Grand Strategy Crusader Kings III

[Theodora]

Tbh Zariusz if you posted this on their forums there's a good chance it gets the dev's attention. I dunno what the independencel/vassalhood situation is in that map, but most areas get at least a once-over eventually (if not several); and you can hope to influence those changes, from what I've seen in the past (especially eu4 map updates).

 

[Zariusz]

Tbh Zariusz if you posted this on their forums there's a good chance it gets the dev's attention. I dunno what the independencel/vassalhood situation is in that map, but most areas get at least a once-over eventually (if not several); and you can hope to influence those changes, from what I've seen in the past (especially eu4 map updates).

Actuall caucasians did this already
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/i-hope-northern-caucasus-got-rework-in-ck3.1414304/

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...d-to-properly-map-out-north-caucasus.1413495/

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/caucasus.1270327/

 

[Harthwain]

The death rate for champions seems to be much higher than for commanders though.

That depends on Toughness of each knight. At low they drop like flies, while at high they contribute a lot (both in terms of increasing the quality of troops and in actual combat) and don't die/get wounded as often.

It may be a good idea to force low-Thoughness vassals who hate you into being knights and hope they die in battle at some point (or get so severely wounded they die soon after).

 

[Average Manatee]

It also depends on how much toughness the rest of the army has to soak damage. Knights drop like flies if a battle is very close and both sides get ground down to nothing.

 

[mondblut]

Tbh Zariusz if you posted this on their forums there's a good chance it gets the dev's attention.

Better yet, report it to Kadyrov. Paradox must still be shaking since the last time

 

[Smoker]

Really need some minor / honorary titles for prestige dumping

 

[Zero Credibility]

Some of the AI logic in this game really escapes me. I try to revoke a county from an asshole vassal that is trying his best to fuck up my internal borders, after asking him nicely to stop being a dick did not help. He says no and rebels. And for some reason my underage nephew, whom I gave every piece of land he has after his father managed to lose it all, with +100 opinion to me and while being tutored by me decides it would be a good idea to join this doomed little rebellion. I mean, why?! And why can't I just throw his stupid ass in jail since he is still my ward in my castle through the whole damn war?

 

[Catacombs]

He says no and rebels.

You forgot to mention the rebellion somehow scrounges up enough men to be 3x the size as your available levies.

 

[Harthwain]

You forgot to mention the rebellion somehow scrounges up enough men to be 3x the size as your available levies.

That's because lords have more levies than they let you use.

This is why having good relations with your realm priest is important (the happier he is, the more levies he will give you). I was stunned when I realized he was single-handedly responsible for ~50% of my monthly income. You can also increase the number of levies with some perks in certain lifestyles. And it's always good to have well developed "family domain" so to speak.

 

[Catacombs]

This is why having good relations with your realm priest is important

Of course. I usually play Catholics, and it's a pain, in the early game, not to just switch priests without constantly murdering them.

 

[Average Manatee]

Your realm priest gives you all he can at >0 opinion. The catch is that what theocratic vassals gives depends on your devotion level, at max devotion level you get 55% income and 50% levies, vs. 25% levies and 10% income of nobles. Which is pretty broken.

 

[Average Manatee]

Does being gay actually do anything? It seems to be completely meaningless, no fertility penalty or anything.

 

[Delterius]

Of course, it was obvious that someone will make this mod
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2219905226&searchtext=

Something for you fantadomat

Honestly that's the map the game should have had from the beginning.

How dare someone making mod refocusing the game about Crusader Kings onto... Crusader Kings in current year, somebody call UN, EU and ADL.
Now with Kangz and street shitters out and paper map the game will run faster too its Anuda Shoah!

That map is extreme , no CK world is complete without my Tamil Prester Johns of Nestorian Christianity.

 

[mondblut]

Does being gay actually do anything?

Woke points.

 

[Tigranes]

Does being gay actually do anything? It seems to be completely meaningless, no fertility penalty or anything.

AFAIK just means you can seduce same-sex characters, and if you happen to get caught, then you're known for sodomy on top of adultery for extra bad vibes. So that's another religious crime to be excomm'd / imprisoned / etc., though obviously it's not that strict because CK2/3's always been about demon possessed raving lunatic nobles.

If we presume that you're a closet gay King who's married and shit but actually likes man, then it wouldn't necessarily have tanked your fertility to zero. You'd do what's needed and if you can go out in secret and try to have a fling.

Generally, any kind of flings in CK3 seems extra pointless to me, unless part of a wider arc where you're seducing a rival / someone you want to kill / whatever.

 

[InD_ImaginE]

Some of the AI logic in this game really escapes me. I try to revoke a county from an asshole vassal that is trying his best to fuck up my internal borders, after asking him nicely to stop being a dick did not help. He says no and rebels. And for some reason my underage nephew, whom I gave every piece of land he has after his father managed to lose it all, with +100 opinion to me and while being tutored by me decides it would be a good idea to join this doomed little rebellion. I mean, why?! And why can't I just throw his stupid ass in jail since he is still my ward in my castle through the whole damn war?

Probably not the first time in real history that someone that "close" would be betraying the King/Emperor or whatever

 

[Zero Credibility]

This just feels random to me. I tried experimenting a bit, and there is generally little rhyme or reason for why a vassal joins or does not join a rebellion. Some join even though they love me. Some don't join even though they don't like me. My own sons in laws, that do like me, and who are allied to me, join the rebellion against me at a drop of a hat, even though the ink on their land grants isn't even dry. What's the point of opinions or alliances if this keeps happening?

 

[Average Manatee]

If we presume that you're a closet gay King who's married and shit but actually likes man, then it wouldn't necessarily have tanked your fertility to zero. You'd do what's needed and if you can go out in secret and try to have a fling.

In CK2 it was a pretty serious fertility nerf. Hence "gay son simulator". It makes sense to have at least some penalty. Lustful is +25% fertility, chaste is -25%, yet being gay or asexual is no modifier. Apparently lustful gays are better at making kids than normal straight people?

This just feels random to me. I tried experimenting a bit, and there is generally little rhyme or reason for why a vassal joins or does not join a rebellion. Some join even though they love me. Some don't join even though they don't like me. My own sons in laws, that do like me, and who are allied to me, join the rebellion against me at a drop of a hat, even though the ink on their land grants isn't even dry. What's the point of opinions or alliances if this keeps happening?

Are they joining factions or rebellions when you try to imprison/revoke something? In the latter case maybe they like the person you are going after a lot?

 

[Tigranes]

Sure, maybe it should be -10 or whatever? Its a pretty minor balance issue so w/e - the larger question is how CK2/3 represents Catholic values in a way that a Good person is a likeable chum, and a Bad person is a scheming fellow.

Add to that how certain traits are almost always overwhelmingly positive (e.g. Brave), and the trait economy becomes quite one-dimensional unless you create seriously different religions. (and yes, being gay, like being a witch, hardly seems to do much.)

Wouldnt mind seeing, say, Brave give much higher risk of combat death, and education choices force you to choose Craven to avoid Brave, or even battlefield trauma turns Brave people Craven, etc.

As it is, you either go Ambitious Brave etc supermen, fatass coward dipshits for the lulz, and so on.

 

[mondblut]

Apparently lustful gays are better at making kids than normal straight people?

They do a gay version of coitus interruptus. Keep their wives around to ejaculate in them when they are about to finish.

 

[Average Manatee]

I think Brave does increase chance of combat deaths. At least it did in CK2 and this was entirely unlabled. The thing is you just... don't have your king fight in combat, because even if craven has 1/10th the chance of dying as Brave, why would you risk it? And every commander becoming Craven after fighting a few battles in CK2 was just annoying bullshit honestly.

 

[IDtenT]

I've always found Brave a benefit.

 

[Tigranes]

In every iteration, as far as I can recall, Brave has been overwhelmingly positive. And obviously same goes for Ambitious, etc. There's an argument to be made as to whether all traits should have interesting pros and cons such that you are choosing between different types of characters, or whether it's more about having a lot of traits that might be great to terrible but you can't control which you pick up so you have to roll with the punches. CK2/3 does a bit of both, of course, but it tends to be very easy to control your child's education and genetic traits - even without spending a lot of lifestyle points on it. So if we're going to give players so much easy control, then I would suggest that all/most traits should come multiple-edged.

I think Brave does increase chance of combat deaths. At least it did in CK2 and this was entirely unlabled. The thing is you just... don't have your king fight in combat, because even if craven has 1/10th the chance of dying as Brave, why would you risk it? And every commander becoming Craven after fighting a few battles in CK2 was just annoying bullshit honestly.

Well, that's why I think it shouldn't be such a given that your King living until 90 every time is a great thing, and Brave is always better than Craven, and so forth. IMO it's really jarring and boring to have your realm's history reading "King X the Brave, ruled from age 16 to 80, kept his 25 Martial all the way through, succeeded by King Y the Ambitious, ruled from 20 to 70..." which is what happens easily even if you aren't trying to munchkin.

If, for example, a Brave king acquired massive stress from not being out on the field, and you had to choose to put him at some personal risk of injury / craven / etc, and stress actually mattered more, then we'd also have a game where a lot of your characters do pick up multiple stress traits if they've been around for decades and it really does crimp your style. As opposed to now, when I get a Mental Break and I'm just like whatever, half the time it just gives me more bonuses.

All of these mechanics already exist in CK3 and did in CK2 - they just stay at a very mild level so you can lean into that and larp your flawed King, but the base mechanics essentially sit there and say "do whatever you want Oblivion style and be great at everything and live forever!"

 

[Harthwain]

Your realm priest gives you all he can at >0 opinion.

Not to my knowledge:

When a ruler's religion has the Theocratic Doctrine, temples are leased to a realm priest. The realm priest provides their liege with taxes and levies based on their opinion. The minimum is at 0 opinion, where no taxes or levies are provided, and the maximum is at 50 opinion, where 50% of the taxes and 100% of the levies are provided.

 

[Average Manatee]

That's incorrect, check the nested tooltips for your vassal taxation and you'll see it broken down. Only Clans work on opinion (aside from getting no theocratic contribution at <0). Feudal/republics always have the same base value, theocratic is based on devotion rank, tribe is based on prestige rank, clan is based on opinion. Feudal/republic ends up massively weaker than the other 3 when they are at high levels. Which is why you should build church holdings in your demesne rather than cities or castles, you get way, way more out of them.

EDIT: actually if you go to the theocracy tab on the realm screen it just flat out states as much.