Europa Universalis V

Steam Reviews

Read all reviews on Steam

• Recommended Posted November 6, 2025 on Steam I never write reviews, but I've been playing Paradox/grand strategy games for over a decade and wanted to say thank you. Haven't had any crashes, the systems are mind-boggingly confusing and in-depth, I rarely know what I'm doing and I'm having the time of my life. I'm in my 30s with a kid and this is the first time I've wanted to take a week off just to play a game in years.
• Recommended Posted November 9, 2025 on Steam [h1]I absolutely love this game[/h1] EU5 is ambitious, interconnected, and alive. It takes the best of EU4, MEIOU, Victoria 2, CK2, and CK3, layering those elements atop the Imperator: Rome framework to create the deepest and most flexible Paradox experience yet. Every choice, whether political, economic, cultural, or military, ripples through your nation’s fabric. It abandons abstract mana and static modifiers in favor of living systems: people, infrastructure, politics, and trade. It’s undoubtedly more complex, but rewards mastery. Your empire is alive and ever-growing (or shrinking if you're screwing up). As your population develops and internal political blocs spend their money to build industries, it needs regular care lest it grow misshapen. YOU ARE THE GARDENER. Water it when supply is lacking, prune it back into shape when in excess, and if any of those political blocs turn into parasites then rip them out, root and stem. [h3]Pros:[/h3] [list] [*]No launcher required, fast loading screens, integrated mod manager. Savescumming is easier than ever before. ;) [*]Automation: I can't deny that this is a MASSIVE boon for the player base. Pretty much any mechanic of the game is automatable, allowing the AI to manage almost any aspect of your country. For those who might struggle with certain mechanics early on or hate micromanagement, just give it to the AI while you focus on other things. Although competent, its not as good as a player, and it obviously can't know your long-term objectives or roleplaying desires, so you're still incentivized to learn the mechanics yourself if you want to maximize their utility. [*]Politics: Adds depth and complexity to the genre, every system is interconnected with it. Balancing the various political estates in your country has an impact on your economy, diplomacy, military, and population. You walk a tightrope, balancing the satisfaction and influence of your nation's internal stakeholders. Play them off each other well and their support can bolster your rule, incur their dissatisfaction or allow them too much power however; and they'll make you their ♥♥♥♥♥. [*]Values: In Vic 3 politics were nebulous. It felt like you were reacting rather than influencing, forced to implement whatever policies the movements in your country demanded. The system in EU5 is flexible enough to allow you mix and match values that would perhaps seem conflicting to a modern person, its possible to play as an innovative yet spiritualist empire with a capital economy running off of serfdom. Does it sound strange? Sure, but its your job to make it work with all the positives and negatives that each value gives you. [*]Economy: Each country is unique in the types and number of RGOs they have, the goods and market neighbors a country's market has, and what economic value system they start with. It incentivizes you to not just build up your industry, but to also trade with other nations (or conquer them). Starts are more unique even for obscure nations that lack flavor and events. Economic warfare is incredible, embargoes aren't just a modifier anymore, they'll actually stop the target country receiving goods and depriving them of vital resources to manage their nation. Market Attraction and Trade Advantage mean that you cripple your enemies without ever drawing your sword. Investing in your economic power and its foreign projection can be just as profitable as conquering, and it'll cost less pops to do so. [*]Population: Mana is gone and replaced with multiple interwoven systems. Managing your population and industries is an engaging past-time in between wars. I find myself much more willing to just sit back and manage my nation during peace time. Every single action you take, and every mechanic you interact with influences your population and demographics and vice-versa. That soldier you're marching into battle over a river crossing? He's the laborer who works in your lumbermill. If he dies, that's one less guy to cut your trees for you (and the cost of goods and construction will rise), if he doesn't come home then that's also one less person to have children. Diseases, starvation, and wars actually feel painful as a result and you have to dedicate soldiers and ships to maintaining your supply lines. [*]Control: Infrastructure is now VITAL. It really feels like building an empire, trying to exert control with roads and shipping lanes, the system is an incredible solution to the "bigger is better" playstyle eu4 nudged you towards, Now you actually have to be able to reap the benefits from conquered lands if you want to extract wealth and resources, incentivizing you to trade before conquering. You now need to wait till you can develop my naval infrastructure to begin expanding overseas. You may want to subsidize industries and overproduce the construction materials to lower the cost of building roads and ports across your empire. [*]Integration: Its no longer just a button click with a mana cost! You actually need to ensure they're at least a tolerated culture before. Even then, tolerated cultures can only be integrated, but not cored. You need them to be an accepted culture to do that. Either accept or convert them. [*]War: Frontage and Initiative, combined with the ability to choose where units are placed in your army's formation (L/C/R) adds a surprising amount of tactical depth. Understanding which units are slower/faster to the frontline but better/worse at holding it, which are better flankers, and where they should be all be positioned for optimal performance is engaging. And with ever-modernizing warfare, enemies develop unique armies with their own strengths and weaknesses that you've got to adapt your own armies formations for. Army composition is impacted by politics and population. Playing as France, I actually want to keep the nobles powerful a bit longer because I love having a lot of those Mailed Knights in my levies. Dilute their power and population? Less knights. [*]Parliament: Putting province-claim Casus Bellis behind the Parliament system really helps to slow down your expansion while adding a political element. What's more is that the system handles it with nuance. The internal political blocs in EU5 use incentives rather than coercion. You won't be forced to pass a law like in Vic3, instead if you want to temporarily raise taxes or levies, change a law, or get approval to claim that lucrative province your neighbor owns; Then you need to give the political blocs a concession. This means you actually have to weigh internal vs external politics. You agonize over passing a law that the nobles want but you know will dilute your centralization or crown power, in the mean time your ally is encroaching upon that province you want. If you choose to wait for the next parliament and hope for better demands, will the province still be free to grab? [*]Start Date: I like 1337. I get to enjoy the climax of the Medieval Period and play a feudal subsistence society, then change my values and focus as the renaissance then exploration eras come along or choose to try and stick with the old ways. In Eu4 it wasn't often that I needed to make big changes to the estate privileges once I got past the early game. However Eu5's mechanics give you the sense that the world significantly changes over time, and sometimes you have completely rethink your approach in order to stay competitive; the earlier start date adds a greater contrast between early and mid-late game playstyles. I don't think this start date would have worked well in EU4, but EU5's depth makes it valid. [/list] I originally had a much longer review with more detail and an entire Cons section, however Steam's character limit prevents me from fitting it here. EU5 is superb though, with the launch issues being AI/UI based, such as vague tooltips, lack of options in some Situations, passivity in war or lack of expansion. Updates will hopefully fix that quickly.
• Recommended Posted November 9, 2025 on Steam I was fully prepared to dislike EU5, but I can't. This is a good game and sets the standard not just for future games, but retrospectively for past ones. Paradox has been dropping the ball for a long time with half-baked, bare-bones releases that barely function and have zero depth, expecting you to buy three years of DLC before the game gets good. EU5 doesn't seem to be that. This game comes across as a passion project from the Paradox of old. The Paradox of EU3, CK2, and Victoria 2. And it shows in how much this game borrows from those old games, while improving on it. If you're wondering where some of the negative reviews come from, a large portion of them are disappointed EU4 fans who wanted the game to be more like that. This game is clearly not a spiritual successor to EU4, but to EU3. This game is a departure from what Paradox has been doing for the last few years. Gone are the days of catering to 'meme' players. There are no magical focus trees. No mana. No absurd events with silly naked people. This is not a game made for viral memes and youtube videos. Mappainting is a relatively slow process and snowballing is somewhat restrained because you can only control the periphery of your empire so much. The game is unapologetic about its desire to be a serious grand strategy game with lots of interlocking systems. This isn't a patchwork of random features that don't interact. Every game aspect ties into every other aspect. Pops are tied to estates which are linked to taxation which funds your court costs which affects your legitimacy which changes your estate happiness which affects your pop satisfaction which is tied to your levy size and on and on it goes. Everything is interlinked and it's great. And most shocking of all, multiplayer works. We had a few desynchs, tolerable for a fresh release, but we were able to resynch and continue playing. It has its problems. The biggest, most glaring problem is the AI. The game is just too complex for the current AI to handle well. Or even handle competently. The AI really is a pushover right now, meaning you face no challenge at all. Paradox doesn't have a good reputation for making competent AI anyway, and this game looks like it will be particularly tough to make a good AI for. I'm still skeptical if this will ever be addressed. But given the work that went into this game's design, I'm actually willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. The UI has some issues and can definitely be improved, but it's nowhere near as bad as some of the negative reviews make it out to be. The game simply has a lot of information and it has to put it all somewhere. Do not go into this expecting to fully understand everything on your screen at a glance. No UI change will make that happen. All in all, this game is worth trying out if you're looking for a more serious grand strategy game.
• Not recommended Posted March 8, 2026 on Steam Veteran Europa Universalis player here (5000+ hrs) : I have never left a negative review for a game in this series before- but after the most recent update to EUV I feel I have to speak up. I really really really want to like this game. . . but it just isn't fun. Here's where the game breaks down for me: Historical Flavor: A lot of players have commented that there isn't a noticeable difference in playthrough experience between starting nations. Notably absent from EUV at the moment is a mechanic similar to mission trees in EUIV- a unique map for nations that rewards players who achieve historical goals with buffs, claims, and event chains that ground the roleplaying experience that this series is known for. Instead, players are mostly left to experience a series of unchained historical events that have minimal impact on most nations that receive them. While the sandbox experience has a lot of appeal for player agency and encouraging replayability, it currently feels like there's not much in the box besides sand. While I like sand as much as the next person its ultimately "coarse and it gets everywhere", and well you get the point. . . Pacing of Conquest: It seems the devs are aware that the game feels like it takes too long from the player perspective and are working on speeding it up. While I can appreciate that consideration, here are two areas I have yet to see progress in: the speed of conquest, and the speed of integration of territories. Building the CB acquisition process around a 4 year cooldown timer titled "Call Parliament" is a mindbogglingly bad choice. It slows down an already long game and forces the player to wait to participate in what should be a core aspect of this role playing game- warfare and conquest. If the player does manage to conqueror vast stretches of land, they are then forced into a different waiting game around integration- the average territory can take up to 10 years to core- over double the amount of time in EUIV and that's only if you have an advisor working on the process. Passive integration can take well over a hundred years to complete, and with the shear number of provinces and territories in the game, its almost a guarantee that a playthrough with an expansionist country like Muscovy or the Ottomans will face ahistorical limitations to growth. I cannot stress this enough: it is not fun to be punished for winning wars and attempting to recreate historical empires. I expect a challenge- but this is not challenging, its frustratingly limiting. Economics and Trade: On the one hand, I appreciate that the devs have put so much detail into creating such a detailed system for trade and economics. I think there is a lot of potential here for something fresh in the EU franchise. Currently, however, this system is mind numbingly tedious. All aspects of a nation's trade and economy can be fine tuned, but in order to run these systems efficiently- the player feels like they must constantly be pulling levers up and down. If I only had 30 or 40 levers to pull, I think it could be a fun experience. This game has hundreds- making it feel impossible to steer the ship without steering it a snail's pace. The rewards for doing so are not significant enough that I want to keep doing this for 400 hrs of gameplay- which feels like a fair estimate of how long it would take me to get through a playthrough at this pace. On the other hand, almost everything can be automated, but the AI seems to make poor long term choices for your nation's financial health. Eventually, you will run into hard limits and economic crashes that feel frustrating exactly because you trusted that the system would take care of those things for you and from the player's perspective it seems like it isn't doing its job. Colonization: I'm not sure what happened here, but this mechanic was a big miss. Colonization is not at all fun to manage- again, there are too many necessary levers to pull leading to the feeling that the player is actually managing 3-4 separate nations at once. In a game bogged down by complexity, the player gravitates towards nations that avoid this mechanic. The end result however is that they then lose out on one of the key historical processes that shaped the Early Modern Period- and should be a key mechanic within EUV Ultimately, I think this game can be salvaged, but it will be a monumental task for the devs to do so. I've seen some players recommending that that new players wait until Q4 2026 to buy in, but I wouldn't be surprised if this game ends up taking much longer than that to fix because of how much needs to be changed in order to make this a fun player experience. My biggest worry in all of this is that the devs wont be able to fix it because it will be too costly and the player base will be left with a bad game in an absolute gem of a series. I'd like to recommend to new players to buy into the development process that Paradox is known for- but after 6 months of patches, I'm not convinced that this game will make it.
• Not recommended Posted February 5, 2026 on Steam Big Paradox fan with over 10,000+ between their games. 1.1.0 came out recently to address some of the issues with launch and, to be frank, they did not cook hard enough. The game has so much potential, and I definitely will be returning to it to give it more tries as it gets updated, but the honest truth that its current state (3 months after *full* release, 1.1.0, and already starting to hype up the first DLC) is still far below what I would expect from an early access/open-beta release. The game is still an unfished beta with bugs, UI nightmares, and convoluted/esoteric balance that fails to promote any of: historical accuracy, realism, or fun. Managing your nation is tedious not because of innate complexity but because of overly cumbersome and repetitive systems and interfaces. Diplomacy is pointless because the AI does whatever it wants regardless. War overwhelmingly favors the side with greater initial military capabilities, all but eliminating underdog stories and the success of minor nations. The Economy quicky devolves into Cookie Clicker-levels of braindead building expansion, and Trade is so frustrating to control it feels as if the developers intended it to be thoughtlessly automated and forgot to make it fun. Every game feels the same no matter what nation you play as, and very, very few nations provide an interesting challenge to the player because small nations get unavoidably annexed and medium-large nations unavoidably snowball. Also, 1.1.0 broke colonization. While it was already a mess, I want to point this out because I'm concerned how any update (even a beta one) can be pushed that obliterates such a core (and heavily advertised) mechanic without getting caught by senior developers or QA testers -- are they just approving every pull request over there? How can the community expect the countless bugs to get fixed when their updates are introducing more than they are fixing? I do not recommend buying this game in its current state, and do not believe it will be in a good (and stable) state within the next few months. Wait until 2027, or Q4 of 2026 at the earliest. I have strong hope that it will eventually be good, please prove me right.
• Recommended Posted November 8, 2025 on Steam This game is so wildly ambitious that it shouldn’t function in our world, yet somehow it does. It's alien technology. An atlas in video game form, it simulates all 400 million people alive on Earth in 1337, from the 1,085 settlers in Greenland to the 92 million people of China, following them hour by hour over 500 years of history while remaining fun and performant. It’s the foundation of a genuine masterpiece, complete with the Black Death rendered as an early game boss. If you’ve enjoyed any Paradox Studios game in the past, play this one too. Don't skip the tutorials though.