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

«‹›1029 »

Arrhythmia: Jul 22, 2011

COOL CORN posted:

What's the best count to start with to get the count->emperor achievement?

The count of Kaliopolis in the Latin Empire start date is set to inherit the Latin Empire. So, you know, :ese:

# ? Aug 16, 2014 19:55

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 3, 2024 20:22

Ofaloaf: Feb 15, 2013

# ? Aug 16, 2014 20:20

DrSunshine: Mar 23, 2009; Did I just say that out loud~~?!!!

How dreamy~ :swoon:

It should read "Patrinia's Pretty Portraits Pack" instead.

# ? Aug 16, 2014 20:25

Mantis42: Jul 26, 2010

Still waiting for a tits mod.

# ? Aug 16, 2014 20:36

Ageofbob: Sep 16, 2011

Is that for real? If it is, post a link.

# ? Aug 16, 2014 22:49

TaurusTorus: Mar 27, 2010; Grab the bullshit by the horns

I could swear I saw one that had breast size as a trait, its basically just attractive. It also had penis size.

# ? Aug 16, 2014 22:50

Ofaloaf: Feb 15, 2013

Ageofbob posted:

Is that for real? If it is, post a link.

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?790833-MOD-Patrinia-villosa-s-Portrait-Pack

The sclera-less blank stare is my favorite blank stare.

# ? Aug 16, 2014 22:55

Entropia: Nov 18, 2012; Can't post for 10 years!

anime kings

# ? Aug 16, 2014 23:01

Eric the Mauve: May 8, 2012; Making you happy for a buck since 199X

KOraithER posted:

It's really easy to become your spouse's rival if you are unfaithful and refuse to end it when discovered.

If you're not depressed one of the more reliable ways to get yourself dead if your heir is really awesome and you want to play as him is have a couple affairs, piss your wife off, then make her your spymaster. You won't live longer than a year.

# ? Aug 16, 2014 23:21

Reveilled: Apr 19, 2007; Take up your rifles

Ofaloaf posted:

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?790833-MOD-Patrinia-villosa-s-Portrait-Pack

The sclera-less blank stare is my favorite blank stare.

For some reason I feel a lot more charitable towards this as a mod knowing that it's some random Korean person making it, instead of some anime-obsessed weeaboo type.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 01:50

Empress Theonora: Feb 19, 2001; She was a sword glinting in the depths of night, a lance of light piercing the darkness. There would be no mistakes this time.

I kind of want to use that mod for my next CK2 LP and just never mention or acknowledge it in any way for the entire run.

It's actually pretty well-done for what it is; it'd give the game a kind of Long Live the Queen-esque charm.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 01:54

Arrhythmia: Jul 22, 2011

Rincewind posted:

I kind of want to use that mod for my next CK2 LP and just never mention or acknowledge it in any way for the entire run.

It's actually pretty well-done for what it is; it'd give the game a kind of Long Live the Queen-esque charm.

Add in a new horde that all has those faces.

What'll be really fun is when it starts mixing into the regular gene-pool.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 01:57

toomanyninjas: Feb 10, 2005; DOGOLD, I WANT YOU TO CALL AN AM-BOO-LANCE AND WHEN THEY GET HUR I WANT YOU TO TELL THEM TO
KEEP SMILING!

I've created Duke Barry of the Isles, Gibb Dynasty. He's doing really well so far and will soon be king of Scotland, but my only regret is that the ruler designer doesn't let me create brothers for him. Without Robin, Maurice and Andy the dynasty is pretty thin right now.

It's a tragedy, but at least Barry is stayin' alive.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 02:28

Iseeyouseemeseeyou: Jan 3, 2011

VerdantSquire posted:

The doge of Venice is an African. He is also both cynical and possessed at the same time.

so close

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alessandro_de%27_Medici,_Duke_of_Florence

# ? Aug 17, 2014 02:42

Mantis42: Jul 26, 2010

quote:

This is the beefier part of the post, in part because Paradox haven�t actually put up a detailed release announcement of the game yet, and in part because I actually got to talk to a couple of the devs about it: Doomdark and Johan Lerstrom. Rather than an overview, I�m going to break this down into the parts I�ve already mentioned on the forums, and everything else I forgot to mention.

Tribal Holdings
So, the first thing that I accosted Doomdark about was the suitability of feudal mechanics to represent even the Old Gods start date, let alone the newer, earlier start. In return, I was told about a new type of holding that hopes to rectify this: �tribal� holdings.

Tribal holdings (though I don�t know if that will be their actual in game names) sound like they will be much like castles, bishoprics and cities, although Doomdark also put trade posts in that list, which leads me to believe they might be an over-holding of some sort (to prevent the awkwardness of having one holding change to another later in the game). Essentially tribal holdings will represent lands that aren�t properly fortified yet, more owned by virtue of people living there than by people actually building towns etc.

An interesting aspect of tribal holdings, as Johan later expanded on them to me, is that vassals who are �tribal� (presumably a new title equivalent to count, based on your holding type) don�t provide levies in the way that a feudal vassal does. Instead, a tribal vassal must be called to arms, like an ally. In this way, your vassal management becomes much more important, and vassal ties are much looser. A king can only gain power if he is respected enough by his vassals, even more so than currently, and a vassal maintains full control of his own armies, making war much more scattered.

I don�t know if I can emphasise how much I really, really love this idea. The reign of a king in this era was much more loose than CK2 currently has it (and even later than the 1066 start really), and the idea of a king having to scrounge support from vassals rather than just expect them to provide levies feels much more in keeping. In addition, with the elective gavelkind succession, the idea of a king having very little power over his subjects is expanded.

Elective Gavelkind

Sometimes, Empires can get a bit blobby
Which leads us neatly into another interesting new feature, designed for the breaking up of blobs: elective gavelkind. Empires being too blobby has always been a big concern, and even more so with the introduction of a start date that may very well include the entirety of Francia as one huge empire. At least one response to this, which also adds to the susceptibility of tribal civilisations falling apart without a leader, is elective gavelkind.

From what I can tell, elective gavelkind is much like what it sounds: it�s a cross between tanistry and gavelkind. The new ruler must be selected from your dynasty, but I believe that other dynasty members will also get titles, as gavelkind suggests. In addition, upon succession, some vassals may be given the option to become independent, no war involved, much like the decadence mechanics are supposed to work.

The exact nature of this hasn�t been settled on yet, since they�re still testing it out, but it may be based on the power of the vassal relative to liege, the opinion of the vassal, or perhaps even a choice that everyone is given regardless, and then acted on appropriately. In any case, this serves to make early empires more likely to break apart, and perhaps constantly try and put themselves back together, in a way that current succession laws don�t.

My only hesitation with this is that it will probably still be too easy to get a big mid-late game empire going. Once elective gavelkind is gone, I�m not sure what will be used to try and break apart large empires that have formed under primogeniture, or even normal elective. So, while this should solve the early Karling problem, I don�t think it will do anything for the HRE, or for later game blobs. We shall see however: blobbing is clearly something in the forefront of the minds at Paradox, so hopefully this will also be settled. One possible solution is:

Vassal Limit
A new limit, much like the current demesne limit, will be imposed upon rulers with the introduction of the Charlemagne DLC. This limit does exactly what it suggests: it imposes a soft-cap on the number of independent vassals you can have in your realm before you start taking penalties. To offset this, you will be encouraged to hand out more duchy titles, and perhaps even kingdoms, as your empire becomes too large for you to manage each vassal yourself.

This is a great idea, and as unfortunate as it may be to have to impose rules like this, rather than providing encouragement for playing the game in a certain way, I think it fits in very well with the current demesne limit. It makes sense that if you can only manage so many holdings yourself, you can logically only manage so many vassals as well before you become stretched thin. This is why vassals exist in the first place.

In addition, this adds a new balancing factor to crown law. As crown law gets higher, and the monarch begins to exercise more direct control over his vassals, the vassal limit will decrease, so that more titles need to be handed out. This means that going up to absolute crown law will not only make your vassals like you less, but also encourage you to give those vassals more power as well, to help maintain the laws you impose.

As said before, I very much hope this will be the way to make empires crumble. With low crown laws, empires can be sprawling, but somewhat weak, with fewer levies to help defend against outside threats and even factions, and less control over their vassals. As crown law increases, larger vassals will come into play, curbing the power of monarchs who they don�t like, making factions more likely to spawn. Ultimately, this may see more independence factions firing and being successful. Fingers crossed.

Seasons
Finally, seasonal changes, similar to EU4. I think everyone has been expecting something like this for a while, and I guess that Paradox decided to just throw it in there now. Seasons should have an effect upon attrition in provinces, making war in winter a more dangerous affair, and there was a hint that weather might effect combat, perhaps by changing terrain. Whether this will just affect military educations (fights better in snowy conditions) or whether there will be a weather effect on combat I�m not sure, but in either case this is a change I don�t have much to say on other than it�s there.

Overall, I think that might be all the information I got out of developers. I didn�t have my journalism hat on at the time, so I didn�t chase up nearly as many questions as I should have done, but hopefully that puts some fears to rest that people may have had. I know that I started off very disappointed in the idea of a further timeline extension, but having discussed with the devs, this sounds much more thought out than I gave them credit for. Here�s hoping that everything goes as well as it does in my imagination.

Source.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 04:07

YouTuber: Jul 31, 2004; by FactsAreUseless

Reveilled posted:

For some reason I feel a lot more charitable towards this as a mod knowing that it's some random Korean person making it, instead of some anime-obsessed weeaboo type.

That portrait pack; if he was so inclined, could be far more reactive than the current packs merely because they're 2d images. It appears that every character uses the same default slate both male and female so overlaying the poo poo would be easier than the 3d kind where you get potato noses and poo poo.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 04:16

Rejected Fate: Aug 5, 2011

Okay, a lot of those features sound really cool.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 04:20

Captain Oblivious: Oct 12, 2007; I'm not like other posters

Tribal Holdings sounds neat and all, but Vassals are already bordering on militarily worthless in the early game on account of how little levies they give you. I'm not sure this'll be much different in practice.

If anything calling them as an ally might make them more useful.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 04:30

DStecks: Feb 6, 2012

quote:

An interesting aspect of tribal holdings, as Johan later expanded on them to me, is that vassals who are �tribal� (presumably a new title equivalent to count, based on your holding type) don�t provide levies in the way that a feudal vassal does. Instead, a tribal vassal must be called to arms, like an ally. In this way, your vassal management becomes much more important, and vassal ties are much looser. A king can only gain power if he is respected enough by his vassals, even more so than currently, and a vassal maintains full control of his own armies, making war much more scattered.

Holy poo poo, that's literally exactly what I suggested for low crown authority. Too bad it's only meant for the early game, but if this is moddable... :getin:

# ? Aug 17, 2014 06:02

Ithle01: May 28, 2013

Seasonal warfare sounds interesting, it might encourage dropping levies down during the lean months to avoid losing manpower while re-raising in the spring. I'm taking a wait-and-see approach to this one, but I definitely like the idea. Plus it sounds like it'll make retinues take more attrition, so I guess I'm in favor of that? This sounds like a nice bonus for the modders out there.

Elective gavelkind is going to last about as long it takes me to transition to a new succession. Unless I'm a sprawling empire, then I can see sticking with this to break up vassals from acquiring too much power individually. Actually that brings up the question: who gets access to this? Just asking because right now I'm playing a game as a hindu and primogeniture has me murdering my children left and right every time my ruler gets infirm or depressed.

I like the vassal limit in theory, but I really don't want to penalized for having too many city or temple holding vassals and I tend to do this anyway to make raising levies more efficient.

Tribal holdings; I got no idea what's going on here.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 06:03

csm141: Jul 19, 2010; i care, i'm listening, i can help you without giving any advice; Pillbug

So I take it the game won't appreciate me having two hundred and fifty vassals then, huh? Better wrap this game up I suppose.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 06:08

DrSunshine: Mar 23, 2009; Did I just say that out loud~~?!!!

All of those are very interesting new mechanics. I'm starting to warm up to this patch a bit! Though we'll still have yet to see if it's justifying the price tag, if it really is as big of an expansion -- mechanically -- as they say it is. I'll say one thing, though, that the "tribal vassal" mechanic sounds like what the whole feudal game should've been like to begin with!

# ? Aug 17, 2014 06:10

YouTuber: Jul 31, 2004; by FactsAreUseless

How the hell would a Byzantium game play out with the vassal limits? There was no Kings in the Byzantine structure of government. Sure at various points of Rome's lifetime you had people with control over areas large enough to be Kingdoms but to render that in the CK2 system you would have to extend the revoking of titles for both Dukes and Kingdom titles. The entire way the Byzantine Empire worked is counter to that system. Byzantium loving poo poo up again in CK2 :argh:

Also since we're at the 700s shouldn't there be small pockets of Arian christians around? Over in England I seem to recall there being a tiff over following the Irish rites over the Latin but I can't remember when exactly that was and who was involved. The further you go back the deeper the rabbit hole gets with the Christian faith. Monophysites should be more entrenched in the East and Islam less spread to the common people as well though probably uniform in rulers.

YouTuber fucked around with this message at 06:55 on Aug 17, 2014

# ? Aug 17, 2014 06:45

NihilVerumNisiMors: Aug 16, 2012

The new CA/vassal limit interaction sounds as if it might make managing empires a nightmare, especially with the current faction system on top.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 06:48

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

Oy. Hope that comes with softening the vassal relations penalty at the higher crown authorities; it's already not really worth going past medium, since everyone will hate you and your realm will fall apart. If you have to condense your vassals at the same time, good grief.

I'm also a little dubious of the seasonal warfare thing, just because sieging tends to take forever, particularly when provinces start getting built up more. Unless you have megastacks of archer retinues that can successfully assault, you're going to be spending months per province; there's no practical way with sieging to go to war in spring and wrap it up by autumn, at least against a meaningful opponent.

Strudel Man fucked around with this message at 07:07 on Aug 17, 2014

# ? Aug 17, 2014 07:03

feller: Jul 5, 2006

I just spent half an hour or so trying to get this game to start up properly on a bootcamped rMBP. I'm having to play it in windows in the first place because the mac client is crazy unstable. Anyway, on full resolution, the launcher appears in the bottom right corner and won't move so I can't hit the 'play' button. On lower resolutions, the launcher appears in a usable position, but then the game window itself is still max resolution meaning all of the buttons (ie options, credits, start campaign etc.) are off the screen. Please, someone have a fix for this.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 08:01

reignonyourparade: Nov 15, 2012

YouTuber posted:

That portrait pack; if he was so inclined, could be far more reactive than the current packs merely because they're 2d images. It appears that every character uses the same default slate both male and female so overlaying the poo poo would be easier than the 3d kind where you get potato noses and poo poo.

In all honest I've never been very fond of the 3d modeled portraits, so to me yeah this isn't any worse than vanilla and in some ways actually seems to be a lot more standardized and less likely to get weird angles some of the vanilla clothing and hairstyles have.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 08:14

cool new Metroid game: Oct 7, 2009; hail satan

Strudel Man posted:

Oy. Hope that comes with softening the vassal relations penalty at the higher crown authorities; it's already not really worth going past medium, since everyone will hate you and your realm will fall apart. If you have to condense your vassals at the same time, good grief.

yeah, seems pretty backwards to me.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 10:17

Jedit: Dec 10, 2011; Proudly supporting vanilla legends 1994-2014

Strudel Man posted:

I'm also a little dubious of the seasonal warfare thing, just because sieging tends to take forever, particularly when provinces start getting built up more. Unless you have megastacks of archer retinues that can successfully assault, you're going to be spending months per province; there's no practical way with sieging to go to war in spring and wrap it up by autumn, at least against a meaningful opponent.

So your complaint is that the game is historically accurate?

# ? Aug 17, 2014 10:26

Torrannor: Apr 27, 2013; ---FAGNER---
TEAM-MATE

Megadyptes posted:

yeah, seems pretty backwards to me.

No, I don't think so. Everybody complains about blobbing, and high CA is one of the main reasons why the AI blobs. Making higher CA have more downsides will probably stop some AI's from implementing it in the first place, and makes realms with Absolute Crown Authority less stable.

All in all, the tribal vassals, seasons, CA changes and the Charlemagne story stuff sounds great. I wonder if tribal vassals will only be for those who have the DLC, that could be a good incentive to buy it.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 10:28

Punished Chuck: Dec 27, 2010

Tribal vassals sound really awesome. I do hope the vassal limit only includes count-level vassals and above. I would think that it probably would, but I'd hate to be penalized because a few of my demesne counties have a bunch of holdings so half of my allowed vassals are a bunch of useless barons.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 12:10

Eric the Mauve: May 8, 2012; Making you happy for a buck since 199X

Jedit posted:

So your complaint is that the game is historically accurate?

Yes, but no. As bad as sieges were for the siegers in the winter, they were even worse for the siegees.

Sieges generally could probably do with being sped up a little, anyway. They can take a kind of ridiculously long time as it is.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 12:21

Omnicarus: Jan 16, 2006

Eric the Mauve posted:

Yes, but no. As bad as sieges were for the siegers in the winter, they were even worse for the siegees.

Sieges generally could probably do with being sped up a little, anyway. They can take a kind of ridiculously long time as it is.

Sieges really need to be able to negotiate with the leader of the defenders. What's missing in the current system that was present in actual warfare was that often the individual nobles would negotiate a separate peace with a large power just to spare their lands or end one specific siege. Storming castles was much more rare than laying siege for a few months then taking a hefty bribe/terms/allow safe conduct for the defenders in exchange for leaving or taking over the castle.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 12:48

Chalks: Sep 30, 2009

WeaponGradeSadness posted:

Tribal vassals sound really awesome. I do hope the vassal limit only includes count-level vassals and above. I would think that it probably would, but I'd hate to be penalized because a few of my demesne counties have a bunch of holdings so half of my allowed vassals are a bunch of useless barons.

It sounds great, but this is a really good point that I hope they deal with. It would seem crazy to discourage people from building new holdings in lands they control because a mayor vassal takes up the same space as a king vassal in this system. Either make it only apply to large vassals, or make different vassals take up vassal limit relative to their power.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 13:22

Eric the Mauve: May 8, 2012; Making you happy for a buck since 199X

The game could benefit from a pretty strong "distance from capital" relations malus against kings and emperors. A simple linearly growing malus (-10 if it's 3 counties away, let us say, then -20 at 6 counties, -30 at 9...) would cause the difficulty of keeping an empire together to grow exponentially as the empire grows. A large empire would pretty much have to keep its Chancellor on vassal appeasement duty full time, plus pay out a fair bit in bribes.

It would make a character's Diplomacy rating even more gigantically important than it already is... which could be bad.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 14:07

Torrannor: Apr 27, 2013; ---FAGNER---
TEAM-MATE

Eric the Mauve posted:

The game could benefit from a pretty strong "distance from capital" relations malus against kings and emperors. A simple linearly growing malus (-10 if it's 3 counties away, let us say, then -20 at 6 counties, -30 at 9...) would cause the difficulty of keeping an empire together to grow exponentially as the empire grows. A large empire would pretty much have to keep its Chancellor on vassal appeasement duty full time, plus pay out a fair bit in bribes.

It would make a character's Diplomacy rating even more gigantically important than it already is... which could be bad.

Yeah this is a bad idea for exactly the reason you describe. After buffing the non-diplomacy stats in The Old Gods it would be a step backwards to make diplomacy stronger again. Besides, the game already factors distance into factions if I recall correctly. The de jure kingdom/empire system simulates this a bit as well, since places farther away are unlikely to be de jure part of your kingdom/empire.

Chalks posted:

It sounds great, but this is a really good point that I hope they deal with. It would seem crazy to discourage people from building new holdings in lands they control because a mayor vassal takes up the same space as a king vassal in this system. Either make it only apply to large vassals, or make different vassals take up vassal limit relative to their power.

The quote speaks of "independent" vassals in your realm, I wouldn't be surprised if this doesn't include baron level vassals.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 14:10

DarkCrawler: Apr 6, 2009; by vyelkin

I'm a Norse Asatru pagan dynasty ruling over about ten gazillion Russian Slaviyanska Pagans in the heart of Rus and have managed to do so for 200+ years or so. How is this possible?

They can't stop screwing with eachother 34 plots :psyduck:

Also I'm loaded, of course.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 15:42

Tuxedo Catfish: Mar 17, 2007; You've got guts! Come to my village, I'll buy you lunch.

Jedit posted:

So your complaint is that the game is historically accurate?

I realize this is crazy talk in a Paradox thread, but gameplay should always trump realism.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 16:26

Tomn: Aug 23, 2007; And the angel said unto him
"Stop hitting yourself. Stop hitting yourself."
But lo he could not. For the angel was hitting him with his own hands

DarkCrawler posted:

I'm a Norse Asatru pagan dynasty ruling over about ten gazillion Russian Slaviyanska Pagans in the heart of Rus and have managed to do so for 200+ years or so. How is this possible?

They can't stop screwing with eachother 34 plots

Also I'm loaded, of course.

Because you have a million vassals and they have a million courtiers and between the lot of them there's gonna be a million plots?

Do you see that little box next to the known plots button, by the way? Check that - it'll auto-stop every plot that comes up as soon as you discover them. Makes life much easier unless you're specifically looking for a reason to revoke someone's title.

Tuxedo Catfish posted:

I realize this is crazy talk in a Paradox thread, but gameplay should always trump realism.

Well, the question is whether this change is actively bad for gameplay, though - it's not as if realism and good gameplay are necessarily diametrically opposed, otherwise we wouldn't be playing games based on history at all. The seasons had a very major effect on strategy historically, dictating the tone and pace of campaigns a lot of the time, and their addition MIGHT add something more to the current gameplay beyond "Mass troops, crush enemy."

That said, based on the info we have now it's hard to say how gameplay is going to be affected. Are siege times going to be rebalanced considering the new effects of the seasons? Will it be easier to split off a minimal siege force to hunker down for the winter without having to individually split off a billion tiny barony levies? How are the besieged going to be affected by the new seasons? We don't know yet, and can't say off-hand.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 17:08

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 3, 2024 20:22

Captain Oblivious: Oct 12, 2007; I'm not like other posters

Tuxedo Catfish posted:

I realize this is crazy talk in a Paradox thread, but gameplay should always trump realism.

Historical realism isn't really a sacred cow for CK2 anyway. We've slaughtered it before, we'll slaughter it again.

# ? Aug 17, 2014 17:19

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

«‹›1029 »