|
verbal enema posted:Infamy and coalitions are loving dumb there I said it After playing with this for a bit, they are really loving stupid. They make no sense and are the gamiest mechanic solely to prevent you from blobbing, which they don't even do in the first place. So is shattered retreat, which changes nothing except enhances my most favorite mechanic in the game, running after the army you outnumber. Now you can run after it again after you annihilate it. That's not boring and a waste of my time at all! Who thinks up this poo poo? The rational seems to be: 'Now THIS will prevent you from blobbing!' *doesn't prevent blobbing* 'Oh, ok. Now this time, we really mean it. You won't be able to blob anymore!' *doesn't prevent blobbing* 'We're really really sure you won't blob. We promise!' *doesn't prevent blobbing* MMM Whatchya Say posted:Clearly the next DLC shoould be all about Heathens and Heresies . I'd like for the next expansion to be 'not dumb bullshit our players will have to mod out or roll back'.
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 01:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 15:01 |
|
|
The mechanics are fine and honestly should be expanded not rolled back.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 01:59
|
|
|
Quick question - how does Pictish change to Scottish culture? Is it set to happen at a particular date? Is there any way to prevent it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 02:37
|
|
|
Coward posted:Quick question - how does Pictish change to Scottish culture? Is it set to happen at a particular date? Is there any way to prevent it? Is a Pictish province owned by a non-Pict? It becomes Scottish. Don't want it to become Scottish? Don't become a non-Pict. I actually think that could be reworked to be more interesting, and dare I say, historical, but as-is it's rather simple.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 02:42
|
|
|
It has a chance to pop up if any non-pict holds a pictish county. So the best way to prevent it would be to ethnically cleanse all non-picts from the world.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 02:44
|
|
|
Why would you ever not want to be Pictish with all the funny names.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 02:45
|
|
|
Excellent. All Shall Be Pict.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 02:49
|
|
|
catlord posted:Is a Pictish province owned by a non-Pict? It becomes Scottish. Don't want it to become Scottish? Don't become a non-Pict. I actually think that could be reworked to be more interesting, and dare I say, historical, but as-is it's rather simple. I'm having a good time starting as a Scottish dude and trying to supplant Pictish culture in the 8th century. It is a bit simplistic if that's all that's happening, though. I'm getting a high rate of "hey this county is now Scottish" events.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 02:52
|
|
|
Well the MTTH for the pict->scot event is 100 years by itself, if you are already Scottish though I think you'd be double dipping into the regular culture conversion event as well
TheBlackRoija fucked around with this message at 03:05 on Feb 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 03:02
|
|
|
Can you usurp Saxony if you are not yourself Saxon?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 03:06
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:The mechanics are fine and honestly should be expanded not rolled back. Same with coalitions, it's just transplanting another EUIV system which works fine there, but not so great in CKII, mostly because it's a bit nothing/everything and because the game still lacks a decent diplomacy/treaty system similar to EUIV.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
I see that Geheimnisnacht still doesn't have character creator enabled. Are the problems it would cause surmountable or is that thing staying off for good?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 04:05
|
|
|
Can I just say that I would love a system where you can promise titles to courtiers/vassals in exchange for their support. So I could be like 'yeah chancellor you should support my invasion of this duchy because guess who'll be a duke pretty soon if I do?' or 'seriously (count of last de jure county I need in my home duchy), you should accept my revoke demand and you might just find yourself with a whole bunch of land somewhere else really soon'. Maybe you could tie it to a massive tyranny hit if you didn't follow through to prevent abuse I don't know. e: also, more uses for favours.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 04:21
|
|
|
Deceitful Penguin posted:The Conclave mechanics were pretty much exactly what was needed to fix blobbing. Shattered retreat is poo poo because it's an EU mechanic that doesn't account for the fact that CKII and EUIV are completely different games in many ways. Both infamy (by making you wait longer between wars, kind of, or else fight against 8 different armies that don't coordinate and so you have to take the time to track each one down for warscore) and shattered retreat (by making your wars take longer to complete) slow map painting down, but don't really do anything to make it harder.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 05:00
|
|
|
Arbite posted:I see that Geheimnisnacht still doesn't have character creator enabled. Are the problems it would cause surmountable or is that thing staying off for good? While there's nothing inherently broken about designing say, a regular human or dwarf or whatever, there are a bunch of important features that run off modifiers and flags like magic and mutation which thus won't work if you try making a wizard. Not to mention irreconcilable features/races/traits/etc. Because players on the Pdox forums kept complaining about how their khornate vampire orc grail knight wasn't working properly it was decided to just turn it off. Designing a 'blank' character of whatever sort you want and then console-adding stuff is how you're supposed to do it. What do you want to make?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 06:56
|
|
|
catlord posted:I actually think that could be reworked to be more interesting The cultures as a whole concept should be reworked to make it different from our other games since we have all these melting pots. So much to do, so little time. Groogy fucked around with this message at 08:38 on Feb 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 08:35
|
|
|
Groogy posted:The cultures as a whole concept should be reworked to make it different from our other games since we have all these melting pots. So much to do, so little time. Isn't EUIV getting a revamp to their cultures?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 09:18
|
|
|
Is it possible to create a religion modifier that affects a religion's moral authority based on actions that religion's religious group in addition to the actions of the religion itself? Example: giving a small boost to the moral authority of all Christian religions (Catholic, Orthodox, Miaphysite, etc.) because someone in the christian religious group holds a holy site.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 09:39
|
|
|
I posted a patch DD for CK: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/conclave-dd-6-the-2-5-2-patch.908792/
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 13:21
|
|
|
quote:We have also acted decisively on the issue of Infamy and Coalitions. Sparing no effort, we have renamed these features to Threat and Defensive Pacts, which we feel should resolve all known problems with them. You live for this, don't you? EDIT: Also, quote:Added a Next Song button, and a setting to disable the context restrictions on music. FINALLY! CrazyLoon fucked around with this message at 13:41 on Feb 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 13:34
|
|
|
Pretty much, yeah.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 13:50
|
|
|
Skellybones posted:Designing a 'blank' character of whatever sort you want and then console-adding stuff is how you're supposed to do it. What do you want to make? At the time I wanted an 'Omega Mega Blood Dragon,' but the Red Duke's got that covered now. These days I'm just curious.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 13:57
|
|
|
quote:Characters who have someone trying to seduce them now have the option to let the seducer know they are not interested (based on things like their traits and their opinion of their spouse) which will block all further seduction attempts for some time, both by the original seducer and anyone else. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 13:58
|
|
|
Deceitful Penguin posted:The Conclave mechanics were pretty much exactly what was needed to fix blobbing. Shattered retreat is poo poo because it's an EU mechanic that doesn't account for the fact that CKII and EUIV are completely different games in many ways. So I just started playing multiplayer CK2 again and I completely agree that shattered retreat sucks and killing, like, 100 troops and then having to chase the other 10k across Arabia to finally wipe their loving rear end out is a huge pain in the balls (working as intended?).
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 14:04
|
|
|
Those changes look good, but will I still have to keep disbanding and re-raising my levies over and over again when I'm up against a coalition? For example, if I wanted to take Sicily here I would have to fight four separate wars against the coalition:  I would need to raise my levies (and they're spread out on various islands etc, so it takes a while), take enough stuff to get 100% score, disband them and start all over again. Four times. If I could either declare war on all four at the same time, or declare a new war with levies raised, it would be fine. It's that whole process of re-raising levies constantly for trivial wars I object to, before coalitions I could declare war on a bunch of people at the same time to avoid that. Dissolving a coalition entirely when it loses a war probably isn't a good solution, considering how easy it is to defeat them at the moment, but even that would be better than this. If you're going to make me fight the whole damned world every time I declare a war, I'd like the war to last more than 3 months and to get more than a single county out of winning it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 14:07
|
|
|
Chuck Finley posted:So I just started playing multiplayer CK2 again and I completely agree that shattered retreat sucks and killing, like, 100 troops and then having to chase the other 10k across Arabia to finally wipe their loving rear end out is a huge pain in the balls (working as intended?). The impression I'm getting from all this talk (do note, I haven't actually played Conclave yet) is that if you are the aggressor, then wars should be moreso about actually taking the land via sieges, rather than pingponging enemy troops all around the country. So based on that, I'd say that yeah, what you described is working as intended. But from what I gather the amount of deaths really could be a bit higher, while having it count for less of the warscore (I assume this is what the 75% cap on battle warscore for aggressors is all about. Meaning, you'll be able to kill more dudes with this patch, but ultimately you gotta frikking siege if you want to ever win).
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 14:12
|
|
|
Apoffys posted:Those changes look good, but will I still have to keep disbanding and re-raising my levies over and over again when I'm up against a coalition? You declare 4 holy wars simultaneously and take the rest of Sicily in one campaign. Pretty easy actually.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 14:30
|
|
|
I got something like +50% infamy for vassalizations. Somehow a duke in England got independence (crown was under viceroyalty), and the duke of Skane got out from under Danmark, my primary title (no idea how either happened). Both accepted vassalization, but I've had high infamy for close to 100 years because I won a big holy war and now this. I'm already a megablob and expanding doesn't make a lot of sense anyway, but still. 50% for de jure vassalizations? Why?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 14:39
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:I posted a patch DD for CK: Fix the any_army and random_army scopes! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
Clanpot Shake posted:I got something like +50% infamy for vassalizations. Somehow a duke in England got independence (crown was under viceroyalty), and the duke of Skane got out from under Danmark, my primary title (no idea how either happened). Both accepted vassalization, but I've had high infamy for close to 100 years because I won a big holy war and now this. I'm already a megablob and expanding doesn't make a lot of sense anyway, but still. 50% for de jure vassalizations? Why? Looks like you vassalised about ten counties all at once. Vassalisation doesn't incur as much infamy as conquest, but it does incur some - I think it's half, but it may be a third. The last time I was able to accept a vassalisation it was 2.5%, but that was before I was an Emperor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 15:15
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:I posted a patch DD for CK: quote:Defensive Pacts are now separated by religious groups eyyy
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 15:25
|
|
|
started a game as venice in the charlemagne date. One of the patricians was up to some plotting bullshit, I figure I'll take any reason to lock a rival up and did so. Turns out to be a real good choice, a year later my guy died triggering an election, won by the guy who was now sitting in my oubliette. So now I'm just collecting gold until I am in the lead for popularity at which point I can execute the current doge and take back my family's rightful spot.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 15:38
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Looks like you vassalised about ten counties all at once. Vassalisation doesn't incur as much infamy as conquest, but it does incur some - I think it's half, but it may be a third. The last time I was able to accept a vassalisation it was 2.5%, but that was before I was an Emperor. Sounds about right. Hwicce had only 2 but Skane is (I think) 5 counties, plus he had a few in Scotland, Germany, and Pomerania. Still, no idea how he got out from under me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
Solemn Sloth posted:started a game as venice in the charlemagne date. One of the patricians was up to some plotting bullshit, I figure I'll take any reason to lock a rival up and did so. Turns out to be a real good choice, a year later my guy died triggering an election, won by the guy who was now sitting in my oubliette. So now I'm just collecting gold until I am in the lead for popularity at which point I can execute the current doge and take back my family's rightful spot. I assumed Patricians in the dungeon would be released if they won so now I almost want to let one of the four rivals driven insane by the oubliette just to see what happens.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 15:57
|
|
|
Skellybones posted:Fix the any_army and random_army scopes! What is up with them? I literally just moved to CK2
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
One thing I really liked about CK2 on initial release was how decisive battles could be in winning wars, rather than having to siege down holding after holding. It's a shame they've shifted gradually away from that, but I can kind of see why it's necessary. Ideally, though, I think the siege mechanics should have been the other way about: siege the peripheral holdings first (perhaps in ascending order of garrison size or fort level, going after soft targets and all that), then the primary holdings. That way it would nicely simulate the ravaging of the countryside that actually went on, since campaigning armies tended to avoid open battle and long, drawn out sieges like the plague. It would also make viking raids make more sense, as well as minimise the impact on count-and-upwards level vassals and lieges in the early stages of a war. Sure, the church, the barony and the town are burned to a crisp, but when the invading army steps off to avoid your liege's advancing doomstack you've still got fresh levies in your castle to bounce back with. And hey presto, there's no longer any need for the shattered retreat mechanic because the loser of a war's first act still has something to draw upon. You could even balance it out a bit by giving negative modifiers to relations with your walked-over vassals, since you let their house get burned down and their common folk get slaughtered while you sat safe behind your fort level 9.00 castle walls. If barony level vassals are too small fry to make it a meaningful penalty, maybe ladel on a war exhaustion modifier in addition, with risk of peasant revolt, tax penalties, all that. Then again, I'm betting the "siege primary holding first" mechanic is so deeply baked into the game that changing it requires CK3 to come out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 16:00
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:I posted a patch DD for CK: Oh boy! Let's see... quote:Characters who have someone trying to seduce them now have the option to let the seducer know they are not interested (based on things like their traits and their opinion of their spouse) which will block all further seduction attempts for some time, both by the original seducer and anyone else.  LONG REQUESTED FEATURE ADDED! Hopefully the extent to which AI characters are resistant to seduction can be tweaked in settings, because I have a solid feeling that by default they mostly won't resist unless they're lovers with their spouse. But at least when you're playing as a female character you can stop the goddamn seduction spam and get on with playing the game. quote:We have also acted decisively on the issue of Infamy and Coalitions. Sparing no effort, we have renamed these features to Threat and Defensive Pacts, which we feel should resolve all known problems with them.  It is amazing how much Paradox devs enjoy trolling their own forums.quote:At higher levels of Threat, however, Pacts of other religious groups will band together when any one of them is attacked. At the highest levels even your co-religionists may feel the need to join forces against you. So, no change whatsoever so far as the people screaming about it on the forums and on reddit (who are pissed off because their playstyle is "paint the map ASAP" and Their tears are delicious.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
Chief Savage Man posted:I assumed Patricians in the dungeon would be released if they won so now I almost want to let one of the four rivals driven insane by the oubliette just to see what happens. Yeah, having my liege in my dungeon was definitely weird and cool.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 16:12
|
|
|
Do coalitions get a malus to opinion against their target? Will they still marry with people in the targets realm? Is it possible to marry then inherit titles in the coalitions realms? Have you, Pdox, considered infamy gains as a function of year? As time goes on, infamy gains from taking the same county in the same situation increase, representing the shift from crusader kings toward EU nations. Is that a good solution or does it not really help solve the problems infamy was created to deal with?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 15:01 |
|
|
The only problem  (In case you can't tell from the tone of my posts I really can see both sides of this issue. On one hand I sympathize with Paradox in that I don't understand what's fun about playing CK2 in a Conquer The World style because there are other games that are more fun to play that way. I've conquered the world a couple times in CK2, and then realized it's way more fun to play Civ IV to scratch that itch. On the other hand, since infamy and coalitions do jackshit to inhibit AI megablobbing and if anything Muslim megablobs got even stronger in this patch, it seems almost like aggression on Paradox's part against people who play this way and it's only the latest in a series of efforts to thwart player megablobbing that extend basically back to the game's release.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 16:21
|
|