Grand Strategy Crusader Kings III

[Delterius]

crusader kings are indeed famous for going anywhere but the east

Of course I use the term in the later sense. Saladin, not Fu Manchu, is what CK needs.

I don't think any portrayal of the holy land is complete without Persia and Central Asia. And the general area of the East only became more immersive with Jade Dragon. I also believe that the East is the central protagonist of any story set in the crusades. Until of course DLCs about northern crusades and such like come knocking.

I dislike India only in so far that it feels like it is set up to be it's own isolated domain. But I've had great fun uniting India as both a muslim nomad and a tamil nestorian. Wouldn't want that experience removed from any CK game I play.

In short, whenever people say 'It's called CRUSADER KINGS' I just think that, precisely, which is why I want the map to at least reach the steppe. It would be very mid otherwise.

 

[Barbarian]

crusader kings are indeed famous for going anywhere but the east

Of course I use the term in the later sense. Saladin, not Fu Manchu, is what CK needs.

Early CK2 where Genghis Khan and other horde conquerors were simply spawns close to easternmost Anatolia made much more sense than when they added later with part of China being on the map.

They got to a point where they legit ignored the game title. Even a fantasy aztec medieval invasion of europe was added.

 

[The Brazilian Slaughter]

Adding the East was just better, that old CK/CKII map straight out deleted like 1/3 of the Eranshah, and Persia is a massively important player in world history.

It also made Zoroastrian games WAY more interesting, because before you would just have muslims stomping around and having to fight Muslims. Now the East is a free-for-all between muslims, tibetans, hindus, Western Protectorate and nomad hordes.

The real issue is that India just feels weirdly detached from the rest of the game-area most of the time, except perhaps Tibet, Western Persia and Central Asia. Sometimes you get the odd Super-India blob coming out of the subcontinent, that's interesting. Even subsaharan Africa has more contact with the rest of the gameworld than India.

 

[Hace El Oso]

It makes no sense to attempt to depict nomadic/steppe societies in a game that is based entirely around arbitrary lines on a map, ownership of the towns, cities and abbeys within those spaces and the static populations that inhabit them. That requires a different game, and this one barely tries to do what it says on the tin already.

Mongols, Huns, Timurids, they’re meant to fulfil the gamified version of their real function for people from Krakow to Baghdad which is huge, demonic doomstacks of slavering foreigners threatening to engulf the whole world. Crusader Kings doesn’t even make a serious effort to simulate Holy Orders or proper medieval civilization like the Hanseatic League, why would I give a damn about Curry Kings and the Last of the Mohicans out in Tibet?

 

[deuxhero]

The Core Expansion will, among other features, introduce something that has been frequently requested by you in the community. Without saying too much, it will definitely make the game more challenging - and we’ve spent a lot of time making sure that it’s as dynamic and immersive as possible, while also presenting you with new ways to strategize. We’re also going to introduce a feature dripping with medieval flavor, a system that can be used by clever players to really make their mark on the world. All in all, this expansion will lean more towards the systemic side of the game.

As with the Core Expansion, the Major Expansion will focus on several things that have been requested by you in the community for ages - some of what we’re choosing to do has been asked for since the early days of Crusader Kings as a game series. One of the feature sets comes up very frequently when we see you discuss what you’d like to see in expansions - and another is brought up now-and-again as a powerful player fantasy. No matter what, we promise that this expansion will provide several new and fresh perspectives, and should please you regardless of which style of expansion you prefer, systemic or roleplay-focused. We can barely wait until you get your hands on this one, and personally, I can say that it’s one of the expansions I’ve been wanting to make since my early days working on CK2 - its time will soon come!

Any idea what this is? I've heard unlanded play suggested by commenters which would fit "powerful player fantasy.

 

[Delterius]

It makes no sense to attempt to depict nomadic/steppe societies

loved playing them tbh

 

[Hace El Oso]

loved playing them tbh

That’s nice, but it doesn’t make their mechanics any less awkward and absurd.

 

[Delterius]

loved playing them tbh

That’s nice, but it doesn’t make their mechanics any less awkward and absurd.

their mechanics were fun tbh and i don't think the region is complete without them

 

[The Brazilian Slaughter]

The Core Expansion will, among other features, introduce something that has been frequently requested by you in the community. Without saying too much, it will definitely make the game more challenging - and we’ve spent a lot of time making sure that it’s as dynamic and immersive as possible, while also presenting you with new ways to strategize. We’re also going to introduce a feature dripping with medieval flavor, a system that can be used by clever players to really make their mark on the world. All in all, this expansion will lean more towards the systemic side of the game.

As with the Core Expansion, the Major Expansion will focus on several things that have been requested by you in the community for ages - some of what we’re choosing to do has been asked for since the early days of Crusader Kings as a game series. One of the feature sets comes up very frequently when we see you discuss what you’d like to see in expansions - and another is brought up now-and-again as a powerful player fantasy. No matter what, we promise that this expansion will provide several new and fresh perspectives, and should please you regardless of which style of expansion you prefer, systemic or roleplay-focused. We can barely wait until you get your hands on this one, and personally, I can say that it’s one of the expansions I’ve been wanting to make since my early days working on CK2 - its time will soon come!

Any idea what this is? I've heard unlanded play suggested by commenters which would fit "powerful player fantasy.

Something is telling me unlanded play as well.

Gosh, properly supported unlanded play could be so good. Imagine starting as some rando and working your ass into power.

Unlanded would also be useful in a lot of cases. For example, the case of rulers who lose their lands. In history, it was very common for deposed rulers to head to friendly courts and try to regain their titles. Losing all your land shouldn't be game over, rather you end up living in a foreign court and needing to obtain supporters and allies to try and regain your title.

Unlanded could also allow the appearance of a lot of non-feudal govts - Carolinglian government, Chinese Government, etc.

 

[deuxhero]

Unlanded could also allow the appearance of a lot of non-feudal govts - Carolinglian government, Chinese Government, etc.

Isn't the official reason CK3 doesn't have playable republics that they don't work in a game where everything is based on the player being a hereditary land holders? I understand playable republics are also a most wanted feature, and a multi-generation plot to pull off a Caesar-esqe subversion of a republic into a defacto absolute monarchy would be totally on-brand if the mechanics allowed it to exist.

 

[Harthwain]

Isn't the official reason CK3 doesn't have playable republics that they don't work in a game where everything is based on the player being a hereditary land holders?

CK2 had playable republics in a DLC (called The Republic DLC).

 

[The Brazilian Slaughter]

Unlanded could also allow the appearance of a lot of non-feudal govts - Carolinglian government, Chinese Government, etc.

Isn't the official reason CK3 doesn't have playable republics that they don't work in a game where everything is based on the player being a hereditary land holders? I understand playable republics are also a most wanted feature, and a multi-generation plot to pull off a Caesar-esqe subversion of a republic into a defacto absolute monarchy would be totally on-brand if the mechanics allowed it to exist.

I dunno, CKII had Merchant Republics, but AFAIK it was a massive code wrangle to make it work, I hear the code for that is an absolute mess.
But yes, being able to live without being a hereditary land-holder would absolutely make it far more possible to simulate the old merchant republics.

Hell, if you have some Ancient Rome mod, you could finally do what Imperator should have done: Make it all about being able to play the powerful characters of the Roman Republic and all plan and conspire to seize absolute power.

 

[thesecret1]

I dunno, CKII had Merchant Republics, but AFAIK it was a massive code wrangle to make it work, I hear the code for that is an absolute mess.

They are chock-full of massive bugs to this day. Borderline unplayable, require you to actively work around them just to progress. Sad.

 

[deuxhero]

Unlanded confirmed. Oddly description implies it doesn't have republics among new government types (one would expect them to be mentioned if included).

 

[Average Manatee]

I dunno, CKII had Merchant Republics, but AFAIK it was a massive code wrangle to make it work, I hear the code for that is an absolute mess.

They are chock-full of massive bugs to this day. Borderline unplayable, require you to actively work around them just to progress. Sad.

Not really unplayable but there's a lot of things that can take you unaware. Usually issues with succession skipping people depending on whether they were landed feudally or as a republic.

Also IMO forced seniority succession is really shitty to play with eventually because you're constantly hopping between 65 year olds who rule for 1.5 years before croaking once your dynasty grows. If you intentionally keep your dynasty small and don't land them so they don't grow the tree then it plays a lot better.

 

[The Brazilian Slaughter]

Also IMO forced seniority succession is really shitty to play with eventually because you're constantly hopping between 65 year olds who rule for 1.5 years before croaking once your dynasty grows.

Late Soviet Russia Simulator.

But yeah, Republics in CKII are such a mess

 

[The Brazilian Slaughter]

Unlanded confirmed. Oddly description implies it doesn't have republics among new government types (one would expect them to be mentioned if included).

MASSIVE OVER-INCLINE

 

[Fedora Master]

Ah yes, exactly what the game needed, a mode of play that removes most of it from itself.

 

[thesecret1]

Can't wait for paradox writing skill to shine again. I can see it already: "You went to a banquet and made a really funny joke. The king thought it was hilarious! He then took it further and wrote a decree giving you one of his counties, as a joke. Then he got drunk and forgot about it the next day, but the decree remains. Congratulations, Count!"

 

[AdamReith]

Sounds like people would just be content with a random event generator ala reigns. When the model doesn't even track character location or travel times what's the difference?

 

[Minecrawler]

Battles will still take weeks and moving around the map will still take months/years.
And they have no intention of changing that.
They are already saying unlanded is more of a generational thing, i.e. you are basically a gypsy caravan. There's no room for 'playing as a merc captain,' or whatever, within the current engine.

 

[deuxhero]

There's no room for 'playing as a merc captain,' or whatever, within the current engine.

Set out across the world as a historical adventurer, one of your own making, or keep playing your beloved character after being unfortunately deposed from your lands! Travel to distant realms, take on contracts, gather friends, wealth, and fame - do mercenary work, or settle in new lands.

 

[Minecrawler]

There's no room for 'playing as a merc captain,' or whatever, within the current engine.

Set out across the world as a historical adventurer, one of your own making, or keep playing your beloved character after being unfortunately deposed from your lands! Travel to distant realms, take on contracts, gather friends, wealth, and fame - do mercenary work, or settle in new lands.

Yeah, that's what I was commenting on.
There's no way for it to feel natural with 1day/tick.

 

[thesecret1]

Sounds like people would just be content with a random event generator ala reigns. When the model doesn't even track character location or travel times what's the difference?

To be fair, the events have been the focal point of criticism about the game for a while now.

Not that I'm an expert or anything – I've barely touched it. Every time I play for a couple hours at most, then go back to CK2.

 

[Average Manatee]

Can't see how this will work well. Owning land is basically the challenge of CK3. The game is (annoyingly) set up so that vassals give you practically nothing in terms of military or economy but love to revolt. What's the difficulty for unlanded characters? I assume if you're some kind of merc band you can still raise retinue (the actual army units that matter), can still fight wars, capture characters and ransom them (the actual way to make money, not holding shit ass counties that give 1g/month), can still plot to seduce the queen and force the king to let you marry his daughter or w/e your path is to getting a realm, and so on.

Seems a lot like how they added the underground tzeenchian faction in Warhammer 3, which had a bunch of interesting ideas and mechanics behind it but the whole gameplay fell apart due to the fact that there's literally no challenge and you're basically playing a god mode unassailable faction.