Fedora Master
STOP POSTING
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2017
- Messages
- 31,007
All PDX games after CK2 are meme games that only exist so people can make the first Nubian Empress of the Satanic Roman Empire.
If you're a mercenary, it's pretty good, but gets boring after a while. If you're not a mercenary, it gets boring fast.So tl;dr, is the adventurer thing actually good?
Yes.It was then that a massive fuck-off army of 8k screaming moors showed up to engage Gonçalo's forces of 1.8k MaA during a siege. Gonçalo army of pikemen, heavy cavalry and armored footmen proceeded to engage in what was one of the biggest curb-stomps on the Crusader... or should have been. Rather, Gonçalo and his "Hands of God" proceeded to narrowly beat the vastly larger heathen force, while the rest of Christendom just stood and watched. A second subsequent attack finally had the rest of the Crusade help, and Gonçalo managed to win the Crusade by actually sieging down land.
Yeah, combat changes made that possible. From the Roads to Power release patchnotes:
Advantage now affects battles by a factor of 10 (up from 2), this makes having the right commanders/fighting in the right terrain much more important, allowing smaller armies to beat larger ones more consistently.
So now, for example, an advange of 30 in combat (defending across a strait) means 300% more damage alone, without accounting commanders and other sources of advantage. Wining 1:10 may now be feasible.
Ehh, yuck. I don't like when combat is dominated by a small simplistic "how gud at fighting" stat. I much preferred when you had a commander with like heavy infantry and mountain traits and they dominated when you combine those circumstanceso now, for example, an advange of 30 in combat (defending across a strait) means 300% more damage alone, without accounting commanders and other sources of advantage. Wining 1:10 may now be feasible.
Ehh, yuck. I don't like when combat is dominated by a small simplistic "how gud at fighting" stat. I much preferred when you had a commander with like heavy infantry and mountain traits and they dominated when you combine those circumstanceso now, for example, an advange of 30 in combat (defending across a strait) means 300% more damage alone, without accounting commanders and other sources of advantage. Wining 1:10 may now be feasible.
You get +10 advantage just form picking chivalry focus and getting 3 perks in (And its on the line that gives you knights which was already arguably one of the strongest options for small and/or earlygame realms). +100% bonus damage in combat just from that is ridiculously stupid. We're back to CK2 where martial rulers are the only way to play.Not really. Terrain, perks, quality (men-at-arms counters), commander traits, and other situational modifiers are hugely important still. Without those you only really get a 30 advantage if you have an almost max quality commander against a scrub.
From my games: Yep, it's pretty good. It's definitively radically different from starting as a count or the like.So tl;dr, is the adventurer thing actually good? I remember that sort of thing was actually possible back in CK2, you could start as a single county holder in a large empire, work your way up the ranks, become a spymaster or something, and eventually betray your liege and become the sovereign yourself.
What did they add in CK3? Also, how does it interplay with the dynastic mechanics? AKA, can you first work on building your dynasty, and then elevate your entire your family into power? It would be cool, as that's how it worked for the Borgias or the Julio-Claudians.