CKII is released.

[Merkwürdigliebe]

Though in player hands in a self-made kingdom it'll probably be kinslaying all the way.

It is not as if they are looking to put a dagger in your back and grab your titles at the first opportunity anyway, so I figure it would be alright.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Have they released a DLC or patch with an expanded pagan/norse focus?

Nope, think they are planning too though.

Norse focus for the DLC would be pandering to the audience though. By the time of the Grand Campaign the relevant pagans were the various Finno-Ugrics between Scandinavia and Novgorod and shamanists in the East, but most importantly Lithuanians.

 

[RedScum]

Enough about finns!

 

[Snerf]

Norse focus for the DLC would be pandering to the audience though. By the time of the Grand Campaign the relevant pagans were the various Finno-Ugrics between Scandinavia and Novgorod and shamanists in the East, but most importantly Lithuanians.

No arguments, just curious. Since I saw the DLC where they highlight the potential for Aztecs to invade Europe, I figured anything was on the table. I don't see the problem with a little alt-history audience pandering when releasing DLCs. It doesn't tarnish the vanilla released product IMO.

Also - I want a glorious Odin worshiping Europe putting the pope in his place.

 

[Trash]

Though in player hands in a self-made kingdom it'll probably be kinslaying all the way.

Sure. But that's always what it's about. Hating on the neighbours would make some fun addition tho.

And I can't think of anything but a Pagan dlc next. Unless they want to expand on the church and holy orders first. I personally got the feeling they save the Pagan one for last as they might expect it to be the biggest draw?

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

And I can't think of anything but a Pagan dlc next. Unless they want to expand on the church and holy orders first. I personally got the feeling they save the Pagan one for last as they might expect it to be the biggest draw?

Quite possible. And like discussed before, it'll probably be named Wrath of Odin or something. Naming the DLC in a way to reflect how history went better wouldn't work that well, seeing how "Perkele Perkele Perkele Perkele Perkele Perkele Perkele Perkele Perkele Perkele Perkele" doesn't really have marketing power.

 

[Snerf]

seeing how "Perkele Perkele Perkele Perkele Perkele Perkele Perkele Perkele Perkele Perkele Perkele" doesn't really have marketing power.

I'm sure there's at least 10 of us who would buy a game on that name alone.

 

[Konjad]

I dislike alternative history in history-based games though, therefore I consider Aztec DLC a terrible rape on a great game made by it's own father.

 

[mondblut]

Have they released a DLC or patch with an expanded pagan/norse focus?

Nope, think they are planning too though.

Norse focus for the DLC would be pandering to the audience though. By the time of the Grand Campaign the relevant pagans were the various Finno-Ugrics between Scandinavia and Novgorod and shamanists in the East, but most importantly Lithuanians.

If there is ever an excuse to pander to some audience, norse focus that is. Not to mention some 50-100 years timeline rollback is a given (I hope), which means twice the awesome for the price of one.

Lithuanians' only claim to fame was sitting on their collective arse doing exactly nothing beyond stubbornly refuting teutonic advances; the mongols are unplayable in half the scenarios and it took them no more than half a century to bend over and convert despite being a supreme ruling power, and those "hey, it's free land" guys in extreme northeast - who are they again?

Fuck these losers. OOOODHIIIINNNN!

 

[IDtenT]

The rival system is patrician only, but is mod-able into feudal bloodlines.

I want to see cardinals.

 

[Mortmal]

Things they have to improve in next dlcs are obviously theocracies and holy orders, pagans of course but also some balance issue. Id like them to revamp the mongol invasions, the 120k doomstack with no attrition army is not realistic , only way to counter it is to drag them on a coast and throw a doomstack of your own troops stored in boats to prevent attrition. That makes really no sense, russians , ukranians and co are doomed to die if they dont expand to a megablob, theres no option to vassalize and free yourself later , to pay tribute or bribe them to look elsewhere, they really need lot of work, same for aztecs.Also muslims are overpowered, try the fatimid , they roll over anything and its possible to conquer the whole map in a century.
Naval warfare: it needs to be revamped, right now its just useless micromanagement to load in and out troops, it adds nothing to the game, they may as well auto embark and charge you some fee, i know it was not the best era but still theres ship to ship combat since antiquity.

 

[Konjad]

same for aztecs.

lol. is there even anyone who play with this turd?

 

[Mortmal]

i do use it, its a funny little event they added. Is it so much worse and unrealistic than my fatimid shia caliphat conquering all of europe ? I think not .

 

[Average Manatee]

I dislike alternative history in history-based games though, therefore I consider Aztec DLC a terrible rape on a great game made by it's own father.

I've got bad news for you. Everything by Sept 16th 1066 and beyond is alternative history.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

I dislike alternative history in history-based games though, therefore I consider Aztec DLC a terrible rape on a great game made by it's own father.

I've got bad news for you. Everything by Sept 16th 1066 and beyond is alternative history.

And there's a lot of alternate history before that too.

 

[Malakal]

Paradox games only provide you with sandbox situation based on the historical date and up to this point they mainly tried to be plausible within the game mechanics. Aztecs kind of changed that stemming into alternate history and I have very mixed feelings about that. But as long as it doesnt influence the core game and is not mandatory... After all you had aliens in HoI.

same for aztecs.

lol. is there even anyone who play with this turd?

From gameplay point of view its an excellent addition because it provides a challenge for the west similar to the Mongol threat. Its just stupid as far as history is concerned.

 

[Malakal]

Things they have to improve in next dlcs are obviously theocracies and holy orders, pagans of course but also some balance issue. Id like them to revamp the mongol invasions, the 120k doomstack with no attrition army is not realistic , only way to counter it is to drag them on a coast and throw a doomstack of your own troops stored in boats to prevent attrition. That makes really no sense, russians , ukranians and co are doomed to die if they dont expand to a megablob, theres no option to vassalize and free yourself later , to pay tribute or bribe them to look elsewhere, they really need lot of work, same for aztecs.Also muslims are overpowered, try the fatimid , they roll over anything and its possible to conquer the whole map in a century.
Naval warfare: it needs to be revamped, right now its just useless micromanagement to load in and out troops, it adds nothing to the game, they may as well auto embark and charge you some fee, i know it was not the best era but still theres ship to ship combat since antiquity.

I would love to see expanded Religion dlc but mainly Papal Curia and feudal-church relations. Wars were fought over investiture and it was one endless conflict not represented in the game.

 

[Merkwürdigliebe]

Had this happen today. No idea how it happened or how it hasn't been holy warred to death yet. All the same pretty glorious.

 

[RedScum]

Oden!

 

[Wise Emperor]

Crusades will fix it

So, at Gamersgate there are available for preorder, launching on Monday...
The Republic for 9.99€
Songs of Prosper 1.99€
Faces of Lyric Suite 1.99€

...and of course 1.09 on same day.

 

[Konjad]

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?657220-1.09-Patch-Notes
From 1.09 patch notes:

- Gender corrections to certain characters
- Constantine de Hauteville is no longer female

 

[Borelli]

Doesn't EU3 merchant republic gameplay make the republic DLC redundant? OK you have your own personal character but it feels like it will be boring when you lose the republic election.

 

[IDtenT]

Doesn't EU3 merchant republic gameplay make the republic DLC redundant? OK you have your own personal character but it feels like it will be boring when you lose the republic election.

It will be a gem when it comes to multiplayer. Having each player take on a family.

 

[Cassidy]

Here I'm still hoping for a "800 AD: Vikings and Rise of Islam" Expansion Pack.

 

[Konjad]

I hope a lot of expansion DLCs are yet to come...

 

[IDtenT]

They'll release DLC until it turns a lesser profit than EU IV DLC. So basically 'till EU IV release.

 

[Konjad]

EU IV is going to be released this year

 

[Borelli]

I'm worried that with EU3 being pumped up with expansions that EU4 will lack many of it's features since they will want to save them for future expansions.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

I'm worried that with EU3 being pumped up with expansions that EU4 will lack many of it's features since they will want to save them for future expansions.

Even with *all* the expansions EU3 is still paper-thin compared to every other Paradox game on the Clausewitz engine. It would require genuine effort to not have more features in base EU4.

 

[Malakal]

Base CK wasn't really much if you discount the number of events. Really easy too.