Wait really... I assumed it was the end date for some reason... oops. I mean never played past 1250 ish in Ck2 and I always do the earliest possible start.
@@LemonCake101 You're missing out, CK2 has actually interesting scenarios in its later starts. I think it's the last game that they made which was ballanced for multiple starts. Although with the last DLC's they did sort of make money trivial.
March of Eagles takes place in the end date of EU, so I think there is no need to mention it. However, there is a really forgotten Paradox game called Sengoku, which takes place in another time period, and its end date is somewhere in the early 17th century
Yeah but some of it's hard to buy. Like look at the premise. Apparently there were all these large countries assembled and ready to defeat the Ottomans once and for all, but the king dies and suddenly the whole thing's off? A bit contrived and some poor writing if you ask me. And apparently one of the middling powers is the canon cause of the league war and it was because some diplomat got thrown out of a window, and it wasn't even the only time in lore that it happened in that very city. Reused plot points like that are very amateurish if you ask me.
@@WindandTruth420 Plus instead of having the Ottomans with their plot armour die in some epic fight they just kind of wither away wounded in Victoria until pathetically dying after the Great War. They then reuse a character from a prior battle and have him beat everyone after!? Terrible writing.
CK2's end game screen gives the Capetian Dynasty the highest historical score, since Crusader Kings isn't about dominating the map with one state by the end date, but about maintaining a successful dynasty across multiple countries and centuries. The Ottomans, who enter the historical record in the late XIII century would be surpassed even by less relevant, but far older noble families.
Historically they won most of the cultural impacts of Medieval Europe as well as leading the crusades which is in the title of the game, even near the start date of EU4 they were starting to become more centralized so I would say France won in both CK games.
Even if you're biased both EU iv and Vicky the only countries that could even contest Britain are Russia and France, and with France just being decimates from the Napoleonic wars in euiv Britain is a clear favourite. That damned H2O keeping Britain from most harm again and again
America is the winner of the Victoria games. Even in the midst of the Great Depression the only countries that are ascending faster are Japan and Germany, but their candles are burning on both ends.
@@TheOwneroftheIC I agree with this, for the same reason France didn't win EU4. At the very last minute, things changed. At the end of EU4, Napoleonic France was defeated, and at the end of Victoria 2/3, UK got hollowed out by WW1, going into Major debt to the USA and US gets an equal seat at the table in the WW1 peace deal, before fucking off again. UK had to invest so much resources at this point to keep its empire going, while the USA was isolationist and only focused on growing its industry and economy. I think the end of WW1 was the first time the US realized it could save or kill the UK, and started poisoning the UK's meals.
@@TheOwneroftheIC No, it isn't. The US would have had VERY small prestige, an average army score, and would have been first in industrial score, but would still lose to the UK overall (if we're talking about it within the game) In reality, despite being involved in WWI, the USA was a pariah state. The Anglo-French alliance adopted Woodrow Wilson's idea of a League of Nations, but America has never joined, and any American attempts at diplomacy in Europe were blocked. By 1936, the world continued to be led by the British and the French, with America standing on the sidelines. US would only truly win in hoi4.
@@matwiwNot really, even hyper biased RUclipsrs for Britain like Old Britannia fully admit that they would have followed Germany into a Weimar state without American money. In one of his video’s it’s described how Britain went 24 hours close to financial collapse but was saved by Wall Street. Also, America has one of the most dominant positions in history. It’s a practical miracle that Europe, Africa, Asia and South America aren’t just a series of directly controlled puppets. As an American, y’all are lucky we have such a pathetic government.
@@LemonCake101 putting things out there the USA would have won the codl war regardles of idology. if the US was communits and UDSSR was captials the USA win just as easy as they were simply starting with an isane lead. history books portray them as equals and while they were the 2 most ifluancel nations. they were never on equal footing.
Plus they are the richest nation at that point with the Ottomans not overtaking them until they controlled both the Black and Red Sea trade routes to the Far East.
I think winner of Victoria 2 is USA because they had a significantly stronger industry with 35-40% of the worlds industrial output compared to the UK's 10-15% and the UK owed a lot of money to the US after ww1. The US also achieved their ambitions, like the UK achieved their Cape to Kairo, of keeping European powers out of the Americas (Monroe doctrine) and had their own large sphere of influence (all of the Americas). UK has larger navy, but USA also has a big one. You can tell how important the US is by their stock market crash making everyone in the world broke.
I think a case could be made that the USA “won” Victoria. In 1936 the British Empire was strong but it was much more devastated from WWI than the US was. The US had the resources to dominate the world in 1936 it’s just that they were choosing to stay in isolation. Because the US’s power was only potential I can understand giving it to GB but the US was right there too.
@@LemonCake101 yeah I get that. I don’t think Great Britain is a bad choice or even the wrong choice. I just feel the US should’ve gotten an honorable mention like Russia and the Soviet Union got.
The US was not truly isolationist. For example the US was covertly aiding the entente during ww1 long before it formally joined the war. Both germany and Britain were blocading each other to build up war exhaustion. The were also reliant on trade with USA especially for food. The US progressively cut off its trade with getmany and increased trade with britain. The US also gave generous loans to Britain. Whe Germany retaliated, the US pretended like it was just an innocent merchant who dindu nuffin. But i would agree that US won victoria
from a technological standpoint UK was further ahead than the US, UK had the biggest merchant shipping fleet in the world (by a lot), in 1936 the Royal Navy is more sophisticated, and the Royal Airforce is a little larger than the Us airforce. (UK had an air fleet of 800 in 1934 which rose to 3500 by 1939, U.s. had 800 in 1936 which rose to 2,400 by 1939). U.K. had radar which the US didn’t (US didn’t have access to cavity magnetrons), slightly beyond the time frame but the U.K. also discovered it was possible to separate the isotope uranium-235, starting operation Tube Alloys and passing the discovery to the U.S. - other techs include jet engines, proximity fuses for effective anti-air capabilities. Yes you could make a strong economic argument for the U.S., and they did have the ‘resources to dominate the world’, but they were far behind in terms of the military and technological build-up that they would need to realise that ambition. a decade later and clearly they would be there, but the simple truth is that they weren’t in 1936. The UKs orbit is also much bigger in 1936 - the figures i was giving earlier are for the UK only - in reality the UK had greater access to resources than the US in 1936 due to empire, the U.K. controls the Suez canal, the most important trade artery in the world, the UK still dominated the insurance industry and international trade (hence the size of the merchant fleet). The UK was immensely powerful pre-ww2 and exerted it’s influence far more effectively than the US at that point.
@@billder2655 None of that would really contribute towards 'score', though. UK would be a bit ahead on prestige, and possibly double the USA's military score (remember that your Navy counts towards that score, and the U.S. was near parity with the UK at the time, or the USA's mil score would be even lower)- but the USA would have triple the UK's industry score, and would have a pretty comfortable lead since industry score gets chunky by 1936 in general.
@@firefox3249 The US has been the largest economy in the every year since the 1890s. The US was the #1 world power even before WW1 it just took a generation for the Europeans to acknowledge it.
@@friendguy13 That is really not true at all. Prior to world war 1 the British fleet was vastly larger and better trained, it also owned the majority of the worlds merchant shipping meaning the British could limit US power projection. Even if you look at the "Great white fleet" in 1908 30 of 38 ships used to resupply coal to the fleet were British. In 1936, I'd agree USA is ahead, but before WW2 the US had economy, but that's it. It's military and power projection capabilities were far behind that of Europe's leading powers
That sounds so boring.. How different could a game set in 12,000 something BC be any different from a game like 'Imperator Rome' in mechanics? It gets to a point where technology is stagnant, and there isn't much one can do due to those limitations.
@@Bigzthegreat well a 12,000 bce map game would be impressive as hell to pull off considering most of the world was still neolithic hunter gatherer tribes by that point. it would be sick as hell just for the doggerland inclusion though. but one during the bronze age would be almost exactly the same as imperator rome if you removed the non-tribal status away from literally country except for egypt, babylonia, syria, the minoans, and the indus valley civilization (and replaced parthia with the sea peoples)
@@phiscz My only idea for 12,000 BCE is letting players and AIs research technology ahead of time at will, with the only limiting factor being population and innovation, kind of like 'Cividlization 2'. With such bad technology though, a game in that era wouldn't have anything interesting happen.
@@LemonCake101 It was originally made to increase trade relations between the Kingdom of Hawaii and Great Britain. In more modern times it's been a symbol of remembrance for how Hawaii got Donbass'd by the United States. The first (and I think only) nation to object to it was, funnily enough, Great Britain.
For Vic3 I disagree. Sure they had all these colonies. But these were in many cases also a big burden. The US was already outgrowing the british economy by far. And while this is future talks, you could also argue that Germany has a high spot on the list, given that they 5-10 years later will win against the Alliance of France-Britain, and it required the US and Soviets to end the war. Which hints that the british position was kinda blown up and not actually that high in reality. So Vic3 is the US, followed by Germany.
At the first glance at this vid i thought he was going to tell about the most well known Multiplayer players in each game, but then the realization came :( That would be such a neat idea to make a video about Multiplayer history of Paradox's GSGs. EU4 for instance has a massive one, at the very least in the CIS region
Multiplayer history as a whole is quite hard ‘collate’ since a lot of it happens on independent discords many of which have shut down and disappeared, and a lot of it happens in languages I can’t speak.
Eu4 does have that little ranking of tags by score that you get in the 1821/resign screen that has spain as number 1, which ive always found a little funny. I suppose it's like cumulative for the whole period of the game and not about 1821.
Next up: Winners of Hearts of each of these games. Who had the bigfest struggles and managed to prvail despite the odds or just managed some stunts so awesome during the games timespan that you just have to love them. Would be an interesting discussion at least, even if extremely open ended
an interesting thought! for eu4, my choice would be the Netherlands, their success in the 17th and 18th century is almost unbelievable, becoming a great power as such a small country despite competing with Great Britian, France and Spain. Surviving the "Rampjaar" is almost impossible without a lot of luck in the game. For vic2&3, my more controversial pick would be Switzerland: despite being a quite poor and politically unstable backwater at the start of the 19th century, it managed to reform itself into one of the richest and most stable democracies in the world. Though the polarised political and religious situation in Switzerland at the start of the game is unfortunately poorly represented, so ingame path towards the economic growth seems much smoother than it was historically.
I would have considered Qing China as contenders for EU4. They lagged behind technologically but their massive economy and trade potential was part of why they got targeted the way they were during the victorian era.
Ming makes much more sense for CK3 than Qing does for EU4. They are not lagging behind yet and their biggest contender is another regional power the Ottomans rather than a world spanning empire miles ahead of them.
I agree with most of this except 1936 is a very strange year. As an American I can say that the USA does not really win Victoria because it doesnt have much of an Army. It has a decent Navy and a very strong economy, but no real "power projection.' Britain does have a large empire, but with a lot of cracks and struggles. When Germany becomes a threat a few years later, they have a hard time with that. I propose that Japan is a contender for winning Victoria. If for nothing else they get the "greatest improvement" in the points. By 1936 Japan has won wars against Russia and China and is gobbeling China up at game end. Not the largest empire in the world, but one that everyone is taking as a serious threat. The same can't be said of many other places at that time.
Idk If i'd say GB "wins" the victorian era games, they were pretty beat up after the Great War and the United States was, from an economic standpoint, in a better position than the UK.
Preferable to Genocidal Fascism Yet still, Western Liberalism is even more preferable (hence the Cold War) Liberalism >>>> Marxist Leninism >> National Socialism
I thought this was going to be a video about dozens and dozens of game runs and see which country won the most times in each game. Satisfied nevertheless xd but now I need a video like that
I would also pick Britain for EU4, but I think Spain is a close contender, despite the fall off, using the score as a metric for the sheer amount of tremendous accomplishments starting in 1492 until the 1800s. If the game stopped a few decades earlier, I think Spain wins for sure
Imperator Rome ending in 27 BC is stupid. That's just a tiny portion of Rome's existence. That's false advertising. It should be called something like Magna Antiquity.
i disagree about vic 2/3, clearly usa should have the win, since they are in 1936, and yes they suffer from depression they are still set to have the largest industry ever
I mean, by 1936 Breton Woods was a thing, GB and the other European empires were weakened by WW1, instability was also rampant on the old continent, for Vic2/3 winner I would put the US as a serious contender.
Nor is there even a reason to play that long if you started in 867 start, even in the 1066 start it wouldn't be worth it since you could easily conquer and build tall with buildings than with your dynasty at that point.
@UnimportantRUclipsGuy Idk my specs, my pc is pretty good. Honestly I do have to turn the graphics down 50 years before game end so it doesn’t lag so much but other than that it runs pretty well
I've got a shit pc and it seems to run extremely good. Ck3 is probably their best running game for me. Has slowed a bit with the movement of people around maps for tournaments and stuff but overall still good performance.
We know who won, now we need to know who the different personalities were. Who was the main character of Imperator: Rome? (well that's kind of obvious). Who is the anti-hero of EUIV? Who is the comedic relief of HOI4? Who are the NPCs? Who is the side character the fanbase loves a̶n̶d̶ s̶h̶i̶p̶s̶ w̶i̶t̶h̶ o̶t̶h̶e̶r̶ s̶i̶d̶e̶ c̶h̶a̶r̶a̶c̶t̶e̶r̶? So many possibilities...
Imperator rome: main character rome Main villain: parthia Secondary protagonist: idk armenia maybe? Secondary antagonost: carthage Crusader kings: Main character: france Secondary protagonist: byzantine empire Main villain: the mongols Secondary antagonist: most muslim states Eu4: Main protagonist: the uk Secondary protagonist: prussia Main antagonist: france Secondary antagonist: the ottomans Vic: Main character: the uk Secondary protagonist: the USA Main antagonist: Germany Secondary antagonist: austria-hungary Hoi4: Main protagonist: USA Secondary protagonist: uk Main antagonist: germany Secondary antagonist: japan.
@guycrew3973 well vicky involves tbe period where ww1 happened and in that war, Austria hungary was really the second country of the central powers. But I do see your point considering the ussr, and the proto cold War between Britain and Russia of the 19th century
Dear Sir Lemon Cake 'The Wise', Your videos are splendid, and your commentary is simply marvellous! However, to truly understand which tier list of your large repertoire is the best of the bunch, I hereby request and challenge you to make a tierlist of your tierlists. Yours sincerely, Joshua
Dear Joshua, I hope this reaches you well. The tier list of tier lists is planned as a finale, a final send of if you will to the series when it reaches its conclusion. I thank you for your time and consideration, Lemon Cake
IT GOTTA BE SENGOAT! This man was throwing hands with Roger and prime Whitebeard and yet you can still go on r/OnepiecePowerscaling and see people call HIM YC+
Agree with you on all the games. Although for Victoria games I could probably include USA as well. Its finale is the post-World war 1 situation. And while Britain won the war, it was in such a weakened position that by the start of HOI4 their Empire is collapsing and couldn’t maintain the world order. While US wasn’t that big of a participant in WW1, it just kept developing while others were fighting, resulting in roaring twenties and clearly dominant position in cultural and economic sense. At the start of HOI4 they are also weakened by Great Depression, but still in the matters of economy and influence they were the leaders
Wait, the UK winning EUIV is not controversial since they literally start the Victorian period after the setting of EUIV. When it comes to Victoria 2 and 3 the game ends at 1936, The British empire is severely weakened by WW1 and by 1936 the USA has more industry than the rest of the world combined. The winner of Victoria 2/3 should definetely be the United States of America
In general, if we consider eu4 end date (1821) not in the game mechanics, but in historical reality, the victory is really for Russia. 7 years before that Russia had defeated Napoleon, its international prestige was at the highest level even possible, and Russia itself became the gendarme of Europe, created the Holy Alliance, which for some time dictated European politics. It was a very short hegemony, which started to shatter in 1830, but technically they won.
Victoria ends in 1936 - and by 1936 Britain was not the worlds leading Global power. By the beginning of the 20th century Germany was the worlds leading power and after WW1 USA stepped into that role. Britian was 3rd or 4th by the end of the games timeline, and was on death's door financially, economically and structurally.
@@genovayork2468 1453 It is most likely top 5. I can only come up with Ming and Ottomans being way stronger, nothing in Europe for sure. 1821 though? France is recently beat up. 1936? USA, UK, Soviet, Germany, Japan... 1948? USA, Soviet, UK, yeah France is back again for a little while.
This is honestly a really interesting topic. I hope you do more of these! Maybe you could do the opposite. Which nation ends up the weakest at the end? (excluding nations that are just straight up annexed).
On Victoria: By 1936 the US had surpassed the UK in GDP. You could argue that the UK still has the advantage on overall score with military and prestige. Had the US not withdrawn into isolationism post WWI, I think there's no question that they would be the winner.
I think america is the far winner in vic america had a much larger and better economy, and their military industry while not mobilised at the time would show its potential during ww2 becoming (arguably) the strongest military ever
@@Periodedetelevision-jo6ozI won’t say arguably the only competition is the Red Army which while still very strong was much more damaged and the Soviets can’t really use their population advantage against the US
Historian Eric Hobsbawm said it best in The Age of Revolution when he said 'Britain by 1815 had gained the most complete victory of any power in the entire history of the world, energing from 20 years of war as the only industrialized economy, the only naval power, and virtually the only colonial power in the world.'
Vicky 3 is undoubtedly the United States. By 1880, the United States was the largest national economy in the world, by 1936, they were head a d shoulders above the British. The end screen for Vic3 shows population, GDP, and Standard of Living and prestige (largely a function of GDP). The US would rank #1 in GDP and SoL at this time (with consistent upward growth, less the great depression af game end). Prestige would also likely be high due to the scientific and engineering achievements of the USA (first skyscraper, etc), in addition to the aformentioned GDP benefit.
Vic2 is more up in the air. Rank 1 GP is a mix of industry (clerk and craftsman pop), military (boats & soldiers * war policy), and prestige (art, science events, winning wars, and colonizing). USA would be first in industry, but probably not in military. The Royal Navy was about as big as the US navy. Prestige is probably still UK. Either UK or US could make a strong claim for V2 #1.
Awesome video idea, but I do think most reasonable people would come to the same conclusions you do here. Might be interesting to do a top 5 most powerful nations or focus on a specific type of power category to get more discussion.
I started playing CK2 2 weeks ago and I’m having a lot of fun. It’s a lot different than Total War but the warfare still makes sense, among other things. I’m currently in year 1270 playing as Leon and I conquered France through a strong claim 30 years earlier and made the empire of Hispania. Just made the empire of Francia and I’ll let it go to my daughter (Basque so Absolute Cognatic) just so I can micromanage my kingdoms again; threat was 95% after taking France and factions have been annoying because of claimants but at least all the kingdoms will have someone from my dynasty. I hope Francis doesn’t attack me.
Interesting fact about the Ottoman Claim to being the Roman Empire, or a continuation of it, it's the only one that is actually based in Roman Law and culture. Killing the emperor unironically means you become the emperor, or well... more acurately you have the ability to proclaim someone as an emperor. The reason being is that titles are NOT inheritable, but is supposed to be given to the most competent and deserving individuals (supposed to), killing an emperor means you proved he was not competent and that you are more competent and deserving. Also, interesting fact about the claim of the Russian Empire being Rome, Russia and the H.R.E actually signed a treaty recognizing each other as the Western and Eastern Roman Empire's. Meaning that for anyone who believes the H.R.E is the Roman Empire, they have to acknowledge that the Eastern Roman Empire was the true continuation of it and that the H.R.E was merely a recreation of the Western Roman Empire. This also means that the Roman Empire did last until at least the 20th century if you follow Roman Law, or if you believe in the H.R.E's claim. However, there is one big issue with the Ottoman Claim, not every Ottoman ruler declared themselves as Caesar of Rome, or the Ottoman State as the contiuation of the Roman Empire, which would lead to the Roman Empire being in a weird existing but not existing state. Though, in Christianity, the Roman Empire is also still around, because being Roman and Christian is the same thing (Mostly as an attempt to convert Romans, but it still maintains that Augustus is a protective spirit of Rome and is said to be eternally Rome, and Rome is later on expanded to mean the world. Meaning in a theological sense every Christian is a continuation of the Roman Empire and every Christian Country can claim itself as a continuation of Rome, but Constantinople or Rome are required to claim yourselves as Rome itself.) Truth is, it's all Rome.
I think Qing won Europa Universalis, if you take away the game goals and mechanis, for sure thhe most busted army numbers and economy, and if it wanted the biggest navy too, sure the quality of the army and the navy would be a lot inferior, but yet not so big difference compared to the victoria years
I'm going to toss my hat in the ring and give the winner of Vicky to the United States by the end of World War I they had effectively: Been able to practice inperialism, all at the expense of a GBR guarantee due to the Monroe Doctrine. Played both sides of the war and joined towards the end allowing them a seat at the winners table Become the only great power in the Americas and certainly one of the great powers of the world. Whereas Britain certainly didn't come out any better for fighting in the great war. As for EU IV I agree its Great Britain. By the end of the Napoleonic Wars, Britain had essentially won the most complete victory in human history, to the point where the time after is named after their queen.
USA wins Victoria it is unquestionably the strongest economy (more than gb and France combined) in the world at the end the game. It’s a game about economics.
Vic 2, i think in 1936 you gotta realize thats pretty far after the scramble and pretty much the beginning of ww2, one could argue that at this point the soviets, or the ameicans, or even the germans held more military power, or industrial power, although i think at this point gb def had the most prestiege
It seems that, whenever there is a smooth transition from one time period of the game to another without any gaps (CK-EU4-Vic2-HOI4), the "winners" of the previous game are in the strongest position in the earliest start date. The only exception is Vic2, as the UK goes through something of a downgrade in the latter game. Yet, if we change the winner to be the US, it still fits the bill, as the game has to give the US a ton of debuffs to keep them from getting too strong, and even then playing for them is often considered to be the equivalent of an easy mode
You either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain. We complain because life sucks. If Germany or Japan won, we would be complaining more. :D
While I fully agree that Axis powers are DEFINITELY the straight-up evil side that I'm GLAD they lost, I wouldn't exactly call Allies "good guys" (you know, with stuff like Bengal famine or like anything Stalin was doing...), they are just "less outright terrible" side.
The French goals were not algiers to Madagascar; it was west Africa to Djibuti. That's why Britain and France had some conflicts over sudan since both needed that territory to finalize their cross-continental ambitions
Does't CK2 literally have a historical scoreboard using their in-game rules? I think the Capet dynasty (and if having to tie to a country, then France) is ranked as the overall winner
I would argue the US also won Victoria as Britian started their downfall after WW1 and was already behind the US in GDP since the 1880s and was militarily behind the US since WW1.
Yes, this is all completely arbitrary - and Stellaris is still in progress.
Come talk in my Discord: discord.gg/bSs2e9YsFv
do a ocean tier list
@@NKVD.Officer I am good
@@LemonCake101 sorry my supreme commander. i will make future suggestions with thought put into them.
@@NKVD.Officer good idea!
Paradox won by being able to milk history for map games
Can't believe they came up with so much lore
They won by being able to milk me for dlcs 😂
@@infidelcastrato1844 pdx is milking you? 🤨
They even went to the future for more games. I’m waiting for the inevitable Bronze Age collapse paradox game.
im waiting for either a cold war game or one set in the years 476-900, maybe even one about Alexander?
1337 is not the end date of CK2 it is just the last start date you can start in, CK2 actual end date is also 1453 like CK3
Wait really... I assumed it was the end date for some reason... oops. I mean never played past 1250 ish in Ck2 and I always do the earliest possible start.
@@LemonCake101 You're missing out, CK2 has actually interesting scenarios in its later starts. I think it's the last game that they made which was ballanced for multiple starts. Although with the last DLC's they did sort of make money trivial.
I guess I will have to give it a go some day!
@@monarchofthesea9395 yes! The 1337 Byzantine start is so much fun especially playing it in Hip mod
@@EmperorJohn That would be a fun one, really tricky I imagine. Not done that.
March of the Eagles remains forgotten
March of Eagles takes place in the end date of EU, so I think there is no need to mention it. However, there is a really forgotten Paradox game called Sengoku, which takes place in another time period, and its end date is somewhere in the early 17th century
Good.
@@ClattC most of the world would be disqualified
I believe it would also be great Britain as the winner of that game
As it should be
Imperator: Me
CK3: Me
EU4: Me
HoI4: Paradox, by making me addicted to it forcing me to waste 1.5k hours of my life
Stellaris: Me
idk the unbidden tends to win alot but im just a noob
I wasted 5000 hours
@@quempire2656 id equal that if my laptop didnt get outdated but i like to think of it as a break before i continue past 1k hours
@@quempire2656 Tbh idk anyone who did that on vanilla. I've only got 2.5 because of mods that make the game more interesting
@@lokenontherangemodded hoi4 is still absolutely a result of paradox. Hoi is a ridiculously easy game to mod.
the lore of these games is wild
Someone really should make a pdx game lore channel fr fr
@@LemonCake101 they did, its either overly sarcastic productions or the armchair historian
Yeah but some of it's hard to buy. Like look at the premise. Apparently there were all these large countries assembled and ready to defeat the Ottomans once and for all, but the king dies and suddenly the whole thing's off? A bit contrived and some poor writing if you ask me. And apparently one of the middling powers is the canon cause of the league war and it was because some diplomat got thrown out of a window, and it wasn't even the only time in lore that it happened in that very city. Reused plot points like that are very amateurish if you ask me.
@@WindandTruth420Yeah the plot armor is just ruining my suspension of disbelief
@@WindandTruth420 Plus instead of having the Ottomans with their plot armour die in some epic fight they just kind of wither away wounded in Victoria until pathetically dying after the Great War. They then reuse a character from a prior battle and have him beat everyone after!? Terrible writing.
CK2's end game screen gives the Capetian Dynasty the highest historical score, since Crusader Kings isn't about dominating the map with one state by the end date, but about maintaining a successful dynasty across multiple countries and centuries. The Ottomans, who enter the historical record in the late XIII century would be surpassed even by less relevant, but far older noble families.
The Rurikids were more successful. By your logic Malla too.
@@genovayork2468 no bc it's literally paradox choice's or else it wouldnt be at the top of the end screen
Historically they won most of the cultural impacts of Medieval Europe as well as leading the crusades which is in the title of the game, even near the start date of EU4 they were starting to become more centralized so I would say France won in both CK games.
@@exqeott If Capet is at the top Paradox is wrong and bs at history, simple as.
@@genovayork2468 Why?
Even if you're biased both EU iv and Vicky the only countries that could even contest Britain are Russia and France, and with France just being decimates from the Napoleonic wars in euiv Britain is a clear favourite. That damned H2O keeping Britain from most harm again and again
Rule Britannia!
America is the winner of the Victoria games. Even in the midst of the Great Depression the only countries that are ascending faster are Japan and Germany, but their candles are burning on both ends.
@@TheOwneroftheIC I agree with this, for the same reason France didn't win EU4. At the very last minute, things changed.
At the end of EU4, Napoleonic France was defeated, and at the end of Victoria 2/3, UK got hollowed out by WW1, going into Major debt to the USA and US gets an equal seat at the table in the WW1 peace deal, before fucking off again. UK had to invest so much resources at this point to keep its empire going, while the USA was isolationist and only focused on growing its industry and economy.
I think the end of WW1 was the first time the US realized it could save or kill the UK, and started poisoning the UK's meals.
@@TheOwneroftheIC No, it isn't. The US would have had VERY small prestige, an average army score, and would have been first in industrial score, but would still lose to the UK overall (if we're talking about it within the game)
In reality, despite being involved in WWI, the USA was a pariah state. The Anglo-French alliance adopted Woodrow Wilson's idea of a League of Nations, but America has never joined, and any American attempts at diplomacy in Europe were blocked. By 1936, the world continued to be led by the British and the French, with America standing on the sidelines. US would only truly win in hoi4.
@@matwiwNot really, even hyper biased RUclipsrs for Britain like Old Britannia fully admit that they would have followed Germany into a Weimar state without American money. In one of his video’s it’s described how Britain went 24 hours close to financial collapse but was saved by Wall Street.
Also, America has one of the most dominant positions in history. It’s a practical miracle that Europe, Africa, Asia and South America aren’t just a series of directly controlled puppets. As an American, y’all are lucky we have such a pathetic government.
You forgot another reason for the USA winning HoI4: They didn't get the massive casualities and infrastructure damage of the USSR.
Exactly, the USA really planned better by choosing to be on their continent
@@LemonCake101 Let's fight the war at your place.
@@LemonCake101 putting things out there the USA would have won the codl war regardles of idology. if the US was communits and UDSSR was captials the USA win just as easy as they were simply starting with an isane lead. history books portray them as equals and while they were the 2 most ifluancel nations. they were never on equal footing.
@@LemonCake101 It took the USA million of years to execute the plan. But it payed off in the long run.
I would put mamluks as winners of crusader kings games since they have the Holy Land and its called "crusader kings". So, like... they won those
I mean honestly... fair!
Plus they are the richest nation at that point with the Ottomans not overtaking them until they controlled both the Black and Red Sea trade routes to the Far East.
I love the lore of Paradox Extended Universe. That's some amazing worldbuilding they're doing, with so many interesting powers.
I think winner of Victoria 2 is USA because they had a significantly stronger industry with 35-40% of the worlds industrial output compared to the UK's 10-15% and the UK owed a lot of money to the US after ww1. The US also achieved their ambitions, like the UK achieved their Cape to Kairo, of keeping European powers out of the Americas (Monroe doctrine) and had their own large sphere of influence (all of the Americas). UK has larger navy, but USA also has a big one. You can tell how important the US is by their stock market crash making everyone in the world broke.
That's a fair point!
I think the usa won the economy but Britain won the military and colony part
@@showman9619don't forget, at the begining they didn't had the west coast or Texas.
@@zord1352 but the uk gained a lot more land
@@showman9619 gaining a bunch of shitholes isnt worth much, is it?
I think a case could be made that the USA “won” Victoria. In 1936 the British Empire was strong but it was much more devastated from WWI than the US was. The US had the resources to dominate the world in 1936 it’s just that they were choosing to stay in isolation. Because the US’s power was only potential I can understand giving it to GB but the US was right there too.
That's a fair argument; but I do value power projection too, hence the earlier mention of it at the start of the video
@@LemonCake101 yeah I get that. I don’t think Great Britain is a bad choice or even the wrong choice. I just feel the US should’ve gotten an honorable mention like Russia and the Soviet Union got.
The US was not truly isolationist. For example the US was covertly aiding the entente during ww1 long before it formally joined the war. Both germany and Britain were blocading each other to build up war exhaustion. The were also reliant on trade with USA especially for food. The US progressively cut off its trade with getmany and increased trade with britain. The US also gave generous loans to Britain. Whe Germany retaliated, the US pretended like it was just an innocent merchant who dindu nuffin.
But i would agree that US won victoria
from a technological standpoint UK was further ahead than the US, UK had the biggest merchant shipping fleet in the world (by a lot), in 1936 the Royal Navy is more sophisticated, and the Royal Airforce is a little larger than the Us airforce. (UK had an air fleet of 800 in 1934 which rose to 3500 by 1939, U.s. had 800 in 1936 which rose to 2,400 by 1939). U.K. had radar which the US didn’t (US didn’t have access to cavity magnetrons), slightly beyond the time frame but the U.K. also discovered it was possible to separate the isotope uranium-235, starting operation Tube Alloys and passing the discovery to the U.S. - other techs include jet engines, proximity fuses for effective anti-air capabilities.
Yes you could make a strong economic argument for the U.S., and they did have the ‘resources to dominate the world’, but they were far behind in terms of the military and technological build-up that they would need to realise that ambition. a decade later and clearly they would be there, but the simple truth is that they weren’t in 1936. The UKs orbit is also much bigger in 1936 - the figures i was giving earlier are for the UK only - in reality the UK had greater access to resources than the US in 1936 due to empire, the U.K. controls the Suez canal, the most important trade artery in the world, the UK still dominated the insurance industry and international trade (hence the size of the merchant fleet). The UK was immensely powerful pre-ww2 and exerted it’s influence far more effectively than the US at that point.
@@billder2655 None of that would really contribute towards 'score', though. UK would be a bit ahead on prestige, and possibly double the USA's military score (remember that your Navy counts towards that score, and the U.S. was near parity with the UK at the time, or the USA's mil score would be even lower)- but the USA would have triple the UK's industry score, and would have a pretty comfortable lead since industry score gets chunky by 1936 in general.
I think that GB has a better claim to 1821 than 1936. USA industrialization goes brrr
US great depression goes bigger brrr. The US realistically started to show its might during WW2.
@@firefox3249 The US has been the largest economy in the every year since the 1890s. The US was the #1 world power even before WW1 it just took a generation for the Europeans to acknowledge it.
@@friendguy13 That is really not true at all. Prior to world war 1 the British fleet was vastly larger and better trained, it also owned the majority of the worlds merchant shipping meaning the British could limit US power projection. Even if you look at the "Great white fleet" in 1908 30 of 38 ships used to resupply coal to the fleet were British.
In 1936, I'd agree USA is ahead, but before WW2 the US had economy, but that's it. It's military and power projection capabilities were far behind that of Europe's leading powers
@@firefox3249the us and france could have stopped the germans in 1936. plus the great depression was global
@@shatter382oh i’m sorry who owed us money after ww1?
Paradox won with their DLC policy.
But who won the unmade Paradox game that covered the Bronze Age?
Egypt
That sounds so boring.. How different could a game set in 12,000 something BC be any different from a game like 'Imperator Rome' in mechanics? It gets to a point where technology is stagnant, and there isn't much one can do due to those limitations.
@@Bigzthegreat well a 12,000 bce map game would be impressive as hell to pull off considering most of the world was still neolithic hunter gatherer tribes by that point. it would be sick as hell just for the doggerland inclusion though. but one during the bronze age would be almost exactly the same as imperator rome if you removed the non-tribal status away from literally country except for egypt, babylonia, syria, the minoans, and the indus valley civilization (and replaced parthia with the sea peoples)
Assyria
@@phiscz My only idea for 12,000 BCE is letting players and AIs research technology ahead of time at will, with the only limiting factor being population and innovation, kind of like 'Cividlization 2'. With such bad technology though, a game in that era wouldn't have anything interesting happen.
I expected a Stellaris part, in which the obvious winner is:
you
That or the ones, the swarm flees from.
The winner of Stellaris is your PC when your turn it off and the lag goes away
The winner in stellaris is humanity because humanity is number 1
@@iwantmynametobeaslongaspos7194United Nations of Earth sweep
Me, I did. I have more hours in the games than any of the devs spent making them.
I won and now I'm pursuing a geography degree
Oh neat, Geography is a mood
@@LemonCake101 thanks, I think it's more important than ever
based
I think the US wins victoria 2/3 if you look at the end date, their industry is simply unmatched in 1936.
10:21 Oh hey, Hawaii.
I love how that is part of the flag
@@LemonCake101 It was originally made to increase trade relations between the Kingdom of Hawaii and Great Britain.
In more modern times it's been a symbol of remembrance for how Hawaii got Donbass'd by the United States. The first (and I think only) nation to object to it was, funnily enough, Great Britain.
@@walnzell9328 I find it funny how the Union Jack flies the US Senate though but for sure!
the grassland eu4 texture as the background is awesome
A hint if you will for some of the pdx enjoyers
They say Early birds gets the worm, can i get a worm flavoured cake
Oh no, not only am I being eaten by you, but also a worm... oh the humanity!
well must be your and well favourite word
Well, what can I say, it is what it is. Moving swiftly on...
For Vic3 I disagree.
Sure they had all these colonies. But these were in many cases also a big burden. The US was already outgrowing the british economy by far.
And while this is future talks, you could also argue that Germany has a high spot on the list, given that they 5-10 years later will win against the Alliance of France-Britain, and it required the US and Soviets to end the war. Which hints that the british position was kinda blown up and not actually that high in reality.
So Vic3 is the US, followed by Germany.
At the first glance at this vid i thought he was going to tell about the most well known Multiplayer players in each game, but then the realization came :(
That would be such a neat idea to make a video about Multiplayer history of Paradox's GSGs. EU4 for instance has a massive one, at the very least in the CIS region
Multiplayer history as a whole is quite hard ‘collate’ since a lot of it happens on independent discords many of which have shut down and disappeared, and a lot of it happens in languages I can’t speak.
Eu4 does have that little ranking of tags by score that you get in the 1821/resign screen that has spain as number 1, which ive always found a little funny. I suppose it's like cumulative for the whole period of the game and not about 1821.
It’s cumulative but also weighted towards the late game (you earn more score later)
Spain didn't exist before 1707.
Spain still controlled 2/3 of the Americas tho
"You might be saying, am I biased?"
"No."
Based.
Next up: Winners of Hearts of each of these games. Who had the bigfest struggles and managed to prvail despite the odds or just managed some stunts so awesome during the games timespan that you just have to love them. Would be an interesting discussion at least, even if extremely open ended
Lemon Hoi4 content... a cursed thought
an interesting thought!
for eu4, my choice would be the Netherlands, their success in the 17th and 18th century is almost unbelievable, becoming a great power as such a small country despite competing with Great Britian, France and Spain. Surviving the "Rampjaar" is almost impossible without a lot of luck in the game.
For vic2&3, my more controversial pick would be Switzerland: despite being a quite poor and politically unstable backwater at the start of the 19th century, it managed to reform itself into one of the richest and most stable democracies in the world. Though the polarised political and religious situation in Switzerland at the start of the game is unfortunately poorly represented, so ingame path towards the economic growth seems much smoother than it was historically.
I would have considered Qing China as contenders for EU4. They lagged behind technologically but their massive economy and trade potential was part of why they got targeted the way they were during the victorian era.
Ming makes much more sense for CK3 than Qing does for EU4. They are not lagging behind yet and their biggest contender is another regional power the Ottomans rather than a world spanning empire miles ahead of them.
@@Sirvalian Not on the map, so they don't count.
I agree with most of this except 1936 is a very strange year. As an American I can say that the USA does not really win Victoria because it doesnt have much of an Army.
It has a decent Navy and a very strong economy, but no real "power projection.'
Britain does have a large empire, but with a lot of cracks and struggles. When Germany becomes a threat a few years later, they have a hard time with that.
I propose that Japan is a contender for winning Victoria. If for nothing else they get the "greatest improvement" in the points.
By 1936 Japan has won wars against Russia and China and is gobbeling China up at game end.
Not the largest empire in the world, but one that everyone is taking as a serious threat. The same can't be said of many other places at that time.
Idk If i'd say GB "wins" the victorian era games, they were pretty beat up after the Great War and the United States was, from an economic standpoint, in a better position than the UK.
Someone forgot March of the Eagles!
Ya could’ve put in a win for GB there.
I originally did but I decided UK won hard enough
@@LemonCake101 Rule Britannia Intensifies
@@LemonCake101 shouldve done fallen eagle mod from ck3 to fill the gap with a nation nobody really knows about or its the muslims im not sure
"the good guys won WWII" *Soviet union takes over half of Europe*
The good guys also won the cold war btw
Preferable to Genocidal Fascism
Yet still, Western Liberalism is even more preferable (hence the Cold War)
Liberalism >>>> Marxist Leninism >> National Socialism
“Budget Great Britain.” Okay buddy we conquered the world too. Cut us some slack..
RUclips thinks this video is about Europe Universalis. The game from 2000. A game that definitely wasn't on the list.
In fairness Eu4 isn't even an option
I thought this was going to be a video about dozens and dozens of game runs and see which country won the most times in each game. Satisfied nevertheless xd but now I need a video like that
I would also pick Britain for EU4, but I think Spain is a close contender, despite the fall off, using the score as a metric for the sheer amount of tremendous accomplishments starting in 1492 until the 1800s. If the game stopped a few decades earlier, I think Spain wins for sure
You mean if the game stopped two centuries earlier.
@@Sirvalian No, I'd still give it to Spain overall if the game stopped like mid 1700s
@@johnny-smithI must disagree Spain was a great power but definitely not the strongest not anymore
Yeah, but if the game stopped in the 1840s, spain has lost almost all of their South American territories and don't ever really recover from that.
Imperator Rome ending in 27 BC is stupid. That's just a tiny portion of Rome's existence. That's false advertising. It should be called something like Magna Antiquity.
I feel like 'Rome' probably sells more
Yeah. Why though? Were they scared to program the rise of Christianity?
i disagree about vic 2/3, clearly usa should have the win, since they are in 1936, and yes they suffer from depression they are still set to have the largest industry ever
I mean, by 1936 Breton Woods was a thing, GB and the other European empires were weakened by WW1, instability was also rampant on the old continent, for Vic2/3 winner I would put the US as a serious contender.
CK3 "ends" in 1453, but there's no way that unoptimized garbage doesn't crash before 1350.
Another W for CK2
Nor is there even a reason to play that long if you started in 867 start, even in the 1066 start it wouldn't be worth it since you could easily conquer and build tall with buildings than with your dynasty at that point.
I’ve gone to 1453 twice with high graphics + world conquest and never crashed…
@UnimportantRUclipsGuy Idk my specs, my pc is pretty good. Honestly I do have to turn the graphics down 50 years before game end so it doesn’t lag so much but other than that it runs pretty well
I've got a shit pc and it seems to run extremely good. Ck3 is probably their best running game for me. Has slowed a bit with the movement of people around maps for tournaments and stuff but overall still good performance.
We know who won, now we need to know who the different personalities were. Who was the main character of Imperator: Rome? (well that's kind of obvious). Who is the anti-hero of EUIV? Who is the comedic relief of HOI4? Who are the NPCs? Who is the side character the fanbase loves a̶n̶d̶ s̶h̶i̶p̶s̶ w̶i̶t̶h̶ o̶t̶h̶e̶r̶ s̶i̶d̶e̶ c̶h̶a̶r̶a̶c̶t̶e̶r̶? So many possibilities...
That makes me want an Axis Powers Hetalia mod for HOI4. Who am I kidding, there probably is one.
Imperator rome: main character rome
Main villain: parthia
Secondary protagonist: idk armenia maybe?
Secondary antagonost: carthage
Crusader kings:
Main character: france
Secondary protagonist: byzantine empire
Main villain: the mongols
Secondary antagonist: most muslim states
Eu4: Main protagonist: the uk
Secondary protagonist: prussia
Main antagonist: france
Secondary antagonist: the ottomans
Vic: Main character: the uk
Secondary protagonist: the USA
Main antagonist: Germany
Secondary antagonist: austria-hungary
Hoi4: Main protagonist: USA
Secondary protagonist: uk
Main antagonist: germany
Secondary antagonist: japan.
@@mappingshaman5280I’d definitely say Russia is the secondary antagonist in vibky Austria wasn’t really seen as that big of a threat
@guycrew3973 well vicky involves tbe period where ww1 happened and in that war, Austria hungary was really the second country of the central powers. But I do see your point considering the ussr, and the proto cold War between Britain and Russia of the 19th century
Congrats on 15k!!
Thanks!
Dear Sir Lemon Cake 'The Wise',
Your videos are splendid, and your commentary is simply marvellous! However, to truly understand which tier list of your large repertoire is the best of the bunch, I hereby request and challenge you to make a tierlist of your tierlists.
Yours sincerely,
Joshua
Dear Joshua,
I hope this reaches you well. The tier list of tier lists is planned as a finale, a final send of if you will to the series when it reaches its conclusion.
I thank you for your time and consideration,
Lemon Cake
IT GOTTA BE SENGOAT! This man was throwing hands with Roger and prime Whitebeard and yet you can still go on r/OnepiecePowerscaling and see people call HIM YC+
I think a good continuation of this would be who won each paradox game not in irl facts but who is the most broken country/tag/realm
I mean, half the time that's just a 'check last DLC'
Feels odd to use "nations" for CK2 and 3 rather than dynasties and families, considering that that's the whole focus of CK.
Agree with you on all the games. Although for Victoria games I could probably include USA as well. Its finale is the post-World war 1 situation. And while Britain won the war, it was in such a weakened position that by the start of HOI4 their Empire is collapsing and couldn’t maintain the world order. While US wasn’t that big of a participant in WW1, it just kept developing while others were fighting, resulting in roaring twenties and clearly dominant position in cultural and economic sense. At the start of HOI4 they are also weakened by Great Depression, but still in the matters of economy and influence they were the leaders
Wait, the UK winning EUIV is not controversial since they literally start the Victorian period after the setting of EUIV.
When it comes to Victoria 2 and 3 the game ends at 1936, The British empire is severely weakened by WW1 and by 1936 the USA has more industry than the rest of the world combined.
The winner of Victoria 2/3 should definetely be the United States of America
Hi! I think there’s an argument to be made for Parthia in Imperator Rome, or at least for them to be included as an honorary mention. Great vid!
Thanks! Yeah that's fair, but I tried to avoid too many honorary mentions since that may end up with... a whole lot of em!
Ey well done on 15k subs ❤
Thank you it, appreciate it!
0:59 Objection! How can you have only 4 subscribers and almost 15,000 subscribers at the same time!?
When I made that screenshot I had 4, and not updating it made it funnier over time
@@LemonCake101 lol
the true victory in any of these games is just world conquest
I get told off for pushing the WC narrative though
In general, if we consider eu4 end date (1821) not in the game mechanics, but in historical reality, the victory is really for Russia. 7 years before that Russia had defeated Napoleon, its international prestige was at the highest level even possible, and Russia itself became the gendarme of Europe, created the Holy Alliance, which for some time dictated European politics. It was a very short hegemony, which started to shatter in 1830, but technically they won.
thanks for making me hungry for anything lemon flavored
The real winners were the casus beli we made along the way
Victoria ends in 1936 - and by 1936 Britain was not the worlds leading Global power. By the beginning of the 20th century Germany was the worlds leading power and after WW1 USA stepped into that role. Britian was 3rd or 4th by the end of the games timeline, and was on death's door financially, economically and structurally.
Basically, "which country was the dominant world power in real life at the end date of the game"...
Ming won CK3. By the time Victoria ends in 1936, the US had already surpassed Britain in capacity.
No, US was nowhere close to Great Britain until their colonial empire fell apart.
@@Nerazmusthey had a much bigger industry bigger army and weren’t in crippling debt
Delicious, now then.
Who wins Stellaris?
It's hilarious how France is within the top 5 for every game but Imperator, but never gets the top spot by the end date.
Not top 5 in 1337 and 1453.
@@genovayork2468
1453 It is most likely top 5. I can only come up with Ming and Ottomans being way stronger, nothing in Europe for sure.
1821 though? France is recently beat up.
1936? USA, UK, Soviet, Germany, Japan...
1948? USA, Soviet, UK, yeah France is back again for a little while.
@@Sirvalian Egypt, Qara Qoyunlu, Bengal, Bahmania, Vijayanagar, Yuan, Muscovy, Lithuania, Jaunpur, Gujarat, Moghulistan, Uzbekia were stronger.
They would take eu4 if it ended when napoleon was at his height, but since it ends afterwards they lose.
Idk who did it irl but I most certainly know i've lost every single one
1337 is golden horde
Yuan, Egypt and Delhi are more powerful, boso.
i fw your oc heavy ❤
Bad time to have eyes
I would say in CK2 the Mongals would probably be the winners - while in our timeline they completely collapse in CK2 they are massive
Lemon, gamers won, the gamers won...
But at what cost... (DLC)
0:28 this reminded me that i wouldn't really mind if paradox made an eu5
Well I have good news for you...
4:02 Oh no, the Roman Empires did not end there, the pope made sure of it
I called the Ottomans for CK. They are the early game boss of EU4 after all.
This is honestly a really interesting topic. I hope you do more of these! Maybe you could do the opposite. Which nation ends up the weakest at the end? (excluding nations that are just straight up annexed).
Could be interesting, but yeah the swarms of annexed tags are probably the ‘winners’ for that.
I enjoy this lemon based historical content
Thanks!
On Victoria: By 1936 the US had surpassed the UK in GDP. You could argue that the UK still has the advantage on overall score with military and prestige. Had the US not withdrawn into isolationism post WWI, I think there's no question that they would be the winner.
I think america is the far winner in vic america had a much larger and better economy, and their military industry while not mobilised at the time would show its potential during ww2 becoming (arguably) the strongest military ever
@@Periodedetelevision-jo6ozI won’t say arguably the only competition is the Red Army which while still very strong was much more damaged and the Soviets can’t really use their population advantage against the US
Honestly these games are basically 1 game or series like the Total War games. They just tweak what was appropriate for each time period.
Historian Eric Hobsbawm said it best in The Age of Revolution when he said 'Britain by 1815 had gained the most complete victory of any power in the entire history of the world, energing from 20 years of war as the only industrialized economy, the only naval power, and virtually the only colonial power in the world.'
Bunching the USSR with the good guys is absolute lunacy
Vicky 3 is undoubtedly the United States. By 1880, the United States was the largest national economy in the world, by 1936, they were head a d shoulders above the British.
The end screen for Vic3 shows population, GDP, and Standard of Living and prestige (largely a function of GDP). The US would rank #1 in GDP and SoL at this time (with consistent upward growth, less the great depression af game end). Prestige would also likely be high due to the scientific and engineering achievements of the USA (first skyscraper, etc), in addition to the aformentioned GDP benefit.
Vic2 is more up in the air. Rank 1 GP is a mix of industry (clerk and craftsman pop), military (boats & soldiers * war policy), and prestige (art, science events, winning wars, and colonizing).
USA would be first in industry, but probably not in military. The Royal Navy was about as big as the US navy. Prestige is probably still UK. Either UK or US could make a strong claim for V2 #1.
If Eu4 ended 10 years earlier, France would easely be the winner
Awesome video idea, but I do think most reasonable people would come to the same conclusions you do here. Might be interesting to do a top 5 most powerful nations or focus on a specific type of power category to get more discussion.
I started playing CK2 2 weeks ago and I’m having a lot of fun. It’s a lot different than Total War but the warfare still makes sense, among other things. I’m currently in year 1270 playing as Leon and I conquered France through a strong claim 30 years earlier and made the empire of Hispania. Just made the empire of Francia and I’ll let it go to my daughter (Basque so Absolute Cognatic) just so I can micromanage my kingdoms again; threat was 95% after taking France and factions have been annoying because of claimants but at least all the kingdoms will have someone from my dynasty. I hope Francis doesn’t attack me.
i think theres a mod for playing out ck3 battles in a total war game, but im not sure if its for ck2 or ck3
Well idk how but in cities skylines the sewer monsters threw an uprising and drowned the people in their own fluids, so I think they won
Interesting fact about the Ottoman Claim to being the Roman Empire, or a continuation of it, it's the only one that is actually based in Roman Law and culture. Killing the emperor unironically means you become the emperor, or well... more acurately you have the ability to proclaim someone as an emperor. The reason being is that titles are NOT inheritable, but is supposed to be given to the most competent and deserving individuals (supposed to), killing an emperor means you proved he was not competent and that you are more competent and deserving.
Also, interesting fact about the claim of the Russian Empire being Rome, Russia and the H.R.E actually signed a treaty recognizing each other as the Western and Eastern Roman Empire's. Meaning that for anyone who believes the H.R.E is the Roman Empire, they have to acknowledge that the Eastern Roman Empire was the true continuation of it and that the H.R.E was merely a recreation of the Western Roman Empire. This also means that the Roman Empire did last until at least the 20th century if you follow Roman Law, or if you believe in the H.R.E's claim. However, there is one big issue with the Ottoman Claim, not every Ottoman ruler declared themselves as Caesar of Rome, or the Ottoman State as the contiuation of the Roman Empire, which would lead to the Roman Empire being in a weird existing but not existing state. Though, in Christianity, the Roman Empire is also still around, because being Roman and Christian is the same thing (Mostly as an attempt to convert Romans, but it still maintains that Augustus is a protective spirit of Rome and is said to be eternally Rome, and Rome is later on expanded to mean the world. Meaning in a theological sense every Christian is a continuation of the Roman Empire and every Christian Country can claim itself as a continuation of Rome, but Constantinople or Rome are required to claim yourselves as Rome itself.)
Truth is, it's all Rome.
Spain had a good claim too
Russia and England won eu4,other countries like Spain, ottomans,france have had all some peaks but Russia and England always grew bigger and stronger
I think Qing won Europa Universalis, if you take away the game goals and mechanis, for sure thhe most busted army numbers and economy, and if it wanted the biggest navy too, sure the quality of the army and the navy would be a lot inferior, but yet not so big difference compared to the victoria years
Ming won CK3 you mean.
@@Sirvalian there is no Ming in CK3, only with mods
in HOI4 if we are talking about LATE game the the soviet union will destroy everyone, like you get insane eco bonuses and some army bonuses as well.
I'm going to toss my hat in the ring and give the winner of Vicky to the United States by the end of World War I they had effectively:
Been able to practice inperialism, all at the expense of a GBR guarantee due to the Monroe Doctrine.
Played both sides of the war and joined towards the end allowing them a seat at the winners table
Become the only great power in the Americas and certainly one of the great powers of the world.
Whereas Britain certainly didn't come out any better for fighting in the great war.
As for EU IV I agree its Great Britain. By the end of the Napoleonic Wars, Britain had essentially won the most complete victory in human history, to the point where the time after is named after their queen.
USA wins Victoria it is unquestionably the strongest economy (more than gb and France combined) in the world at the end the game. It’s a game about economics.
Usa could also be arguied as the winer for vicky 2/3
Vic 2, i think in 1936 you gotta realize thats pretty far after the scramble and pretty much the beginning of ww2, one could argue that at this point the soviets, or the ameicans, or even the germans held more military power, or industrial power, although i think at this point gb def had the most prestiege
For 1337 you can kind of put Golden horde.
Also USA lost City skylines.
USA wins prison architect
Also don't forget that in HoI IV, the Soviets are underpowered as all fuck and sometimes end up even below Japan.
It seems that, whenever there is a smooth transition from one time period of the game to another without any gaps (CK-EU4-Vic2-HOI4), the "winners" of the previous game are in the strongest position in the earliest start date. The only exception is Vic2, as the UK goes through something of a downgrade in the latter game. Yet, if we change the winner to be the US, it still fits the bill, as the game has to give the US a ton of debuffs to keep them from getting too strong, and even then playing for them is often considered to be the equivalent of an easy mode
"the good guys won." You sure?
You either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain. We complain because life sucks. If Germany or Japan won, we would be complaining more. :D
@@shorewall >If Germany or Japan won, we would be complaining more. :D
If you don't exist, there's no one to whine to :D
While I fully agree that Axis powers are DEFINITELY the straight-up evil side that I'm GLAD they lost, I wouldn't exactly call Allies "good guys" (you know, with stuff like Bengal famine or like anything Stalin was doing...), they are just "less outright terrible" side.
The French goals were not algiers to Madagascar; it was west Africa to Djibuti. That's why Britain and France had some conflicts over sudan since both needed that territory to finalize their cross-continental ambitions
Huh: I was explicitly taught 'Algiers to Madagascar' while studying the subject. Good to know!
@LemonCake101 its a very interesting piece of colonial history. The exact incident is called the Fashoda Incident, pretty good read tbh
the ck2 end date is a great example of just convincing people (me) by just saying things with confidence.
Learn basic history.
@@genovayork2468 what does history have to do with lemoncake just being wrong and confusing the last start date of the game with the end date???
Everyone knows that the First Galactic Empire under Palpatine won Stellaris
British puts GB as a "winner" of EU4. Checks out.
Does't CK2 literally have a historical scoreboard using their in-game rules? I think the Capet dynasty (and if having to tie to a country, then France) is ranked as the overall winner
That looks at the entire game, not just the end date.
I would argue the US also won Victoria as Britian started their downfall after WW1 and was already behind the US in GDP since the 1880s and was militarily behind the US since WW1.
in ck2 the random island next to sri lanka is the ultimate winner
Vic 2 ends in 1936, and by that time, the US is probably the strongest country, not the UK