|
I wonder how many negative traits are going to be in CK3, and just how awful your characters can be. I look forward to my Average Bear playthrough.PinheadSlim posted:Lol well in an effort to stop loving around and get back on topic, God no, stuff like retinues, the best start date, most playable nations, plague management, becoming Satan, being able to choose to seduce the Pope, all of that is behind DLC iirc.
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 19:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 14:59 |
|
|
PinheadSlim posted:Lol well in an effort to stop loving around and get back on topic, CK2 is very bare bones without the expansions and unfortunately you missed the excellent humble sale of them. Still worth trying at least.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 19:30
|
|
|
PinheadSlim posted:Lol well in an effort to stop loving around and get back on topic, It's pretty good with no expansions but you're limited to playing Christian feudal characters. I also recall that Legacy of Rome is a good purchase because it gives you retinues, which act as a standing army that makes minor wars a lot less annoying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 19:31
|
|
|
CK2 is absolutely playable bare bones. I think it handled DLC better than EU4. Try it for a bit and then you can mix it up with pagans, Way of Life, Conclave and stuff as you want.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 19:32
|
|
|
PinheadSlim posted:Lol well in an effort to stop loving around and get back on topic, Imo you should just look at it as a demo and ask yourself 'would I buy the 2/3 DLC needed for most interesting features'. Mods generally assume you have the DLC that they've reworked for their features too and this makes vanilla not all that great
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 19:34
|
|
|
Barebones CK2 is fine but you'll want pick up Conclave and Way of Life pretty soon. Reaper's Due, Holy Fury and Sons of Abraham are also good early picks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 19:39
|
|
|
HerpicleOmnicron5 posted:becoming Satan, being able to choose to seduce the Pope, all of that is behind DLC iirc. That poo poo sucks though
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 20:06
|
|
|
You can probably play CKII with no DLC to get the feel for if you will want to spend money on more DLC. Its been a while since I played the base game though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 20:07
|
|
|
I would take at least Conclave, as it changes the game a lot (and for the better)
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 20:09
|
|
|
CK2 was a good game when it came out, and it still is a good game without the DLC. And since it is actually free to play now there is no cost to trying it out. I will nth that stuff like Way of Life and Conclave are great and should be high in the priority list of expansions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 20:20
|
|
|
Awesome, gonna try it later today and if I like it then it's Conclave and Way of Life first. Speaking of expansions it's funny how Victoria 2 didn't get that many. I don't know poo poo about history from that period so I couldn't recommend anything but maybe reforming the Sikh empire as Punjab could be one way to go. Maybe someone with a better understanding of that time period could think of more.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 21:07
|
|
|
PinheadSlim posted:Awesome, gonna try it later today and if I like it then it's Conclave and Way of Life first.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 21:13
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:I think it was from before PDS went DLC focused. An elegant game, for a more civilized age.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 21:16
|
|
|
PinheadSlim posted:Awesome, gonna try it later today and if I like it then it's Conclave and Way of Life first. Victoria 2 was part of the previous era, with actual Expansion Packs. Compared to everything else in that era, CK1 got 1, HOI3 got 3, EU3 got 4, HOI2 got 3, and Vicky2 got 2. So, less than most, but not THAT much less than most.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 21:19
|
|
|
I do really wish Paradox would slightly re-visit their DLC strategy and look at a bit of a hybrid approach between pure modular DLC and linear old-school Expansion packs. I think it would be totally fine and good if every couple years these workhorse franchises got a big $30 Expansion that everyone will need going forward. That could let the DLC be actually more a-la-carte and focused in scope, while the big foundation shake ups could be done better through full on expansions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 21:28
|
|
|
Lotti Fuehrscheim posted:
late as gently caress and haven't posted about Paradox in ages but in favour of this for the forever thread title. Baronjutter posted:I do really wish Paradox would slightly re-visit their DLC strategy and look at a bit of a hybrid approach between pure modular DLC and linear old-school Expansion packs. I think it would be totally fine and good if every couple years these workhorse franchises got a big $30 Expansion that everyone will need going forward. That could let the DLC be actually more a-la-carte and focused in scope, while the big foundation shake ups could be done better through full on expansions. Yeah one of the things that makes it hard to revisit a paradox game after a while is that there's a million DLCs and you need to ask people which ones are important and which ones aren't. I'd love to see fewer, bigger DLCs with concrete themes and then they can sprinkle in cheaper flavour packs whenever. Like I know estates are base game now but when I started playing EU4 (having played 2 and 3) they were mentioned all the time in online tutorials but locked behind... some Russia-focused DLC I think? At the very least keep gameplay DLC and specific nation/culture/whatever flavour packs very separate. Edgar Allen Ho fucked around with this message at 21:43 on Oct 23, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 21:31
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I do really wish Paradox would slightly re-visit their DLC strategy and look at a bit of a hybrid approach between pure modular DLC and linear old-school Expansion packs. I think it would be totally fine and good if every couple years these workhorse franchises got a big $30 Expansion that everyone will need going forward. That could let the DLC be actually more a-la-carte and focused in scope, while the big foundation shake ups could be done better through full on expansions. This is basically what they are suggesting the plan is going forward, except the big foundation shake up is free instead.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 21:42
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I do really wish Paradox would slightly re-visit their DLC strategy and look at a bit of a hybrid approach between pure modular DLC and linear old-school Expansion packs. I think it would be totally fine and good if every couple years these workhorse franchises got a big $30 Expansion that everyone will need going forward. That could let the DLC be actually more a-la-carte and focused in scope, while the big foundation shake ups could be done better through full on expansions. One thing they do that I appreciate is when they include fundamental changes into the base game for free, like oil usage in Hearts of Iron 4. But it's weird finding out what is and isn't included in the base game. For example, I saw a youtuber hit the "decolonize africa" button in the pregame settings and when I went to try that I realized I didn't have that option. I finally got Man the Guns but only when it was on sale.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 21:47
|
|
|
PinheadSlim posted:One thing they do that I appreciate is when they include fundamental changes into the base game for free, like oil usage in Hearts of Iron 4. I just completely bypassed EU4 for this reason, honestly. I didn't get it early on, but kinda wanted to a few years into the lifecylcle. But even looking at the store page is just such a ridiculous mess of DLCs, it's impossible to tell which ones I should want or why, which ones have big gameplay affects and which don't, or even what I'm buying. Literally you cannot really tell what you are buying. And since I knew the base game would be pretty sub-par at that point I just decided to forget about the whole thing entirely. I'm sure the DLC is perfectly parseable to someone who has been playing the game the whole time, but to the uninitiated it is unintelligible mess that is extremely off putting. It is a game that does not want to be purchased.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 21:54
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 21:59
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:I'm sure the DLC is perfectly parseable to someone who has been playing the game the whole time 
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 22:00
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I do really wish Paradox would slightly re-visit their DLC strategy and look at a bit of a hybrid approach between pure modular DLC and linear old-school Expansion packs. I think it would be totally fine and good if every couple years these workhorse franchises got a big $30 Expansion that everyone will need going forward. That could let the DLC be actually more a-la-carte and focused in scope, while the big foundation shake ups could be done better through full on expansions. I feel like hoi4 has been doing this ok after starting off really rocky. Man the guns and waking the tiger took longer, cost $20 and featured big improvements that make the game much more different than before. The next expansion is probably not coming out till 2020 which makes it 3 major dlcs in 3 years instead of mid-eu4 where you had the spring dlcs and the fall dlcs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 22:02
|
|
|
I think what I'm trying to address is the problem paradox sometimes has with building on top of a myriad of other DLC where they have to ignore or make a bunch of compromises to work around DLC-added mechanics and resources. They jam as much as they can into the free patches, which is nice, but the entirely free patch model gives us stuff like Stellaris' big 2.2 update. Some great ideas, but so often it really feels like there just wasn't nearly enough resources put towards it. I'd hope if they rolled what they try to do piecemeal through free patches that are subsidized by the DLC and do it all as a paid Expansion (not DLC, since all future updates would require it) they'd have the budget to really put the time and resources needed into it. Like I rather pay for an update that's really fully developed and tested than keep getting free update after free update that clearly didn't spend enough time in the oven. They get into these technical and game design deficits and they need to sell more DLC to pay for the budget to fix this deficit, but then DLC then adds more problems and it seemingly never ends. Sometimes a good DLC/Patch will be 2 steps forward 1 step back, but then the next might be 1 step forward 2 steps back. When you have a really good foundation and are just adding more meat to the bones the DLC system works, but when you have a deeply flawed game that needs radical surgery it's better to save up your changes and do it in one big go rather than trying to string it out over time in little uncoordinated drips and drabs that you can coax out of the DLC budget.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 22:17
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I think what I'm trying to address is the problem paradox sometimes has with building on top of a myriad of other DLC where they have to ignore or make a bunch of compromises to work around DLC-added mechanics and resources. They jam as much as they can into the free patches, which is nice, but the entirely free patch model gives us stuff like Stellaris' big 2.2 update. Some great ideas, but so often it really feels like there just wasn't nearly enough resources put towards it. I'd hope if they rolled what they try to do piecemeal through free patches that are subsidized by the DLC and do it all as a paid Expansion (not DLC, since all future updates would require it) they'd have the budget to really put the time and resources needed into it. I feel like you're thinking of Stellaris and I don't think the DLC has done this. I do think the DLC model makes it hard to build on old DLC because you can't assume that your customers have it all, which does suck for some stuff (like with how Traditions worked)
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 23:05
|
|
|
Taear posted:I feel like you're thinking of Stellaris and I don't think the DLC has done this. The different series seem to have different philosophies on this - CK2 does build on past DLC content a lot more, and if they design a feature that requires another DLC to use, usually they will just unlock it as part of the new DLC as well. Like the silk road for example was added as part of Rajas of India, but Jade Dragon also interacts with it a fair bit, so they just decided that you can access the silk road with either of those DLCs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 23:08
|
|
|
Athas posted:To me, this is exactly why CK is interesting. You can't just focus on short-term stability; you always need to take succession into account. Of course, sometimes it's fun to follow a branch of the family instead. The events in CK2 that make it possible to switch to a cadet branch when winning a crusade make that possible, but I suppose it could be made more general. I had a really fun game once where I had my empire set up as Enatic Tanistry but all duchies were Agnatic Gavelkind (and all my own dynasty), and deliberately took nothing to do with succession, so there was a lot of back and forth as dukes tried to get their wife or daughter elected Empress, meaning the top title continually leapt around the huge and sprawling dynasty without ever coalescing arouund a few large and powerful branches. Lots of kinslayers though. Can't kill anybody when everybody is family.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2019 23:42
|
|
|
Turns out the "Deus Vult" controversy was a bunch of hot air.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2019 00:18
|
|
|
Clearly a miscommunication. They would never get rid of the beloved Deus Vult! They meant to say there will be no Deus Vault, the mythical cache containing divine treasures. There will no quests to obtain holy relics of divine power from God's personal stash in Crusader Kings 3 (until the appropriate DLC).
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2019 01:29
|
|
|
That reminds me they're getting rid of the inventory system in CK3. I loved hoarding body parts and shiny junk...
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2019 02:34
|
|
|
My favorite part of this is the implication the roman empire was only a century away from the steam engine
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2019 03:18
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:My favorite part of this is the implication the roman empire was only a century away from the steam engine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeolipile
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2019 03:19
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:My favorite part of this is the implication the roman empire was only a century away from the steam engine As much as I love laughing at "hole left by the Christian dark ages": https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeolipile?wprov=sfla1 Edit: dammit
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2019 03:20
|
|
|
If only Christianity hadn't brought the Dark Ages, Poland would into space by now...
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2019 03:22
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:My favorite part of this is the implication the roman empire was only a century away from the steam engine With better/more access to steel they very well might have. That dark ages graph is still stupid for many other reasons though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2019 03:31
|
|
|
Someone post the version with poo poo like "The Annunaki leave us" and "The Finnish-Korean Hyper War"
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2019 03:37
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:If only Christianity hadn't brought the Dark Ages, Poland would into space by now... Oh, is this the new excuse for not investing in Eastern Poland?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2019 04:38
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:My favorite part of this is the implication the roman empire was only a century away from the steam engine Perhaps they were, if "steam engine" is steam engine as a gimmick toy of some inventor thinking about natural philosophy for entertainment while hundreds of slaves are working his fields.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2019 08:28
|
|
|
Pyromancer posted:Perhaps they were, if "steam engine" is steam engine as a gimmick toy of some inventor thinking about natural philosophy for entertainment while hundreds of slaves are working his fields.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2019 10:00
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:My favorite part of this is the implication the roman empire was only a century away from the steam engine That thing is known as "The Chart" and it's famous in how every pixel of it is wrong. Like the scientific being a single number and being a thing in general, and existing in an ancient world, but only in the Mediterranean. Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans organizing a development relay race... I'd better stop.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2019 10:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 14:59 |
|
|
V for Vegas posted:It should be pretty easy for PDX to counter any negative comparisons between CK2 and CK3. Most of the CK2 DLC was bolting on mechanics to allow you to play something other than the baseline Western Christian nation. PDX just need to say different religions and nations are baked into the model from the beginning, so all of that DLC is already in the game. The DLC will be to flesh out content for mechanics which every player already has which is basically what Johan was saying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2019 10:49
|
|