CKII is released.

[Trash]

Patch incoming on friday(?)

v1.04

MAJOR:
- Revised the Message Setting system
- Religion groups are now marked playable in the religion file (no more hard coded rule)
- AI: Improved marriage acceptance. Smarter about "Desires Better Alliance". Values prestige gain or loss higher.
- Added some useful status info to the delayed character tooltip (similar to the info in debug mode)
- Cooldown added to excommunications (only for the same Pope though)
- Doubled the flanking damage bonus in combat
- Increased the flank leader Martial skill bonus in combat by 50%
- Nerfed taxes given by bishops to Anti-Popes by 50%
- Holy Orders now cost maintenance if you're in at least one offensive, non-Crusade war
- Halved all peasant revolt risk factors
- Added an "Isolated County" revolt risk modifier and cut the special events that used to simulate it
- Peasant Army size is now determined by the biggest holding garrison size (so they will always be dangerous)
- The Succession War CBs now have the proper success outcome
- Fixed a bug with the usurpation of titles that would hand over all vassals too
- AI: More wary of expensive assassinations
- AI: Fixed some issues with the correct Casus Belli choice
- AI: Tweaked vassal revolt risk to depend more on ambition from traits
- The duchies of Cornwall and Brittany are now de jure part of the Kingdom of Wales
- Buffed the Caliphates and the Seljuks. Nerfed the Byzantines.
- Added vassal Seljuk mercs; the Ghilman
- Now shows a portrait of the target in available player plots
- Hooked in missing plot icon in available player plots

MINOR:
- Upped the chances of dying due to disease a little bit
- Increased the effects of the genius, quick, slow, imbecile and inbred traits
- Reduced the levy size effect of some of the "recently occupied" modifiers
- Nominated bishops are now properly disinherited at once
- Combat events will not happen until three days into a combat (to avoid commander deaths and such when overrunning tiny forces)
- When an Anti-Pope is installed in Rome, the old Pope no longer becomes an Anti-Pope
- Waived the opinion penalty for held elector titles for elective duchies and below
- Fixed a CTD issue that could occur in tooltips when hovering over Holding modifiers as they expire
- Vassal mercs can now always be employed by their liege, no matter their religion
- Scaled wealth effects and triggers are now based on nominal peacetime income
- Fixed an error in the opinion warning when banishing characters (not the correct figure.)
- The game will now also auto-generate an appropriate number of traits for children with not enough scripted traits
- Added a text warning/explanation for DoW on a revolter
- Traits are now read from multiple files, facilitating modding
- Fixed an issue with event ids in a namespace
- Fixed an issue with flipping "random god names" tooltips in fire event effect tooltips
- Fixed a bug with the decision 'Demand Duchy from liege' with duke tier lieges (should not be available)
- Fixed a tooltip issue with the "any" type event triggers
- Better tooltips for event triggers 'higher_tier_than' and 'lower_tier_than'
- Re-enabled selection of the same type of plot again for players
- Fixed an issue with save/reload of the last selected plot/ambition
- Fixed an issue with protected inheritance not always working under Gavelkind
- Exported MAX_ELECTOR_TITLES_LEGALLY_HELD to defines
- Exported the max duchies held opinion penalty to defines
- Exported the tax penalty for bishops loyal to the Pope or Anti-Pope to the defines
- The "recently conquered" holding penalties are no longer applied during civil wars or wars between vassals
- AI: Fixed a bug where the AI would grant titles to vassal mercs
- Added 'same_guardian' trigger
- Slightly nerfed William of Normandy's initial army size
- Switched the portraits of Harold and William the Conqueror
- Changed some title colors to conform better to their cultural region
- Added proper history for the Prince-Bishopric of Agen
- The Earl of Atholl is now a _legitimate_ bastard

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

- Religion groups are now marked playable in the religion file (no more hard coded rule)

Seems they finally got the hint

 

[Kayerts]

Varna, I haven't tried out your changes and am fuzzy on the scripting, but do they apply to player-controlled countries as well? If so, it's going to be annoying to have to get to war score 100% with every single rebel you face; it makes assassinating the rebel leader start to look even more like a silver bullet, for the leader of a large imperialist state.

I'm inclined to think that higher battle weights and a higher plot threshold for breaking away from the liege are better ways to handle fracturing. For the ERE in particular, I'd go with some semi-invasion-level war condition for the Seljuks at the game start, wherein if they win, they take all Byzantine holdings in Anatolia. Historically speaking, the ERE had lost all of Anatolia within 10 years of the game's start, and all their non-Euro territories within 20 years. (Refer to this map by the esteemed Wikibro, Bigdaddy1204.) Of course, without an overpowered ERE, the game's overpowered Shia Caliphate might end up conquering Europe, so I don't know.

Not really sure what to do with the HRE. Maybe give the Kaiser a 1% of dying every time he moves troops over a river.

 

[Saxon1974]

Since they are still patching I think I will wait to play this game even though it looks fun now. Im a big fan of knights of honor so hope I like this one too.

One thing I wonder about is when they buff and nerf things.....sometimes this messes up balance. Anyone know how they decide how to do that? Is it from player feedback?

 

[Malakal]

Varna, I haven't tried out your changes and am fuzzy on the scripting, but do they apply to player-controlled countries as well? If so, it's going to be annoying to have to get to war score 100% with every single rebel you face; it makes assassinating the rebel leader start to look even more like a silver bullet, for the leader of a large imperialist state.

I'm inclined to think that higher battle weights and a higher plot threshold for breaking away from the liege are better ways to handle fracturing. For the ERE in particular, I'd go with some semi-invasion-level war condition for the Seljuks at the game start, wherein if they win, they take all Byzantine holdings in Anatolia. Historically speaking, the ERE had lost all of Anatolia within 10 years of the game's start, and all their non-Euro territories within 20 years. (Refer to this map by the esteemed Wikibro, Bigdaddy1204.) Of course, without an overpowered ERE, the game's overpowered Shia Caliphate might end up conquering Europe, so I don't know.

Not really sure what to do with the HRE. Maybe give the Kaiser a 1% of dying every time he moves troops over a river.

Patch notes foretell some nerfing to the BE. And Turks being a danger to the Europe would be a good addition.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Actually, I was thinking about removing rather silly element of an independence war ending with the death of the rebel leader... Or making that it can end with the death of the monarch as well.

And yes, the conditions apply to the player as well, which I think is a good thing: It forces you to carefully organize your feudal clusterfuck so it doesn't collapse like a house of cards. It discourages map-painting in favour of actual nation-building.

As for the battle weights and thresholds... Those are far more sensitive and harder for the AI behaviour to handle than the altered victory conditions. I'm also pretty sure you can't have the "rising" warscore that county claim wars have, which is a further complication. In short, there's only two options: Either drastically lower the AI warscore requirements for the liege to accept terms, or to modify the white peace (keep in mind, the liege only accepts white peace if he isn't winning and the war has gone on for several years).

 

[GarfunkeL]

Used to be beta feedback only, who tested the patches before they were released. Nowadays it's probably player feedback through their forums.

 

[Carlos' Bitch1]

So...now that the post release excite has, hopefully, worn off...what kind of product is CKII? Any glaring faults? Areas where an expansion is really needed? Etc?

 

[Sergiu64]

So...now that the post release excite has, hopefully, worn off...what kind of product is CKII? Any glaring faults? Areas where an expansion is really needed? Etc?

It seems to be quite playable. I guess a few realism issues with how long people live when no one is trying to assassinate them and the smaller amount of children. A lot more random events would be nice.

 

[Tigranes]

It's a solid game. I don't know if it will have legs over the long run like EU does. After all, the simplified combat / technology system means that there aren't a lot of different ways in which your empire actually operates; the only difference across playthroughs come from the history you organise of different characters. Which is plenty fun, and will get better with more events, but the actual running the country part I don't think is complex enough, so that may shorten the lifespan somewhat.

For now, though, good stuff. Worth the money.

 

[Malakal]

Definitely solid. Certain issues need work and polishing, like ambitions and war goals of different war types and of course laws, but overall no glaring bugs.

Most events in any game from Pdox out of the box.

Battle system is way too much about numbers, that needs changing. Not enough differences in buildings and armies between cultures, some other mistakes. But its perfectly playable right now and quite fun too.

 

[Chef_Hathaway]

Battle system is way too much about numbers, that needs changing. Not enough differences in buildings and armies between cultures, some other mistakes.

That's pretty much the shortcoming of all the Paradox combat systems other than HoI. Quantity will always win in vanilla Paradox games, other than HoI and Vic2 sometimes.

 

[Spectacle]

Quality will actually win in CK2, the Holy Order armies with their massed knights can steamroll much larger armies.
There's fuck all you can do to improve the quality of your personal armies though, all feudal holdings produce pretty much the same troops.

 

[Chef_Hathaway]

Not in EU3. In EU3, both quality and quantity have their merits, depends on which nation you're playing. I would say that, as a rule, quantity is better for large land nations (France, China, Austria, Hungary) and Steppe Nomads (Golden Horde, Timurids, etc) and quality is better for smaller naval nations (Portugal, England, Brittany, Denmark, Ireland, etc...). EU3 gives a lot of importance to generals, terrain, manpower, sliders and ideas.

Sure ideas and generals make a (small) difference, but when it comes down to it, the fucking dice will always screw you over and quantity will prevail. Always.

Only time I've ever seen quality make a difference is in mods where it's buffed.

Also, you're probably going to have good, if not better generals as a land nation than a naval one.

I'm also basing this on MP experiences, not SP, you can do good as pretty much anything in SP.

 

[20 Eyes]

Battle system is way too much about numbers, that needs changing. Not enough differences in buildings and armies between cultures, some other mistakes.

That's pretty much the shortcoming of all the Paradox combat systems other than HoI. Quantity will always win in vanilla Paradox games, other than HoI and Vic2 sometimes.

Not in EU3. In EU3, both quality and quantity have their merits, depends on which nation you're playing. I would say that, as a rule, quantity is better for large land nations (France, China, Austria, Hungary) and Steppe Nomads (Golden Horde, Timurids, etc) and quality is better for smaller naval nations (Portugal, England, Brittany, Denmark, Ireland, etc...). EU3 gives a lot of importance to generals, terrain, manpower, sliders and ideas.

True.

In my last EU3 game, my very high-quality Dutch army would routinely wipe the floor with much larger doomstacks.

 

[XenomorphII]

Not in EU3. In EU3, both quality and quantity have their merits, depends on which nation you're playing. I would say that, as a rule, quantity is better for large land nations (France, China, Austria, Hungary) and Steppe Nomads (Golden Horde, Timurids, etc) and quality is better for smaller naval nations (Portugal, England, Brittany, Denmark, Ireland, etc...). EU3 gives a lot of importance to generals, terrain, manpower, sliders and ideas.

Sure ideas and generals make a (small) difference, but when it comes down to it, the fucking dice will always screw you over and quantity will prevail. Always.

Only time I've ever seen quality make a difference is in mods where it's buffed.

Also, you're probably going to have good, if not better generals as a land nation than a naval one.

I'm also basing this on MP experiences, not SP, you can do good as pretty much anything in SP.

Quantity always prevails? Then why is it so easy to take a few thousand troops from Europe and conquer India/China/Americas?

Quality makes a huge difference in EU. Take Prussia and go quality and take their special decision. Any army that meets you will have to significantly outnumber you (even other European forces) or it will get ripped apart.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Quantity is the shittiest slider choice after Decentralization in EU3, Quality will only have only slightly smaller armies but will inflict disproportionately higher losses, meaning Quantity is only useful for countries that are hopelessly outnumbered otherwise. EU3's combat is by far the most lacking in all Paradox games, far inferior to HoI model where strategy can actually win the day instead of superior numbers/tech. Then again, EU3 is baby's first Paradox game, lackluster in comparison to all the other, more detailed games (even after five expansions the game still has less meat on its bones without mods).

And EU3 having more builder elements than, in this case, CK2? Puh-leeze, in EU3 you mostly just wait, wait, wait and wait and then build a new tier when you reach the tech. You also can't build up provinces beyond the constraits of their original status and are constrained by the inflexible base tax mechanic, problems CK2 does by far the best job of avoiding among Pdox games: In CK2 it is possible to start nation-building almost anywhere on the map because of how the Holdings work. In my campaign Kalevan province is worth more than 90% of the provinces in Europe, and my realm would make for some very lucrative conquest if I wasn't a major power that can defend itself. This kind of dramatic rise in provincial value is not possible in EU3.

 

[Malakal]

I disagree, quantity in EU3 is the obviously superior slider. At least in a competitive environment. The difference between maxed quality and quantity is 25% global manpower. And manpower is THE deciding factor in interhuman warfare as long as both sides can reach each other. One battle wont win you the war, running out of manpower WILL lose it for you. Reinforcing armies is also extremely important.

Consider this: with sliders aimed at morale, other than maxed quantity, morale difference between quantity based army and quality based ones is small. Therefore quantity based army has only to prolong battles and kill quality morale, then pursue and destroy. Numbers of troops lost in battles quickly become insignificant compared to losses due to attrition and pursuit. Watch your casualty ledger, even in SP.

Quantity will replenish its losses quicker, its also a deciding factor. 20% difference in discipline is a small price to pay.

 

[GarfunkeL]

I've always played for quality, as that discipline difference has seemed to mean that my army kills the other side quicker.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

And if you have a large nation, manpower is only an issue if you fuck up. And because it does not significantly influence what really makes the big difference, Force Limit, Quality all the way.

 

[Chef_Hathaway]

I disagree, quantity in EU3 is the obviously superior slider. At least in a competitive environment. The difference between maxed quality and quantity is 25% global manpower. And manpower is THE deciding factor in interhuman warfare as long as both sides can reach each other. One battle wont win you the war, running out of manpower WILL lose it for you. Reinforcing armies is also extremely important.

Consider this: with sliders aimed at morale, other than maxed quantity, morale difference between quantity based army and quality based ones is small. Therefore quantity based army has only to prolong battles and kill quality morale, then pursue and destroy. Numbers of troops lost in battles quickly become insignificant compared to losses due to attrition and pursuit. Watch your casualty ledger, even in SP.

Quantity will replenish its losses quicker, its also a deciding factor. 20% difference in discipline is a small price to pay.

Exactly my point, in MP it's the far superior option, in SP, who gives a fuck the AI is dumb.

Then again, EU3 is baby's first Paradox game, lackluster in comparison to all the other, more detailed games (even after five expansions the game still has less meat on its bones without mods).

This too, I got into EU3 after playing all the other Pdox games of it's day, and I really didn't see why everyone liked it more than those.

Such a waiting game as numbers tick down and you've nothing to do while they do.

 

[oscar]

Numbers do seem way too important in CK combat. Even if a defender has 50% of the attackers number, they'll be easily defeated while the attacker will take barely a scratch. The one exception to this is Holy Orders, who can smash even defending forces that outnumber them.

In CK unless the enemy is at least 2/3 the size of your army it turns into whack-a-mole. By contrast in EU3 unless factors were massively on your side (tech or numbers) you could never really be too sure how things were going to swing. It also seems impossible to voluntarily retreat in CK2. EU3 had a good system where you can't retreat before a certain period of time, but after that you can if the dice have been against you, the enemy has brought up unexpected reinforcements etc etc

So yeah combat needs work. More Total War-style cultural variation between armies would be nice as well. An army of wild Highlanders should play differently than a French one.

 

[Smashing Axe]

It'd be nice if you could automate some of your military for minor irrelevant rebellions like some count trying to break from your influence, and to deal with the 1000th peasant rebellion. It's a real pain with large kingdoms

 

[GarfunkeL]

Weird that you can't. You can do that in HoI3, where units under garrison commands automatically attack partisans/rebels in nearby provinces and I thought EU3 and Vicky2 now had something similar with cavalry.

 

[Spectacle]

It'd be nice if you could automate some of your military for minor irrelevant rebellions like some count trying to break from your influence, and to deal with the 1000th peasant rebellion. It's a real pain with large kingdoms

The patch that's supposed to come out later today is promised to have your vassals smart enough to raise their armies and take out rebels on their own. Now there will be a good reason to divide up your empire into powerful duchies.