|
I...I don't get how to play this game. I've watched a bunch of videos and did the in-game tutorial, I know what to do to play but not how. Is there a step-by-step guide that's like "pick this count, do this, then try this, etc" or something so I can see the appeal? I can't find the magic in this game but I'm sure it's there. Maybe it's my fault. I have a hard time with games that leave a lot up to the player. Is this one of those "Make your own fun" sort of games like Minecraft?
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 03:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 20:36 |
|
|
Iunnrais posted:What's the difference between a personal, and a de jure claim? Do you mean, fabricated versus de jure?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 03:12
|
|
|
Iunnrais posted:What's the difference between a personal, and a de jure claim? Do you mean, fabricated versus de jure? Personal claims are specific to you. If your father was King of England, you personally have a claim on the throne because of your personal relation. De jure is tied to the title, not the individual. If York leaves the kingdom for whatever reason, any king of England would be able to declare war to take it back. If the entire Kingdom of England is usurped by...I don't know, the Greeks, the new Greek king of England would still be able to declare war for York with a de jure claim, even though he has no personal connection to that land, because York is considered to be a part of the Kingdom of England.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 03:20
|
|
|
rizuhbull posted:I...I don't get how to play this game. I've watched a bunch of videos and did the in-game tutorial, I know what to do to play but not how. Is there a step-by-step guide that's like "pick this count, do this, then try this, etc" or something so I can see the appeal? I can't find the magic in this game but I'm sure it's there. Maybe it's my fault. I have a hard time with games that leave a lot up to the player. Is this one of those "Make your own fun" sort of games like Minecraft? I would say sort of. There is a lot of variability in the challenge of the game. If you just pick a count of Ireland you probably won't be seriously challenged for a long time and you'll just spend most of your time waiting for claims to be forged and trying to inherit stuff. You can make the game more challenging by picking more difficult starts such as bordering infidels who will declare holy war on you. Aside from basic survival, you do have to make your own goals for your dynasty. Usually my goal is "conquer everything" and I find it very entertaining.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 03:22
|
|
|
rizuhbull posted:I...I don't get how to play this game. I've watched a bunch of videos and did the in-game tutorial, I know what to do to play but not how. Is there a step-by-step guide that's like "pick this count, do this, then try this, etc" or something so I can see the appeal? I can't find the magic in this game but I'm sure it's there. Maybe it's my fault. I have a hard time with games that leave a lot up to the player. Is this one of those "Make your own fun" sort of games like Minecraft? The most common short-medium term goal is usually "become king/emperor of your general vicinity." Goals beyond that are more varied - some people go for world conquest, some go for spreading their dynasty as far as possible, while others have a particular (a)historical goal, anything from "Complete the Reconquista early" to "Zoroastrian Finland." For your first game, pick a count in Ireland (in the 1066 start, not in 867 when you get curbstomped by Vikings) and try to unite the island.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 03:38
|
|
|
rizuhbull posted:I have a hard time with games that leave a lot up to the player. Is this one of those "Make your own fun" sort of games like Minecraft? I'm honestly kind of wondering if this is the kind of game for you, as it's very open-ended. It doesn't really give you any goals at all, besides "don't die". You can start out as any ruler you wish, from the level of a count to an emperor. You can set yourself any goal within the confines of playing as a medieval European/North African/Middle Eastern ruler, such as "conquer as much land as possible", "survive as X" or "get your dynasty on as many thrones as possible". You can even just chill in your own kingdom, not expanding at all, and experiencing the different lives of your various rulers and interacting with the vassals. EDIT: Also, because the game is so open-ended, and leaves so much choice up to the player and to the decisions of the AI, each playthrough is unique. So what you ask for-- a step by step guide on what to do-- is not really possible, as the objective and situation will change every time. Say for example, you start off as the Count of Ormond, in Ireland. You set for yourself the overarching goal: Make myself king of Ireland Now you have a big grand plan, and to work towards that, you make a lot of little sub-plans. Now, you find that in order to form a Kingdom, you must take 51% of the Kingdom's de jure territory, and have at least two duchies under your control. So your secondary goal should be to get at least 2 duchies and 51% of the territory. Now, this defines your tertiary goal: Form the Duchy of Munster. How do you form the Duchy of Munster? Well, a Duchy can be formed when you control at least 51% of the de jure territory of the Duchy and can pay the 100-200 gold it costs to form it. So you have several immediate goals:
And let's say that when you start off, you have no heirs of your dynasty. This means you will lose the game when your character dies. That's bad! So you can add to your immediate goals:
Which means one goal you can perform right off the bat, is to Get Married. So, to sum up, the goals you set determine how you play the game. Set a big overarching general strategy and approach, and then fulfill the criteria for those goals, one by one. DrSunshine fucked around with this message at 03:56 on Jul 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 03:43
|
|
|
Turns out if you "force" a Norse republic you can't really raid at first because your home province doesn't count as friendly territory unless you're the doge.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 03:44
|
|
|
rizuhbull posted:I...I don't get how to play this game. I've watched a bunch of videos and did the in-game tutorial, I know what to do to play but not how. Is there a step-by-step guide that's like "pick this count, do this, then try this, etc" or something so I can see the appeal? I can't find the magic in this game but I'm sure it's there. Maybe it's my fault. I have a hard time with games that leave a lot up to the player. Is this one of those "Make your own fun" sort of games like Minecraft? You gotta pick somewhere that isn't too hard to make something out of, like a duke in Hungary. It tells it's own stories, really, you just have to find the right area to play in to get settled.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 03:49
|
|
|
Starting out as the King of England was probably not a great idea, but one question- how do you avoid France just smashing you into paste whenever they decide they want part of Normandy? I mean, historically, they did take it over, and it's easy to see why (the vast majority of your troops are overseas) but I'm wondering if it's possible to hold them off. Also, how do you tell what vassals will be able to call in allies if they decide to revolt? How do you work out their relationships with each other?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 04:03
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Starting out as the King of England was probably not a great idea, but one question- how do you avoid France just smashing you into paste whenever they decide they want part of Normandy? I mean, historically, they did take it over, and it's easy to see why (the vast majority of your troops are overseas) but I'm wondering if it's possible to hold them off. Like everything in this game, the solution is to stab people. Repeatedly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 04:17
|
|
|
rizuhbull posted:I...I don't get how to play this game. I've watched a bunch of videos and did the in-game tutorial, I know what to do to play but not how. Is there a step-by-step guide that's like "pick this count, do this, then try this, etc" or something so I can see the appeal? I can't find the magic in this game but I'm sure it's there. Maybe it's my fault. I have a hard time with games that leave a lot up to the player. Is this one of those "Make your own fun" sort of games like Minecraft? It is pretty much "Make your own fun", which is type of game I usually can't stand (I give up most sandbox games after finishing the main storyline in the case of GTAs or Elder Scrolls. Minecraft is just completely beyond my plane of understanding as well). CK2, on the other hand, is really compelling to me for some reason, and I think it's because the emergent storytelling is so far in advance of anything else in games I can think of. Setting your own goals is pretty fun if you have a bit of an interest in history, the goal of my 2nd to last game was to take and hold Jerusalem during the 1st Crusade as Tancred de Hauteville, for instance. After I'd secured that goal, I branched out and started marrying off de Hautevilles into positions where they could inherit various Kingdoms. Eventually the dynasty was in control of all of Iberia, the HRE, Croatia, Italy, Sicily, the Holy Land, Egypt, and various independent duchies. My current game is revolving around making all of England become de jure for the kingdom of Brittany, and for all the counties to be Breton culture. I had no idea what I was doing when I started playing CK2 and now it's probably one of my most played games ever.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 04:25
|
|
|
So my game starting as the Count of Constantinople in CK2+ Shattered World has been going pretty well. After forming the kingdoms of Nicaea, Bulgaria, and Trebizond, I was able to found the Byzantine Empire! Which was my major goal for the game, getting that done in the early 1200s means I'll need to set some new goals for myself. Maybe try to hork up the remainder of Greece? The one hitch is that I share a massive land border with the Ilkhanate. So far, I've only been the target of their ire once-- immediately after forming the Byzantine Empire, they declared war on me cleaved off all of my Armenian holdings with a 70k doomstack. While I appreciate their commitment to pretty borders-- the Duchy of Armenia provinces I held were a non-contiguous exclave sitting awkwardly in the Sultanate of Armenia, which was my main regional rival before the Mongols totally obliterated them-- I was sort of discomfited by the ease with which they could run roughshod over my entire empire. Other European nations fell over themselves to join the war on my side, but the only Christian kingdoms that had formed besides mine were Bavaria and "Greece", which was quickly reduced to a two-county rump state by an Athenian megaduke, so mostly it was just lovely little duchies and counties which didn't exactly get the job done. Since then, the Ilkhanate has mostly been focused elsewhere-- destroying the Muslim emirates that they missed as they barreled through the big sultanates, dealing with rebelling vassals, and losing a war against the Golden Horde (!). But is there anything else I can do to prepare in case they come calling again, beyond just hoping they don't want to carve off too much of my empire? I think that all the stuff I've got left is out of their usual path of expansion, and they just went for my Armenian provinces since they'd gotten the rest of Armenia from the Muslim Sultanate of Armenia, but this is the first game where I've had to deal with the Mongols in any serious capacity, so I'm not really sure how it usually goes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 04:28
|
|
|
At some point during my game, Venice got taken over by a mercenary band. As a result, all of the Venetian trading posts have disappeared from the face of the Earth. Now there are only two trade republics in the known world: Crimea which was created by me after a holy war, and the merchant league of Bulgaria. I honestly have no idea how Bulgaria got this way, but I'm inclined to think it involves witchcraft. Last I saw them they got destroyed by the Shiite Caliph and the Byzantine Empire. Looking at the republic trade zone map later, they have trading posts around Italy, Crimea, and somehow England  .Also quick question: the Golden Horde appeared and attempted to invade Cumania but I managed to beat them thanks in part to my 300k manpower army. As a result, they have no land and their levies appear broken since they now only invade with about 5k troops. With no land it's hard to siege and their levy shows up at random times, am I basically just forced to wait until the warscore reaches 100% every invasion and hope they convert to a settled nation soon?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 04:48
|
|
|
The Battle Axe posted:
If you completely wipe out their army, you should get an instant 100%.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 05:12
|
|
|
Something weird happened in one of my Zoroastrian games earlier that I've never seen before. I made myself king of Khwarazmia and the shah of Samarkand automatically became my vassal. Is everyone else in a kingdom automatically submitting to you when you make the title something I missed in the patch notes? I was getting ready to invade him and redistribute his land but now I'm stuck with the second most powerful person in my realm hating me when I was about to change succession laws. He has two dukedoms so I can't get rid of him easily, and if I stab him his son will just hate me even more.The Battle Axe posted:Looking at the republic trade zone map later, they have trading posts around Italy, Crimea, and somehow England Yeah I think something's wrong with the trade range too. In the same game I had Venetian trade posts in my county and they're nowhere near me. Trujillo fucked around with this message at 05:21 on Jul 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 05:18
|
|
|
A Tartan Tory posted:Like everything in this game, the solution is to stab people. Repeatedly. People keep saying this, but I don't get where you're getting the money for bribes and/or direct attack like this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 05:55
|
|
|
Bloodly posted:People keep saying this, but I don't get where you're getting the money for bribes and/or direct attack like this. Use the plots. Go to their character page and on the bottom left there is a plot tab. Click it and you'll get options like assassinate or discredit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 06:05
|
|
|
That's why I mentioned bribes. Getting people to aid you is expensive. The question stands-where are you getting the money?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 06:15
|
|
|
Bloodly posted:That's why I mentioned bribes. Getting people to aid you is expensive. The question stands-where are you getting the money? Increase city taxes, use your steward to squeeze out more money, get your spymaster to shake people down for money, fight holy wars if you're Catholic so that the Pope chucks money at you, raid people if you're pagan, make a vassal republic, be a republic, fight embargo wars against republics, banish rich dudes (warning: may cause mass revolts), invest in tax-increasing buildings in your holdings, max out your demesne...
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 06:22
|
|
|
So my game freezes when I raise my levies against France. What's the problem here?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 06:24
|
|
|
Daeren posted:Increase city taxes, use your steward to squeeze out more money, get your spymaster to shake people down for money, fight holy wars if you're Catholic so that the Pope chucks money at you, raid people if you're pagan, make a vassal republic, be a republic, fight embargo wars against republics, banish rich dudes (warning: may cause mass revolts), invest in tax-increasing buildings in your holdings, max out your demesne... If you create an Antipope don't you essentially start getting massive amounts of cash from the Church taxes, since almost all of it goes to you if the Antipope is within your demesne?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 06:33
|
|
|
El Pollo Blanco posted:If you create an Antipope don't you essentially start getting massive amounts of cash from the Church taxes, since almost all of it goes to you if the Antipope is within your demesne? Having an Antipope means you'll never have to worry about money again, in my experience. The caveat is that your bishops will only provide you with the income if they like the Antipope more than the real Pope. The Antipope I made in my Italy game easily gave me >100 gold per month income wise, I actually couldn't spend it fast enough.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 06:58
|
|
|
What's always tricky, is figuring out the proper replacement for the basque requirement to switch into true cognatic succession. Having to be basque is kind of dumb, but at least it's nice and simple. More logical replacements are always tricky, and I can sort of see why Wiz went with "no special requirement whatsoever." Like, right now, I'm got half programmed a thing that, if you're switching from ag-cog to true cognatic, would require either that the current ruler is a woman or that your eldest child is a daughter with a stat at 20. Which makes sense, ish...but then I realized, it only really makes sense if your realm is under gavelkind or primogeniture law. And there are a fair number of other possibilities, now. And I could put in alternate requirements, but...I don't know. I guess elective and tanistry could check for any legitimate daughter with a stat at 20, and ultimogeniture could check for a youngest child who was also a daughter, but then seniority is just a big annoying mess that I don't know what I'd do for. Should I just say gently caress it, let people get into true cognatic as easily as any other switch? Bloodly posted:That's why I mentioned bribes. Getting people to aid you is expensive. The question stands-where are you getting the money? Strudel Man fucked around with this message at 07:09 on Jul 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 07:07
|
|
|
quote:Should I just say gently caress it, let people get into true cognatic as easily as any other switch? May as well. After all, it means you have twice or more(Depending on how many daughters vs sons are born) the heirs to deal with, seeking power, etc. Also it means more chaos for everyone, which is what the game's all about. Check the adventurer events, though. Wouldn't surprise me if they didn't have some silly 'male-only' requirements on them. Bloodly fucked around with this message at 07:13 on Jul 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 07:10
|
|
|
Bloodly posted:Check the adventurer events, though. Wouldn't surprise me if they didn't have some silly 'male-only' requirements on them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 07:15
|
|
|
Strudel Man posted:Should I just say gently caress it, let people get into true cognatic as easily as any other switch? Might as well. If you're going to bother coding requirements any tougher than Wiz's "have this much prestige, keep the consequences in mind, otherwise go nuts", I'd stick to worrying about them for the AI - then you can keep them in terms of "things that would make this more probable" and it'll make more sense for less agonizing over The Right Requirements. If the player wants to turn the HRE into an enatic matriarchy and doesn't mind annoying all their vassals to do so, well, that's on the player.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 07:18
|
|
|
Right now, I have the AI only changing succession laws normally under two conditions: 1: To make crown laws align between multiple kingdom titles, or 2: To match their succession laws to their liege's, if in a kingdom with high or absolute crown authority. As implemented so far, I'm having it so that vassals will always switch if they're able under absolute authority, while if authority is only high, they'll switch the basic succession type if they like the crown liege at 50 or better, and the gender succession type either towards equality or towards advantaging that particular ruler's gender. (I.e., under high crown authority, men will switch towards female preference only up to true cognatic, while they'll switch towards male preference all the way to agnatic, and women will switch towards female preference all the way to enatic, and towards male preference only to true cognatic.) A mirror, in that sense. Since there's a nice, clean spectrum of choices when enatic and enatic-cognatic are activated, I also decided to require that it be stepped through one at a time. I.e., you can only switch to a given gender succession if you're already within one step of it; changing from agnatic to enatic would require at least four rulers. I think that's probably fair, and helps justify no special requirement for true cognatic itself. I'm also going to be tying who can be a councilor to the gender succession. edit: You know, the gender divide in who will switch to what is rather ugly to code and minor in effect. It sounds nice, but it's probably pretty pointless. I'll just have them switch gender succession in the direction of their liege's at high crown authority or above. Strudel Man fucked around with this message at 07:43 on Jul 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 07:28
|
|
|
Having played a lot of CK2 with absolute cognatic (both Dorne games in the Game of Thrones mod and CK2+ with the optional gender equality module) I feel like the advantages of having a greater pool of councilors and not having to pass on excellent female heirs for their dopey younger brothers are already just naturally balanced by the drawbacks of the AI being reluctant to form matrilineal marriages. It's a lot harder to get female heirs to marry into inheritances, and you need to keep tabs on your female heirs lest the AI patrilinealy marries them to some dope and you have to start stabbing people to avoid a game over further down the line.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 07:46
|
|
|
Strudel Man posted:Nobody actually gets stabby as often as you're advised to in this thread. There are limits to what you can realistically solve with stabbing. I dunno, as Doge of Amalfi I've murdered 2 of the 5 families completely so they were replaced and then murdered everyone but children for 2 others so that my heir has always been the oldest and has the most prestige. In between those murders I've also murdered the neighbouring Duke of Capua and his heir. Also does the AI every create trade republics? As Venice got absorbed by the Byzantines and so I'm the only trade republic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 08:21
|
|
|
I've started a new TOG game and I'm a few decades in, around 910 A.D. I just noticed that in the year or so since I played CK2 last I missed the Sunset Invasion DLC. If I buy Sunset Invasion will it invalidate my current save? Will the Aztec events still occur if I buy the DLC now or would I need to start a new game to see them?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 08:34
|
|
|
Geokinesis posted:I dunno, as Doge of Amalfi I've murdered 2 of the 5 families completely so they were replaced and then murdered everyone but children for 2 others so that my heir has always been the oldest and has the most prestige.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 09:10
|
|
|
Strudel Man posted:Okay, yes, as trade republics are literally drowning in money, you can assassinate a lot of people when playing one. It's plum necessary for republics to be murderous. They get fewer options like higher crown laws or matrilineal marriages, so out come the knives. Trade Republics are essentially the drug cartels of the Crusader Kings world.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 09:14
|
|
|
How do you become king of Ireland? I've tried a few playthroughs now, and I'm usually able to get 3-5 provinces in Ireland but then Kings start landing and taking over provinces and even if you fabricate or acquire claims to take the provinces they have you can't beat their giant 8000 man doomstacks. I can take out petty kings and earls easily enough if I carefully manage my funds to have mercs up but there's no competing with those major kings that always seem to take over parts of Ireland. Also why does marrying a wife of a different culture make your dude become that culture? I married some greek courtier because she had great stats but apparently that caused me to become Greek and Orthodox somehow, which resulted in a lot of Ireland hating me. I guess I should just stick to marrying only catholics with my direct heirs and maybe even only Irish ones at that to make sure my vassals and nearby foes don't get so pissed. That really limits options for good wives though. I'll probably end up trying a different spot now that I've mostly figured out the game mechanics though since I'm getting a tad sick of Ireland.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 09:35
|
|
|
Are you starting in 867? It should be pretty trivial if you're starting in 1066.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 09:38
|
|
|
chunkles posted:Are you starting in 867? It should be pretty trivial if you're starting in 1066. Yeah 867.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 09:41
|
|
|
Rurik posted:Where's the fun in that? I think the game gets dull when you can't lose. So purposefully ignoring what I know about the game to make it harder for myself, in order to make things more fun? I think when I reach that point I'll be well bored with the game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 09:53
|
|
|
Vigilance posted:Yeah 867. Try 1066, you won't have to deal with an assload of Viking kings landing and claiming half of the British Isles
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 09:58
|
|
|
Knuc If U Buck posted:So purposefully ignoring what I know about the game to make it harder for myself, in order to make things more fun? I think when I reach that point I'll be well bored with the game. Purposefully doing what a medieval ruler would've done. They were just as petty and passionate as all other people. If they had simply calculated everything by cost and effect, the Middle Ages wouldn't had been so chaotic and interesting. There would also be no awesome stories to tell other than the variations of "here's how I became God-Emperor and here's how I kept everyone else down". Also, what's the point of character traits if not to play according to them? King Knut the Kind should not act in a cruel manner.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 10:33
|
|
|
Ah I just discovered something amazingly useful in my Byzantium game. Whenever I play Byzantium holding onto your counties can be annoying because if you make the Kingdom of Greece odds are it will pass outside yourself at some point due to born in the purple. Having someone else hold the title will usually get bad penalties from whoever holds it desiring control of the duchy/counties. So I made it an elective title which worked for one generation but my new heir wasn't getting enough votes. This really left me in a bind until I realized the person that was getting all the votes I could have excommunicated; then I could imprison them for free and have them castrated so they could no longer hold land. No opinion penalty from any vassals at any point of the way. I think this would be pretty useful for anyone being uppity not just people that get in my way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 10:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 20:36 |
|
|
Strudel Man posted:They do. I already adjusted those, though, so that woman can raise a host in search of adventure if they're strong, genius, quick, or are top-level education in diplomacy, intrigue, or martial. Oh really? I was actually just thinking about removing the male-only requirement for it, but you wouldn't by any chance mind sharing your alterations to the adventures text file, would you? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 10:44
|
|
