Go Native: Europa Universalis IV Introduces New World

By Graham Smith on December 14th, 2013 at 9:00 am.

This is a weirdly terrible drawing.

I haven’t returned to the fields of European conquest since the weeks immediately after Europa Universalis IV‘s release, because my Austrian struggles seemed like a personal canonical history I couldn’t repeat or replace. The Conquest of Paradise expansion might lure me back with a new world of promise, however. It’s due for release on January 14th, and a new developer diary video below explains the mechanics you’ll play with if you want to take control of the Native American tribes.

As Adam reported last month, Conquest of Paradise’s coolest feature might be that it can randomly generated the new world for you. If you don’t want to know where the new lands are on the map, ticking a box will create a new landmass in a random location, so you can stumble across it accidentally while sending fleets out to land somewhere else. Like India, maybe.

If you decide you want to start on the new landmass though, the new tweaks sound like they’ll keep it interesting for you. I especially like the sound of the nomadic-style tribes described in the video above, in which you can continually up sticks and move to a new province, gaining in power every time you do.

Refresh your memory about the joys of Europa Universalis with Adam’s Wot I Think.

, , , .

20 Comments »

Sponsored links by Taboola
  1. Hunchback says:

    Maybe i didn’t give it enough chance, but i found EU 4 a bit dull, compared to CK2. I don’t mean to start a flame-war between fans, but i don’t see -much- of a point to play EU 4 when there’s Civ 5 in it’s current state. The fun feature of CK compared to Civ was the whole RPG aspect of it, which sadly doesn’t exist in EU, so… *shrug*

    • programmdude says:

      I personally found CK2 a bit dull compared to EU4, well EU3 since that was out first. It really depends on what you are into, I like the whole world domination bit of EU4, that Civ5 just lacks in my opinion. Maybe I just haven’t given CK2 a good enough chance, but I think that the whole lineage thing just isn’t for me.

    • Premium User Badge

      Anthile says:

      Except that you are probably just going to mash end turn through most of EU4’s timeframe when you play CIv.

    • Anders Wrist says:

      Crusader Kings 2 has the magical ability to enchant people who don’t normally enjoy the grand strategy settings of Paradox Games. Europa Universalis 4 does not posses the exact same ability. I personally enjoy games with a bit more basis in reality than the Civilization games, which I find tend to be rather dragged out, and when I have a want something more fantastic, there’s the brilliant modding community to turn towards, or even options in official DLC, such as this one. There’s never a dull moment for me in Europa Universalis – I’m always plotting my next conquest, even if all I’m really doing in game is fastforwarding the time until my claims are fabricated.

      To each his own, as they say.

    • Premium User Badge

      JamesTheNumberless says:

      As a fan of both Civ and EU I see them as very different sorts of games. EU is the game I always wanted the Medieval Total War games to be. It scratches many itches that Civ doesn’t with its realism and historical accuracy but it isn’t a replacement for Civ. Civ has a complete fantasy world – it also abstracts the passage of time and the representation of armies and combat, for the sake of the larger scale elements in the game. Civ asks you to suspend much more disbelief in return for more extreme possibilities and more gamey elements. As for CK2 – everyone I know who played it first, prefers it to EU4 – when I tried it, having played EU4 first, I just found that I was unsatisfied and wanted it to work more like EU4. Civ and EU are games for different moods. CK demands probably yet another mindset.

      • Canadave says:

        As someone who started with EUII, I just find it tough to really engage with CK2 because I don’t like expanding my power through diplomatic trickery. I prefer to raise armies and be all smashy with them, which kind of works, but not really that well. Assassinating a monarch to get more titles just isn’t as satisfying as carving out a global empire, for me.

    • Meneldil says:

      Comparing apples to oranges much?

      • Premium User Badge

        JamesTheNumberless says:

        It’s a little bit harder to get into oranges but their segmented nature tends towards a turn-based approach – and more naturally facilitates multiplayer.

        • IC says:

          This hilarious comment would have made me spit out my cornflakes, if I’d been eating cornflakes.

    • Theame says:

      my co-worker’s sister-in-law makes $89 every hour on the computer. She has been fired for 8 months but last month her check was $14048 just working on the computer for a few hours. view it…………http://www.Rush64.com

  2. Chalky says:

    I’m trapped in an infinite loop of trying to get to “Adam’s Wot I Think” via the link in the article. Help me!

  3. Bull0 says:

    The graininess/terribleness of that top image gives me nostalgic feels

  4. sventoby says:

    Are there any screenshots of what the randomized New Worlds might look like?

    • Locust says:

      Here’s a couple;

      http://i.imgur.com/FmjqU38.png
      http://i.imgur.com/PHiRztG.jpg

      They don’t look very good as you can see, Paradox delayed the game to work on it. I’d be more excited about the other features, I can’t see Paradox getting world generation up to civ-standards this quickly.

      • Premium User Badge

        JamesTheNumberless says:

        It’s never going to be easy mixing the real world with procedural landmasses but these really do seem quite bad… Maybe it would have been better to make only minor changes to the basic outline of the Americas but with altered coastlines, islands, lakes, wildernesses and ambiguity over where the real riches are going to be.