Crusader Kings II: I desperately want to be cucked by Satan

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Crusader Kings II: I desperately want to be cucked by Satan

fuck off Batman: Oct 14, 2013; Yeah Yeah Yeah Yeah!

Toadsniff posted:

You aren't really making a compelling argument here, if you can't play it without paying for it then my point stands. What you paid for in Old Gods is more than what you paid for for any other expansion.

You can play it without paying if you are in a multiplayer game, and the host has bought DLCs. Every DLC that host has is now available to you also (for that game only).

# ? Apr 15, 2014 19:14

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 5, 2024 00:36

Toadsniff: Apr 10, 2006; Fire Down Below: Crab Company 2

Cantorsdust posted:

And Rajas added three new religions with new game mechanics and also physically changed the entire world map by expanding it 30%. Yet it was a bad DLC and Old Gods was a good one?

All the expansions do the same thing. The gameplay mechanics in each expansion is superfluous. Draw an icon, add a modifier to it, create a few new events that also modify a trait. RoI only really added India anything above it isn't even playable.

Ck2 DLC equates to flipping a few switches and slapping $15 on it. I love CK2, I like the DLC fine for what it is but for the past two now I haven't seen a return on that $30 investment. Yes DLC is a cash grab, but since there really isn't anything else like CK2 out there I'm kind of stuck with it. I don't have to like it. Sorry for bitching to you all about it. I just wish there was more meat this relationship, Paradox is giving me an emaciated midget when I paid for a Scarlett Johansson.

# ? Apr 15, 2014 19:16

Cantorsdust: Aug 10, 2008; Infinitely many points, but zero length.

Toadsniff posted:

All the expansions do the same thing. The gameplay mechanics in each expansion is superfluous. Draw an icon, add a modifier to it, create a few new events that also modify a trait. RoI only really added India anything above it isn't even playable.

Ck2 DLC equates to flipping a few switches and slapping $15 on it. I love CK2, I like the DLC fine for what it is but for the past two now I haven't seen a return on that $30 investment. Yes DLC is a cash grab, but since there really isn't anything else like CK2 out there I'm kind of stuck with it. I don't have to like it. Sorry for bitching to you all about it. I just wish there was more meat this relationship, Paradox is giving me an emaciated midget when I paid for a Scarlett Johansson.

If you think DLC is a cash grab, then don't loving buy it. I think it's amazing how much stuff you get for free in each patch. Even without buying Rajas, you still get to mess around in India for free. I don't know what else to tell you. The CK2/EU4 method of DLC has worked really well, and I've never felt like I've gotten too little for my money. It looks even better when you compare it to EU3 and earlier's expansion model, where honestly it felt like purchasing a patch sometimes.

You can't please everyone, I guess.

# ? Apr 15, 2014 19:21

Thrasophius: Oct 27, 2013

CommonTerry posted:

Well they spawn after the first crusade is declared, so if there's no need for a crusade they won't spawn at all. Also, can a mended Patriarch even call crusades?

The mended patriarch cannot call crusades as far as I'm aware however the pope always exists so I'm assuming he'll be able to call them eventually. I may have to cultivate a christian kingdom in the middle of my empire so that they have a safe heaven to call the crusade from.

# ? Apr 15, 2014 19:24

binge crotching: Apr 2, 2010

Thrasophius posted:

however the pope always exists so I'm assuming he'll be able to call them eventually

I've never seen a landless pope call a crusade, probably because with no land he's instantly at a -100% war score. So if you want crusades, you need to give him a holding somewhere.

# ? Apr 15, 2014 19:41

Main Paineframe: Oct 27, 2010

Toadsniff posted:

For starters increasing the roleplaying aspect of the game would be huge.

•Increasing the number of traits and interesting events on how those traits come into play. (these come in as a trickle; voice of jesus/satan, berserker, etc)

•More robust base building

•More politics and ability to manipulate public opinion

•Secret military squads for clandestine missions (would work with a spymaster but would be deployable like an army). I would love to see a whole slew of unique missions such as sabotage/impersonation.

•Less arbitrary assassinations, not based on percentage or dice rolling. (not plotting but the two should not be mutually exclusive, they should integrate these two)

Some other things I can't think of right now.

Actually Old Gods added raiding and physically changed the entire world map by adding rivers. Had you said Sons of Abraham then I'd agree with you wholeheartedly. Old Gods is probably the most robust DLC CK2 has ever received, that was a bad example.

Each DLC has added new traits, The Republic and Legacy of Rome added new ways to build up your political or military base, whichever DLC added factions added more politics, assassin armies that move on the map is stupid, and I don't see a fair way to perform assassinations or other intrigue without percentages or dice rolling.

You call raiding a major game mechanic? Muslims and Republics are way bigger changes than having a button you can click to make you super rich.

# ? Apr 15, 2014 19:42

KOGAHAZAN!!: Apr 29, 2013; a miserable failure as a person

an incredible success as a magical murder spider

Riso posted:

As a big India nut, maybe you have some ideas regarding a syncretic Norse/Hindu faith and/or Indo-Norse culture?

Ergh, I don't really want to present myself as some sort of authority on the matter. Especially not on something like Hinduism, which is super complex for a number of reasons- not least among which is that it's not and has never been a unified monolithic faith with a central doctrine, but a collection of highly mutable sects in communion with each other. And all the books I have are on modern Hinduism, which is all about this weird metaphysical stuff and doesn't really have a lot to do with the polytheistic thing that most people imagine it to be. (mediaeval brahmanism would have been a lot closer, I think?)

Though, okay, as a thought experiment: if you take a bunch of Vikings and drop them into Indian in the tenth century, I think what you're going to see is the Norse faith absorbed into brahmanism as just another sect- Norse deities will start to be identified with Vishnu and Shiva and the religion will start to take on philosophical concepts like karma and reincarnation. Traffic in the other direction- I don't know if I know enough about Norse paganism- Hollywood pastiche aside- to intelligently comment on this either, but I suspect other direction would be minimal. The problem is that India has a long tradition of philosophy and philosophical debate, and the Vikings don't- any sort of syncretism is going to operate in an Indian philosophical framework because that's the only one available, and that will inevitably throw an Indian bias over the whole process. Plus, you could have dropped the entire population of Scandinavia into the subcontinent at this point (well, any point), and not even notice.

A big problem for Norse rulers integrating into Indian society is that they're going to be mleccha, which means they'll be unclean and have no varna, and if they have no varna then (I think?) they have no dharma, and if they have no dharma then they basically don't exist as far as Hinduism is concerned. On the other hand, vanilla has a decision where you can straight up buy your way into the kshatriya varna, so maybe it shouldn't be that hard to fix? :v:

Sorry, I don't know how useful any of this will be for designing game features. As a apology, have a big long quote from John Keay's India: a History on the nature of religion in the time of the Guptas:

quote:

As between the orthodox and heterodox sects ecumenism was still the norm. The Guptas, although identifying themselves with Lord Vishnu and performing Vedic sacrifices, encouraged endowments to both Buddhist and brahman establishments with even-handed munificence. Yet the physical separation of the two communities, as implied in Fa Hian's account, may be significant. Buddhist monasteries were usually located outside the main centres of population and influence, near enough for collecting alms and instructing the laity but far enough for tranquility and seclusion. The 'brahmacharis', on the other hand, technically brahman students but here implying the whole brahman educational establishment, were now located within the city and close to the court.

Hinduism as a religion with specific doctrines and practices was still unrecognisable. Arguably it still is. The criteria of orthodoxy lay- and lie- in conduct rather than belief. Deference and support to brahmans, acceptance of one's caste, public participation in traditional rituals, festivals and pilgrimages, and the propitiation of familial or local deities remained of the essence. As already noted, concepts like those of dharma, karma and the transmigration of souls, though originally aired in the Upanisads and nowadays considered quintessentially Hindu, had hitherto been more zealously championed by the Buddhists. To the Buddhist practice of erecting and adorning stupas of dressed stone have also been traced the first experiments in stone architecture and in the devotional use of sculptural iconography. Only after achieving remarkable expertise in the portrayal of the Buddha figure and of animal and human, mainly female, figures did the stonemasons of Mathura and elsewhere turn to producing images of the orthodox 'Hindu' pantheon.

How the personae of these deities, especially Vishnu, Shiva and various forms of the mother-goddess, emerged- or converged (for all were composites)- and how they eventually displaced most of the earlier Vedic deities is not well-documented. Vedic sacrifices like the aswamedha remained essential to kingship during and long after the Gupta age, but from about this time onwards 'we do not come across the case of a single individual ascribing his greatness or luck to a Vedic deity'. Personal seals found in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh usually bear the emblems of Shiva or Vishnu, and the inscriptions of nearly all the dynasties of the age protest their devotion to some form of the same two deities. Indeed the convergence of the various Shaiva and Vaishnava personae, as well as their growing popularity, may have been partky the outcome of dominant dynasties like the Guptas co-opting the resources, divine and supernatural as well as political and economic, of their conquered feudatories.

This certainly seems to have been the case with many of the legends, incarnations, consorts and relatives associated with Vishnu, including his identification with Krishna (the Yadava deity) and with Vasudeva and Narayana, all cults which seem to have originated in the Mathura region and western India. In Malwa and central India a more popular Vaishnava cult of the period was that of Vishnu in his Varaha incarnation as a colossal wild boar who, not unlike King Kong, hoists to safety a small and naked nymph representing the earth, The famous fifth-century sculptural representations of this myth at Eran, Udayagiri and elsewhere in eastern Malwa may well celebrate the incorporation of a local boar cult into the Vishnu persona as a result of Chandra-Gupta II's long soujourn in the region while he fought the Satraps.

Whatever their genesis, sanction for this accretion and fusion of cults was provided by the Puranasa and the epics as they were recast, expanded and written down during and after the Guptas. Brahmanic authority was thus gradually accorded to the new composite deities, and the sculptor responded by giving them concrete form. Awesome figures of legend, obscure local deities, and various fertility and tutelary spirits were duly transformed into worshippable images. Their identity with the gods and goddesses of orthodox scripture conferred prestige on them; at the same time it brought them within the brahmanic mainstream of what is now called the 'Great Tradition' of Hinduism.

It remained only to refine the nature of man's relationship to the new generation of deities and to develop forms of worship suitable to it. This process may also have been influenced by Buddhist precedent in that the new relationship assumed a degree of divine proximity and compassion which is not often evident in the Vedas but is fundamental to legends concerning the Buddhist Boddhisatvas. The supplicant's more personalised response, with its emphasis on devotion rather than propitiation, is evident in the famous Bhagavad Gita whose interpolation into the Mahabharata probably dates from the third to fourth centuries A.D. But it was the much later Bhakti movement, drawing its inspiration and fervour from devotional practices in the south of India and Bengal, which would eventually endow Hinduism with its public fervour and and its private intimacy of communion. Though seemingly at odds both with the dangerous business of Vedic ritual and the mind-boggling subtleties of Upanishadic metaphysics, this new devotional emphasis would become the most distinctive and endearing characteristic of what we now call Hinduism.

Instead of 'Hinduism', scholars sometimes use the term 'brahmanism' to distinguish the pre-Bhakti orthodoxies of the post-Vedic era from the teachings of the heterodox sects like the Buddhists and Jains. 'Brahmanism' would have been as meaningless to its supposed adherents as 'Hinduism', but the term does have the advantage of accommodating a variety of orthodox traits, including the authority accorded to the brahman caste, the innumerable cults to which brahmanical acceptance was extended, and the complex philosophical notion of brahman as an impersonal monotheistic entity which, like the Word in Christianity, subsumed all deities, the human soul as well as the divine, and indeed all creation.

quote:
In the Vedas brahma(n) denotes hymn, prayer, sacred word, formulation of truth, substratum etc., ideas that developed later to signify, on the practical level, the title brahman for the person who possessed the qualities conveyed by such ideas, and, on the conceptual level, their abstract summation as the immutable universal principle.

Thus we learn that 'the brahmanas attributed brahma power to the brahmans', an unassailable observations but one of such elliptical import that it deters further enquiry by anyone ignorant of Sanskrit- a category which then as now included most Indians as well as nearly all non-Indians. For as will already be apparent, abstract terms like brahman pose insurmountable problems of translation. Their connotations change over the centuries and their associations, ramifying through the literary canopy like lianas, defy the lexicographer's search for equivalent words in other languages. Dharma ('religion', 'duty', 'order'), artha ('wealth', 'politics', 'motive'), danda ('authority', 'coercion', 'government') and many other such concepts of crucial importance prove no less elusive. Conversely, English words like 'divinity', 'sovereignty', or 'power' have no exact Sanskrit equivalents.

That would be the fifth century, but a lot of it should still be relevant in the CK2 timeframe.

----------

Meanwhile, does anyone with experience modding the map know how well it'll respond if I go crazy with archipelagos? I am making a fantasy mod (I know, I know), and there are islands everywhere. For instance, the files say that provinces that can't be reached from "the continent" by land have to be specially tagged and grouped for pathfinding purposes- how exactly is "the continent" defined? If I have one (and only one) landmass that touches a map edge, is that "the continent"? Is it the biggest landmass? Is it the landmass with the most provinces? If I go mad and tag everything as an island, is that going to break anything?

# ? Apr 15, 2014 19:43

Toadsniff: Apr 10, 2006; Fire Down Below: Crab Company 2

Main Paineframe posted:

Each DLC has added new traits, The Republic and Legacy of Rome added new ways to build up your political or military base, whichever DLC added factions added more politics, assassin armies that move on the map is stupid, and I don't see a fair way to perform assassinations or other intrigue without percentages or dice rolling.

You call raiding a major game mechanic? Muslims and Republics are way bigger changes than having a button you can click to make you super rich.

Yeah I realized after posting those bullets that I basically just described Total War.

# ? Apr 15, 2014 19:46

Darkrenown: Jul 18, 2012; please give me anything to talk about besides the fact that democrats are allowing millions of americans to be evicted from their homes

Toadsniff posted:

All the expansions do the same thing. The gameplay mechanics in each expansion is superfluous. Draw an icon, add a modifier to it, create a few new events that also modify a trait. RoI only really added India anything above it isn't even playable.

Ck2 DLC equates to flipping a few switches and slapping $15 on it. I love CK2, I like the DLC fine for what it is but for the past two now I haven't seen a return on that $30 investment. Yes DLC is a cash grab, but since there really isn't anything else like CK2 out there I'm kind of stuck with it. I don't have to like it. Sorry for bitching to you all about it. I just wish there was more meat this relationship, Paradox is giving me an emaciated midget when I paid for a Scarlett Johansson.

If making DLC is so easy, then how come everything breaks? QED :colbert:

# ? Apr 15, 2014 21:34

Riso: Oct 11, 2008; by merry exmarx

Darkrenown posted:

If making DLC is so easy, then how come everything breaks? QED

Because you outsource to India.

# ? Apr 15, 2014 21:38

Darkrenown: Jul 18, 2012; please give me anything to talk about besides the fact that democrats are allowing millions of americans to be evicted from their homes

If a devotion to authenticity is wrong, then I don't want to be right!

# ? Apr 15, 2014 21:42

Riso: Oct 11, 2008; by merry exmarx

You should have learned from your Japanese experiment that it will never work out right!

# ? Apr 15, 2014 21:45

Toadsniff: Apr 10, 2006; Fire Down Below: Crab Company 2

Darkrenown posted:

If a devotion to authenticity is wrong, then I don't want to be right!

[insert Ganges joke here]

Not authentic enough :colbert:

# ? Apr 15, 2014 21:46

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Edison was a dick posted:

I've been inspecting the game files when planning this, I couldn't find out where the Jain vassal opinion bonus comes from, apart from one of the branches giving a +5 bonus.

If it is the case that there's the +30, then you break even with the opinion bonus with the right branch of Jainism without having to find a priestly dynasty member to marry, have no short reign penalty, can designate your heir, and have the irony of a Jain Empire having access to the most powerful CB.

On the other hand, you basically can't war to get any territory until you do become mongol, and your breeding program has fewer options.

The Jain vassal opinion is in defines.lua.

Seems like it's better than break even, though. +10 for feudal vassal opinion of divine marriage and +10 for saoshyant descendant is only +20, compared to +35 for Svetambara Jain.

You also get +3 to your demesne size as Jain, in addition to the heir designation.

edit: You mention +25 for divine marriage, and a 'priestly dynasty member' - am I misunderstanding how that bonus works? I thought it was just that priest vassals always got a +25 opinion bonus for divine marriages, while everyone else (the bulk of your vassals) get the +10.

Autonomous Monster posted:

A big problem for Norse rulers integrating into Indian society is that they're going to be mleccha, which means they'll be unclean and have no varna, and if they have no varna then (I think?) they have no dharma, and if they have no dharma then they basically don't exist as far as Hinduism is concerned. On the other hand, vanilla has a decision where you can straight up buy your way into the kshatriya varna, so maybe it shouldn't be that hard to fix?

I'm not any kind of expert on philosophy, but my intuition is that any religious position which says that the dudes who can have you executed at a whim don't matter/exist is probably going to change within that society PDQ.

Strudel Man fucked around with this message at 22:03 on Apr 15, 2014

# ? Apr 15, 2014 21:54

KOGAHAZAN!!: Apr 29, 2013; a miserable failure as a person

an incredible success as a magical murder spider

Strudel Man posted:

I'm not any kind of expert on philosophy, but my intuition is that any religious position which says that the dudes who can have you executed at a whim don't matter/exist is probably going to change within that society PDQ.

Yeah, probably. It was just the first thing that came to mind when thinking about cultural problems you'd run into. :v:

Strudel Man posted:

The Jain vassal opinion is in defines.lua.

Also: this goddamn game and hardcoding poo poo, I swear. :argh:

You couldn't just have stuck a vassal_opinion line in religions.txt, huh?

# ? Apr 15, 2014 22:14

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Autonomous Monster posted:

Yeah, probably. It was just the first thing that came to mind when thinking about cultural problems you'd run into.

Also: this goddamn game and hardcoding poo poo, I swear.

You couldn't just have stuck a vassal_opinion line in religions.txt, huh?

Until RoI itself, that wasn't a valid place to have character modifiers. But given that they did something very similar for buddhism, it does seem odd that they squirreled away the Jain one in defines.

Strudel Man fucked around with this message at 22:28 on Apr 15, 2014

# ? Apr 15, 2014 22:21

binge crotching: Apr 2, 2010

Darkrenown posted:

If making DLC is so easy, then how come everything breaks? QED

You really are the best dev. :swoon:

# ? Apr 15, 2014 22:34

CommonTerry: Dec 16, 2013; good is soda grape

Toadsniff posted:

Just curious how you'd suppose one play the DLC without paying for it? Reviews haven't meant poo poo for CK2 since the original release date. I thought old gods was a good expansion, well rounded and loaded with content. This is not.

You don't need to buy ROI to enjoy all of the things it adds. You only need to buy it if you want to play as an Indian nation, the same was true of Sword of Islam and Muslims. However, you do have to buy Old Gods to enjoy most of the things it adds. So yeah, if you quantify "good DLC" by how many features are behind a paywall, it's the best they've done right behind Aztec Invasion.

Toadsniff posted:

For starters increasing the roleplaying aspect of the game would be huge.

•Increasing the number of traits and interesting events on how those traits come into play. (these come in as a trickle; voice of jesus/satan, berserker, etc)
•More robust base building
•More politics and ability to manipulate public opinion
•Secret military squads for clandestine missions (would work with a spymaster but would be deployable like an army). I would love to see a whole slew of unique missions such as sabotage/impersonation.
•Less arbitrary assassinations, not based on percentage or dice rolling. (not plotting but the two should not be mutually exclusive, they should integrate these two)

Some other things I can't think of right now.

"Increase RP" I agree, but the game is coded to function more as a grognard-lite strategy board game than an RPG. Hopefully the community's clamoring for more RPG/flavor will affect the development of CK3 in that direction, but sadly that's years ahead and I think the kind of RP you and me want from CK2 just isn't feasible because of how it's built.

"More traits, more event chains" Maybe if they overhauled the interface, but I'm not really too keen on 1000 more event chains.

"Base building?" What, you want some lovely Total War/RTS bullshit where you queue up units? Sorry, that's not even remotely historical. The fact that the game even lets you dick around with buildings in holdings/construct new ones is a little too much. In reality, if you as a king wanted to beef up your army with new reforms, you would have discussed that with your top commanders and vassals, who would then get their underlings to muster the resources to implement them, or argued against the action, or just ignored you. That's why I agree that Crusader Kings should feel more like an RPG if it wants to truly be a simulator.

"More politics/public interaction" I have zero idea how they could implement that without shoving in a million annoying event chains. Bring that up when CK3 development is announced, it would work well with the last point, but I seriously doubt there's a way they can put what you're looking for in a CK2 DLC.

"More spy flavor" Why? The people who use assassination and plots extensively are powergaming shitheads who wouldn't appreciate it anyway.

# ? Apr 15, 2014 22:40

Chickpea Roar: Jan 11, 2006; Merdre!

Autonomous Monster posted:

Yeah, probably. It was just the first thing that came to mind when thinking about cultural problems you'd run into.

Also: this goddamn game and hardcoding poo poo, I swear.

You couldn't just have stuck a vassal_opinion line in religions.txt, huh?

What's the problem with it being in defines.lua?

# ? Apr 15, 2014 23:01

Landsknecht: Oct 27, 2009; I hope this person is trolling, nobody can be so unfunny and dumb

So as the Byzantine emperor I forged a claim on rome and then took it from the pope, but some of the minor holders are still vassals of the papacy, but since the pope is now landless I can't declare a county-claim war on him. What do I do? (this is in ironman so I can get the cheevs).

# ? Apr 15, 2014 23:03

McGavin: Sep 18, 2012

Landsknecht posted:

So as the Byzantine emperor I forged a claim on rome and then took it from the pope, but some of the minor holders are still vassals of the papacy, but since the pope is now landless I can't declare a county-claim war on him. What do I do? (this is in ironman so I can get the cheevs).

You either cry and wait until this bug is fixed in the next patch or pause the game and assassinate all of the Pope's vassals until he inherits a claim then declare war on him before he gives it away again.

# ? Apr 15, 2014 23:09

CommonTerry: Dec 16, 2013; good is soda grape

^^That only works if one of the holdings is a barony btw

e. or would it be a temple, because he's a religious head

CommonTerry fucked around with this message at 23:18 on Apr 15, 2014

# ? Apr 15, 2014 23:10

Esroc: May 31, 2010; Goku would be ashamed of you.

How do you get the Pope to give you a claim on a neighboring land? The Pope has a +100 opinion of me and I have plenty of Piety laying around, but every land I ask him to allow a claim on he denies.

I'm about ready to pour my entire fortune into assassinating the motherfucker.

# ? Apr 15, 2014 23:21

DivineCoffeeBinge: Mar 3, 2011; Spider-Man's Amazing Construction Company

Esroc posted:

How do you get the Pope to give you a claim on a neighboring land? The Pope has a +100 opinion of me and I have plenty of Piety laying around, but every land I ask him to allow a claim on he denies.

I'm about ready to pour my entire fortune into assassinating the motherfucker.

He has to really dislike the guy whose land you want.

Alternately, become an emperor and vassalize the Pope.

# ? Apr 15, 2014 23:25

Roland Jones: Aug 18, 2011; by Nyc_Tattoo

Okay, still doing my Ua Briain game, it's going better. Was in the process of taking over enough counties to become King of Ireland. However, in the process of besieging the very last one, my guy died, leaving his inheritance to his son. Which, well, whatever, war's already over, and- Wait why can't I have the ambition to become King of Ireland? Why did I not get the option to create the title upon conquering the place? Is that only a thing Murchad can do, and now that I'm stuck with Brian I'm out of luck, or is there something I need to wait for?

Edit: Scratch that; making my conquered lands into duchies fixed that for some reason. Dunno what the problem was, but oh well. Now to save up money until I can make myself King.

Edit again: Still can't get any new ambitions on Brian, though.

Roland Jones fucked around with this message at 23:58 on Apr 15, 2014

# ? Apr 15, 2014 23:44

Fluffy Tail: Jan 3, 2012; "I am the beginning and the end. The alpha and the omega. The first and the last."

Chaos Dunk

Roland Jones posted:

Okay, still doing my Ua Briain game, it's going better. Was in the process of taking over enough counties to become King of Ireland. However, in the process of besieging the very last one, my guy died, leaving his inheritance to his son. Which, well, whatever, war's already over, and- Wait why can't I have the ambition to become King of Ireland? Why did I not get the option to create the title upon conquering the place? Is that only a thing Murchad can do, and now that I'm stuck with Brian I'm out of luck, or is there something I need to wait for?

Edit: Scratch that; making my conquered lands into duchies fixed that for some reason. Dunno what the problem was, but oh well. Now to save up money until I can make myself King.

You need two Duchies before you can create a King level title. Empires require you to have two King level titles. I guess Duchies need two Counties as well.

# ? Apr 15, 2014 23:52

Thrasophius: Oct 27, 2013

SeaTard posted:

I've never seen a landless pope call a crusade, probably because with no land he's instantly at a -100% war score. So if you want crusades, you need to give him a holding somewhere.

I've already taken his lands and the AI won't give him anymore, I've just realised there will never be a crusade in my game now :cripes:

# ? Apr 16, 2014 00:02

KOGAHAZAN!!: Apr 29, 2013; a miserable failure as a person

an incredible success as a magical murder spider

Nightblade posted:

What's the problem with it being in defines.lua?

defines is where all the super inflexible stuff lives. If there's a CDEF_JAIN_VASSAL_OPINION value in there, rather than a vassal_opinion value in the religions file, it means that, rather than looking in the (soft coded and easily accessible to modders) religions file and seeing that there is a Jain religion with the vassal opinion property with such and such a value, it has to already know, in its (hard coded and modder-inaccessible) exe brain, there there is such a thing as a Jain religion with a vassal opinion property and then go looking for the value in the defines file.

Basically, you can't add new propeties to things in defines, only adjust the values that are already there.

Though, if Strudel Man says you could do it in religions anyway then there isn't any functional difference in this case, it's just a really weird way to do it and it makes the code harder to interpret.

Though, I guess we could now have a problem where the game will choke if it can't find the Jain religion in the religion file? The GoT guys should have caught that, if it does.

# ? Apr 16, 2014 00:02

McGavin: Sep 18, 2012

Fluffy Tail posted:

You need two Duchies before you can create a King level title. Empires require you to have two King level titles. I guess Duchies need two Counties as well.

You need to control >51% of the territory of any non-emperor title in order to create or usurp it. King titles require you to control at least two duchies as well. Emperor titles require you to control >80% of their territory and at least two kingdoms.

McGavin fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Apr 16, 2014

# ? Apr 16, 2014 00:25

James Garfield: May 5, 2012; Am I a manipulative abuser in real life, or do I just roleplay one on the Internet for fun? You decide!

McGavin posted:

You need to control >51% of the territory of any non-emperor title in order to create or usurp it. King titles require you to control at least two duchies as well. Emperor titles require you to control >80% of their territory and at least two kingdoms.

You can't create the kingdom unless you have both 50% of its territory and two duchies.

# ? Apr 16, 2014 00:34

RagnarokAngel: Oct 5, 2006; Black Magic Extraordinaire

Thrasophius posted:

I've already taken his lands and the AI won't give him anymore, I've just realised there will never be a crusade in my game now

So give him Rome back, don't be a dick to Papa man.

Unrelated but something I was thinking about thats been bothering me. I don't know if it's a swedish translation thing but it kinda rubs me the wrong way how Cynic is used as a trait in this game. It actually seems to represent 2 things, being a skeptic (not believing in God, or at least questioning His existence) and being pessimistic (Which is how I've always seen cynic used).

These 2 things are not necessarily equal and I can see someone being a pessimist but not a skeptic, or vice-versa. It wouldn't be so weird to roll them together if the opposite, Zealous, seems to only refer to religious zeal and not like, optimism or a lust for life (Which would make sense as an opposite of "Cynic" as I understand it).

Does any of this make sense or am I crazy?

# ? Apr 16, 2014 00:35

Thrasophius: Oct 27, 2013

RagnarokAngel posted:

So give him Rome back, don't be a dick to Papa man.

I would but I'm orthodox so I don't have the option too :negative:

and catholic is now an orthodox heresy because I mended the schism.

# ? Apr 16, 2014 00:47

Rumda: Nov 4, 2009; Moth Lesbian Comrade

Thrasophius posted:

I would but I'm orthodox so I don't have the option too and catholic is now an orthodox heresy because I mended the schism.

Well slowly convert provinces back to Catholicism until its retakes its rightful place.

# ? Apr 16, 2014 00:50

Edison was a dick: Apr 3, 2010; direct current only

Strudel Man posted:

The Jain vassal opinion is in defines.lua.

Seems like it's better than break even, though. +10 for feudal vassal opinion of divine marriage and +10 for saoshyant descendant is only +20, compared to +35 for Svetambara Jain.

You also get +3 to your demesne size as Jain, in addition to the heir designation.

edit: You mention +25 for divine marriage, and a 'priestly dynasty member' - am I misunderstanding how that bonus works? I thought it was just that priest vassals always got a +25 opinion bonus for divine marriages, while everyone else (the bulk of your vassals) get the +10.

Ah, you are correct, I misunderstood it to mean if you had a divine marriage with a temple holder, you got +25 for every zoroastrian vassal.

Jain would indeed be the best option here.
I'm going to continue with the Zoroastrian plan for now, but I guess I'll be going to India after I convert to Mongol culture.

I'm just pondering what the AI would do if they were a Mongolian Jain, since they have a horde culture, but a pacifist religion. Would they ever actually decide to use the invasion CB?

# ? Apr 16, 2014 01:09

KOGAHAZAN!!: Apr 29, 2013; a miserable failure as a person

an incredible success as a magical murder spider

RagnarokAngel posted:

Does any of this make sense or am I crazy?

No, it makes perfect sense. And they probably shouldn't be conflated. It's not the only trait with this problem, though: Brave seems to include the concept of recklessness. And there's no "cautious" or "wary" trait that isn't Paranoid or Craven, either, and no way to express the concept "I am an introvert" without going full-on "I am scared of other people" (Shy).

Though what really bugs me about the traits in the super lopsided personality traits. Of the 25 traits,, excluding Diligent, Patient, Slothful and Ambitious, which affect everything equally, there are 12 which affect DIP, 10 which affect INT, 4 which affect MAR, 4 which affect STE, and 2 (Arbitrary and Just) which affect LEA.

The general effect of ths is that it's much easier to build a character for DIP or INT then it is any of the other stats- you can hit a higher cap and you can much more easily fill holes.

I don't know if it's affecting balance or whatever, but it is irritating me. :smith:

# ? Apr 16, 2014 01:25

Thrasophius: Oct 27, 2013

Rumda posted:

Well slowly convert provinces back to Catholicism until its retakes its rightful place.

How likely is it to get an event to change religion? because I'm thinking of educating my heir with a catholic so I can give the pope land when he takes over, trigger crusades then switch back to orthodox once the holy orders have spawned but that's only if it's likely to have a conversion event fire.

# ? Apr 16, 2014 01:35

Roland Jones: Aug 18, 2011; by Nyc_Tattoo

Alright, doing much better in this; the LPs just made things seem much faster-paced and usually cropped the images so there wasn't always a sense of how much time actually happens between things, so I felt like I was going way too slow. I've now managed to become King of Ireland with seven counties, get four of the remaining six to swear fealty to me, then conquered one of the remaining two, after which the last one saw the writing on the wall and reconsidered her decision to not join the Kingdom of Ireland.

I have a problem, though. I married my eldest son to some woman with claims in York (now Privek or something) in the hopes of eventually getting claims to the lands over there back when my first guy was still alive; however, after the marriage he went over to her court, and now, even though I'm king and everything's going to poo poo over there, I can't get either of them to come back. Besides this probably loving up my grandkids' education, I'm worried as to where he'll be when my current dude dies. He's still my heir, but will he return to Ireland or stick around over in that shithole?

# ? Apr 16, 2014 02:00

Hefty Leftist: Jun 26, 2011; "You know how vodka or whiskey are distilled multiple times to taste good? It's the same with shit. After being digested for the third time shit starts to taste reeeeeeaaaally yummy."

Toadsniff posted:

Seriously not trying to be antagonistic here. But would it be safe to assume that all future DLC for this game will really only equate to some text boxes that adjust a skill +/- 1? Because when you break the new DLC down that is all that's going on. The new religions do not add anything of value from what I've played, playing a Jainist is no different than a Hinduist. They all have the same Intrigue events, same marriage laws, replace deer/boar with tiger and so on. The only reason you'd get anything more out of RoI than other expansion is if you have a boner for India.

I do have to agree with this a little, there's really not that much stuff for seasoned players in Rajas of India. If you're new to CK2 I can imagine it would be fun to switch out to India, but if you've played it for 500 hours then it's really not that much different at all from Europe. I think more emphasis on the caste system beyond traits would be nice so you have a bit more of a unique experience, but I'm not sure how you'd make the religions more distinct.

# ? Apr 16, 2014 02:00

monster on a stick: Apr 29, 2013

Thrasophius posted:

How likely is it to get an event to change religion? because I'm thinking of educating my heir with a catholic so I can give the pope land when he takes over, trigger crusades then switch back to orthodox once the holy orders have spawned but that's only if it's likely to have a conversion event fire.

The Catholic holy orders won't go Orthodox - at best they'll switch to a heresy of Catholicism (Cathar, Fraticelli, Waldensian) if the heresy supplants the original religion.

# ? Apr 16, 2014 02:15

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 5, 2024 00:36

Pellisworth: Jun 20, 2005

Edison was a dick posted:

Ah, you are correct, I misunderstood it to mean if you had a divine marriage with a temple holder, you got +25 for every zoroastrian vassal.

Jain would indeed be the best option here.
I'm going to continue with the Zoroastrian plan for now, but I guess I'll be going to India after I convert to Mongol culture.

I'm just pondering what the AI would do if they were a Mongolian Jain, since they have a horde culture, but a pacifist religion. Would they ever actually decide to use the invasion CB?

Digambara is the best Jain sect, and whichever Buddhist one also gives +1 health. The +5 vassal opinion is kinda underwhelming when you consider the +30 you get just for being Jain, and +1 health makes all your dynasty members less likely to die from childbirth, disease, battle, age, etc. That makes for easy long reigns (coupled with the ability to designate a young child as heir). Also, Digambara means "sky clad" and refers to the fact that Digambara monks don't wear any clothes. So imagine the 30 Learning guru you recruit showing up naked :v:

Jains have amazing realm/dynasty stability and maintenance. The drawback is they're extreme pacifists and don't get to go on hunts and can't Holy War (though you can easily enough convert to Hindu to do that). Ironically enough they're probably the easiest to expand within India using Subjugation, since they get +1 monthly Piety while at peace which helps a lot toward banking the 500 Piety for a subjugation.

I might write a longer post on the Indian religions.

Edit: some of the mechanics are kinda opaque. For instance, Buddhists have gender equality (no penalty for female rulers) and I don't think that's in their religion tooltip.

Also Jains don't have any short reign penalty.

Pellisworth fucked around with this message at 02:40 on Apr 16, 2014

# ? Apr 16, 2014 02:36

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Crusader Kings II: I desperately want to be cucked by Satan

«‹›1029 »