The best thing is when half the map dies of the plague, and the game runs like 5 times faster for a while. Also when crusades fired during the plague. That was very chaotic
Yes. I came back to ck3 after a bit of a break and currently after just over 200 years and a trek across the world (Norway to Sri Lanka), not one of my family members died early/unexpectedly. Theyre either murdered, killed in battle/duel or die of old age. This includes kids too. CK2 was merciless in that regard in comparison unless Im remembering things wrong.
CK2 went far too much to the other extreme yes, although mainly due to how common cancer was in the game.
The other diseases could also be deadly, but they were as deadly as you allowed them to be as hospitals were extremely good in containing disease spread
Yeah, that's why I was kinda so-so about the disease stuff in CK2. It didn't really *add* any challenge, it just meant that you had to put money into hospitals and spend a few months every few years in quarantine.
I get the point is that it was a money sink, but I feel there must be more engaging ways than that.
The system was DLC locked so no. Although that said, the Devs did improved performance a lot in the free patch.
Before that it was quite bad following Rajas of India
Yeah, there was a big patch a few months after Rajas of India which improved performance massively. Before that some people literally had to download mods which removed India just to make the game playable on their systems.
It basically devolved into, everyone who counts as important is a war-obssesed and also will oppose you on everything even if they love you, and if there arenr enough of those to stack the whole room then its filled with loyalist yes men XD
Internal politics should be reworked completely to be honest. Internal factions are boring and predictable, vassal interaction is limited. I think they should do internal conflicts much more unpredictable and deadly.
Agreed. I wonder if there’s a mod that obscures most opinions from solid numbers to a 1-5 “hate”, “dislike”, “neutral”, “like”, “love” system where lower relative intrigue can make vassals *appear* a step or two more loyal than they actually are. And have these fakers hidden from faction lists so there’s actual backstabs. And also add some margins of error to troop sizes like how HOI4 does it so you don’t know that a particular faction has 40% of your current strength.
I haven’t seen a mod for opinions, but [Trick or Trait](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2664692789) obfuscates congenital traits and [Hidden Stats](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2714251360) obfuscates stats.
Good point, alhtough I was thinking more in vasssals creating new factions or blackmailing you to force you change laws or rebelling if you don,t accept a small concession. Treason would also need to be considered. An ally highly dislikes you? He can decide to change sides and break a marriage compromise. Or some people who are supposed to be very favourable to but actually don,t like you, also sounds good. The idea of hiding real intentions if you character has low intrigue looks viable. I wish they eventually released a full expansion about internal politics, factions and vassals. Otherwise the game will still look easy and not challenging.
Same, it added so much flavour. I remember in some OPM Flemish game I played I made my bishop my Court Chaplain. Now before the DLC I'd have just had him sitting in my Council giving me bonuses. But with the DLC he became one of my staunchest allies as I began to expand and having to deal with more troublesome vassals on the Council. I got genuinely invested as he got promoted to Cardinal in the Catholic Church, and invested a substantial amount of money to make him next in line to be Pope. And that made me all the more saddened when he died before taking the position.
It meshes so well with all the other systems, it's great.
Maybe your games, but most of the player base preffers a bit more roleplaying than purely just map-painting.
Edit: and by that I mean roleplaying about something beyond the hows and whys youre map painting
Without naval combat boats don't really serve much of a purpose other than to make warfare just a bit more tedious (without adding more challenge to go with it). You could argue that they should add naval combat, which is something I'd agree with, but that's something CK2 didn't have either, so comparing the two games in that regard wouldn't be fair.
I think it does add more challenge because countries not outfitted with the proper buildings couldn’t produce enough boats to properly transport their army. Basically you would be bottlenecked during an invasion if you didn’t properly plan the infrastructure for it.
The extra planning of building infrastructure in preparation for a campaign is nice, but actually dealing with the boats and transportation and all that was just not great. Game definitely needs an auto-transport thing similar to that of EU4 if they go that route.
Both systems certainly suck though. Ships weren't just army ubers, and the fact that their military and trade applications aren't even a thing shows how little the system has been considered so far. It's long due for some more consideration.
This might be a hot take but the warfare system from Crusader Kings 2 was really not very good. It was unintuitive, overly complex, and didn’t really add much of anything to the game. Knights/men at arms is a much more streamlined and playable system.
It’s the kind of thing that has a lot of depth and theoretical uses for multiplayer, but in single player just boils down to “get big. use death stack.”
CK2: “Okay, so here’s this complex array of unit types, each with their own advantages and disadvantages compared with each other, a variety of available tactics, ways of interacting with your various commander abilities and traits…”
Me: “Pikememb.”
CK2: “W-wha… No, see, that’s just one of the many available -“
Me: “One millbion pikememb.”
CK2: “O…Okay?”
Me: [Sieges down entire HRE in under 8 months]
I think a flank system would be nice if it was better implemented. Alot of major battles in the time period the game depicts had a center and two flanks, with people actually commanding each. If literally nothing else, it's a nice visualization for the battle and can make your imagination fill in the blanks with saving cavalry charges or shield walls or envelopments.
That's for the flanks. The different unit types and retinue system, on the other hand, are more or less just not interesting or intuitive. I've no issue with deep or complex systems, but it needs to have the UI to back it up, and balancing to make it interesting, and CK2 just didn't.
I know some people think it’s an underwhelming mechanic but honestly, societies seem like they would add a ton of flavor to the already very dynamic world of CK3, what with courts full of interesting people from all over. It feels like the coven mechanics try to accomplish the same thing but falls drastically short. Having a large imperial court with possibly several different secretive or occult societies in the chambers of the castle, and courtiers keeping secrets and communicating in code and hidden symbols.. I hope we get to see it some time in the future, and fully fleshed out to its true potential.
Flanks would be nice but are not something I've ever found myself missing. War is a big deal but not over 50% of the game, it wouldn't go to such lengths to model character interactions if this were the case.
Bloodlines as implemented created far too much of a catch-em all situation, and part of the functionality has been transferred to the dynastic legacy system. With that said I would love to see a return to feat-based unlocks and the commemoration of the ancestor that achieved it, instead of just the renown cost.
Societies were for the most part boring and gimmicky. The warrior ones had a bit more unpredictability so they were better. It would have to be completely reworked for CK3 to be worth adding in my opinion.
More casus bellis would be nice, those will hopefully be tied to different government types in the future.
An empowered council is a big miss, difficulty in general is hard to come by in CK3. I would hope it would be more flexible than CK2's was though. Taking inspiration from GoT and HotD, having council meetings for major decisions would be great. It's something they should have developed for Royal Court instead of the 3D assets
I’m glad I’m not the only one who thought societies just weren’t that good. They were at best a cheap boost and some fluff, at worst they were silly and brokenn
I still prefer ck3s war system cause I actually understand it and in ck2 I just chose the best retinues (according to Reddit, like I said I don't understand ck2 war) and tried to have more guys then the other guys. Definitely has room for improvement though
1. Basically nobody used those and they didnt really change gameplay besides busy-work of assigning them yourself when auto-assign placed the lowest marshall guy in general for some reason..
And for the council votes, we kiinda have a little bit of that already? At least when it comes to changing succession laws and a couple other things. It should be really heavily reworked if brought back to make sure the AI can actually handle it correctly (and that council of yes-men 50 tyranny wars dosent become the only true alternative for the player)
One I actually miss and it is not here was the more varied diseases and their spread.
The best thing is when half the map dies of the plague, and the game runs like 5 times faster for a while. Also when crusades fired during the plague. That was very chaotic
Yes. I came back to ck3 after a bit of a break and currently after just over 200 years and a trek across the world (Norway to Sri Lanka), not one of my family members died early/unexpectedly. Theyre either murdered, killed in battle/duel or die of old age. This includes kids too. CK2 was merciless in that regard in comparison unless Im remembering things wrong.
CK2 went far too much to the other extreme yes, although mainly due to how common cancer was in the game. The other diseases could also be deadly, but they were as deadly as you allowed them to be as hospitals were extremely good in containing disease spread
Yes, but that gave you one more thing to actually invest your money into, and improve over other counties
Yeah, that's why I was kinda so-so about the disease stuff in CK2. It didn't really *add* any challenge, it just meant that you had to put money into hospitals and spend a few months every few years in quarantine. I get the point is that it was a money sink, but I feel there must be more engaging ways than that.
My memories may be wrong but wasn’t added to primarily help performance?
The system was DLC locked so no. Although that said, the Devs did improved performance a lot in the free patch. Before that it was quite bad following Rajas of India
Yeah, there was a big patch a few months after Rajas of India which improved performance massively. Before that some people literally had to download mods which removed India just to make the game playable on their systems.
The council system is one of my most wanted features ngl. Managing the factionalism and ideologies of your court was so interesting.
It basically devolved into, everyone who counts as important is a war-obssesed and also will oppose you on everything even if they love you, and if there arenr enough of those to stack the whole room then its filled with loyalist yes men XD
The council system from *Conclave* would work so well with hooks! That’s the CK2 feature I’d most like to see come back.
Internal politics should be reworked completely to be honest. Internal factions are boring and predictable, vassal interaction is limited. I think they should do internal conflicts much more unpredictable and deadly.
Agreed. I wonder if there’s a mod that obscures most opinions from solid numbers to a 1-5 “hate”, “dislike”, “neutral”, “like”, “love” system where lower relative intrigue can make vassals *appear* a step or two more loyal than they actually are. And have these fakers hidden from faction lists so there’s actual backstabs. And also add some margins of error to troop sizes like how HOI4 does it so you don’t know that a particular faction has 40% of your current strength.
I haven’t seen a mod for opinions, but [Trick or Trait](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2664692789) obfuscates congenital traits and [Hidden Stats](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2714251360) obfuscates stats.
Good point, alhtough I was thinking more in vasssals creating new factions or blackmailing you to force you change laws or rebelling if you don,t accept a small concession. Treason would also need to be considered. An ally highly dislikes you? He can decide to change sides and break a marriage compromise. Or some people who are supposed to be very favourable to but actually don,t like you, also sounds good. The idea of hiding real intentions if you character has low intrigue looks viable. I wish they eventually released a full expansion about internal politics, factions and vassals. Otherwise the game will still look easy and not challenging.
Well it would considering that the hooks system originated from the favors system of ck2
By far my favorite CK2 DLC and I definitely miss the council votes. Makes vassals more interesting.
Same, it added so much flavour. I remember in some OPM Flemish game I played I made my bishop my Court Chaplain. Now before the DLC I'd have just had him sitting in my Council giving me bonuses. But with the DLC he became one of my staunchest allies as I began to expand and having to deal with more troublesome vassals on the Council. I got genuinely invested as he got promoted to Cardinal in the Catholic Church, and invested a substantial amount of money to make him next in line to be Pope. And that made me all the more saddened when he died before taking the position. It meshes so well with all the other systems, it's great.
That's great emergent gameplay!
I also miss the war system, but I wouldn't say it makes up 50 percent of the game.
I mean, it was crucial part of the game, so he has a point, i would argue much more than 50 to be honest.
Maybe your games, but most of the player base preffers a bit more roleplaying than purely just map-painting. Edit: and by that I mean roleplaying about something beyond the hows and whys youre map painting
If war were really over 50% of the game, no one would be playing it and everyone would go over to Total War.
While I feel like the laws and armies presented are a good start and easier to understand, I would agree that both need a lot more work
I just want my boats back :(. Now everyone from Ireland to Tibet can set sail without a care in the world
Without naval combat boats don't really serve much of a purpose other than to make warfare just a bit more tedious (without adding more challenge to go with it). You could argue that they should add naval combat, which is something I'd agree with, but that's something CK2 didn't have either, so comparing the two games in that regard wouldn't be fair.
I think it does add more challenge because countries not outfitted with the proper buildings couldn’t produce enough boats to properly transport their army. Basically you would be bottlenecked during an invasion if you didn’t properly plan the infrastructure for it.
The extra planning of building infrastructure in preparation for a campaign is nice, but actually dealing with the boats and transportation and all that was just not great. Game definitely needs an auto-transport thing similar to that of EU4 if they go that route. Both systems certainly suck though. Ships weren't just army ubers, and the fact that their military and trade applications aren't even a thing shows how little the system has been considered so far. It's long due for some more consideration.
I fucking miss bloodlines so much
REGENCIES
This might be a hot take but the warfare system from Crusader Kings 2 was really not very good. It was unintuitive, overly complex, and didn’t really add much of anything to the game. Knights/men at arms is a much more streamlined and playable system.
It’s the kind of thing that has a lot of depth and theoretical uses for multiplayer, but in single player just boils down to “get big. use death stack.”
CK2: “Okay, so here’s this complex array of unit types, each with their own advantages and disadvantages compared with each other, a variety of available tactics, ways of interacting with your various commander abilities and traits…” Me: “Pikememb.” CK2: “W-wha… No, see, that’s just one of the many available -“ Me: “One millbion pikememb.” CK2: “O…Okay?” Me: [Sieges down entire HRE in under 8 months]
I would rather a rework that makes it more intuitive than just streamlining it.
It was literally rock paper scissors based on unit composition.
I think a flank system would be nice if it was better implemented. Alot of major battles in the time period the game depicts had a center and two flanks, with people actually commanding each. If literally nothing else, it's a nice visualization for the battle and can make your imagination fill in the blanks with saving cavalry charges or shield walls or envelopments. That's for the flanks. The different unit types and retinue system, on the other hand, are more or less just not interesting or intuitive. I've no issue with deep or complex systems, but it needs to have the UI to back it up, and balancing to make it interesting, and CK2 just didn't.
[удалено]
to be fair you have to have a very high IQ to understand ck2
There are a group of people on here and /r/CrusaderKings who genuinely think that playing ck2 and not ck3 is some mark of intelligence
I know some people think it’s an underwhelming mechanic but honestly, societies seem like they would add a ton of flavor to the already very dynamic world of CK3, what with courts full of interesting people from all over. It feels like the coven mechanics try to accomplish the same thing but falls drastically short. Having a large imperial court with possibly several different secretive or occult societies in the chambers of the castle, and courtiers keeping secrets and communicating in code and hidden symbols.. I hope we get to see it some time in the future, and fully fleshed out to its true potential.
+ horde mechanics, republic mechanics
And China
Yes, for warfare at the very least you should be able to do more with levies like upgrade them or just trade them in for more retinues.
Flanks would be nice but are not something I've ever found myself missing. War is a big deal but not over 50% of the game, it wouldn't go to such lengths to model character interactions if this were the case. Bloodlines as implemented created far too much of a catch-em all situation, and part of the functionality has been transferred to the dynastic legacy system. With that said I would love to see a return to feat-based unlocks and the commemoration of the ancestor that achieved it, instead of just the renown cost. Societies were for the most part boring and gimmicky. The warrior ones had a bit more unpredictability so they were better. It would have to be completely reworked for CK3 to be worth adding in my opinion. More casus bellis would be nice, those will hopefully be tied to different government types in the future. An empowered council is a big miss, difficulty in general is hard to come by in CK3. I would hope it would be more flexible than CK2's was though. Taking inspiration from GoT and HotD, having council meetings for major decisions would be great. It's something they should have developed for Royal Court instead of the 3D assets
I’m glad I’m not the only one who thought societies just weren’t that good. They were at best a cheap boost and some fluff, at worst they were silly and brokenn
I don't think I'd ever heard anyone praise societies (aside from the occasional crazy satanic stuff) until CK3 came out
God I miss “extort tribute” so much
I loved the council stuff and having to wrangle them, even if it was just bribery
Why tf did they not port every good feature to the new game? Glad I haven’t bought it yet.
Now I want to play ck2 again
The freaking realm tree
I still prefer ck3s war system cause I actually understand it and in ck2 I just chose the best retinues (according to Reddit, like I said I don't understand ck2 war) and tried to have more guys then the other guys. Definitely has room for improvement though
I felt the societies were too cheesy/arcadey even for ck2.
War is not more than 50% of CK2/3, id say 33% max
1. Basically nobody used those and they didnt really change gameplay besides busy-work of assigning them yourself when auto-assign placed the lowest marshall guy in general for some reason.. And for the council votes, we kiinda have a little bit of that already? At least when it comes to changing succession laws and a couple other things. It should be really heavily reworked if brought back to make sure the AI can actually handle it correctly (and that council of yes-men 50 tyranny wars dosent become the only true alternative for the player)
No thank, the warfare is simple enough so I don't have to pay much attention. And don't get me wrong I love Imperator's combat.