|
I also set up Scandinavian Elective since I had four sons and didn’t want everything split up. I had my firstborn set up to inherit everything important and gave my other kids titles of their own. But then my mediocre third son goes and murders his brothers so now he’s first in line. He doesn’t have the kinslayer trait so I guess he got away with it, but he can’t fool me!
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 21:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 14:21 |
|
|
wizardofloneliness posted:I also set up Scandinavian Elective since I had four sons and didn’t want everything split up. I had my firstborn set up to inherit everything important and gave my other kids titles of their own. But then my mediocre third son goes and murders his brothers so now he’s first in line. He doesn’t have the kinslayer trait so I guess he got away with it, but he can’t fool me! Oh don't worry. The second you take over playing as him, someone will immediately discover the murders and slap him/you with it. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 23:07
|
|
|
I should probably be more annoyed by the CK2 stuff that isn't in CK3 but like. I hated how republics were handled, I really hated nomad mechanics, I thought the military system was simultaneously overly complex while being easy to ignore, the tech system was incredibly stupid... Basically the only thing I'm actually missing from CK2 at this point is a more historical Byzantine empire and maybe some Seljuk/Timur events that I don't think are in yet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 23:34
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:I don't see what's so great about CK2. I can't even imagine going back to it after playing CK3. CK2 was equally as nonsensical in the same areas CK3 is, if not more so. It did have a lot more absurd hard blocks that prevented me from playing the way I wanted to play, though, which is thankfully not the case in CK3. Yeah, agreed. I'm enjoying the "review," but it's not making me think "oh, CK3 is so much worse than CK2." CK2 had all the same inherent absurdities and illogical occurrences, it was just harder for me to see what was going on most of the time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 13:07
|
|
|
What's the low-down on clans? Are they good/bad/broken? Is it possible to change to feudal from clan? Or do I *gasp* need to change the way I play?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:08
|
|
|
Hellioning posted:I should probably be more annoyed by the CK2 stuff that isn't in CK3 but like. This is more or less the impression I got from the devs too, that stuff like regencies/republics/nomads/societies were removed without replacement mainly because the CK2 treatment wasn't satisfying or didn't fit in the new game. I'm sure they'll revisit all of them in the years to come. I really miss the Conclave council and Reaper's Due disease system but I might just be a masochist!
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:59
|
|
|
What was wrong with regencies? It's basically like guardians all over again -pick someone who's not gonna get you killed- I thought? The alternative, just having literal babies do international diplomacy, is far worse.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 16:06
|
|
|
I liked regencies (see above re: masochistic realism) but as a gameplay experience "you can't really do anything except hope for RNG childhood events and that your regent or council doesn't roll back all your power consolidation/legal reform progress in an orgy of self-dealing" is surprisingly unpopular!
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 16:14
|
|
|
Serephina posted:What was wrong with regencies? It's basically like guardians all over again -pick someone who's not gonna get you killed- I thought? Agreed. I see no problem on how CK2 handled regencies, and it was b etter than no regencies Republics were kinda bad and I never played them but I liked that they existed because thanks to them some form of trade existed, which was weird but better than not existing at all like in CK3 Nomads were fun, even if only for a game or two As for combat/retinues: it was overcomplicated and you could indeed ignore that complexity because 90% of the time more men = win, but still it was more balanced and the AI wanst in such a huge handicap for not being able to use MaA effectively as the player can Zeron posted:They haven't included a ledger in most of their recent games. The reasoning if I remember correctly is that it encouraged them to be lazy on ux design and that all of that information should be shown in the appropriate places instead of just throwing them all into a big list. Don't see what prevents them from doing both but... Thats a weird reasoning. In CK3 information is all over the place and rarely in and practical, sortable fashion (althought that did improved in the last patch), it doenst seems like an improvement at all for me Elias_Maluco fucked around with this message at 16:26 on Mar 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 16:24
|
|
|
Dallan Invictus posted:I liked regencies (see above re: masochistic realism) but as a gameplay experience "you can't really do anything except hope for RNG childhood events and that your regent or council doesn't roll back all your power consolidation/legal reform progress in an orgy of self-dealing" is surprisingly unpopular! Yes. I mean, we all enjoyed our regent basically dying of a stroke while screaming "WHY WON'T YOU DIE???". And the first time an actually competent regent managed to royally gently caress over my underaged ruler, I made sure to exterminate his whole family, but it got old pretty fast. I don't know what better system they could implement though, since those kinds of regencies weren't uncommon in real life. Torrannor fucked around with this message at 00:14 on Mar 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 16:36
|
|
|
Moreau posted:What's the low-down on clans? Are they good/bad/broken? Is it possible to change to feudal from clan? Or do I *gasp* need to change the way I play? I did a clan playthrough a few patches back. It pretty much assumes you're poly because clan vassals get upset if they aren't allies, and how much they like you dictates how much they pay you, so if you don't have a dozen relatives to marry off you're very much at a disadvantage with actually getting vassals to give you stuff. It makes things a little interesting sometimes with managing opinion, but overall didn't really feel like that much of a change. It didn't really leave me with any desire to do it again. Switching between them requires shenanigans where you give your heir a title that is the opposite type. There's no intended game way to do it as far as I can tell.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 16:53
|
|
|
Are there any mods that add more clothes without making the checksum ineligible for achievements? I love the Historical Immersion Project stuff but also wanna do some cheevo runs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 19:29
|
|
|
Buschmaki posted:Are there any mods that add more clothes without making the checksum ineligible for achievements? I love the Historical Immersion Project stuff but also wanna do some cheevo runs. This is literally impossible without a change from Paradox (because the script that controls characters' clothing choices is in a directory that is checksummed for achievements), so familiarise yourself with the CheatEngine script for modded achievements I guess.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 20:26
|
|
|
Hellioning posted:I should probably be more annoyed by the CK2 stuff that isn't in CK3 but like. It's always interesting to me because I think the CK3 military/tech/cb system is way worse than CK2's ever was, but I also like a lot of the janky poo poo people hated. I preferred how CK2's tech worked by being very gradual and mostly unnoticeable until you looked at the numbers of a later run vs earlier, I also liked how it rippled out slowly over the map (though not getting some bonuses if you shifted capitals was indeed dumb.) I feel like CK3 it's way too easy to get cbs, especially good cbs, and the army system is equally stupid, but WAY more powerful. Were tactics arcane sorcery no one understood, yes. But at least by castles giving you actual soldiers if you raised your levies you would actually get a mix of units until you were so big it didn't matter and you could just use your retinue. I hate how levies are represented, I hate how MAA work, I hate the knight system (which is great for any fantasy mod), I dislike how your armies no longer form on the map instead teleporting, it's a lot of things. I also really liked showing three flanks, it rarely mattered but it was neat to see. These are of course really opinionated. One thing I think is extremely stupid in CK3 and is more a matter of numbers is how vassals are handled. Because of the new way vassal income is calculated you are incentivized to keep everyone at count level if possible. There's no incentive at all to make higher tier vassals, it's always a punishment. In CK2 this wasn't so one sided. Dukes produced tech, dukes actually had better income, dukes centralized where their levies were raised (even more important for kings). Part of this is that vassals don't seem to know how to invest in their own lands in CK3, but yeah you always want to play to minimize risk by keeping your vassals lovely instead of anything to encourage you to take the risk of more powerful vassals.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 21:11
|
|
|
Eimi posted:It's always interesting to me because I think the CK3 military/tech/cb system is way worse than CK2's ever was, but I also like a lot of the janky poo poo people hated. I preferred how CK2's tech worked by being very gradual and mostly unnoticeable until you looked at the numbers of a later run vs earlier, I also liked how it rippled out slowly over the map (though not getting some bonuses if you shifted capitals was indeed dumb.) I feel like CK3 it's way too easy to get cbs, especially good cbs, and the army system is equally stupid, but WAY more powerful. Were tactics arcane sorcery no one understood, yes. But at least by castles giving you actual soldiers if you raised your levies you would actually get a mix of units until you were so big it didn't matter and you could just use your retinue. I hate how levies are represented, I hate how MAA work, I hate the knight system (which is great for any fantasy mod), I dislike how your armies no longer form on the map instead teleporting, it's a lot of things. I also really liked showing three flanks, it rarely mattered but it was neat to see. I kinda agree with all that. Except I like knights Specially I dislike a lot how easily you can send armies across the globe, how buildings affect MaA with accumulative bonuses and how levies stay the same (worthless generic units) from 867 to 1450 Also not a big fan of the new tech system, tied to culture and locked behind fixed dates Elias_Maluco fucked around with this message at 21:37 on Mar 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 21:32
|
|
|
Eimi posted:dukes centralized where their levies were raised (even more important for kings). Ah yes, giving the king of France a single province in India so I can summon his full levee there. The current pros I can think of would be higher tier vassals makes it easier to manage factions, and giving a title to a vassal lets them also declare their own wars to unite the De Jur Lands/expand that doesn't share a truce timer with your own.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 21:33
|
|
|
Guzba posted:Ah yes, giving the king of France a single province in India so I can summon his full levee there. Faction management is the big reason I consolidate vassals at the king/emperor level. Gold usually isn't an issue for me past the tribal era in most games, so the extra income from counts/dukes usually isn't a huge incentive. Also, now that every ruler gets some MaA, a civil war against 3 kings is easier than against 10-15 dukes encompassing the same territory, as the armies you'll be facing will have way less knights/MaA.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 22:02
|
|
|
Serephina posted:What was wrong with regencies? It's basically like guardians all over again -pick someone who's not gonna get you killed- I thought? Not everyone likes playing the game on speed 5 waiting for something to happen. For me, if I'm not out there making something happen, I might as well not be playing the game and should probably play something else.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 23:28
|
|
|
I sorta liked regencies in that they only like... slightly limited diplomacy due to their personality. You could also try marrying them off or shuffling around vassalage to displace your current regent, which I thought was cool cause it really felt like engaging in court politics. Just wish it had been expanded upon or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 23:50
|
|
|
Eimi posted:These are of course really opinionated. One thing I think is extremely stupid in CK3 and is more a matter of numbers is how vassals are handled. Because of the new way vassal income is calculated you are incentivized to keep everyone at count level if possible. There's no incentive at all to make higher tier vassals, it's always a punishment. I actually see it the other way around. I actively try to make only a few people answerable to me. It is much easier to keep track of and ensure factionalism doesn't arise when you can keep an eye on and buy out just a handful of vassals rather than trying to understand what 5 dozen dukes are doing in your empire. The money isn't even a thing. I have never had an issue having enough money to maintain the MaA doom stacks even mid-game with my own money-producing buildings. I often keep feudal contracts at low tax/low levies just for the extra + opinion until I get some dynasty traits going. I understand a lot of what you said but don't necessarily agree with a lot of them. CBs are indeed just far too easy to obtain in CK3 with claim fabrications. I often don't even bother with trying to farm claims with women anymore. I do think they need some sort of "far away from capital" mechanic as well to make empires much harder to keep control of if they keep MaA doomstacking a thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 00:06
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:Not everyone likes playing the game on speed 5 waiting for something to happen. Quit being a dick. I play on speeds 2 and 3. Playing a 0-year literal infant who's declaring wars is daft as heck. Yes you got less autonomy with a regent, and that was cool as it disincentivized those ultra-long reigns which sidestepped the whole changing-hats-in-a-dynasty aspect that the game is obstinately based around. There's a ton of child events in the game already and those, plus keeping with a hypothetical ck3 regent, should be enough to let you play around. Currently the only real disadvantages to playing a child is lack of a wife/stats, and I guess no lifestyle points yet, but I've not heard of a single person who intentionally has their heirs be very old so that their empire runs with more skillpoints-active-per-century.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 00:43
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:Not everyone likes playing the game on speed 5 waiting for something to happen. Indeed, this is why paradox should also remove truces.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 01:04
|
|
|
Neighboring kingdom is made up of 3-4 duchies. So your options are use your one invade kingdom per life to get it and be hosed with your other neighbors or take one duchy every 10 years.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 01:06
|
|
|
I dig the more discrete technological gains, it's way more fun to think "I invented the trebuchet!" rather than "I placed three points in my military technology (siege) bar, that'll quicken my assaults by .5%" Knights are cool too, really appropriate for a game that places so much emphasis on personal relationships and interactions. I'm a big fan of the More Single Combat to let your own dude throw down with enemy knights in battle. Definitely agree with the rally point complaints though. It was way more immersive to call the banners and have them pop up all over your realm, and there was some strategic consideration there too -- do you wait for your entire force to consolidate and slam them into the entire enemy stack, or do you scrape together a smaller force near the border and try to defeat the enemy in detail before they can consolidate theirs? Do you have enough of the right type of the right levy in the right place? Where are your retinues? I feel like allowing us to move and place rally points at will hurts it too. They may as well just let you raise levies in literally any province of yours you want because you already effectively can, it's just a bit of pointless busywork to delete an existing rally point and place a new one somewhere else. The entire system needs rethinking
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 01:12
|
|
|
Are we unironically arguing that truces are bad, and the player should be able to conqueror the entire world within a generation? Just go take a duchy to your left, and a duchy to your right if you're a warmonger. Also after a duchy or two from the same guy, you can usurp his kingdom and shatter the realm into a bunch of independent dukes who have 0 armies and you can wardec on all at once. And this is ignoring the whole 'press courtier's claim on the kingdom' thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 01:19
|
|
|
Well, as was said earlier, not everyone likes playing at speed 5.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 01:22
|
|
|
I know it was completely suboptimal but I really liked how, before the DLC that added commander titles, when you pressed the army button all the little companies were led by the relevant lord. Something really fun about being able to drag all my ugly earls and incompetent dukes along with me to whatever hopeless war I declared. And having them get killed in battles and having to deal with succession issues - or exploit helpless orphans - was fun. I guess the knight system essentially works that way. One of the mods I found let me set it to like thirty knights by default so sorry, my lord, but by God you will go or you will hang.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 01:24
|
|
|
Serious post, if you want more wars just make some alliances with AI and be called into dumb wars all the time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 01:38
|
|
|
To be fair, it's not that I think regencies would be terribly relevant for my own gameplay in CK3 in any case. I can count the amount of times I've played as an actual child on one hand, and I just pushed 500 hours. On the other hand, I do usually play as female characters, so having children late in life is pretty rare. And I also didn't like how CK2 would put women into a regency during the last few months of pregnancy (though that was a game option you could turn off, thankfully). Serephina posted:Playing a 0-year literal infant who's declaring wars is daft as heck. Yes you got less autonomy with a regent, and that was cool as it disincentivized those ultra-long reigns which sidestepped the whole changing-hats-in-a-dynasty aspect that the game is obstinately based around. There's a ton of child events in the game already and those, plus keeping with a hypothetical ck3 regent, should be enough to let you play around. Currently the only real disadvantages to playing a child is lack of a wife/stats, and I guess no lifestyle points yet, but I've not heard of a single person who intentionally has their heirs be very old so that their empire runs with more skillpoints-active-per-century. I understand it's somewhat immersion-breaking to have actual infants waging war and conducting diplomacy, but I still don't like just sitting back and waiting for things to happen to me. I want to be out there doing things, not waiting for an event screen to pop up and give me a choice. Despite how my initial post came off as, I don't really mind chilling out a bit sometimes, but regencies in CK2 could last very long times and also pop up at very inconvenient and random intervals, stripping you of most of your agency and essentially forcing you to not play the game for a while. If a regency system was to be introduced, I would want it to be significantly more involved and give more player agency than what we had in CK2. Which is also why I say I don't miss regencies at all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 01:48
|
|
|
BigPaddy posted:Neighboring kingdom is made up of 3-4 duchies. So your options are use your one invade kingdom per life to get it and be hosed with your other neighbors or take one duchy every 10 years. Or the real option, take a dutchy, murder the leader, rinse and repeat.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 02:11
|
|
|
BigPaddy posted:Neighboring kingdom is made up of 3-4 duchies. So your options are use your one invade kingdom per life to get it and be hosed with your other neighbors or take one duchy every 10 years. Truces are good precisely because they force you to make these types of decisions, or the decision to eat the Truce Breaker penalty.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 02:20
|
|
|
BigPaddy posted:Neighboring kingdom is made up of 3-4 duchies. So your options are use your one invade kingdom per life to get it and be hosed with your other neighbors or take one duchy every 10 years. Plenty of times I've had to wait for a Duke/King to die, either to weaken his army (mainly the levies I guess - but it also can gently caress up their income), invalidate alliances/truces, or split the realm in half which means two targets. Don't forget there's a lifestyle trait that makes truces shorter. You can also just take the hit for breaking a truce if you really need it. Like if you just needed one more county/duchy to get a cheevo, just do it anyway. Efb on all of it BBJoey posted:Well, as was said earlier, not everyone likes playing at speed 5. PancakeTransmission fucked around with this message at 02:52 on Mar 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 02:26
|
|
|
Alfred P. Pseudonym posted:Truces are good precisely because they force you to make these types of decisions, or the decision to eat the Truce Breaker penalty. Personally, I agree with this. If you want to pursue a goal while a truce is standing in the way, you have plenty of active ways to deal with that, like finding another objective or the aforementioned murder. Options are good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 02:26
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Train Commanders still doesn't work For me, it feels like the window of playability of Paradox games is getting smaller over time and it definitely isn't because they're releasing content too quickly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 02:49
|
|
|
I think the only real loss for the rally point system is the case in which you are getting invaded on multiple fronts at once in which you might actually have your smaller stacks get attacked before they could consolidate. Other than that, the only thing rally points do is get rid of the tedious 'drag click a box over your entire realm and right click a province with decent supply values so everyone meets up.' Also, as dumb as the MAA system is, it is at least an improvement over retinues. It's really cheesy to be able to give your retinues a move order and declare war a day before they cross the border to give the AI not enough time to react by raising levies. Oh, and while I agree it's silly to be able to do war and stuff while off on a pilgrimage or whatever, I also thought it was silly to have a regent during the last few months of every pregnancy. Also, given how low stats for newborns are, I think the corruption and mismanagement for regencies is kind of modeled, if only incredibly obliquely, and as someone whose current CK3 game would be in a 15 year regency if they existed, I am very glad I get to do things, even with my 0/0/1/0/0 stats hampering me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 03:04
|
|
|
Always fun when I find new ways to screw up. I have this weirdly good thing going on in my current game where everyone has one son and a ton of daughters. I’m like in my fourth generation and it’s been like that for everyone until I screwed it up. I had one son and three daughters. That son had one son and two daughters, and then died in his 30s from wounds. So my grandson, who is like 17 is about to inherit everything despite being still in partition. Of course when I’m 65, my wife died and I go ahead and marry a 25 year old, why not! In a year she pops out twin boys, and I guess that was too much for me because I drop dead a few months later. So now my like 18 year old grandson inherits the empire and has two baby uncles for vassal kings. The game took pity on me and one of my uncles died at 15 from stress, this was after abdicating his realm back to me at 7. Dude just couldn’t take it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 04:20
|
|
|
I just remembered in CK2 I would strategically give powerful vassals provinces near my capital/borders so I could raise their levies at convenient rally points. New system is definitely better than that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 05:04
|
|
|
Can you train your goddamn people yet?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 10:06
|
|
|
ninjahedgehog posted:Definitely agree with the rally point complaints though. It was way more immersive to call the banners and have them pop up all over your realm, and there was some strategic consideration there too -- do you wait for your entire force to consolidate and slam them into the entire enemy stack, or do you scrape together a smaller force near the border and try to defeat the enemy in detail before they can consolidate theirs? Do you have enough of the right type of the right levy in the right place? Where are your retinues? Plus the interface seems to be actively trying to make you use your armies in the most ineffective way, is weird I mean, nobody really wants to "raise all" except very early in the game or on very rare big wars. And why would anybody wants to raise their armies scattered in multiple random stacks is also beyond me DJ_Mindboggler posted:I just remembered in CK2 I would strategically give powerful vassals provinces near my capital/borders so I could raise their levies at convenient rally points. New system is definitely better than that. Is not, in my opinion. Is just easier. In CK2 at least you had to do something to be able to project your armies so far (and still it would be part of your army), now you can just freely teleport all your men anywhere, which makes expanding once you become a big blob much easier than it already was in CK2 Elias_Maluco fucked around with this message at 12:30 on Mar 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 11:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 14:21 |
|
|
Anecdotally, it does seem like the AI is better at handling factions now, or there just aren’t enough of them. I’m seeing large AI empires hold it together a lot more.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2022 11:53
|
|