Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Grand Strategy Crusader Kings III

Fedora Master

Arcane
Patron
Edgy
Joined
Jun 28, 2017
Messages
27,804
India just tanked the entire games performance when it released but who cares right?
 

AwesomeButton

Proud owner of BG 3: Day of Swen's Tentacle
Patron
Joined
Nov 23, 2014
Messages
16,153
Location
At large
PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Make the Codex Great Again! Grab the Codex by the pussy Insert Title Here RPG Wokedex Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath
IMO not only China, but also India and sub-Saharan Africa have no place in a game trying to model medieval European societies and politics. The broader the map, the shallower and more catch-all the mechanics will be.

For a good and plausible model, the best scope is a "theater" or region, that's when your "historical simulation" looks less like a meme factory and more like what you are advertising. The British Isles plus a bit of Scandinavia is one option. The Iberian Penunsula plus bits of north Africa is another, or the Balkans, or the Eastern European plains, or Germany - France - Italy.

I'm not against niggers, just let's keep their campaigns and maps segregated from other campaign settings which in any case didn't in any significant way interact with them historically.

If total war could release epxansion campaigns with their own campaign map, it shouldn't be any difficulty to do for paradox' modern games. They just don't want to, they would rather have all the kitchen sinks thrown in at the same time.
 

Fedora Master

Arcane
Patron
Edgy
Joined
Jun 28, 2017
Messages
27,804
The influence of sub-saharan Africa on medieval Europe was minimal and could easily be handled via event chains. Same with India.
 

Preben

Arcane
Patron
Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Jan 18, 2017
Messages
3,821
Location
Failsaw, Failand
The influence of sub-saharan Africa on medieval Europe was minimal and could easily be handled via event chains. Same with India.

Sub-Saharan Africa is a natural consequence of having North Africans playable. Otherwise they would sit with their backs against Terra Incognita, perhaps with some annoying events about raids from the desert.
 

Fedora Master

Arcane
Patron
Edgy
Joined
Jun 28, 2017
Messages
27,804
The influence of sub-saharan Africa on medieval Europe was minimal and could easily be handled via event chains. Same with India.

Sub-Saharan Africa is a natural consequence of having North Africans playable. Otherwise they would sit with their backs against Terra Incognita, perhaps with some annoying events about raids from the desert.

How terrible.
 

Hace El Oso

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
3,114
Location
Bogotá
That's the thing, it's kept the name but Crusader Kings, for better or for worse, isn't meant to be focused exclusively on Christendom anymore.

Christians, Muslims and pagans of Europe, Asia Minor and the near east was a good balance in the same way I would not expect a game about Siam, Burma, Indochina and the Chinese frontier to include Japan or Yemen. There is no ground to argue for the inclusion of such wildly unconnected places as China in CK if you want complex, distinct mechanics rather than the same cookie cutter ‘economic’ approach for the whole planet.
 

Norfleet

Moderator
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
12,250
The problem is scope creep. You start out with western Europe and Christendom. But without their neighbors, you don't have any Crusading. So you gotta add them to the game. So now they exist in the game. People want to play them. But THEY have neighbors, so now you gotta throw THOSE in....

And so it pretty much expands outwards from there until you end up with more or less the entire Old World, since at least in the timeframe given, they didn't interact at all with the New World.
 

AwesomeButton

Proud owner of BG 3: Day of Swen's Tentacle
Patron
Joined
Nov 23, 2014
Messages
16,153
Location
At large
PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Make the Codex Great Again! Grab the Codex by the pussy Insert Title Here RPG Wokedex Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath
Crusader Kings 3 is about as fun as CK2 was for me. Unfortunately it's still just as easy to break within two or maximum three rulers' lifespans, if you play with at least some planning. I think the only way not to break the balance of power in your region is to put yourself inside the limitations of strict roleplaying - but then you are left to hope the AI doesn't break the balance in its turn.

Here is the result of 20 years of blobbing as Rurik, who doesn't have much mileage left in him, and whose domains will split mostly between his grandson and third (eldest surviving) son. The only reason to keep playing, and that's just after 20 years of gameplay, is that I'll be inheriting with an 11-year old who will lose 10 of his grandfather's current titles. His dad, the historical knyaz Oleg, was KIA.

jARgvPH.jpg
 

vonAchdorf

Arcane
Joined
Sep 20, 2014
Messages
13,465
Crusader Kings 3 is about as fun as CK2 was for me. Unfortunately it's still just as easy to break within two or maximum three rulers' lifespans, if you play with at least some planning. I think the only way not to break the balance of power in your region is to put yourself inside the limitations of strict roleplaying - but then you are left to hope the AI doesn't break the balance in its turn.

CK2 was already about the larping / house rules, and so is CK3.

Here is the result of 20 years of blobbing as Rurik, who doesn't have much mileage left in him, and whose domains will split mostly between his grandson and third (eldest surviving) son. The only reason to keep playing, and that's just after 20 years of gameplay, is that I'll be inheriting with an 11-year old who will lose 10 of his grandfather's current titles. His dad, the historical knyaz Oleg, was KIA.

I think CK3 made it more difficult to move on from gavelkind / partition for feudal cultures - in CK2 you immediately had feudal elective which was serviceable until primogeniture.
 

AwesomeButton

Proud owner of BG 3: Day of Swen's Tentacle
Patron
Joined
Nov 23, 2014
Messages
16,153
Location
At large
PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Make the Codex Great Again! Grab the Codex by the pussy Insert Title Here RPG Wokedex Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath
A major part of the problem with Tribal governments is that they have an unexpectedly easy access to mercenaries. That's because Tribal governments don't have to pay upkeep in money, instead they pay in Prestige. This leads to a situation where "with one hand" you can finance your men-at-arms with Prestige, and "with the other hand" you can finance your mercenaries with gold. Cheap gold can be used to get a quick trump card in wars where you are a couple of thousand soldiers short of pairity with the enemy alliance or, if you already have pairity, to get a crushing advantage. Thus by winning the wars you buy Prestige with gold, and then it becomes self-reinforcing...

Feudal governments on the other hand, need to pay upkeep of their men-at-arms and the contracts of their mercs in the same currency. Go figure.

With about 200 gold being able to buy you around 1500 quality mercs for 3 years (which amounts to about 0.3 gold per month, wtf do they eat?) and the principle is pay and forget instead of monthly upkeep, a Tribal government can raise big numbers very easily. Due to the combat "balance" numbers are still very much the deciding factor in combat. Nerfs from terrain and counters based on unit types are not doing enough (although they are a good idea), and men-at-arms are not wiping the floor with levies enough, at least not in the early game. And if this ~200 gold was easy to accumulate if you have enough direct holdings, even in the Development-poor area of north-east Europe where I was playing, it will only be easier in areas with better development.

CK2 was already about the larping / house rules, and so is CK3.
Yeah, but first, if a game is so much lacking in challenge without house rules, this is evidence the balance is broken. Which, in connection to what I was saying previously, is not helped by the super-large world map.
And second, if this problem persists in the next game of the series, that's a major design flaw not being addressed by the game devs.

I anticipate the argument "well, you picked one of the strongest/easiest factions to play as, so what did you expect", but that's not an excuse either. If one of the most played and historically interesting factions is also one of the most broken ones, then where does the problem lie again?

I think CK3 made it more difficult to move on from gavelkind / partition for feudal cultures - in CK2 you immediately had feudal elective which was serviceable until primogeniture.
That's true, though there are still ways to circumvent the feudal breakdowns. One of the methods shown by youtubers I think is even a bug - it involves changing your realm capital to a county while this county is not part of an existing duchy title - it's still a de jure duchy capital, otherwise you wouldn't be allowed to set the realm capital there, but the key is that the duchy title has not yet been created. Then all the counties in that uncreated duchy will be sent to your Player Heir, in addition to those that were coming to him from the previous realm capital.

What I was thinking of doing is to install courtiers with hooks as vassals of my son who will swipe my titles, and then use them as moles against him, but I think the weak hooks are not inherited. Bummer.
 
Last edited:

AwesomeButton

Proud owner of BG 3: Day of Swen's Tentacle
Patron
Joined
Nov 23, 2014
Messages
16,153
Location
At large
PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Make the Codex Great Again! Grab the Codex by the pussy Insert Title Here RPG Wokedex Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath
It's quite funny reading in the Dev Diaries design decisions being defended with what is more historically appropriate, and then having a unique in-game decision which slams 20+ development (or as much as needed) to Kiev in order to bring it up to 25 development, on par with Constantinople and the other most developed provinces on the map.

Also, Oleg being a son of Rurik whereas he was supposedly a brother-in-law. Oh well, the historical narrative of that region in that period is more in the fantasy genre anyway...

BTW, is there no Casus Belli that requires just winning battles to win the war, as in EUIV? Punitive operations not aimed at grabbing land were definetly a known and employed strategy. For example when you wanted to secure your flank before attacking someone else.
 

oscar

Arcane
Joined
Aug 30, 2008
Messages
8,036
Location
NZ
I tried it about half a year back, so a lot of things could have changed in the meantime, but at that time, it was a pretty decent setting with some nifty mechanics, utterly brought down by vanilla mechanics being retarded. For example, there's this big empire and there's an invading force, right? Well, said invading force gets CBs on kingdoms (as in, all holdings, down to every last baron, get seized by invader), is free to spam them as much as it wants, and gets enough event troops to roll over everything. That alone wouldn't be THAT big a problem... except they can also culture convert at the speed of light. A decade after the conquest, it's all culture converted already.

Maybe they fixed shit since then, though.

I think that's WAI. The Aversarians are in a demographic freefall from losing so much manpower from the last civil war, Godherja and then the defeat at Elysium Pass (plus massive slave uprisings and infighting amongst the Successor states). Canonically the author has stated it's a total Imperrech victory with Cenware rapidly sweeping aside what remains of the decadent and hated Aagiokratia (though the Imperrech itself doesn't outlive Cenware). The migrating tribes probably settle down and establish themselves as a warrior nobility post-Rome Western Europe style. Aversarians in regions like Ilyrossi probably get genocided/enslaved themselves by the natives as revenge for a millennia of slavery and brutality.
 

Theodora

Arcane
Patron
Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Feb 19, 2020
Messages
4,620
Location
anima Bȳzantiī
Christians, Muslims and pagans of Europe, Asia Minor and the near east was a good balance in the same way I would not expect a game about Siam, Burma, Indochina and the Chinese frontier to include Japan or Yemen. There is no ground to argue for the inclusion of such wildly unconnected places as China in CK if you want complex, distinct mechanics rather than the same cookie cutter ‘economic’ approach for the whole planet.

I won't argue at all that if they're intent on including wider swathes of the planet, then they owe it to players to make more distinct systems for different regions and cultures, or more specifically, a greater granularity on systems of governance.

It's fairly plausible that by the time CK3 has been "fully DLC'd" that there will be a lot more of that. Whether they owe it to us on release is a different argument, but going off CK2 on release versus CK2 post-'Iron Century', it's fair to say regional iteration was a big part of their cumulative DLC model.
 

Larianshill

Arbiter
Joined
Feb 16, 2021
Messages
1,719
01_culture_window.jpg


04_ethos_inventive.jpg


Waiting patiently for the Italian reveal. Hopefully this feature will finally allow Paradox to show them for the lovecraftian horrors they are.
 

deama

Prophet
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
4,352
Location
UK
So how does the game compare now to crusader kings 2? I originally wanted to play it on release, but remembered that crusader kings 2 was kinda barebones on release and I think this one was too I heard? Anyway, is it any good now? Worth playing?
 

vonAchdorf

Arcane
Joined
Sep 20, 2014
Messages
13,465
Depends on your play style. Even with the hooks system, the gameplay outside of wars and map painting is still lacking. The first expansion will hopefully fix that.
 
Joined
Jan 7, 2012
Messages
14,149
The core CK2 gameplay is there. I wouldn't really called it dumbed down since most of the core concepts of CK2 are there in CK3, but it's absolutely a lot easier overall. Stuff like CBs are much easier to get, wars tend to be easy to fight, military is much easier and cheaper to get massive advantages over AIs, genetic inheritance has most of the randomness taken out with basically guaranteed genetic trait inheritance if both parents share a type of trait. There's a lot less content than CK2 with all DLC but much more than release CK2.

The CK3 system of differentiating religions and cultures is the most interesting part IMO. It was always a thing in CK2 (x culture can raid, y religion gets different CBs), but CK3 uses it much more widely. It's still fairly barebones and a lot of it is just memes though (reform Christianity to be an incestuous feminist religion lololol upvote me reddit).
 

Larianshill

Arbiter
Joined
Feb 16, 2021
Messages
1,719
Finally managed to get King of All the Isles achievement, after around five attempts. When I finally succeeded, it was so easy, I'm not sure why it took me this long. There's no force capable of stopping a tribal viking, who invested heavily into Chivalry tree. Succession troubles are easily avoided just by disinheriting everyone but your favourite kid, and not letting your heir fight, scandinavian elective isn't even necessary. It's more of a hindrance, even. Things went so much more smoothly once I stopped playing around with democracy.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom