|
TheMcD posted:
"I am the punishment of God. If you had not committed great sins, God would not have sent a punishment like me upon you."  I always love when the Muslims/Mongols manage to push into India, because that means sometimes they'll have war elephants in their levies and oh yeah, they'll bring them out West to kick your rear end with.
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 10:40 |
|
|
monster on a stick posted:Actually... what happens now? If they are tribal, playing as a Norseman and conquering the island should give you poo poo for income (from what others have said.) Also I don't think you can even start there anymore unless you have CM, right? Historically speaking, there should be a poo poo-ton of rich churches and monasteries. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 16:14 on Oct 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
No republic fixes? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 16:13
|
|
|
quote:I think Paradox does respond to the userbase on their forums, which in general is not a bad thing (listening to people who like your game.) On the other hand, you have people saying that they should get rid of all empires except for the historic ones and stuff like that, even though half the fun of CK2 is throwing history off the rails. That's part of the problem, though. The Paradox forum is a place filled with history buffs. History buffs are the worst kind of grognard; they're knowledgeable about history without understanding the underlying concepts of historiography and historical determinism. So, we end up with a lot of threads about how this one province should be this culture or how this duchy could never have formed without realizing that historical outcomes only seem predetermined in hindsight. A game like CKII or EUIV should be plausible, but allow the player to completely wreck history as we know it. As soon as you unpause the game at the start, history as we know it goes out the window. I'm sick of the historical railroading that Paradox has increasingly shoved into EUIV. CK2 seems to be doing this less, but it's still creeping in there as well. The game should be based around plausible mechanics that work on a macro scale and not working off triggered events. EUIV has been completely wrecked by this kind of poo poo. The new expansion with the specific Thirty Years War mechanics are a prime example.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 16:30
|
|
|
Torrannor posted:There is only one merchant Republic in your realm, the Republic of Amalfi. Neapolis is simply a duchy belonging to the Doge of Amalfi, you won't find a second set of families because there are none. This actually brings up a problem I've been having. I started a game as Amalfi and formed Kingdom of Sicily. Venice got a few territories early but then Italy pushed them back to their island. I figured there wasn't enough room in the Mediterranean for two republics (Savoy got mushed in Italian infighting fairly early on) so I fabricated claims and conquered them. The doge was still alive, but didn't have any land. The first bit of weirdness is that I gained one of Venice's merchant houses as a sixth in my republic. It's weird and sticks out from the side of the republic screen like so:  They still had all the trade posts they had in Venice. Eventually the doge died and I got a popup to form Kingdom of Venice, which I did. I even made it my primary title since I preferred the blue to the puke beige that Sicily has, which is also way too close to Italy's color. When my current doge died it told me I lost a bunch of titles. My heir had inherited Sicily properly, but one of the other families (not the one I inherited from Venice) had inherited Venice. All the merchant families moved to Venice and I got four new squeaky clean families with no trading posts or mansion upgrades. I fabricated and conquered Venice again and inherited the same Venitian family as a sixth house again (the screenshot above is actually from this happening a second time). Now I'm kind of afraid to make Kingdom of Venice again. I wonder if the line in the newest patch about merchant republics using the wrong elective law in the capital might have something to do with it? But I think having the extra merchant house shouldn't happen regardless.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
beedeebee posted:Yeah this. I noticed on steam that I have 150+ hours in this game. I have never even played a Muslim ruler or a Merchant Republic... Never played a muslim or a mrepublic myself, and I have almost 500 hours (only game I have more time in on Steam is Euro Truck Simulator 2 almost 1200 hours)
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 16:35
|
|
|
Exclusive first peek at Mexico   
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
Gorelab posted:Plus I think it'd be more fun to have to start again as King of Arabia or something and reconquer my old vassals than juts have the name on the blob change. That and the option to "reform" our muslim governments (probably through laws rather than having to grab all the holy provinces) to a form that doesn't poo poo itself like this, but loses out on some Muslim super-powers in turn. They have added parts of this with the "Piety vs Tech" schools, so maybe build more on that? 1) If you go with Pious/Radical you get morale & recruitment bonuses, better CBs and incentives to go off and conquer (gotta find room for your kin!) but with the downside that if you fail you get more revolts and eventually the big ol' blob will break up. - Either the current Turkish inspired system or a "Caliphate/Shura elective system"? Gets access to Jihad. Gets access to muslim Holy Orders. Basically "Flash & Burn", if these rulers gets high decadence and/or low prestige (from losing fights) everyone inside the realm get opinion negatives towards the ruler, and harsher "further from the center" opinion negatives/independence desire buffs to keep even the super successful Rulers from blobbing too badly + "School" #3 below. 2)The more administrative/practical school you get some tech bonuses and maybe ways to get more resources (higher quality soldiers/routines and gold) from your territory (because you'll control less and have fewer ways to expand rapidly). On the upside some other sort of inheritance system. Maybe mix it up a little with the Merchant Republic mechanic, were you try to build the biggest and bestest decadent palace for your family? No Holy Orders available, but some more mercs. Maybe get a small Opinion buff within the Realm the higher their decadence is, but the opposite to anyone following School 1 or 3. 3)Maybe a third option that's more Tribally inclined? Prestige based rather than Piety/Gold, decentralized, some of the other inheritance systems, like the Khanate/Pagan ones, available. Hard to conquer, high revolt risk, defensive buffs like the North-Eastern pagans. Gets access to Jihad and... Decadence CBs? Basically any close-by ruler who gets high decadence, the tribals have the ability to come swarming out of the wood-work and have their morale & recruitment rates buffed depending on how high the Decadence of their target is. So School 2 can ignore Decadence as far as their internal affairs are concerned but if they aren't careful muslim Tribal Rulers can take advantage. otherwise they don't have the cash on hand, or the ability to easily call up vassals, to build large empires (and the harshest independence desires for large blobbing). Sprinkle #3 inside the interiors nearby the bigger Muslim powers of the other schools so they got plenty of these as neighbours, then remove the decadence Revolt troop spawner events/systems. For inheritance and government, taking parts of and/or tweaking the HRE/Byzantine/Elective/Merchant Republic systems to fit could work, some ideas: You could have a bunch of the mightiest Emirs in the realm get up and elect the successor; either from the same ruler dynasty bloodline only, or with a appointed (by the ruler) successor, or from all nobility/picking between say the 5 with the highest Prestige or Piety (depending on School). The candidates who lose can maybe get a chance to form a revolt if they are strong enough and hate the chosen ruler enough. Same as above, but all the counts and up cast their votes, with the majority deciding the winner. Likewise, but with a set of fixed religious positions/all the imams of the realm get up and pick the successor based on Piety. Maybe a full pious version were the Imams pick successor from Imams, playable theocracy ahoy! Toss in a variant or two depending on the above mentioned schools were you either try to bribe with Piety (the last ruler up until his death, spending it on religious works or something else fluffy + the appointed successor's current piety) or just straight up Merchant Republic style gold bribery if you are following the more administrative school. Depending on government system, school and centralization, allow or disallow revoking titles (free/piety/gold/not allowed).
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 16:38
|
|
Oh man, this is loving hilarious. Apparently, money now makes you immune to imprisonment.  In my observer game, I just intervened a bit to see if my favorite "First Bank of Cluny" exploit still works, and it doesn't. Using the console, I've been chasing this rear end in a top hat through like ten courts now, with like five imprisonment chances of 100%, and five others at 90+% because the guy has 0 intrigue. And he evaded every single god drat one of them. So now, there's a guy running around courts with 66K gold to his name, and nobody could take it from him because he - despite being as incapable as they come in matters of intrigue - can evade every single capture like he's a mythical creature or something. And if you execute him, the money simply evaporates. I hosed around for a while, trying to get to the money, and I believe the only way is to land him (if he isn't already), try to imprison him, he evades it and rebels, you beat down the rebellion, imprison him by winning, strip his title away from him (this throws him into some other court), you marry him matrilineally into your line somehow (since he's lowborn, whomever he's hiding out with won't care) and then eventually inherit the cash. I think. Complicated, but for 66K gold, I'd definitely do it.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
TheMcD posted:Oh man, this is loving hilarious. Apparently, money now makes you immune to imprisonment. A shamefully accurate simulation of social inequality.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 16:53
|
|
|
monster on a stick posted:On the other hand, you have people saying that they should get rid of all empires except for the historic ones and stuff like that, even though half the fun of CK2 is throwing history off the rails. This is one of the few things dragging HIP down (along with a bunch of really loving stupid food-related events). By default, the only empires with actual imperial titles are the HRE and ERE, and although the other empires can be formed, they edited the files to make them exactly like kingdoms but with a fancier icon on the map. Hell, the rulers are even called kings rather than actual emperors. But the most annoying part is that they're so allergic to anything being called 'empire' that they used the 'shortname' modifier for the titles, so Britannia is called just 'Britannia' and not the proper 'Empire of Britannia." The shortname modifier only supposed to be used so, for example, the Byzantine Empire isn't called the Empire of Byzantine Empire, but using it on ALL empires leads to retarded poo poo like someone being called the 'Heir to the Britannia' because GOD FORBID anyone but the Kaiser and the Holy Roman Emperor have the nerve to call themselves an empire. Luckily, this is all easily fixed in the 'landed_titles' folder, but it's still really goddamn stupid.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
Bold Robot posted:So what's the consensus on Charlemagne and the new patch so far? From reading the thread it seems like they kinda went the EU4 route of making things harder and more fiddly without actually making them more fun. Is this accurate or is it too early to say? I haven't had time this week to play yet. As the dust begins settling my impression is that it's a cool new scenario (the Charlemagne start) with some cool new mechanics, but on the whole Paradox got over-obsessed with frustrating the efforts of powergaming players and made the game less fun.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 16:55
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:As the dust begins settling my impression is that it's a cool new scenario (the Charlemagne start) with some cool new mechanics, but on the whole Paradox got over-obsessed with frustrating the efforts of powergaming players and made the game less fun. Yeah it strikes me as very odd that they make a lot of balancing decisions based around things no sane person would do like North Korea mode or banishment for cash. Or altering/removing things because of people exploiting it in multiplayer, when the solution is just, don't do it in multiplayer.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
Minenfeld! posted:That's part of the problem, though. The Paradox forum is a place filled with history buffs. History buffs are the worst kind of grognard; they're knowledgeable about history without understanding the underlying concepts of historiography and historical determinism. So, we end up with a lot of threads about how this one province should be this culture or how this duchy could never have formed without realizing that historical outcomes only seem predetermined in hindsight. A game like CKII or EUIV should be plausible, but allow the player to completely wreck history as we know it. As soon as you unpause the game at the start, history as we know it goes out the window. I'm sick of the historical railroading that Paradox has increasingly shoved into EUIV. CK2 seems to be doing this less, but it's still creeping in there as well. The game should be based around plausible mechanics that work on a macro scale and not working off triggered events. EUIV has been completely wrecked by this kind of poo poo. The new expansion with the specific Thirty Years War mechanics are a prime example. And of course, if you are interested in historical accuracy, then Legacy of Rome is all but pointless since the Byzantine Empire fell and never restored the Roman Empire or ended the schism. axeil posted:Yeah it strikes me as very odd that they make a lot of balancing decisions based around things no sane person would do like North Korea mode or banishment for cash. Or altering/removing things because of people exploiting it in multiplayer, when the solution is just, don't do it in multiplayer. There are literally people who can't help themselves from playing NK mode, banishing for cash, or having an map-spanning empire with nothing but counts, and they welcome this change because apparently they have no self-control or something. I'm really disappointed Paradox is listening to them, because it's just going to stop the wacky AARs that got people who weren't normally Paradox customers to buy the game in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 17:31
|
|
|
Do Ironman/Achievements work with the new Beta patch?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 17:34
|
|
|
quote:There are literally people who can't help themselves from playing NK mode, banishing for cash, or having an map-spanning empire with nothing but counts, and they welcome this change because apparently they have no self-control or something. I'm really disappointed Paradox is listening to them, because it's just going to stop the wacky AARs that got people who weren't normally Paradox customers to buy the game in the first place. It's disappointing. This is the same exact thing that's happened to EUIV as well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
Shadeoses posted:Exclusive first peek at Mexico  That looks sexy as hell.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
monster on a stick posted:There are literally people who can't help themselves from playing NK mode, banishing for cash, or having an map-spanning empire with nothing but counts, and they welcome this change because apparently they have no self-control or something. I'm really disappointed Paradox is listening to them, because it's just going to stop the wacky AARs that got people who weren't normally Paradox customers to buy the game in the first place. If they think is so necessary to prevent those ridiculous exploits, they could make it so that its only blocked on ironman, which is already the mode for people who want the hardest experience and/or have no self-control to not choosing to game the system. This way us normal people could still play the game and have fun.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 18:01
|
|
|
I mostly want to roll back to 2.1.6 after I finish my current game (of course by then there might be another new DLC out, heh) but I really, really, really don't want to lose the "has claims" indicator in the character search. drat it all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 18:11
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:If they think is so necessary to prevent those ridiculous exploits, they could make it so that its only blocked on ironman, which is already the mode for people who want the hardest experience and/or have no self-control to not choosing to game the system. A proper difficulty setting would also do the trick. This shouldn't be that difficult to do (though I've no idea how complex the CK2 code is, and I have a feeling I don't want to know.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 18:14
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:If they think is so necessary to prevent those ridiculous exploits, they could make it so that its only blocked on ironman, which is already the mode for people who want the hardest experience and/or have no self-control to not choosing to game the system. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 18:17
|
|
|
That would be really neat, i never plan ironman anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 18:22
|
|
|
So I'm playing Count of Reggio and I'm currently the King of Italy and Sicily. The save is from last patch and I'm updated to the latest. The only weird thing I've been seeing is that every time I load the latest save up, my electors (Feudal Elective) all change their nominations for my successor. Usually to Duke Not-My-Choice. Then, a few months in game time later, they all switch back to my nomination or some other random dude. But without fail, every single time I load up a game, the electors change their nominations. Is this a known bug?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
Martello posted:So I'm playing Count of Reggio and I'm currently the King of Italy and Sicily. The save is from last patch and I'm updated to the latest. The only weird thing I've been seeing is that every time I load the latest save up, my electors (Feudal Elective) all change their nominations for my successor. Usually to Duke Not-My-Choice. Then, a few months in game time later, they all switch back to my nomination or some other random dude. But without fail, every single time I load up a game, the electors change their nominations. Is this a known bug? You havent read anything about the patch notes or anything from the past few pages of this thread, have you? The effect you are experiencing is a feature built in with the patch.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 18:45
|
|
|
Did Paradox ever make that one holding Hellenic somewhere in the Balkans? Their forums were freaking out about it nonstop before release.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 18:49
|
|
|
Bort Bortles posted:You havent read anything about the patch notes or anything from the past few pages of this thread, have you? The effect you are experiencing is a feature built in with the patch. I think he's actually talking about "electors always switch their votes on game load and then things settle again a few months later" which is a known...I'm not sure whether to call it a bug but it's been happening as long as I can remember, through several versions. It's probably a side effect of intended behaviour, the same way things like inheritance are recalculated on game load. "Electors being less likely to vote for the specific person you nominate" is a 2.2 patch change, yes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:If they think is so necessary to prevent those ridiculous exploits, they could make it so that its only blocked on ironman, which is already the mode for people who want the hardest experience and/or have no self-control to not choosing to game the system. Pretty much. There's actually very little in the new patch I even like. This is a single player game, not loving DotA 2. If people have no self control, that is their problem. And why are they even bothering to balance multiplayer? Is it even all that popular? 'Electors will vote against you for no reason even though they love you just because it needs to be hard for no reason. Oh, and we'll make gavelkind gently caress you over even more.' And if I have to split my kingdom up, why can't I loving divide it out like a goddamn will instead of some stupid random bullshit that ends up giving my capital away. Unless a lot of people start playing ironman, I don't see the temptation to use the console going away all that much.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
Bort Bortles posted:You havent read anything about the patch notes or anything from the past few pages of this thread, have you? The effect you are experiencing is a feature built in with the patch. Yeah I knew electors being assholes was a patch thing, but it didn't make all that much sense that they would ALWAYS change nominations on game load, every time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 18:52
|
|
|
Clearly they're balancing multiplayer because they hope to unseat DotA and become Crusader Kings II: eSport extraordinaire, complete with tournaments (64 players, one game, speed 2 -- the game takes the entire tournament weekend) and casters ("Oh, he just switched his succession law to Agnatic Primogeniture, it's on now!")!
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 18:54
|
|
|
Does anyone know why Karl would have a claim on me as the Kingdom of Asturias? I started a new game and he doesn't start with one, and it couldn't have been inheritance shenanigans because a) it was still in the first generation of the game and b) it was his personal claim. Is it because I gave shelter to Carloman's widow after Karl killed him? I don't think the event's tooltip said anything about a claim, just an opinion hit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
alcaras posted:Clearly they're balancing multiplayer because they hope to unseat DotA and become Crusader Kings II: eSport extraordinaire, complete with tournaments (64 players, one game, speed 2 -- the game takes the entire tournament weekend) and casters ("Oh, he just switched his succession law to Agnatic Primogeniture, it's on now!")! I'd watch it
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 19:05
|
|
|
The whole point of CK2 is that it's not about just blobbing to victory, it's about having to hold that blob together. If I wanted to just paint a map my color Shogun Total War is a really good game, I'd go play that. CK2 is about having to deal with the political and administrative challenges that having an empire entails. Admittedly, the current patch needs some hotfixes for bugs and definitely could use a lot of tuning, but the idea behind the changes is good.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 19:11
|
|
|
WeaponGradeSadness posted:Does anyone know why Karl would have a claim on me as the Kingdom of Asturias? I started a new game and he doesn't start with one, and it couldn't have been inheritance shenanigans because a) it was still in the first generation of the game and b) it was his personal claim. Is it because I gave shelter to Carloman's widow after Karl killed him? I don't think the event's tooltip said anything about a claim, just an opinion hit. I think he gets claims through events. I was a vassal of the king of Lombardy when all of a sudden everything turned blue, and Karl sure as poo poo didn't have a claim on the kingdom when I started.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 19:11
|
|
|
WeaponGradeSadness posted:Does anyone know why Karl would have a claim on me as the Kingdom of Asturias? I started a new game and he doesn't start with one, and it couldn't have been inheritance shenanigans because a) it was still in the first generation of the game and b) it was his personal claim. Is it because I gave shelter to Carloman's widow after Karl killed him? I don't think the event's tooltip said anything about a claim, just an opinion hit. He gets it by event when Carloman dies and his widow goes into exile in the Asturian king's court.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 19:11
|
|
|
Dallan Invictus posted:I think he's actually talking about "electors always switch their votes on game load and then things settle again a few months later" which is a known...I'm not sure whether to call it a bug but it's been happening as long as I can remember, through several versions. It's probably a side effect of intended behaviour, the same way things like inheritance are recalculated on game load. Martello posted:Yeah I knew electors being assholes was a patch thing, but it didn't make all that much sense that they would ALWAYS change nominations on game load, every time. Ahhh derp, I missed that you were stressing on them changing their vote every time, not that they were voting for not-your choice.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Historically speaking, there should be a poo poo-ton of rich churches and monasteries. Tribal counties can have church holdings in them and Ireland has a few of them (I only did a cursory examination because my game keeps crashing after two weeks pass in game). So I guess they accidentally made it historically accurate. If anything raiding Ireland for MA is better now since I don't have to slog through the castles before getting to what I want.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 19:22
|
|
|
Ithle01 posted:Tribal counties can have church holdings in them and Ireland has a few of them (I only did a cursory examination because my game keeps crashing after two weeks pass in game). So I guess they accidentally made it historically accurate. If anything raiding Ireland for MA is better now since I don't have to slog through the castles before getting to what I want. Shh dont say that, Paradox will nerf the MA gain from raiding churches or something!
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
quote:- The opinion modifier for vassals for handing out viceroyalties are now only applied to feudal non viceroyals on duke-tier or higher. Does this not nullify the opinion modifier for viceroyalties, as a practical matter? You can hand out every kingdom but one to a viceroyal and only have count vassals in the last one?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
So does the new Beta patch make Charlemagne and the associated game changes a little more sane or is it wiser to keep rolling with the last pre-patch version?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 10:40 |
|
|
I too would like to see Paradox master the arcane art of having difficulty levels so that the people who have played the game for 1000 hours and are baffled by the fact that, for some strange reason, the game isn't quite as challenging as it used to be can have their medieval nut-punching simulator and the rest of us can have a cool fun game about building a kick-rear end empire.StashAugustine posted:The whole point of CK2 is that it's not about just blobbing to victory, it's about having to hold that blob together. If I wanted to just paint a map my color Shogun Total War is a really good game, I'd go play that. CK2 is about having to deal with the political and administrative challenges that having an empire entails. Admittedly, the current patch needs some hotfixes for bugs and definitely could use a lot of tuning, but the idea behind the changes is good. There's a pretty big difference between "having to deal with the political and administrative challenges that having an empire entails" and having your whole kingdom fall apart every decade or so and the only way to stop it is to simultaneously hold territory spread across the map to reform your religion or having your electors specifically vote against your choice of heir for no reason other than "gently caress you that's why".
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 19:34
|
|