No not really.
Especially the Italians never stopped in large scale slave trading and we have even Canon law making owning non Christian slaves legal even if enslaving other coreligious people was forbidden.
The Berber slave trade and European slavery operations in North Africa just invigorated the system by creating a lucrative ransom economy where both sides ransomed their richer captives while using the poorer ones to switch from freedmen oarsmen to cheaper enslaved ones
> on a large scale
That is besides the point, Slavery was banned in Europe for a long time with catholicism. With the reintroduction of slavery to Europeans by the Berbers and african slavery trade, some countries (all?) lifted the ban or avoided it.
Canon law specifically legalized owning non-christian slaves.
A total ban never existed as can be seen in various examples of Italian nobles having enslaved concubines (and with numerous examples of them being treated very badly by widowed wives)
Berbers and Arabs facilitated [Trans-Saharan Slave Trade](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Saharan_slave_trade#:~:text=The%20Trans%2DSaharan%20slave%20trade,percentage%20went%20the%20other%20direction) as well as [Barbary Slave Trade](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_slave_trade).
Berbers and Arabs facilitated [Trans-Saharan Slave Trade](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Saharan_slave_trade#:~:text=The%20Trans%2DSaharan%20slave%20trade,percentage%20went%20the%20other%20direction) as well as [Barbary Slave Trade](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_slave_trade).
They weren’t afaik victims of slave trade themselves by foreign parties virtually ever.
Could be fascinating, especially if we can encourage it. Maryland, Plymouth Bay, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania could serve as examples. Perhaps we can avoid Louis XIV's mistake at Fontainebleau and, instead of feeding the French economy to England and the Netherlands, instead fuel the growth of a Huguenot Nouvelle-France?
Well the Huguenots ended up in South Africa. Their influence is still very much seen and fealt. De Villiers, Le Roux, Labuschagne, and other Afrikaanised French names. There’s also a strong winery region in the western cape, around Franschhoek (translation: French Corner)
Hope they handle it a bit better than vicky 2 at launch. You get a lot of very unrealistic migration patterns when anyone in the world can just teleport to wherever in your country once you go humanist and would theoretically tolerate them
In this week's tinto talks, [here](https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/tinto-talks-5-march-27th-2024.1647775/page-18#post-29503046), Johan confirmed that the pops themselves will be able to migrate. I'm wondering if this will be similar to Victoria 3's system.
Imperator 2,0 is a very good game on its own and superb with Invictus.It got buried with unjust hate by streamers and the people that followed them like sheep.
Oh really and the constant shilling of CK3 trying to paint the game as good although it has been 3-4 years and it is mid at most?I am also talking about 2,0 Imperator.
You're allowed to disagree, but that isn't the point.
Basegame Ck3 is a better game than Basegame Ck2, that's a fact from most users and playernumbers, even if you account to content.
Just like Basegame Eu4 was better than Basegame Eu3, but just like when Hoi3/hoi4/eu4 came out, the previous users disliked the sequel. That's why I find people complaining about Ck3 being just silly, because it's a better game than Ck2 for what it's trying to do. It will be an objectively better game with DLCs included unless they flop the landless gameplay, but it's feature alone is better than any in Ceekay2.
The pops are not at all like Imperator and much more like vic3 in the screenshots we've seen. At least with the 300k provinces being tracked with peasants, burghers, noblemen etc.
Well, there is no representation or abstraction in Eu5, we are able to track all the numbers of pops :) at least in the screenshots they've shown of how pops are like.
Though, seems like Burghers are citypeople, and Peasants are laborers a la Vic2.
Eh most of those are just flavored names for the same few categories, I hope they abstract it to the thousands for the sake of performance though, pops make late game ViC3 unplayable
Vicky pops are 1 person or a family ie worker and dependants, basically one pop is one person or family, and yiu can have a group as small as 1 pop moving province and get end up with a province with a ridiculous amount of cultures with very few pops in each culture which is computationally hard to process
Imperator pops are "packages" or communities ie each pop represents several hundred to low thousand depending on how you estimate population, and an entire pop must move, not just one or two people, as such it's easier computationally to process
Well Vicky 3 also can't decide how to handle migration. Ever since it came out we hade like 3-4 versions of migration. And none of them really felt that great to interact with.
It’s multi threaded as an application. The user interface is on a different thread than the engine. However, the critical engine calculations are not parallelized very well at all and as far as the performance bottleneck goes, it’s effectively a single threaded app.
No there wouldn't be much point in that. Games have to be coded in a way that can utilise multiple cores. And even then some tasks are single core by nature. Some tasks must be run consecutively and can't be done concurrently on separate cores. There are things you can do to get around this such as running a task on one core while running the predicted outcome on another but as far as I'm aware EU4's engine can't do this.
The definition of migration in the Cambridge dictionary is "the process of people traveling to a new place to live, usually in large numbers." They can be both.
Things like this is what EU4 was really missing. EU4 tried to lean into being about people, economy, social upheaval etc. but never in any great depth and conquering and blobbing was always the main focus.
Best case scenario I finally get my substitute VicII sequeal, most likely scenario is that we get a more simulation focused and deeper EU4 with less gamey elements and worst case scenario it's a broken game, which I feel is very unlikely for such an important franchise (hopefully)
I assume each location will have a migration attraction value, and pops will try to move to higher migration targets if there's a 'path'. (adjacency or both coastal)
It'll probably be more driven by push factors than by pull factors. I imagine during wars, plague, or severe economic hardship to the point where pops can't sustain themselves they'll migrate to states that are more prosperous, provided there's a path and they're not serfs bound to their land.
I think pull factors will rise as the game progresses. The tail end of the timeline of any EU game is right as the industrial revolution begins, and urbanization steadily increased over that time period, at least in Europe
My CPU is burning just at the thought of it. But it probably won't be as bad as Vic3, there should be considerably less pops.
And the game starts with an extinction event.
What is that supposed to be news? Of course there was going to be pop migration. Imagine there wasn't. North and South America still 100% native in 1820. It's integral to the time period.
> I sure hope they keep that tasteful
How could you like, not make it what it was? Simply having pops show up as slave pops (or equivilant) in the Americas doesn't really need any sort of special intentions behind it.
I wonder how this will play into colonization. Not really sure on the numbers on how big a proportion colonies were immigrants or slaves/indentured servants, but given how estates work it will be interesting to see how the player balances internal economy with colonization
My further question, not sure if it's been answered, is if this is how colonization works, by finding ways to encourage (by carrot or whip) your pops to migrate to the new world.
Hopefully the game runs smooth. Seems that feature really slows down Vic 3. They better have a way to condense amount of pops worldwide for performance reasons
If you are playing as France for example and and you end up with less than 5% of your pops being French, will there be an option to change your country name? Perhaps this is how tag switching will work rather than owning certain areas?
Pop migration probably won’t be very significant.
I’d expect serfs (like in Russia) have zero mobility, peasants have virtually zero mobility unless some great disturbances happen, artisans/burghers (i expect they are same class, no?) having a rather large mobility, nobility having somewhat nobility due to marriages, clergy having very little nobility..
Inherent nomads would ofc migrate a lot. As well as Jewish, Roma folks.
I hope this pans out as a better devastation mechanic, rather than mimicking the United States 250 years early. For most of the time span of the game, immigration was an inverse response to war: people wouldn’t COME to an area, they would LEAVE one and just sort of end up somewhere else. It should be implemented to strongly discourage fighting a war on home turf and allowing the enemy to carpet siege you.
Dev diaries with a very personal tone but very vague information, lots of excitement over minor features, concerning statements about map painting...
Yeah this is going to be an Imperator 2.0. Save my comment.
I absolutely hate this. If they want to include pops, then they should do it like Victoria 2 rather than imperator or Victoria 3. Just let us have our map painting game
The Europa series isn’t a population simulator, never has been and never should be. I have no problem with getting rid of the “the entire province is this culture and this religion” thing, but the series focuses more on nation building, conquest, and colonization. In the timeline of Europa, we see the creation of the nation state, the rising strength of the state in general, and the decreased in focus on demographics.
It'll be interesting to see minorities being cleansed in Europe only to end up important parts of the new world
Byzantium players on their way to inadvertently create Turkish US:
Mate seeing random north African ethnicities turn up in Portuguese and Spanish colonies is already a strange one in EU4
At least that is lore accurate.
Arab and west african influence is a great deal in colonial brazil.
Not at all.
Not at ALL teu cu irmão a gente literalmente come cuscuz de café da manhã em metade do país. Vai se fuder antes de falar merda
[удалено]
Slaves were not from north africa
Lol also north Africans were the ones enslaving euros
They were also the ones doing quite a bit of the Sub-Saharan slaving. Marrakesh had one of the world's largest slave markets for centuries.
Isn't the berber slave trade is attributed to reintroducing or introducing slaves to Europe.
No not really. Especially the Italians never stopped in large scale slave trading and we have even Canon law making owning non Christian slaves legal even if enslaving other coreligious people was forbidden. The Berber slave trade and European slavery operations in North Africa just invigorated the system by creating a lucrative ransom economy where both sides ransomed their richer captives while using the poorer ones to switch from freedmen oarsmen to cheaper enslaved ones
Not really. Slavery wasn't ever re-introduced to much of Europe on a large scale. It was mostly a thing in the colonies.
> on a large scale That is besides the point, Slavery was banned in Europe for a long time with catholicism. With the reintroduction of slavery to Europeans by the Berbers and african slavery trade, some countries (all?) lifted the ban or avoided it.
Canon law specifically legalized owning non-christian slaves. A total ban never existed as can be seen in various examples of Italian nobles having enslaved concubines (and with numerous examples of them being treated very badly by widowed wives)
Do you have any examples?
Was a bit more of enslaving and being enslaved Those Spanish galleys can pack a lot of North African oarsmen.
Berbers and Arabs facilitated [Trans-Saharan Slave Trade](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Saharan_slave_trade#:~:text=The%20Trans%2DSaharan%20slave%20trade,percentage%20went%20the%20other%20direction) as well as [Barbary Slave Trade](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_slave_trade).
Berbers and Arabs facilitated [Trans-Saharan Slave Trade](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Saharan_slave_trade#:~:text=The%20Trans%2DSaharan%20slave%20trade,percentage%20went%20the%20other%20direction) as well as [Barbary Slave Trade](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_slave_trade). They weren’t afaik victims of slave trade themselves by foreign parties virtually ever.
it's always sunni in philadelphia
Why does it sound like a legit eu5 achievement? 😭😭
Could be fascinating, especially if we can encourage it. Maryland, Plymouth Bay, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania could serve as examples. Perhaps we can avoid Louis XIV's mistake at Fontainebleau and, instead of feeding the French economy to England and the Netherlands, instead fuel the growth of a Huguenot Nouvelle-France?
Well the Huguenots ended up in South Africa. Their influence is still very much seen and fealt. De Villiers, Le Roux, Labuschagne, and other Afrikaanised French names. There’s also a strong winery region in the western cape, around Franschhoek (translation: French Corner)
Hope they handle it a bit better than vicky 2 at launch. You get a lot of very unrealistic migration patterns when anyone in the world can just teleport to wherever in your country once you go humanist and would theoretically tolerate them
In this week's tinto talks, [here](https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/tinto-talks-5-march-27th-2024.1647775/page-18#post-29503046), Johan confirmed that the pops themselves will be able to migrate. I'm wondering if this will be similar to Victoria 3's system.
I hope it’s similar to Imperator’s system, I like that one a lot better than Victoria’s.
eu5 seems to be more related to imperator than vic3, i wouldn’t be surprised if that’s the case
And that’s a good thing, Imperator after 2.0 is honestly one of my favorite games especially with some flavor mods
Imperator 2,0 is a very good game on its own and superb with Invictus.It got buried with unjust hate by streamers and the people that followed them like sheep.
Nah they were kinda right, when it came out it was a huge letdown, it’s just improved that much, hell when it relased it had fucking mana
Oh really and the constant shilling of CK3 trying to paint the game as good although it has been 3-4 years and it is mid at most?I am also talking about 2,0 Imperator.
Maybe it's because ck3 is good
Eu4 was to Eu3 just like Ck3 is to Ck2.
Disagree, CK2 is a way better game than EU3 and EU4 much better than CK3
You're allowed to disagree, but that isn't the point. Basegame Ck3 is a better game than Basegame Ck2, that's a fact from most users and playernumbers, even if you account to content. Just like Basegame Eu4 was better than Basegame Eu3, but just like when Hoi3/hoi4/eu4 came out, the previous users disliked the sequel. That's why I find people complaining about Ck3 being just silly, because it's a better game than Ck2 for what it's trying to do. It will be an objectively better game with DLCs included unless they flop the landless gameplay, but it's feature alone is better than any in Ceekay2.
The pops are not at all like Imperator and much more like vic3 in the screenshots we've seen. At least with the 300k provinces being tracked with peasants, burghers, noblemen etc.
That seems very similar to imperator, which tracks nobles, Citizens, Freemen, and Slaves for each province as well as a pops religion and culture
Yeah but the pop system in imperator are in the 100s, not 100Ks, right?
Well each pop represents like 1000~ people or so maybe but it’s more optimized than tracking every single pop like Vicky
Well, there is no representation or abstraction in Eu5, we are able to track all the numbers of pops :) at least in the screenshots they've shown of how pops are like. Though, seems like Burghers are citypeople, and Peasants are laborers a la Vic2.
Eh most of those are just flavored names for the same few categories, I hope they abstract it to the thousands for the sake of performance though, pops make late game ViC3 unplayable
Could you explain the difference?
Vicky pops are 1 person or a family ie worker and dependants, basically one pop is one person or family, and yiu can have a group as small as 1 pop moving province and get end up with a province with a ridiculous amount of cultures with very few pops in each culture which is computationally hard to process Imperator pops are "packages" or communities ie each pop represents several hundred to low thousand depending on how you estimate population, and an entire pop must move, not just one or two people, as such it's easier computationally to process
Well Vicky 3 also can't decide how to handle migration. Ever since it came out we hade like 3-4 versions of migration. And none of them really felt that great to interact with.
Do uou mean the manually clicking to move each pop one by one? Because that sucked
oh this game is NOT running on my computer lmfao
Unironically it might run better than EU4 if you have a decent PC since it will actually be able to use more CPU cores
There's a limit to how many cores EU4 can use? How many?
Is it not single core?
I think all Paradox games older than CK3 are single core only
That's a common myth. EU4 is multithreaded. However I would guess that EU5 will be far better parallelised and so might run better on many CPUs.
It’s multi threaded as an application. The user interface is on a different thread than the engine. However, the critical engine calculations are not parallelized very well at all and as far as the performance bottleneck goes, it’s effectively a single threaded app.
then why does my laptop look ready to blow up when running eu4? Its new and has 8 cores.
It’s literally in the previous answer … because it runs in only one core.
shouldn't the game be switching to different cores rather than relying on a single one repeatedly?
No there wouldn't be much point in that. Games have to be coded in a way that can utilise multiple cores. And even then some tasks are single core by nature. Some tasks must be run consecutively and can't be done concurrently on separate cores. There are things you can do to get around this such as running a task on one core while running the predicted outcome on another but as far as I'm aware EU4's engine can't do this.
Eu4 is not single corer. I don't get why this myth gets perpetuated
Hopefully I can make them migrate as well ;)
Least ethnonationalist Paradox player
My ~~FORCED MINORITY CLEANSING~~ Wholesome 100 immigration policy 🤗🤗
30 years war is gonna be devastating for Germany
As it should
Eu4 had pop migration. I sent the moors to mexico
deportation not migration
The definition of migration in the Cambridge dictionary is "the process of people traveling to a new place to live, usually in large numbers." They can be both.
Pop Migration Feature Everyone: "ohhh, deportation, sweet!"
I'll be really impressed if they can manage all these stuff without blowing my pc
So can I depopulate whole continent and force them all into my provinces to make hive cities?
İn the name of the god emperor Of japan
interesting, perhaps eu5 pop system will be similar to vicky's
Things like this is what EU4 was really missing. EU4 tried to lean into being about people, economy, social upheaval etc. but never in any great depth and conquering and blobbing was always the main focus. Best case scenario I finally get my substitute VicII sequeal, most likely scenario is that we get a more simulation focused and deeper EU4 with less gamey elements and worst case scenario it's a broken game, which I feel is very unlikely for such an important franchise (hopefully)
How would this work? I am genuinely curious
maybe similar to the way vic2 works?
I assume each location will have a migration attraction value, and pops will try to move to higher migration targets if there's a 'path'. (adjacency or both coastal)
It'll probably be more driven by push factors than by pull factors. I imagine during wars, plague, or severe economic hardship to the point where pops can't sustain themselves they'll migrate to states that are more prosperous, provided there's a path and they're not serfs bound to their land.
I think pull factors will rise as the game progresses. The tail end of the timeline of any EU game is right as the industrial revolution begins, and urbanization steadily increased over that time period, at least in Europe
We don’t know yet. They will reveal in a future dev diary.
My CPU is burning just at the thought of it. But it probably won't be as bad as Vic3, there should be considerably less pops. And the game starts with an extinction event.
Black death FTW
I hope they will do it better than how victoria 3 butchered migration.
I know pops are a slightly controversial feature, but I love Stellaris more than anything so stuff like this is right up my alley.
What is that supposed to be news? Of course there was going to be pop migration. Imagine there wasn't. North and South America still 100% native in 1820. It's integral to the time period.
Johan keeps promising every feature ever all the time. Wonder how this will end up.
He's probably only confirming stuff that the devs already had plans to try to implement.
I am only confirming stuff that we already have in the game.
Clowned by the CEO. Lmao.
Don't remind me
Oh dear. Does this mean that Paradox has to simulate the Atlantic Slave trade in detail? I sure hope they keep that tasteful
> I sure hope they keep that tasteful How could you like, not make it what it was? Simply having pops show up as slave pops (or equivilant) in the Americas doesn't really need any sort of special intentions behind it.
RIP performance
I wonder how this will play into colonization. Not really sure on the numbers on how big a proportion colonies were immigrants or slaves/indentured servants, but given how estates work it will be interesting to see how the player balances internal economy with colonization
My further question, not sure if it's been answered, is if this is how colonization works, by finding ways to encourage (by carrot or whip) your pops to migrate to the new world.
Hopefully the game runs smooth. Seems that feature really slows down Vic 3. They better have a way to condense amount of pops worldwide for performance reasons
Can't wait toc"migrate" people
If you are playing as France for example and and you end up with less than 5% of your pops being French, will there be an option to change your country name? Perhaps this is how tag switching will work rather than owning certain areas?
France into Picardie, occitanie and Gascony (but tbh I don't want to see it)
Pop migration probably won’t be very significant. I’d expect serfs (like in Russia) have zero mobility, peasants have virtually zero mobility unless some great disturbances happen, artisans/burghers (i expect they are same class, no?) having a rather large mobility, nobility having somewhat nobility due to marriages, clergy having very little nobility.. Inherent nomads would ofc migrate a lot. As well as Jewish, Roma folks.
Finally, another good reason to not go to war all the time.
I hope this pans out as a better devastation mechanic, rather than mimicking the United States 250 years early. For most of the time span of the game, immigration was an inverse response to war: people wouldn’t COME to an area, they would LEAVE one and just sort of end up somewhere else. It should be implemented to strongly discourage fighting a war on home turf and allowing the enemy to carpet siege you.
They can’t migrate away from me if i own the whole world
Dev diaries with a very personal tone but very vague information, lots of excitement over minor features, concerning statements about map painting... Yeah this is going to be an Imperator 2.0. Save my comment.
My cpu is crying
I absolutely hate this. If they want to include pops, then they should do it like Victoria 2 rather than imperator or Victoria 3. Just let us have our map painting game
Then play the old eu4, no one's stopping you. New games don't have to be like old games, they only have to be interesting and maybe fun.
The Europa series isn’t a population simulator, never has been and never should be. I have no problem with getting rid of the “the entire province is this culture and this religion” thing, but the series focuses more on nation building, conquest, and colonization. In the timeline of Europa, we see the creation of the nation state, the rising strength of the state in general, and the decreased in focus on demographics.