Ultimately you'll probably enjoy both like I do, if you enjoy strategy games in general. If you're still undecided, you can go for whichever timeperiod of history intrigues you more. If game balance and diversity of playstyles are important to you, go for CK2. If a more passable UI and less needless micromanagement are important for you, go for EU4. However, temper your expectations because people heavily overexaggerate the difference between CK2 and EU4 in this regard. If you hope for mechanics that promote internal instability, go for CK2. You'll get better warfare and external diplomacy. If you're fine with external factors being your primary opponent, go for EU4. If you instead wish strategy games could be more like the Sims with opportunities for roleplaying, go for CK2. If you like strategy games for how they make you consider different options with tradeoffs, costs, and benefits, go for EU4. There are a lot of things in the games that are really hard to explain, you either have to be looking at the numbers a lot or see it done. If you are just learning your first paradox game I always recommend watching a lets play to learn and grasp the basics. EU4 is much more country sim and based on the actual country and not the characters at all. If you want to role play your actual character a bit though CK2 can be really fun.
In CK2 once you've learned the game the AI is really easy to beat and kind of makes the game less enjoyable if you like challenges in actual fights. But, it really comes down to whether you want to Role Play a little or rule a country. I actually think EU4 is easier to learn if only because you can come across some really unfortunate situations in CK2 that are entirely not even your fault. That being said, the last update and expansion for CK2 was fantastic and the last for EU4 was the worst so far in my opinion. People on here seem to say CK2 but my friends and I all have gotten more time and enjoyment out of EU4 over the years.
0 kommentar(er)
