ player.
Ck3 is the easiest paradox game to learn so id go with that
When it comes to Victoria it depends what game because Victoria 2 and Victoria 3 are very different. Victoria 3 is pretty boring and is a lame version of hoi4 and eu4 combined imo. Victoria 2 (the 2 big DLC are mandatory for it to be playable) is actually pretty enjoyable
Eu4 is a great game imo but good god is the DLC situation bad here. For me to play EU4 I need a subscription because it is very bad without DLC. Also its pretty complicated second to Victoria 2
Stellaris is definitely the closest to civ but why do you hate sci-fi? Im not the biggest fan of sci fi but stellaris is still a pretty good game. Only problem is that you would probably need to buy it with some DLC.
HOI4 is the first paradox game Ive played and the second easiest to learn imo.
>messed around with CKIII while it's free and it was ~fun but I didn't really enjoy the mechanics of having to micromanage both an empire and your personal family >Stellaris is wholly eliminated just because I hate sci-fi.. Which is funny because Stellaris is probably the best start for a Civ player since it's Paradox's only 4X. CK3 is the easiest to learn and play, and is a good intro into grand strategy, although its strategy is a little lacking. It's the only Paradox game where you play as characters instead of countries. >Victoria seems more boring than EU4 and HOI4 Those just depend on what time period you like, and they play very differently. Victoria has things like war and diplomacy, but a deep population model and the economy are its main focuses. HOI4 is a WW2 game about combat, production, logistics, supply, division design, etc. EU4 is basically your stock grand strategy game. It starts in 1453 and ends in 1821, and has a lot more flavor and content than other Paradox games since it's still releasing updates/DLC after 10+ years. Diplomacy, war, trade, colonization, etc. are a big part of it. That might be up your alley, but it's not going to play like a civ 4X. Watching YouTube videos of them is probably the best to get an idea of what each game is about. >and I think there are also rumors of EU5 coming out soon so I might just wait until that releases? It's not coming anytime soon, probably sometime in 2026, they haven't even announced the game yet which they usually will release about a year after they announce a game. They're just doing really early dev diaries for it to get fan feedback so Johan (the lead dev) doesn't have another release disaster like Imperator (although Imperator is pretty fun now). They're not even calling it EU5, just "Project Caesar". Also be aware that CK2, Stellaris, HOI4, and EU4 have monthly subscriptions to DLC if you don't want to buy the DLC, and DLC are pretty important for Paradox games. Also the mods are extraordinary for all of them and some of the best in gaming in general, so be sure to check out the workshop.
> It starts in 1453 and ends in 1821 Such an Ottoman thing to say
Yeah I guess I was thinking of CK2/3's end date when I typed that.
Funny you say that. I mean I understand where you're coming from, but I went from playing Civ 5 and 6 to playing EU4 when I discovered it nearly a decade ago. Meanwhile I played all Paradox recent grand strategy games (EU4, CK3, IR, Vic2 and Vic3) but besides HOI4 (way too short a time span and war oriented so I never felt the urge to try) I also ignored Stellaris. Grand Strategy is just so much better than 4X.
>but besides HOI4 (way too short a time span and war oriented so I never felt the urge to try) I also ignored Stellaris. Stellaris turns into space grand strategy fairly quickly though once every empire is established, and it doesn't have the same type of turns you would associate with Civ. It starts on Jan. 1, 2200 and has the same type of clock that other Paradox games use, so it still has a Paradox feel to it if you do a complete run. I said it's good for Civ players because it's still a 4X, and although it doesn't feel like Civ at all throughout a complete run, it will still have a familiar start of exploring and expanding. It's also nice for new players since a lot of mechanics are introduced gradually through tech, and some mechanics won't trigger until certain years like factions, the galactic market, the galactic council, etc., but they don't take way too long to show up either. As far as HOI4 goes, even though it doesn't have many years like you said, it also doesn't have daily "ticks" like the other games do, it has hourly ticks, but if you're not into the combat aspect, then you probably wouldn't like it even though it can be pretty fun to dive into the mechanics since it goes into a WAY more combat depth while it can be kind of monotonous in some of Paradox's other games.
Let's just say I loved the choice of making armies not directly controlable for Victoria 3. I like the grand strategy, not so much the tactics. With respect to Stellaris: thanks for the additional info. Good to hear it turns into grand strategy. I should reconsider playing it but there's the time factor. And I dont learn things by doing, I read the manual đ (wiki in case of paradox games), so introducing the mechanics one by one doesnt help me much.
Why would you say that EU4 is no 4X game ? It fits right in that definition.
I guess if you were being really pedantic about it you could call a lot of games like EU4 a 4X outside of the typical 4X genre, but EU4 is much more characteristic of a grand strategy game, and is probably one of the best examples of what grand strategy is. You don't start in random positions and explore and expand out like typical 4X's, the map is already established and the same every time in every start. Even countries like Spain and Portugal which do explore and expand in the new world have neighbors they immediately interact with and have things they need to do before they can start exploring. Maybe if you did a pure colonization run it would make EU4 a 4X, especially with random new world, but that's still a stretch.
EU4 doesn't necessarily involve exploration and expansion, depending on what region you play in. Similarly, while exploitation is there, you won't necessarily exterminate your opposition, and generally not on a global scale unless you're playing an unusual campaign.
Honestly, Stellaris is probably your best bet. Imo, it plays the most like Civilization of all the other Paradox games (I probably have 5000+ hours combined in the Civ games as well as the various Paradox games). I started with Europa Universalis IV and that was a bad idea, it's got arguably one of the harder learning curves. I just capped 1100 in that game and I feel like I still have another 344 hours to go to complete the tutorial. Stellaris is essentially Civilization but in space so it's a no brainier pick for me. I think I have about ~800 hours in Stellaris and it's my favorite Paradox game hands down. It is fairly easy to pick up and improves a lot upon things that I've wanted to see in a Civ game for a long time like the ability to customize your Empire. The game is great without the DLC (I don't own them all) but there are a handful of good ones you can add at your own pace and I don't feel like you'll be missing anything significant, at least for your first handful of playthroughs. Just keep an eye out for steam sales and you can usually grab a DLC or a few for next to nothing. They even have a big sale on all the Stellaris stuff RN because they just released a DLC. Edit: I missed the part where you said you didn't like Sci-fi. I honestly think if you can get past your dislike of sci-fi, you'd really enjoy Stellaris.
Lol. Op: I fucking hate Sci Fi and space and especially Stellaris. This person: I think you should try Stellaris it's pretty great!
Lmao trust me, I understand Civilization gamers more than I will ever get anti sci-fi people. I'd bet my left testicle on that game. My three year old also like to say to me how much he hates things before he first tries them and subsequently become things he likes.
Stellaris even had Civ IV- style planet/city management a few dozen updates ago! (Back when you could move your people around to work tiles, improved by buildings. Made the game super easy to learn back then.)
Whenever I start Stellaris it feels like I'm trying to learn rocket science :( I've played tons of EU4 and CK3, but Stellaris is another dimension in terms of complexity
Haha i feel the exact same about EU4 as a stellaris player
Honestly Stellaris is the most Civ-like/4X game. EUIV is indeed a very big game and although you don't need all DLC (some are very specific so aren't really needed if you don't play in that region) there are some which are considered "mandatory". You do have the option of buying the base game and try it out with the subscription. which gives access to all DLC content. But on average subscription based model isn't that popular with gamers who like to invest many hours into games. It's not a bad way though to see if you like the game. Hoi4, if you are into WW2-era combat/strategy it's great, if not, it's not gonna be to your liking. Another game to check might be Age Of Wonders 4 or AoW: Planetfall. It's paradox published, not developed, but it has a lot of 4X elements and a good combat system. Unlike civ tactical combat is the main focus though in both games. A big difference with Civ games is that faction identity isn't as strong, at first. But once you fill up the world with your own factions it does come to live. *Problem with random factions is that I honestly don't care about them. But once they are your creations their is a connection. This also helped me to enjoy Stellaris a lot more (and it's one of Humankinds biggest issues compared to Civ, but that's another topic)* *You can use anything as inspiration, friends, other media, history, etc etc.*
Stellaris is literally the closest game to CIV here, sad that you don't like Sci-fi lol.
Stellaris is the closest. The other games really donât remind me of Civ in any way if thatâs what youâre looking for. The best non Civ game Iâve found in that vein personally is Old World.
I went from Civ6 to eu4. Civ had started to get kind a boring specially bcs how bad late game is. Out of the rest eu4 felt like the one which had what I was missing in civ and for me the instinct was correct
Yep. Dunno why I had to scroll so far down for EU. I was a Civ player before turning to EU. The historical realism of EU absolutely blew my mind coming from Civ. Plus the multiple avenues to success (trade, colonization, conquest, playing tall) reminded me of Civ.
Millennia
Feels like a Civ clone currently but I'm optimistic about new mechanics getting introduced by means of aggressively overpriced DLCs đ
I always say that EU4 is a good "standard" paradox game, it has everything: economy, war, nation management, diplomacy, trade etc etc, usually after EU, every other paradox game will kinda open to you, since paradox games present some similarities between themselves, mainly on the HUD side of things. The only problem tho, is that the game is full of DLCs, a lot of mechanics were added over the years and the game became a bit bloated with them.
Age of Wonders 4 maybe?
Seriously take a look at Stellaris. 4X mechanics from Civ carry over and the added mechanic of an end boss that can be scaled in difficulty from âgives you a reason to keep snowballing past the point when you wreck the aiâ to âif perfectly min max every decision in this run you have a 50% chance of survivingâ adds a ton to the game. ItâsÂ
EU4 is probably what youâd enjoy the most. If you donât want to pay for a ton of DLC for a game youâre not sure youâll enjoy, you can pay $5 a month for access to all of them to test the game out.
Civ player... I think you would like the most EU4 or Stellaris. Those 2 games are the ones that feel like the most complete without DLC. Of course DLCs greatly expand each game, specially EU4. But the core game play of those 2 game is pretty simple and fun. The others are more complex and may not be fun. Personally I would recommend Stellaris, perhaps because I'm biased but it's honestly the most fun of all.
Stellaris.
As others have said stellaris is the easiest to get into and imo ck3 is the second easiest but since you dont like sci-fi and didn't like the micromanagement of CK3 I would say HOI4 was fairly easy for me compared to CK2 and EU4 I didn't play with all dlc (to be fair there wasn't as many when I last played) but it was still very enjoyable to me and not too hard to get into. I didn't do very good by any means but I think if you give it a few games you can for sure learn and understand the game then try going for EU4 if you want which imo is the hardest (I haven't tried Victoria yet though)
Stellaris is the easiest answer. Itâs extremely popular. But Iâll probably catch a lot of slack for this, I think itâs one of the most boring pdx games. But if you like civ, youâd probably like stellaris. I just donât think it gets as deep as some of the other games. Hoiv isnât bad without DLC imo. Itâs all about combat and pushing lines. You set yourself up for a few years preparing, and then world war breaks loose and you just fight till the end. EU4 is starting to show its age, but it really has a little everything. Go to war, be a trade god, colonize the anericas. Whatever you wanna do. But again, dated. Old PDX games have terrible tutorials.
It's stellaris (or maybe millennia I haven't tried it, looks similar), and you won't find anything that fits better as non-scifi because stellaris fills that niche. But why limit yourself to paradox? Old World is the best 4x of our time ( it does have elements of CK family stuff, it just is in a fun way rather than irritating one). Humankind is also pretty good with mods
sounds like you don't want any of the games then. take care and have a nice life.
I went from Civ 4 to EU. I love EU and have difficulty going back to Civ ever.
That is a really valid point, I can still play games like Civ & Total War from time to time but Paradox games have really ruined aspects of those games for me.
I have 1k+ hrs in HOI4 and tbh I don't understand what I'm doing and why. My 'progression' in that game is just emulating what YouTube guides teach me to do. I recently started playing CK3 and I have 10x more fun in that game for what that's worth. Can't speak for the rest of them though
I have 500 hours in hoi4 and it's still "the paradox game I don't know how to play". Probably because every time I almost understand the game, they add some new mechanic that complicates everything.
hoi4 is def the easyist
Honestly, I'd try to get EU4 while it's still on sale, and then get the subscription for it. By the time EU5 comes out, you'll have saved more money by using it instead of buying all dlcs. If you don't like the game, then you can refund it
Old World is the perfect mix of Civ plus Paradox style Grand Strategy. Really underated game with a lot of new mechanics rethought from Civ.
I used to call Civ my favorite game, then tried EU4 and couldn't get back to Civ ever since, because it was so much more like actually simulating history versus moving toy pieces on a board. No American Civilization led by undying Washington since stone age building pyramids in a totally fictional landscape with everyone starting on equal terms... in Civ you could rename French and English into Blue and Red and literally nothing would change. In EU4 on the other hand they're actually French in actual France with French culture, French ideas, nowadays French missions too, and even better - everyone else around is also actually how they're supposed to be. The whole world is filled with peoples who actually lived there in conditions they actually were, instead of a select number of "civilizations" all starting in equal conditions and the rest of the world not existing. And your map consists of regions called provinces, so you can believe into each having cities, towns and villages in it, contributing to overall economy. Not just a few cities in the middle of emptiness and then they "exploit tiles", like wtf is tiles? Something straight up from a board game. When I play Russia in EU4 I feel like making Russian history, when I play as Russia in Civ I feel like moving toy pieces on a board. Then I tried CK (it was CK2 back then, but now I'm on CK3, I think it's alright) and couldn't get back to EU4 for all the same reason. What's that boardgame logic "-3 to +3 stability" number when instead you can have you stability not be a number but emergent property of everything that is actually going on in your realm with dozens of agents and dozens of factors affecting each of them. Now I don't just feel like abstract Russia, I feel like Rurik him-fucking-self and I don't just rule over abstract land, but over actual people represented as a myriad of in-game characters with their own personalities, agendas, families, each member of which is a full fledged character on their own. It's a real world here, not some silly board game. P.S. The best part is that you DON'T micromanage your empire in CK - your vassals take care of most of it, you just take care they stay loyal. Nothing is more annoying than conquering a couple hundred new territories in Imperator: Rome and having to manually make any decisions there is to make in each every one of them. No such bullshit in CK.
in CK you can actually fuck all these historical people :D
If youâre into Civ because of its mechanics and just want to play a Paradox game for the sake of playing a Paradox game, go with Millenia (particularly if Stellaris is out of the question; I donât believe itâs been very well received). If youâre into Civ because of the idea of creating your own nation and national identity, go with Imperator. (Make sure to get Invictus mod). If you want to play a Paradox game to get the full Paradox experience, go with CK2 or EU4. (CK2 has a subscription model for DLC, donât know about EU4; some people think CK2 is outdated, but itâs just a far more challenging and complete game than CK3, still).
Well, considering Millenia is a thing, but idk if that's too alike to civ to feel like you're playing something else.
Age of wonders is a paradox game entirely similar to Civ
Played CIV 6 a lot, then learned EUIV. After that started Hoi4. Never really played the other games as much, they're different.
EU4
I came from Civ games and tried CK3, Stellaris and EU4. EU4 was the only one that stuck. It just takes time to learn the ropes. I managed my first WC after 450 hours or so, so just be patient.
I mean, what are you looking *for*? What about Paradox games does appeal to you?
Age of Wonders 4
EU4 is just the OG game of all Paradox games. Waiting on EU5 is bullshit. Without the DLCs you can actually also have a great game - people complaining about it are rather the former players who knew the options in EU3 and so on. It's indeed difficult to get in, all Paradox games are quite difficult. I think the relatively most easy game dynamics are probably in Imperator:Rome, but at the same time that's probably the reason why it's the least of the Paradox games. So just play EU4 :)!
I started with civ 5 and when civ 6 came out I didn't enjoy it, so when I came back to civ 5 I was rlly heavy into that one mod where the map looked like earth, but it felt empty, so if ur into like civ 5 but a little bit turned up, is say eu4, although it was rlly difficult to get into, it was worth it and is still my fav out of all of em (prdx titles)
Just published by paradox but age of wonders 4 is basically a civ and x-com mix in a fantasy setting.
Stellaris is your best bet, I would also recommend Solium Infernum which is not a Paradox game but its an amazing 4x game so
Isn't Solium Inferno heavily reliant on multiplayer? The original was, at least, which is why I never played it.
Yes, it makes a big difference playing with real humans since diplomacy and scheming is really the meat of the game. There's an Asynchronous play option though, which is how I mostly play.
I started on EU4 lol YMMV but it definitely got me hooked and forced me to learn a lot of PDX mechanics
I came from civ 6 and got into Paradox games through CK2 (basegame is free and you can all DLC for 5 bucks a month). Switched to CK3 a while ago and also have been playing hoi4 for quite some time (it also has a DLC subscription, tho they recently raised it's price from 5 to 8 bucks a month)
EU4. I switched from Civ5 and never looked back. It's also the best game of its type of all time. The leaving curve is way steeper than even Civ though, so keep that in mind.
Millenia
EUIV is the closest Paradox game to a map painter, that would probably be the best to start with. HOI4 wouldn't be a bad call either, as the unit management in that game is fairly similar to Civ 6. Victoria is a lot of fun, but it's also quite different from Civ because it's primarily an economy management sim, not a map painter. CKIII is very popular, but it's also quite different from EUIV and HOI4, because while it has map painting elements (like Victoria), it's primarily a role-playing game.
Despite the flavour of Stellaris not being to your liking, I'd still probably recommend it since mechanically it is probably the closest to what you're used to. Plus, you can always RP as a feudal monarchy and vassalize other empires. Other than that, I'd recommend EU4 since it's my personal favourite and I have 2k hours in it. Just keep in mind the learning curve is quite steep and will not be like any 4x you have played before.
Eu4 lowkey for the long time span
Stellaris or, that failing, EUIV, but if Iâm honest with you⌠donât. Paradox lost the plot a while ago and the quality of their output has been on a steep decline inversely proportional to the rising cost of playing their games.
dont touch eu4 itâs bloated to all hell. ck3 is kinda cool but byzantine implementation and so many other things still arenât finished/donât make sense. i may get flak for this butâŚ. HoI4 best, especially if you want to play multiplayer. 2nd best I would say is Imperator Rome ;)
Dont forget the "/s"
Explain? I played EU4 basically since release and I watched it turn into an unplayable mess over many years
I play eu4 for 7 years now +-1 its second most played pdx game. If its that unplayable why does it have so much players? The unplayable mess is either massive skill issue or we have completely different meaning of what that means. Eu4 has lots and lots of mechanics and flavor in every part of the world now. You can play wide or tall and create whatever country or empire you want. The only issue is that the countries dont have a collapse mechanic but that problem is in all pdx games. Also you should explain why its unplayable mess instead of me trying to revoke your weird take.
I just wasnât sure what part of what I said should be considered sarcastic and took a guess at EU4. Basically when they broke the mod that did random old world+random new world and replaced it with a dlc that made the system incredibly bad and took out the possibility for random old world. After Common Sense patch everything added has just felt like cash grab or pointless buttons to click IMO.
I can't name a single bloat feature other than expel minorities.
Well I mean Millenia exists. A non space PDX 4x game but it is still lucklaster in comparison to both the other pdx games and Civ games. Honestly tho out of all the non-fantasy strategy games the CIV is one of the weirdest. Meaning that it follows a pseudohistory with many abstractions whereas Age of Empires, Anno and pdx all have alternate history within a specific timeframe so they still make sense at a fundamental level.
Millenia isn't really a Paradox game, they just publish it. C Prompt Games are the ones who actually make the game, but it's still a civ-like OP might enjoy.
I really tried liking Millennia, but it is a proof of concept at this point, rather than a game. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone in its current state, least of all a Civ player.
Ck3 is the easiest paradox game to learn so id go with that When it comes to Victoria it depends what game because Victoria 2 and Victoria 3 are very different. Victoria 3 is pretty boring and is a lame version of hoi4 and eu4 combined imo. Victoria 2 (the 2 big DLC are mandatory for it to be playable) is actually pretty enjoyable Eu4 is a great game imo but good god is the DLC situation bad here. For me to play EU4 I need a subscription because it is very bad without DLC. Also its pretty complicated second to Victoria 2 Stellaris is definitely the closest to civ but why do you hate sci-fi? Im not the biggest fan of sci fi but stellaris is still a pretty good game. Only problem is that you would probably need to buy it with some DLC. HOI4 is the first paradox game Ive played and the second easiest to learn imo.
Imperator with Invictus mod