>CK3's new announced expansion was so bad even forumdrones and redditors are denouncing it
>CK3's new announced expansion was so bad even forumdrones and redditors are denouncing it
>CK3's new announced expansion was so bad even forumdrones and redditors are denouncing it
Give a q uick rundown
what?
I mean, this is cool I guess, but this screams free update or part of an expansion rather than, well, a 20$/€ purchase.
We're all waiting for Republics and Horde, China, Byzantium and Islam. Those are the missing features.
CK3 will forever be barebones. They've shown their inability with the forgettable Throne Room expansion which added jack shit and is somehow less useful than a bunch of .jgps in a small screen next to your character.
No doubt they will mess these tournaments up as well. If they had added more buildings and city developments and playable duchies and performance improvements to allow more characters in map, a more expensive court and some additions to the Throne Room DLC I might have okay'd this, but as is this will be barebones, this will be overpriced. I spent 10$ on vidya last month and only so that I could have the games in my library. I had infinitely more fun playing niche indie strategy games and all the classic crpgs from Icewind Dale over Baldurs Gate and Tyranny to Pillars of Eternity than I did mindlessly seeing the ever same mess happening in GSGs.
I only return for mod updates, and only for a very select few, and that's it.
I hope Grey Eminence will be good because otherwise GSGs have no more appeal to me in their current format. All of them feel the same and I know I'm not the only one loosing interest judging by the modding community's general apathy.
playable baronies,
barony details etc., gave any kind of scale to your realm beyond counties with the most shallow modifiers depicted as buildings.
if you want to go the rp route and ditch the gsg then at least make a proper fricking rpsg
>Republics and Horde, China, Byzantium and Islam.
I don't think that China is that important, actually.
Paradox's next expansion should be something covering governments and religion (maybe they should be tied together i.e clan vs feudal?), maybe more economics. That covers Republics, Hordes, Byzantium, and Islam, all in one.
>strategy mechanic dlc
Lol, will never ever happen. You get event packs and event launcher roleplay activities only.
>Forever, and ever, and ever, and ever, and ever, and ever, and ever, and ever, and ever, and ever, and ever, and ever, and ever, and ever, and ever, and ever, and e-
>We're all waiting for Republics and Horde, China, Byzantium and Islam. Those are the missing features
not even, we still don't have unique mechanics for Christianity itself
>PUs
>League wars
>Council of Trent
>Centers of Reformation
>Holy Orders
>we still don't have unique mechanics for Christianity itself
CK3 you moron.
I bet you feel really embarrassed right now
Not embarrassed. It's a minor blunder.
said you after fricking your cousin
when you meant to frick your sister
>EU4 meme mechanic that has to be done via events to make some nations exist, other nations that exist historically because of it don't even get it in their mission tree
>EU4 meme WWI
>EU4 meme vote that just fricks with relations
>EU4 meme that hasn't ever worked right
>CKII meme that is neither unique to Christians nor any different to mercenaries
>We're all waiting for Republics and Horde, China, Byzantium and Islam.
I's like all of these (other than CHina because it's not needed), but what I want first and foremost is a fricking Christianity DLC. Their modular religion garbage has completely failed to even live up to CK2s low standards of fleshing out religion. Even Orthodoxy was better in CK2 and Catholicism was leagues more fleshed out than the hollow shell we get in CK3.
>The cutscene for the DLC literally is similar to the Knight of Flowers and The Mountain from ASOIAF.
I hate Geroge so much for making people believe that everyone was cynical during the Medieval period and that no one actually believed in religion. I understand that he realized that he fricked up massively and tried to change things by adding the Faith Militant, but that was too little too late and now we have morons thinking shit like the Red Wedding was normal because it was based on a historical event.
I don’t think it would have made a difference. GRRM made an explicitly pacifist piece. If anything it’s better that Westeros is ruled by utter cynicism, because if it wasn’t people would be using it as an example of “religion causes all the ills of the world” or whatever.
Its a fantasy world that takes inspiration from certain historical events. George can do what he wants within the confines of his universe. But you can't give the CK3 development team a pass since their game is not supposed to be entirely fantasy. Its supposed to be trying to mimic real history somewhat. And... they just stealing ideas from a fantasy series... for their dlcs. if CK wanted to be a GoT game, they shoulda named it that tbh and get a license. Because that's how the game plays.
Yeah I agree, I’m only defending GRRM here. He may have started a resurgence in low fantasy but I don’t think that was his intention.
As long as the public is fed with positivist humanistic garbage that presupposes the past as inferior and history as ever increasing progress and betterment this won't ever change. They are trained to understand the Middle Ages not thought the actual evidence or througth first-hand accounts, but throught fiction writen by people whose grasp on the period is as flimsy as theirs. There is a worldview-level disconnection here that can't be solved unless people actually sits down and reads history, not bad-quality fiction.
>is a fricking Christianity DLC
You could probably combine it with the government DLC, i.e. the government DLC representing religious governments/organizations/structure as well.
>You could probably combine it with the government DLC
You're thinking like it's 2010. We don't get expansion packs that come with a set of features that all add the the whole game anymore, we get dozens of disconnected features sold separately instead.
is this a bad thing? it's better to focus on one set of features at a time rather than have development disorganized
>is this a bad thing?
Yes
>it's better to focus on one set of features at a time rather than have development disorganized
Did you never play a paradox game pre ck2?
Paradox literally did the reverse of adding flavour for free, while keeping mechanics behind DLC paywall. And it's blasting your moronic asses for some reason.
DLC is just a way to continue funding development of a paradox game. That's how it always was.
It's funny how zoomzooms got brainwashed into accepting games as a service. Absolute waste of a generation.
dlc is how paradox games are able to be supported for years. Is paradox dlc often overpriced? Yes. Do their games feel barebones at launch so they can fix them with dlc? Yes. Does ck3 suck? Yes. But acting like pre ck2 dlc was any better when their expansions were required to have the game be playable is revisionism.
I will admit that PDX has been really generous with mechanical updates being free. I wish the games I’m following had an update schedule half as ambitious as Stellaris. The problem lies in how those features are added. CK2 was feature complete at launch and then slowly the game’s systems were added onto. Hoi4 and Stellaris feel less feature-complete and more like you have to buy whole gameplay mechanics to complete it.
I think people wanted CK3 to be like CK2 but it’s been like getting punched twice, first CK3 didn’t feel feature complete compared to CK2, but 2 years in they still haven’t added the features people want.
>CK2 was feature complete at launch
moronic historical revisionism.
>CK2 was feature complete at launch
Not even remotely true. Loads of the stuff cut from CK1 didn't make it back into the game until Holy Fury.
NEETs fundamentally don't understand how the world works
I have no idea what your logic is. If the team wants to improve war/economy/trade/government etc they should focus on each individually to make sure quality is as good as possible. Your idea is for them to add in a bunch of unrelated mechanics and changes with every expansion and spread their resources thin, which is moronic.
btw old paradox wasn't known for good post-release support
>add in a bunch of unrelated mechanics
You're literally describing their current development model. All the DLC mechanics are some dumb meme windows that exists in a world disconnected from every other mechanic, and they can't have any coherence behind them because it's impossible to do that while accounting for every random hodgepodge of mechanics someone might have purchased.
It's horrible
They add singular features to an area of the game that doesn't mesh with everything else. This is further compounded by them splitting it into free and payed features with the former having to work without the latter.
As a result you end up with a patchwork of mechanics and features that not only badly interface with each other but often enough break the older ones.
That has been an issue since CK2 with the game not being designed for its final features and thus the code not being designed for it.
If you have a problem with GRRM's impression of Middle Ages don't be mad at him, be mad at Maurice Druon since that's who he was aping
GRRM did defended some events in GOT with "muh history was like that" several times, despite Westeros falling very short in what replicating feudal structures, government and dynamics.
I agree that is not a cynical or nihilistic at all, but his own understanding of the period (at least at the time when the novels were new) was very lacking yet he defended it with "realism".
It isn't GRRMs fault that normies are moronic.
Most people know absolutely nothing about history.
>I hate Geroge so much for making people believe that everyone was cynical during the Medieval period and that no one actually believed in religion.
Ned and Robb Stark
Catelyn as well
John Snow
Davos Motherfricking Seaworth
Robert and Stannis Baratheon
Selyse Florent
Aeron Greyjoy
Greatjon Umber
Lancel and Kevan Lannister
Brienne of Tarth
Thoros of Myr
Wyman Manderly
Doran Martell
Every single Dothraki we ever see
The entire city of Volantis
I didn't even like the series much, but it's trivial to remember a whole host of sufficiently pious characters, including POVs.
>everyone was cynical
It's not people being cynical in ASoIaF, but politics and power struggle.
>now we have morons thinking shit like the Red Wedding was normal because it was based on a historical event
Red Wedding is extremely not normal even in the story.
Seriosuly my dude I'm kinda convinced that you didn't actually read the books.
For most of those characters religion is a non-factor. They might have a stated religion but it's pretty much irrelevant to how they act. And Stannis is a fricking awful example. he treats religion is completely instrumental manner to rally support and because he goes along with whatever keeps his fire wizard around, but at no point does he seem to honestly worship rhllor.
Stannis is an atheist who will use religion like a tool. He stopped believing when his parents died on a ship. I wouldn't be surprised if real kings did the same.
We have mentions of disbelief and borderline atheism in some medieval accounts, but for the most part, no: The safe assumption will always be that people believed their own religion, and this includes your average king.
The percieved brutality of some time periods doesn't mean noblemen were necessarily cynical, in the same way that the brutality in Latam doesn't mean your average street thief and gangster doesn't believes in God and the saints. They were rather hypocritical, unable to fulfill their moral obligations and, at the end, flawed human beings.
>write down or talk about apostate views
>get burnt, excommunicated or generally ostracized
That's probably why. I agree most people were religious because it was the overarching social coherence. It's hard to estimate how many were not truly religious.
The only case of massive religious brutality is found not against cynical rulers but against militant heretics like the Cathars. No one was running around during the Middle Ages burning down atheists or capturing noblemen under the suspicion of being apostates: the Inquisition is a pretty late invention and operated separately in each country, and historically it was much more concerned with heresy, muslims and israelites, not impious feudal lords.
While I agree that trying to figure the number of people that just didn't believed the faith is impossible, considering that we do have mentions of people being accussed of atheism, the safe assumption would be that the great majority of both nobles and commoners did believed.
Doran Martell? I don't remember him doing anything religious. You forgot Sansa. Margery and her court of Reachwomen too.
>For most of those characters religion is a non-factor. They might have a stated religion but it's pretty much irrelevant to how they act.
I disagree. Knighthood for example is major religious tradition, Faith of Seven also places heavy emphasis on family (Mother, Father and Maiden are widely popular and Davos, Kevan, Sansa and Catelyn mention them sometimes and share similar concept of family and marriage), religious behavior of Red and Drowned Priests is self-evident. It's harder to say what exactly being religious follower of the Old Gods entails, especially since there is no distinction between religious and cultural traditions of the First Men, but it seems that basic concept of northern honour (something that Blackwoods also believe), great emphasis placed on oaths and basic social order (hereditary king with mythical heritage rules over society) all have religious origin. The Gods are always watching.
Half of those characters aren't religious or are cynically using religion and the vast majority of the onse that are religious were not added until fricking Feast or Dance.
>Ned and Robb
Robb sure, but Ned's religion is borderline none existent and doesn't shape anything he does. Even Cat, who follows a totally different religion is more receptive to very clear animist symbolism than him.
>Cat
I'll give you her.
>Jon
LMFAO, what? Jon has zero regard for religion until Ghost basically returns to him.
>Davos
Doesn't believe until his son dies and he survives exploding and even then he isn't some born again Faithful to the Seven, his belief in Stannis is his defining character trait not his belief in the Mother.
>Robert and Stannis
lol, lmao even
>Selyse
a non-POV character that is directly framed as being unhinged and abnormal
>Aeron
A Feast character when George realized he'd fricked up and started making religion a bigger deal
>Greatjon
what?
>Lancel and Kevan
Again Feast additions to their characters
>Brienne
There's next to nothing about her religion until Feast, prior to that her character revolves around Renly, Cat, and Jaime
>Thoros
A drunkard whose religious reawakening doesn't happen until he starts working miracles.
>Wyman & Doran
what?
For the first three books, George did not treat religion with anywhere near the sort of ever-pervasive importance it had in pre-modern societies until he decides to flip the switch in Feast for Crows, by which point it's entirely too late because most people already have their idea about the world created.
>Seriosuly my dude I'm kinda convinced that you didn't actually read the books.
I'm kinda convinced you're a moron, my dude.
Religions can be considered pre-modern ideologies.
Though Martin's religions don't seem to have any characteristics. Why are masters and septas separate? In medieval Europe clergymen filled both roles.
>Half of those characters aren't religious or are cynically using religion
For all of those characters religion is important, in different ways. For some of them, like Aeron or Lancel, it's absolutely life-defining, for some like Thoros or cat it's the crux of their personal crisis. For some like Davos or Ned it's an inseparable element of everyday life that they don't give much thought because they don't imagine it could actually be otherwise. Some like john or Doran treat it as a source of moral support in hardship. For some it's just a minor detail of their lives, and for some it's a tool. All of them interact differently with religion, but nearly all of them do interact with it and have it play a non-negotiable part of their lives.
There are actually next to no characters in ASoIaF that are actually nihilistic and faithless, and nearly none of them are portrayed in any sort of a sympathetic fashion. The book actually does treat religion with the amount of importance that is believable for a depiction of nobility of a quasi-european sorta-medieval setting.
What this
anon sseethes about is that ASoIaF does not depict everyone as zealously pious, enjoying and benefiting from it. I.e. - he's mad that is not literal RETVRN TO TRADITION religious spirituality propaganda. Because he's a homosexual.
Also
>Ned's religion is borderline none existent and doesn't shape anything he does
All of his honor autism is informed by his efforts to embody the Lords of Winterfell, a role that he had to grow into too suddenly and in extremely harsh conditions. Which includes autistic respect for traditions of the First Men, which is synonymous with the Old Faith.
>Davos doesn't believe until his son dies
Bullshit. He prays and visits sept prior to that.
>"f-feast addition"
Cope.
>Why are masters and septas separate? In medieval Europe~
Because it's not literally Europe, and Maesters have an origin separate from the Faith of the Seven.
*tips fedora* couldn't have said it better myself.
Throneroom gave me insight into human history, that is still relevant today.
Basically, everyones trying to get into the biggest party. If you throw that party then people are willing to work for you, and you use them to increase the splendor of your party. If your party starts to wane, they go to another one.
This is how mega cities work today
why are you gays this obsessed with china i don't get, i think they should be represented as they are in ck2 and not more
We need republics, nomads and silk road mechanics.
>silk road mechanics.
You probably also want China added you stupid fricking redditor
no one is waiting for "china as offmap power" dlc bro. If they're going include China then it should be a playable region
Jade Dragon was cool.
AtE CK2 had Brazil as an offmap and it was cool.
Brazil in CK3 AtE is just trash.
>AtE CK2 had Brazil as an offmap and it was cool.
Just finished my second playthrough in the past month on that mod and never ever EVER had to interact / give a single frick about Brazil. You're full of shit.
Is that possibly because you were playing in the north?
i was in florida
>Just finished my second playthrough in the past month on CK2 and never ever EVER had to interact / give a single frick about China. You're full of shit.
>Yes I played in England how did you know
No it shouldn't. China wasn't feudal and the sheer amount of characters there would grind the game to a halt. Offmap mechanics also fit better with their overall isolationist policies
>China wasn't feudal
average ck3bab is way past the point of caring about things making sense
The engine doesn't actually require feudalism to work. China did have an Emperor and nobility, they just worked a little different since noble positions were less directly connected to governance of land. It can be handled by making most higher titles return to the Emperor rather than doing normal succession, maybe, though this would be very tedious for gameplay so maybe they'll invent something like "eunuch elective".
You can get injured in CK3 battles, it's just that it's rare to begin with and if you focus on martial there are perks and bloodline features to make it even less likely
>playable duchies
ck2 gay here, what does he mean?
probably meant playable baronies, duchies are playable in CK3 just like CK2
The cutscene for the DLC literally is similar to the Knight of Flowers and The Mountain from ASOIAF. Legit you can do the red wedding... They continue to steal ideas from a fantasy book series for their 'roleplaying' dlc instead of actual history. The game needs mechanics, not le roleplay.
So true. It's over, Paradox are no longer a GSG developer.
>The game needs mechanics, not le roleplay.
This has been the Paradox Curse for years, really since Hearts of Iron 4 has it gone bad
Paradox has inexplicably decided to abandon even the thinnest veneer of historical accuracy or even vague 'historical faithfulness' for increasingly absurd meme roleplay, including reviving 14th century duchies as formable nations in the 1940's while World War II is raging
This is at expense of even trying to fix their very shallow and simple actual combat / warfare mechanics...in the World War 2 map game
Look, some amount of 'alt history meme energy' is unfortunately inevitable, but like there is a huge difference between like 'French conservatives win the election rather than the Popular Front', and 'LOL the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is revived and a Bonaparte is back on the throne LOL and America went Gommunist LOLLLLL!!!'
tbh though focus trees in general are a terrible game design. Choose your own adventure bullshit is (1) moronic and (2) Anti-Fun. Even if you're playing normally it's frickin annoying to try to read 30 focuses ahead to try figure out what everything does and how to optimize your path to get the research benefits at opportune times, etc.
I will not pay for paradox shit content.
I am done purchasing Stellaris DLC.
I will not buy any more story packs.
I guess going on a Holy Crusade as a Japanese for the name of Shinto has to wait, because some shitty Swedish meatball-eating wienersuckers just want some shitty RP elements.
GSGchuds need to realize CK3 is mainly a role playing game.
Go play HOI4 or EU4 if you want GSGshit.
CK2 managed to be both so I don’t think this is a great critique.
Exactly, CK2 was so good because it was both GSG and roleplay. Now we get sims-shit and all GSG stuff dumbed down or cut out.
CK3 is shit and I won’t defend it, but CK2 was also terrible as a gsg. The idea that it was good at this is pure revisionism since CK3 makes it look good by comparison.
I’m sorry I don’t agree. CK2 had problems, but as a GSG it’s great. Diplomacy is an incredibly integral part of the game, developing your kingdom is maybe not an elegant system but it’s still satisfying, and vassal relationships are fun to manage. The biggest problem is generating claims is pure bullshit (honestly one thing CK3 does better) and that the various cultures don’t have enough flavour difference. The military is also a little too simple. But the fact that war is a bigger numbers game just makes diplomacy all the more important.
War is awful in Crusader Kings, peace terms are far too limited and static. Some homosexual decides to invade you and you completely obliterate their army and capture and execute their leader. The most you can do is accept a pre-determined peace deal which from memory always consisted of fame-mana and gold. Why can't I decide my own terms? It's shit.
Everything is determined by claims. You can’t take something without a claim and you can’t start a war without one.
If you’re in a defensive war you can’t take something because you don’t have a claim. If you’re beating someone that soundly they probably shouldn’t have tried to go to war with you in the first place. In fact, you should have been going to war with them to take their stuff.
CK2 has problems but this is a bad critique. Again, CK2 is good because it doesn’t just hinge on warfare, it hinges on diplomacy and subterfuge. So in your example, you should marry off your children to inevitably get a claim on duchies and kingdoms you want instead of generating a claim on small counties.
>Everything is determined by claims. You can’t take something without a claim and you can’t start a war without one.
>If you’re in a defensive war you can’t take something because you don’t have a claim.
Why can't we take our claims when winning a defensive war against a kingdom that we have claims against?
>Again, CK2 is good because it doesn’t just hinge on warfare, it hinges on diplomacy and subterfuge.
Neither of those are particularly good or interesting in CK2. Crusader Kings in general has always been way too easy for its own good with a focus on things it didn't flesh out enough.
>If you’re in a defensive war you can’t take something because you don’t have a claim.
lol no
in a defensive war you can't take something even if you have a claim
you could be defending as the ERE (in 1100) against the seljuks of rum, win. then you would have to make peace (truce affects the aggressor only), disband your levies and move your retinues/mercs outside of seljuk territory and declare war AGAIN, then raise your armies all over again
and your gains would be limited by the CB, you could have legal claims over the entirety of anatolia, and completely vanquish the enemy, but unless you have "press all claims" or some other religious/culture gimmick, you will only capture a small piece of territory and be forced to do this all over again for decades
lmao imagine trying to defend this atrocity of a system
I was one of the people hoping CK3 would have the warscore system. It's way too restrictive in EU4 but Imperator Rome nailed it perfectly, I hope they lift that shit wholesale for EU5. Same for navies, actually, heavy ships in Imperator are able to straight-up fricking delete forts and occupy coastal territories which have ports, it's the only Paradox game where being a naval abuser is both fun and powerful
anyone complaining about CK3 being barebones is a filthy secondary who wasn't there when CK2 was even more barebones.
I was there, even before Sword of Islam I recall liking it.
Prior to Sword of Islam, game didn't have factions or retinues, but still had an investiture system and old revolt system.
Under the old revolt system, there was no revolt title, but all rebels were independent during the revolt, which allowed third parties to conquer them. Which was unironically good, because it allowed blobs to be picked apart.
Lack of faction system meant, the vassal would only revolt if liege performed tyranny.
>CK3 is shit
>"well yeah but CK2 was also shit so frick you"
Jesus frick you paradrones will come up with anything to defend your multi-billionaire company
At this point I’m wondering something. I think PDX is trying to differentiate their sequels gameplay-wise. So like, instead of just making CK2 but with a better engine, they want to push CK3 into something like the Sims, because if you just remake CK2, you are just competing with your own sales. This sort of explains Victoria 3 to me. Why remake Victoria 2? The only game it would be competing with is a game you’ve already sold.
I don’t think it’s *great* business calculus, but I sort of get it. At this point CK3 feels like it scratches a different itch from CK2. And that’s probably because there’s no point in scratching the same itch as CK2, because CK2 already exists. I have to assume that’s the thinking going into it because, while fleshing out tournaments and feasts is neat, literally no one asked for this.
It's a pity that the quality-price ratio of its latest dlcs is the worst, because (guess what) people have to eat.
But then you lose out on all the existing customers you built up. Maybe you get initial sales because you tricked them by calling your command economy simulator Victoria 3 and thus making them think they were getting a Victoria game, but soon they realize what it is and stop playing. And no DLC for you.
I haven’t played Vic 3 yet, but I don’t know anyone who plays Vic 2 with lessez-faire.
I do. Helps you avoid zombie economies. You could manually close unprofitable factories, but with LF you don't have to bother.
moronic paradrone
Even full command-economy in V2 is less controlling than anything in V3.
So I’ve heard. Apparently resources don’t automatically go to market, which really turns me off of buying the game. I hate how game designers no longer feel confident enough in their design to build virtual economies and throw the player into it to create emergent gameplay. Instead we get this theme park shit, where all gameplay is on-demand and avoidable if it’s too inconvenient.
Understandable, but I usually like to be very hands-on with my economy.
Skill issue.
>Maybe you get initial sales
all that matters
this isnt true though ck3 is a piss poor rpg
>Why would they keep remaking Call of Duty 4? They'd cut into their own sales
Wiz put the name on, only you'd be this moronic
CK’s audience and CoD’s audience aren’t the same. CoD’s audience plays that game for the multiplayer, so when they release a new game everyone has an incentive to buy the next one to play with their friends.
That same incentive doesn’t exist for PDX. When CK3 released people had the option of just continuing to play CK2, which even has a subscription model to play with all the DLC. Hence it’s entirely possible for CK3 and CK2 to compete with each other.
Okay? So is the sims and it still sells a bajillion copies.
Only Wiz would be moronic enough to compare COD to paradox games (in fact he literally did once)
yeah i'm sure pdox is really worried about ck3 competing with the game they gave away for free
They gave away the game for free because it has so much dlc that they could start a subscription model. Yes, these are products that are competing for market share.
>they want to push CK3 into something like the Sims, because if you just remake CK2, you are just competing with your own sales.
>the Sims
>just competing with your own sales
Yeah. You're right. Why would you make the same thing over and over again or even the same DLCs for the same game?
No-one would buy that.
Except people buy the new Sims game because of the better graphics, and like I said before in
people actually play Sims because their friends play it, and because most people are making online content for it.
People seem super surprised at this idea that a company can release products that directly compete with eachother, even in the same series, and then using examples of games that don’t have that problem.
My best example would be how Warhammer Fantasy Battle was only competing with 40k, so they reformatted the game into Age of Sigmar. All I’m saying is that the direction PDX is taking CK3 is rational, not that it’s good or even neccisary. Because like, even now with games like TWWH and Vermintide, AoS is *still* competing with WFB.
>inb4 post models
You are missing the point, The Sims is not a videogame its a virtual dollhouse , Visuan Novels are closer to videogames if we had that meme of the two circles interlapping each other The Sims circle would never interlap with the other as no one that plays the Sims plays real videogames , while at least visual novels do play some videogames this is why Paradox is fricking moronic
It’s called a Venn diagram. Also, millions of people play the Sims. *I* play the Sims. You can’t possibly say no one who plays the Sims doesn’t play video-games, at least if you’re actually trying to honestly critique PDX’s marketing. That’s a fricking moronic assumption with no evidence to back up.
Anecdotally I’ve gotten two people to play CK3, one who played Mount and Blade and didn’t want to spend hours ramming into CK2’s learning curve, and one who played the Sims.
All I’m saying is that PDX is doing a rational thing. I think, that they think they’re running two products, the more hardcore CK2, which has a subscription model, and the more casual CK3, which they can use to bring new people in. I don’t think it’s a good idea, I think it will alienate hardcore fans which hasn’t worked out for any studio (but it works out really great for shareholders) but I think there’s a rationale behind it.
you are missing the point again, the sims is not a video game so it cant be played
No, I understand your point, and I reject the premise that somehow Sims isn’t a video game. I’m not under some impression that “video game” is some sacred term. It takes inputs, calculates them into outputs, and displays them in a video format. The inputs are usually directed toward some goal. Etc. etc.
Sims is a video game.
sims not a video game which is why post like these are made
, its not about being a sacred term , you will never gaslight people into selling the sims as videogame , its like trying to pass a window it just does not work
what would the sims be called, then?
RBT
>RBT
a Registered Behavior Technician?
virtual dollhouse
I think denying that Sims is a video game is basically what
is getting at
Even Will Wright agree's with that opinion, the sims is not a videogames, just like the OGs microsoft flight simulators in the 1980s were not designed as video games either, any magazine at the time would talk about them as entertaining software rather than videogames as videogame were associated with arcade elements
No, moron, the Sims is a household management game. Your Sims have needs, you fulfill them. It's no different than supply and demand.
Is it a very casual management game? Yes. But there are far more complicated ones in the wider franchise, like SimEarth which had you managing a whole fricking planet. But I bet you'd call that a "virtual toy" or some nonsense like that, because you cannot imagine any video game that doesn't have a fricking scorecard at the end informing you of your defeat or victory.
no, a game is something you can win or lose in. You can't lose in any sim game except sim 2.
You can set goals in the Sims and achieve them. It’s a game. Win/loss states are not necessary for games, though they can exist in the Sims (Sims can die, goals can become unattainable, etc.). Play doesn’t have to be entirely instrumental but even under those terms, Sims still has elements of instrumental play, as hard as it is to find them.
All sims have been super easy since 2. 1 was the only one that felt somewhat hard. But you can* lose, its just that you and me are gaming veterans and the sims is too easy, but a 10yr old could actually make enough wrong choices and lose.
Will Wright himself thinks The Sims and most of the other sim games he made should be though of as toys rather than "games" because they lacked set win conditions and let players basically do whatever they wanted within the sandbox.
People can like different things Anon. While there're obviously people who only like video interactive stories and not anything video gamey, there're probably more people who like the the former that also enjoy the latter compared to the population of people who don't play either. Even within the category of interactive-computer-entertainment-that-isn't-quite-a-game there's a pretty wide difference between a sandbox simulation that you play with by poking it and seeing what happens, and a purely narrative experience like a walking sim or visual novel where you just experience a set story. In fact I suspect there's less crossover between people who like those than either have with people playing proper games
Or consider that you can have people who like specific genres that straddle the game/non-game line, like point and click adventure games which range from very gamey with fail states and tricky puzzles to being very easy and story driven.
While we're in a Paradox thread I think some of trouble with the current state of them can be explained with these differences. Lots of people who've followed them for years want PDS games/products to be more like toy-simulations of historical periods while PDS themselves think they should be making proper games(obviously HOI is the exception here and that was always on the game side of the autism spectrum). See the difference between V2 having a lot of systems that run without a player interacting with them, verses V3's city builder economy. Or for CK and EU, see how they like to move things away from firing on a MTTH to working on a set timer so the player can always know when certain things will happen.
>Johan himself thinks EU4 and most of the other Paradox games should be thought of as toys rather than "games" because they lacked set win conditions and let players basically do whatever they wanted within the sandbox.
Games are toys
That doesn't mean all toys are games
Yohan's pretty obviously more on the game rather than toy sandbox school. The latter would've never centered something around a board game mechanic like mana
So is it about mechanics or win conditions? Cause Sims has plenty of mechanics.
>if we were to scan which parts of the brain are activated while experiencing walking simulator, story driven games or doll house simulators you would find that they dont stimulate any of the zones real games do
That's a nice "if", mr armchair neurophysicist. You sure use a lot of buzzwords but I can tell from my armchair that there is no brain activity going on in that shriveled up head of yours.
Cope, this is beyond meat all over again and the same arguments you morons are using to argue were the same these morons tried to use to convince people that beyond meat was real meat , this is the result it will never work
>this thing this goes back to 2000 is totally the same as the *current year /vpol/ talking point*
God I hate zoomers. Also Sims is more commercially successful series than anything on this board, moronbro.
Missing the point again, we are talking about how do you define a product , doll house simulators are not real video games to claim otherwise using sophistry like the morons were doing its the same the vegans did to pretend beyond meat was real meat, trying to sell vegan meat to meat eaters its the same as to trying to sell doll house simulators to people that play strategy games which is why even paradox themselves and making a sims clone as their strategy was moronic
are making a sims clone*
But I thought Beyond Meat was flopping because not even vegans wanted it? Seriously, what's your obsession with Beyond Meat anyway? Did your uncle molest you after treating you to a candlelit Beyond Meat dinner? What a fricking cheapskate your uncle is, but I still fail to see what the frick that's got to do with Sims or Sims clones. Every moronic zoomer Ganker-tier argument you could make about Sims/Life by You applies to Simcity/Cities: Skylines, and 99% of them apply to normal Paradox output.
NTA, but people hate beyond meat because it's a camel's nose attempt at replacing all meat with an artificial substitute.
Its useless to dicuss with that moron, his discussing with a imaginary strawman boogeyman that he made up in his mind
Sims are not real video games, they do not appeal to people that play real video games because the experience they provide its not close to what real video games do, same goes with walking simulators having more appeal to movie/tv media consumeers, story driven games appealing more to escapism media consumeers, online games being a easy way to trick the brain into social gratification and mobile games appealing to gambling , no amount of moronic sophistry you try to use it will never change the fact that the people that play dollhouse simulators like sims are not interested in playing real video games , the dollhouse simulators were never real video games just like beyond meat was never real meat
>never change the fact that the people that play dollhouse simulators like sims are not interested in playing real video games
I actually played and enjoyed Sims 3 several years before I ever played Grand Strategy games. And what are real video games? Shooters? Moba's? Or are you one of those moronic total war gays?
Problems with beyond meat
>2x the cost of real meat
>dry as frick compared to real meat
>uncanny taste
>real vegans just want to eat vegetables.
Didn’t you just try to use neurology to justify your point? And you call me a sophist? At least I’ve actually read game design docs, holy shit.
Like,
is the dumbest thing I’ve ever read. Products are based on experience and not characteristics?
>pong and a ball in a cup offer the same experience, they’re the same product!
Did Will Wright hurt you when you were a child? Look man we were all excited for Spore but it’s time to move on. Please just take the L on this one.
You are still missing the point, at this point i'm not sure you are even capable of grasping it, read the post again and maybe you'll figure out how moronic you are
NTA, your point is moronic
bro even the sims creator Will Wright says that the sims should be considered as toys rather than videogames
If the guy who made Spore says anything I’m just going to believe the opposite of that.
Btw, Spore is a GSG.
No, you are just a moron and discussing with a boogie man you made in your head yo protect your moronic opinions, fliight simulator are not considered games either btw everytime they have tried to make flight simulator more arcade to appeal to gamers it has been a failure as the people that consume flight simulator are not interested in arcade games just like people that play real games are not interested in doll house simulators
I Spore a video game? You haven't really given a definition, I'm assuming I just need to bring every game to you for a yes or no.
He also compares Sim City to gardening, so i guess city builders belong in Ganker or Ganker you drooling moron.
yes, they are simulator, they were not made in the same spirit as real video games tard
cope more troony
Any argument for the necessity of forms can be refuted by the same arguments used to explain the eucharist.
post 5 video games homosexual or leave the thread.
I get your point! You’re saying certain games don’t count as games because they don’t *feel* like games. And you’re fine to feel that way, but you need something more than feelings to convince me. You have to actually qualify what it is about Sims gameplay that disqualifies it, and all you’ve done is state that it isn’t a “real” game as if that’s some fundamental fact. You’re putting the cart before the horse here and at this point you have like three or four people telling you you’re moronic.
What features? Genuinely interested, but I never played 1. I know Muslim and Indian rulers were locked off, but I would consider that more as content than actual features. When I say features I mean more like the actual systems in the game.
I bet he’s only played Napoleon
>[playable] Muslim and Indian rulers
Those weren't in CK1, and were added before Holy Fury. Off the top of my head, the CK1 features finally released in Holy Fury were Saints and Coronations. Other than coronations most of the mechanics about succession were never really carried over.
That sounds cool, but I think succession in CK2 was good enough. For that matter I think way too many people make a big deal out of primogeniture being a high medieval tech in CK3.
If that’s the case then Will Wright doesn’t understand the difference between Open play and Instrumental play, which explains why he hasn’t done anything in a while.
>as toys
Software toys are superior to games anyways and that's what drew me to paradox games in the first place. All the gamified shit, focus trees, mission trees, lifepath trees are fricked moronic. I just want a compelling realistic sensical historical simulation to toy around in.
I agree, paradox got worse as they moved from toy-simulations of historical periods.
I think you're really misusing the 'toy' term, and that's not a matter of being pedantic. 'Virtual toys' would be something like Townscaper, where there is no point or lose condition - you just dick around as you please. 'Simulators' are not virtual toys, they're very serious and you might have to know something about or learn about the real life aspects in order to actually manage it. And then there are virtual board games, which make heavy use of extremely gamified concepts like cards or mana or cooldowns where they make zero sense.
In some ways Paradox games are the worst of all worlds. They have the mana and cooldowns of virtual board games (why the frick does it take 70 days to do everything in HOI4?), they try to offer the consequence-less freedom of virtual toys, AND they have a historical simulator facade that is a mile wide and an inch deep.
cooldowns make sense in gsgs, in real life things like construction, war, moving troops, passing laws etc all take time. Instant gratifiication mechanics in strategy games like mana are the opposite of depth.
Oh yeah, I agree. But cooldowns in Paradox games mean "You can't do that right now. Why? You just can't."
Like, let's say you construct a building. Okay, obviously that takes time. But you could pay more to speed it up, sacrifice the lives and health of workers, or just increase the workforce. It isn't just "You can't because you can't."
I always saw mana as a good stand-in for cool-downs or construction times. Mana always seemed like a retroactive abstraction of forces in the game world.
The ideal for me was in Terra Invicta. When you construct something you don’t have to, like, gather materials at the construction site. The resources get deducted as mana. But you can’t cancel the construction. And the idea is that your government was retroactively planning to build this thing there, brought the proper resources, and started building when you hit the button. That’s why you can’t simply cancel and build something else.
Mana can be done well, just depends on the layers of abstraction and design. Strictly speaking oil is mana in Hoi4, but if you tie it to mechanization and put a bunch of it in the Caucasus, suddenly every Germany player is driving for the Volga without knowing it.
Trying to have the sims 3 as your target audience while your product is a videogame is moronic which is why they are actually making a sims clone now as they realized ck3 will never work
>The Sims is not a videogame
Just stop. You are embarrassing yourself.
No one considers the sims as real games, they don't have anything in common with real games
a barbie doll hosue simulator
I'm sorry your classmates called you a gay when they found out you play Sims. Maybe when you grow older you'll be less insecure about your hobbies.
You'll still remain a gay though.
So now you’re just appealing to this vague groupthink that “no one” considers Sims a game, even though multiple people in this thread agree it’s a game?
They are wrong and moronic, no one i have ever meet outside of this boards full of troonys and troll has ever consider any of those or sims real games if we were to scan which parts of the brain are activated while experiencing walking simulator, story driven games or doll house simulators you would find that they dont stimulate any of the zones real games do as such there is no considered game no matter how many morons say they are, you don't deconstruct and grasp products based on characteristics you grasp them based on experience, and no person that ever consume real video games will say they are because they would be gaslighting themselves based on the experience playing it, its not groupthink those are facts .
Touch grass incel
Damn, this makes me want to go outside.
The Sims franchise is a bad example. Sims 1 and 2 were physical only (obviously available on Abandonware), Sims 3 runs terribly on modern PCs, which basically just leaves Sims 4 as the only viable title for those who have no idea what they're doing. So EA is safe in that regard.
>walking simulators
not real games
>barbie doll house simulators
not real games
>story driven games
not real games either
Every single of these products are consumed by demographics that do not play real games , same goes with online games that it has been proven to be consumed as a social activity and developers have adopted accordingly , CK3 made the stupid mistake of not understanding that the kind person that plays barbie doll house has 0 intereset in grand strategy games and both of them playing ck2 was pure coincidence thanks to sim 4 being terrible and as this anon said these tech illiterate morons could not play the previous ones
Actually I like Sims and Grand Strategy.
Same. But unfortunately modern Sims is trash.
I think it's more that they're trying to differentiate their games more in general. Crusader Kings represents characters more fully, so it gets all the half-assed "RPG" content, while other games like Imperator and Vicky can't have too much character mechanics or they'll step on its toes. Instead of just trying to make games that are good, they're making games that are different for the sake of difference.
Well they're making an actual Sims game now so hopefully CK3 can be grand strategy after that.
Almost every single strategy game player wants the sequel to be this:
>just gimme the original game but with better graphics, qol and fix any issues the old game had
But devs are moronic and cant even manage this most of the time
publishers and shareholders would never go for that
That's how FIFA and CoD work
modern devs think they have to re-invent the wheel every time they make a sequel
they also get into a mindset of "old is bad and clunky, look at this new system that is dumbed down and clean"
they think dumbing it down is a good thing
Putting crusader kings characters on a proper location on the map and letting them move around without changing capital or leading an army sounds like a great idea. The kind of very huge fundamental change that would justify an entire new game so that things can be properly designed and balanced around it to get the most out of all the potential depth that could come out of it.
Only nuPDS would be moronic enough to not build CK3 around it and release it as a half arsed DLC with meme events instead.
I suppose CK4 will do that in 10 years like how CK3 is elevated Way of Life.
The only worthwhile feature might be the physical travel of characters. But is that only for walking to tournments or??
No its for a bunch of stuff theyve said, like going on hunts, going to feasts and doing pilgrimages and stuff. And pilgrimages can take years if theyre far away enough
I personally hope that leaving for war or going on crusade has a similar mechanic so if you go off invading italy or where ever you have leave the kingdom in the hands of someone you trust
>Having to travel to get to the crusades
That could be interesting. You could have a disastrous journey like Frederick Barbarossa and end up dying before you get there. Or getting shipwrecked like Richard the Lion heart.
You do this in CK2. I got plague while passing Constantinople once and died. you can always "teleport" but that's gamey as hell.
Yes, CK 2 had some "map awareness" as I term it but it was exclusively caused by the plague system. If a disease broke out to wherever you sent your councilmen to, they could risk illness. Some of my spymasters have died that way while researching technology in Constantinople
This would've been the perfect time to implement landless play but they're probably not going to.
Also what do you bet that this is just a player facing mechanic and you'll never see your liege or vassals touring or pilgrims passing through your realm.
>The only worthwhile feature might be the physical travel of characters
You and me both know that all it will be is 10 events that give +-5 piety repeated over and over and over again
>oh no muh rpg elements
shut up sickos. this entire game is nothing but a feudal rape simulator
Exactly, Paradox needs to give in and add official sex mod support.
Making 3d models is exactly this, it's up to the coomers to make the mods
CK3 has potential to be a great coomer game
Idk, the coomer mods require a billion required mods and its still very underdeveloped. The scene hasn't taken off say like Skyrim or Sims 4.
because coomer mods need the game behind it to be fun as well to generate enough popularity
A lot of the fun can potentially be modded, problem with ck3 even with how hard it pushes for rpg elements and tries to please rpgays is that underlying framework they have just doesn't work for that kind of thing. If paradox had balls to just drop all the map painting and made a royal court simulator instead it, which is what they wanted in the first place judging by overall direction, it would be much better for everyone involved. But evidently they lack both will and technical ability to even attempt something like that, nevermind all the screeching from paradrones that would occur.
>has potential
It's been two years of potential by this point. The modding scene is dead.
I'm at the point where I do not wish anymore for this game to get good, I hope the CK series crashes and burns in a fire
I like the idea, but it would have needed to be a central feature of Ck3 at release, also used for things as military campaigns, councils etc. This way it looks like a half-assed experimental feature
>This way it looks like a half-assed experimental feature
Because that's all it is moron
why do you insult me, when we agree?
Weaponised Autism isn't a joke anon. When you're on Ganker.org you have to remember that Autism truly does speak.
Why is this new DLC so bad? It hasn't been released yet.
CK3 is a flop the game is as boring as dust.
I can't believe israeliteadox manage to split one dlc to two and sell it for 30$ twice .This update should have been part of royal court dlc
are the devs lazy or incompetent? maybe lazy isn't the right word, uninspired or unmotivated is probably more accurate.
Probably a fricked up corporate structure that doesn't incentivize engagement or innovation.
LIke whatever, i'll just codemonkey for a bit until i get a better offer.
Comparing your shitkicker job to Paradox
1 krona has been deposited into your account
Paradox jobs are shitkicker jobs
Scandinavian work ethic is practically non-existent at this point
I have no irrational hatred or bias against Paradox but their handling of CK3 is incredibly perplexing
The game launched as a big success, critical reviews, good sales, positive community feedback, smooth launch, and then they basically have done...no good DLC or expansion content for 2.5 years now
I remember the fan reception at the time was "Wow this is a great launch, a little bare-bones, but if they give us 2-4 good expansions this is going to be a great game"
Then nothing for TWO POINT FIVE YEARS lmfao
They are cattering to their target audience which is no longer grand strategy or pc gamers, every RPG DLC that adds more flavor will be praised by barbie dollhouse simulator fanbase they currently have as appealing to a broad audience and taking the sims playerbase its better than trying to please the people that will buy it anyway , welcome to american culture where the morons will cooonsom and preorder shit and justify it by how cheap it is compared to going to a movie or for a dinner on the weekend
The defenders are still blaming the lack of content on a pandemic than ended two years ago
There was also no lockdown in Sweden
At all? I thought there wasn't one initially, buy them they've changed their mind
No there never was any lockdown they just implemented vaxx passes in sept 2021 and made them mandatory for going to the movies and a few things (not for restaurants or jobs but there were some employers who tried anyway) then dropped all restrictions in jan or feb 2022 (can't remember which month) including vaxx passes.
Oh no, it hasn't ended.
They just sidelined it because it was more important the public focused on a moral crusade over the border integrity of a post-Soviet nation.
>being against torture, rape, abductions of children, bombarding civilians
>moral crusade
No no no, they were FOR ukraine, not taking a stand against it
It's incredible honestly, it's not like they even have a rough gem in need of some serious polishing, they have been basically almost there since release and just needed to make less than half a dozen DLCs to make it work great, not even new or revolutionary DLCs just shit they did before basically and they completely and utterly botched it despite this being such a big title for them.
It's so hard to frick it up this bad I really have no sympathy for them, the management has room temp IQ and zero worthwhile vision despite them having to do nothing new with them basically sitting on a monopoly.
Plebbit going nuclear.
Sure they take their sweet fricking time (and braincells)...
hating ck3 is now officially plebbit culture
paradox absolutely destroyed
Holy shit it's fricking over
>even the devs are shitposting on reddit
based for a r*dditor, but it's gone to the point where even talking about it is worthless
it's a shit game, the devs are shit, it is all hopeless
there's 0 potential and 0 hope
fricking lol, this'll be horrifyingly accurate
If you think about it, paradox games are really shallow, even the golden era ones.
But then, all of the competitors are even worse. Shit.
There are more complex/harder games out there, you just don't get a nice UI
HOI3 is more like those grognard games
Maybe instead of being a jackoff gamer you could go outside and get a job
None of them set outside of WW2 or later probably. I liked HoI3, though its ages ago I played that. Also go frick yourself Black person.
To think that almost every CK2 mod team went over to CK3 and left their projects to rot, only to never release because of this piece of shit
Good. Seethe.
He seethed impotently, friendless and alone. Forced to act homosexual and moronic in the hopes of getting a stranger to provide him with his sole form of human contact, insults.
He projected projectedly, projectless and project. Forced to project projections and projected in the project of getting a projection to project him with his sole projection of project contact, projection.
Talking about yourself in the third person is cringe, bro
>only to never release because of this piece of shit
Such as?
CK3+ and HIP2.
>Giving flying frick about PDX games
>Giving frick about Paradrones
Why do you think this board exists? 4X?
lol
lmao
The worst part of this for me is the complete victory of shallow pop culture references over actual historical content implied by the dumb "bloody wedding" button and the trailer. They aren't taking clues from history nor attempting to simulate the period CK3 should simulate, but just cramming in literal onioncrap events whose only purpose is to amuse the brainless player.
CK3 is not a simulation nor a drama but a dumb, nihilistic, cynical comedy.
I like that they are connecting the player's character to the map, in fact I wished for them to address that in CK 3. I disliked how your character and the map were divorced in CK 2 so you could be leading your troops in Jerusalem and still deal with events as if you were back home.
They might be laying the foundation in this dlc so that your character actually exists in the map. If you are leading a campaign far from home, you should only have events about said campaign. If you want to know what's happening back home then you must communicate with your regent through letters.
Someone on the forums was talking about CK3 having an 'identity crisis', with one of the more poignant points being whether it's a realistic simulation or a sandbox. There's no reason you can't have a realistic sandbox simulation
A sandbox needs sand, for you to mold into shapes. If the sandbox is full of water, and not sand, then it just flows through your hands.
Sand also flows trough your hands, moron.
TL;DR?
dev responses to people after the announcement
Kek.
It's more like picrel though.
>you think you're getting all this cool chivalry knight tournament content
>its all just a bunch of fricking buttons and text prompts with negligible rewards with dramatic music playing in the background
The point of this dlc is to connect the player to the map, not so much about events. I trust that the devs know what they are doing, that's why they are still employed instead of a bunch of whining incels who don't understand game development like you
based
i love this shilling cycle of
>try to shill for paradox on /vst/
>nobody is stupid enough to fall for it
>lash out calling people incels or nazis
was very common and easy to spot before V3's release, apparently will become a trend for every DLC or future paradox game from now on
but ck3 and vic 3 are actually shit, unlike eu4 and hoi4 where the people shitting on it are just contrarians
>eu4
corpse of a game held together by a gorillion dlcs, mechanic bloat, and map painting
>hoi4
literally only relevant because of mods
at least victoria 3 has the potential to be something more, even if it's in a bad state rn
ck3 had potential too, it was just mismanaged badly post development
>map painting bad
No matter how much you guys shit on Johan he mogged every single one of you
It's not going to connect players to the map because travel is only going to connected to tours.
They mentioned that hunts will be included. Either way, this is the first implementation of the feature which shall be expanded in future updates. It will definitely be adapted to warfare and crusades because they have mentioned something about supply lines.
>its all just a bunch of fricking buttons and text prompts
Yeah? It was never gonna be Mount and Blade or anything.
>its all just a bunch of fricking buttons and text prompts with negligible rewards with dramatic music playing in the background
You just described every video game ever made.
>I like fruit
>But I don't like apples
>Therefore apples aren't fruit
A correct analogy would be beyond meat which was proven to be a failure , trying to gaslight someone into thinking that barbie doll house simulators are the same as real games is the same as when morons tried to convince people that beyond meat was exactly like real meat
I didn't think a worse developer could exist at paradox after what Johan did with the Leviathan dlc (and imperator at launch), but both the Vic 3 and CK3 dev teams proved me wrong
I honestly would've preferred that they just released ck2 with 3d graphics and started adding updates to it again
I would have preferred it if they released ck2 with 2d graphics.
Also i guarantee you Life by You if properly marketted will mog most paradox titles if nto all , the amount of people that play real video games are less than the people that play the sims but no amount of sales will change the fact the sims are not real video games.
Neither the people that play real video games will play it because its a "videogame from paradox " or the people that play Life by you will start playing real videogames because once again they are demographics that do not interlap with each other
Sims Lives Matter
I don’t like the idea of an existing win or loss condition as criteria for defining a game. European soccer doesn’t really have a direct win or loss condition, at least not in the tradition sense most games use (once x, then y). It has a completion condition (time limit), and a result. A game can’t end early, even if it’s hopeless, unless forfeit. A win condition necessarily ends the game upon a win, but european soccer determines the victory state after the completion of the match, so can’t have a “true” win condition. Tennis, on the other hand, does have a direct win condition and ends the instant someone achieves a specific number of points/sets/etc. Then you have paradox grand strategy, which doesn’t have a win condition but does have a loss condition (running out of territory). A jigsaw puzzle has no loss condition but does have a win/completion condition.
I play the Sims. It is a doll house but it's funny. I've played Sims in my childhood so.
glad I stuck with CK2. I've yet to do everything in that game yet after all these years.
The root of this disaster on a design level was allowing playable characters outside christian Europe. The games is called Crusader Kings yet most of the content these days needs to be made with hindu and even tengri rulers in mind, the quality of the simulation always going down because all systems and events need to be generic in order to work.
If CK2 had focused only on its main theme, detailing a lot more the subtleties of the many types of government within christian lands, adding much more flavor to low-tier rulers, we would have a game magnitudes better.
Does anybody actually play / like playing as hindu / chinese / mongol / whateverthefrick? Outside of just 'having it for the one gimmick run'?
At least Norse is somewhat tied into the actual mechanics and main setting of the games.
I play sometimes as the Nestorian Chinese dude.
It's the hard-mode area of the game.
Chinese are far more fun to play than boring Europoids.
They didn't bring forward the CK2 mechanics that tried to make those areas interesting. No silk road. No Nomadic societies. No caste system in India. I assumed they held back so they can completely rework the areas in future dlc but considering what they have done so far I'm not sure that they are interested in such a DLC. It's funny that the "flavour packs" added content for areas that already had a lot of focus spent on them while other parts of the map are anemic.
CK2 didn't have DLC for those regions at this point in its development either
india/china/mongolia literally didn't exist in ck2 at this point in development
>Does anybody actually play / like playing as hindu / chinese / mongol / whateverthefrick?
No
Anyone who says otherwise is just being contrarian
You don't buy a game called "Crusader Kings' and then only play as Pajeets
There are players who wanted "deus vult" removed for being offensive. They're obviously not playing in Europe (assuming they actually play the game and don't just complain about it on twitter, which is a huge assumption).
My first game in CK2 was Asatru.
I think my longest CK3 game was sub-Saharan Africa, and I'd really like to play China.
I only played Christians in "Crusader Kings", but its been like fifteen years at this point, it's nice to have some other options too.
>t. Paradox worker
If I worked for Paradox, there would be some actual content for the Africans.
>my longest CK3 game was sub-Saharan Africa
how did it go?
Fine for a while. They suck, so there was a lot to build up before I ran out of stuff to do. There wasn't a ton of content but all of CK3 has that problem.
Literally why? They just have less content and are less interesting. It is much more cool to be a crusader and conquer whichever crazy place you want to play in.
I’d be down to play China. Def Japan too. Never played Hindu tho.
Anti-Western leftoids are the ones pushing for focus on the historical enemies of Europe. The Paradox dev team has been taken over by these types who care more about muh representation than anything else. They don't want you to have fun playing as a Crusader King because that's heckin' problematic.
I had a lot of fun as Norge taking my boat down the Volga and raiding Constantinople.
>I had a lot of fun playing as someone other than a Crusader King in Crusader Kings
Yeah, that's what their focus is, and it's moronic.
I've played as norse pagan, hindus, silkroad tibetans, somalians, lithuanians, lybians, i dont give a frick about what you think.
yeah, i can only conquer europe so many times
Unfortunately being nomads and having shit religion and cultures really tends to hold back the play style down
>transformative character-map mechanic
>regencies
>ruler-vassal relations totally reworked
>tournaments
>weddings
>reworked feasts and other social events
So what are people complaining about exactly?
Opportunity costs. There’s a lot of mechanics people would have rather seen improved.
>glorified event box
>trust me, I wish characters were always tied to location, but that is just not the case
>in ck2
>ok?
>events
>events
>events
Wowee, look at all these boxes of text!
If it's not an isolated feature and strategic in someway it might be okay.
Also 'bloody wedding' ui pisses me off. They feel comfortable revealing the ability to do a bloody wedding, but not any mechanical shit.
The Sims isn't a videogame?
No
Why do you hate video games?
I guess I don't hate video games per se, but they've created a bunch of people whose sole personality trait is their consumption of games. Any critique of games or the industry in general becomes a personal attack to them. Or their personality gets so tied up in consuming a certain niche of games that they become a moron like
that has to qualify the enjoyment of games in some arbitrary hierarchy.
I think anyone who calls themselves a gamer is cringe. I just say I play video games. I don't want to make it part of my personality.
skill issue
I don't care, it's not like I'll be paying
How can any alt-history game not eventually devolve into roleplaying? Come to think of it, that's what stellaris and and any other fantasy/sci-fi game does, too. If you don't want roleplay (i.e., homosexualry) to be the focus then either your strategy game has to be Grigsby-serious or it needs to be simple like chess or starcraft (multiplayer).
In order for roleplaying to be actual role-play it needs a set of solid mechanics and a developed background in order to work. Ground rules clear and detailed enough to carry the experience and inmerse the player in the time period the game is meant to simulate.
CK3 fails at that horibly.
How does it fail at that? I have problems with it but I would say it's actually really great at characterization, and if not role-playing, it's at least good at narrativizing each player character.
There are very few characters I remember playing as in CK2. Conversely, I remember entire dynasties I've played in CK3, each character's strength and weakness and how they contributed to their kingdom and dynasty.
Do you just mean that it's bad at historical accuracy? Because I would agree with that.
Roleplaying does not have to devoid of gamify elements, the issue is when its seen as a roleplaying toy rather than a roleplayinggame
At least the last dev diary was good.
the concept is cool and all imo but that shit shouldnt be stand-alone dlc, it should be included in a trade dlc with routes and republics, paradox are fricking morons lol.
I’m a big fan of CK3. I have about 500 hours in it. I guess it is what it is.
advanced silk road mechanics:
>unique provincial modifier granting +1 tax
advanced merchant republic mechanics:
>unique "trade post" building granting +1 tax
They could copy the EU4 mechanic over with relatively little change, it's more suitable to CK3's time range than EU4's anyway. Then they can do something dynamic in EU5.
I knew CK3 would be bad as soon as they virtue signalled by pretending that heterosexuality being the norm was a bad thing.
The idea of having different sexualities during this period is so stupid because sexualities are 20th-century inventions.
That isn't to say there weren't gays or asexuals in the past, the past, but that they wouldn't be seen as sexualities.
Gays would be seen as "homophiles" or sodomites, comparable to pedophiles and animalfrickers. It would be seen as a sexual fetish, not as a sexuality. But for whatever reason, the latter two are nowhere to be seen in-game.
CK2 representing homosexuality as a trait was fine.
>Gays would be seen as "homophiles" or sodomites
Quite literally represented in-game by the sodomite trait
>comparable to pedophiles and animalfrickers.
Represented by religions being able to shun or criminalize sodomy
>But for whatever reason, the latter two are nowhere to be seen in-game.
Anon, why do you think the stance on deviancy in the religious doctrine tab has a goat icon?
>even forumdrones and redditors are denouncing it
Real shit. It's that bad huh?
the are running out of copium, surely at some point paradrones will realize they are no longer the target audience, i think that moment is coming soon
Reaction was bad at first but they seem to like it now. The latest dev diary has 500+ positive reactions to 6 negative.
That's because the last dev diary actually showed some interesting stuff like new vassal management mechanics (basically the ck2 conclave dlc) and additions to buildings
no
paradox actually decided too fix some stuff and genuinely improve a ton of base game features so now people like them again
Wish they included coronations and baptisms in the new expansion. Seems like the perfect opportunity for it, plus it's great for roleplay which is presumably their main focus.
I don't feel like making my own thread for this so I'll ask here. Is it historically accurate for all the Finns and Slavs to be Asian looking?
When are the modders going to come back to CK2 ?
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/dev-diary-122-regencies-and-elegance-of-the-empire.1576961/
Free regency content that'll also be included in 1.9
>Regencies
-if too young, if ill, if imprisoned, or if you travel outside of your/your vassals' lands
>Scales of power
Liege vs Regent balance, naturally drifting, but can be bought with gold, prestige, and piety (presumably events as well)
>Mandates
Generalized tasks for the regent, which they can either do, siphon the benefits from, or ignore
>Strife opinion malus
basically Tyranny, but for a regent and their fellow vassals
>Loyalty
Has its own scale instead of opinion, with loyal vassals giving heirs a strong loyalty hook upon succession
>Regency succession
Has an automatic kind of succession, generally family, Councillor, or powerful vassal. You can designate a successor, which'll upset candidates, or ask your liege to become next regent via a hook. Vassals can also plot to overthrow a regent, if they dislike him too much
>Entrenched Regencies
High-regent scaled diarchs are entrenched in their position, giving them more powers, like revoking titles, retracting vassals, and imprisoning people inside their liege's realm, while liege has less control over them. This is automatically enabled if underage or incapacitated, and the regent can spend some of their liege's resources for their own goals, at cost of strife
Can generate claims, siphon the treasury, change their contract, or even help their liege and increase crown authority
>Discharging
Upon coming of age, an entrenched regent can be discharged (unless their scale is 5 or higher), gifting them a reward for their services
>Coups
A maxed out scale 6 regent can conspiratorially usurp their liege with challenges and events rather than a full on civil war
>legacy of persia
Neat
I expected them to pick something moronic but Persia is actually a pretty good choice
Good stuff
So far this dlc has added some pretty interesting things
It's a hundred times better than royal court that's for sure
Surprisingly pleased by these developments. I guess the constant complains of the community shook things in the HQ.
I really hope these changes make playing as a vassal much more rewarding and fun, perhaps even allowing a "man behnd the man" playthrought, rather than just blobbing and usurping titles.
I'm actually excited for this stuff
>can actually model two joint rulers in an empire
holy shit
Rome kino incoming
never thought I saw the day vanilla would add junior kings. Though they probably frick it up either way.
They haven't, diarchies are for regents only
Co-Emperors are probably guarenteed for the Bzzy DLC though
But... France had junior hights from Hugh Capet to Philip Augustus, that's how they avoided partition without strictly subscribing to primogeniture.
None of this makes me want to play the game tbh. Legacy of Persia is the only kind of interesting thing but 2023 seems to be a bust for me.
lmaoing at the shill AI-tier replies
top tier content paradox, thanks for making us laugh!
meds
So, will diarchs replace "liberty faction"?
Like, instead of moronic faction increasing crown authority for few years, the faction will install a regent with scale of power 6. Simon how Simon Montfort overthrew Henry III.
worthwhile changes, but I'm afraid that people will lump these changes into the nothingburger dlc, so the score will be inflated
>wow LE BASED paradox will give us diarchies, it's gonna be so e-ACK!
Still not excited. My conspiracy theory is that Paradox is taking features from troonyherja. Should be obvious, won't explain why.
>troonyherja
you mean resetera?
was gonna say that paradox skipped several rooms here but I noticed there was an entrance right next to Persia.
So I guess we should expect an Africa expansion next?
You know they're not literally going to move room to room in a straight line right?
Also, that map says NORTH africa, not even paradox pretends anyone cares about subsaharan africa
>no Orthodoxy
they can go frick themselves
Hey I don't see anywhere that says catholicism or Islam either
Hopefully they'll expand on it in the Byzantine update like they said they will with islam and zoroastrianism in Legacy of Persia
If no there are always mods, although I haven't seen any that do Orthodoxy yet
Why do people pretend this pic is a serious roadmap? It's just a fricking joke.
Is there still not a genocide mod for CK3?
Probably can't post it on the workshop because of muh sensitivity.
You can genocide world if you play as a fallen angel in Princes of Darkness
On the topic of religion, I think that if you form the kingdom of Israel and build the third temple as a israeli character that you should get a "messiah" trait kinda like the Saoshyant for Zoroastrianism.
Unironically looking at the dev diaries they've put out this seems like the best expansion they've made mechanically
Conclave's back, regency got reworked, buff stacking is dead and it's harder to domain max etc.
They just chose the absolute most moronic shit for marketing
>They just chose the absolute most moronic shit for marketing
I wouldn't be surprised if they saw the lukewarm reaction and locked some interns in the office for a few weeks to develop unplanned regency mechanics.
Looking at the regency mechnics as they stand, it's not exactly perfect but it's generic enough to fit a lot of systems like Sultan-Vizier relationships, Co-Emperors, Basilious and General relationships etc.
It was probably an early concept for a Vizir mechanic they moved from the Persia pack to this expansion
>Paradox spending money improving the quality of anything ever due to negative feedback
I would be very surprised.
>buff stacking is dead
For MaA sure, but i didn't see that they changed knights.
>buff stacking is dead
>anything at all interesting to work towards is removed from the game to appease low iq (even for their age) MP children in a singleplayer game.
Buff stacking wasn't a good "thing to work towards" to begin with since it's just a detached quantitative bonus. I don't think building up a holding to buff up a specific MaA unit is bad, and although it's similarly quantitative to keep enhancing that province once you've got one set up, building a new one is way more interesting. And as they're now going to have number of building slots expanding, even enhancing one will at least still have decisions that you make.
Why are you misusing midwit words to sound smart? It makes you look stupid when you use a slightly uncommon word wrong.
What word do you think is being used wrong?
Quantitative. You either misunderstand what it means or are using it as a filler word to try and project an intelligence you lack. It adds nothing to sentence.
Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it means nothing. Look at the shit they put in dynasty legacies for some examples of qualitative bonuses for contrast. Not that all of them are good, but you got something that changes gameplay in just about all of those tracks. On the other hand, a quantitative bonus – one that's just numbers – doesn't actually change gameplay. You're either getting ahead, keeping up, or falling behind and that's all there is to it.
>la la la I can't hear you la la la if I ignore your post I can pretend you just don't understand.
Learn to lose arguments gracefully. Bonuses are always quantitative. It's the quality of having a quantity, you goddamn reddit midwit who uses words he doesn't understand.
The word you were thinking of was "Numerical"
No it's not, dumbass. Using "numerical" in this case would be close enough to most likely get the meaning across, but not actually correct.
A bonus is always numerical in nature because it's on a computer. But it's quantitative in the sense that it alters the quantities you're dealing with, and (implictly) nothing more, whereas it's a qualitative difference when it alters some quality (that is, non-numerical aspect) of the gameplay. Obviously, that can still be represented as numbers, as can everything if you try hard enough, but for the player it's a qualitative change in experience.
>I'm not using the word wrong, Merriam-Webster and Oxford are!
Did you even check the dictionaries you're citing? Merriam-Webster defines it broadly, without nuance and therefore neither specifically supports nor refutes that usage. Oxford Reference clearly supports it.
Although the dictionary supports my usage in this case, I would still like to point out that the wording some grad student used when writing a definition doesn't necessarily cover all correct usages, even when it is intended to.
>Um, you know how the dictionaries agree with you and in no way mentions my misuse to say it means numerical changes?
>Well, in my delusions it's the opposite, so there.
>buff stacking
how so?
can you only build one building of each type or what?
and how is one supposed to counter vassals each having 4-5 knights with his ~12-16 knights without hiring mercs?
>buff stacking is dead
is what i meant to quote.
Will other cultures/areas mechanics be actually fun or is that only allowed for the Norse
It's 30 bucks
KEK
absolute fricking MANIA
CK2 make me start buying paradox games. CK3 make me to return to pirating paradox games. Poetry.
The bundle for all of the dlc for this year is like 35 dollars, is there anyone stupid enough to pay for the base dlc?
Am I the only one who has no blue suggestions anymore? Even though the option to show them is on.
>romancing wife
>random courtier buds in trying to romance her as if she was single
>no option that acknowledges the absurdity of the situation
>"what the frick is going on, this makes 0 sense"
>realization kicks in
>romance-related events are completely independent of relationship or marital status
>trying to romance your wife spawns the same events as trying to woo some random broad, including having to outcompete random NPCs
advanced roleplaying
Just make up head-canon and pretend it's what you wanted
>You vil roleplay as ze cuck
If you play ck3 you're already a spiritual cuckold
It is painfully unfortunate that this company is clearly circling the drain and the entire genre will follow suit.
>How will this help us sell Crusader Kings?
I don't understand the problem, characters shouldn't get married?
marriages are so minor they should not be a highlight in this game
the addition of a wedding event is miniscule compared to what still remains to be added to this game
>not appreciating the sanctity of Holy matrimony
You're not the target audience, nullifidian.
how dare you assume me a nullifidian
i am merely speaking on the ritual of weddings, which has naught to do with the life that comes after it
Marriage is only not a big deal in CK3 because Paradox has been continuing to do a shit job at it for the entire lifetime of the franchise. This isn't really going to make the difference, but the travel system and regents are good improvements in their own rights.
>but the travel system
travel system is just an event bar that triggers events when you pass over the icon on the map
>regents
This is an actual improvement that they made
>is just
You can do this to anything. The travel system takes into account local buildings, terrain, and other features like control and ownership. It then uses the event framework to feed relevant content. It also has you plan your route and both costs and time take where you go into account. Although I imagine the actual event content in the system may be lacking in quantity, I don't think there's much else I'd want from a travel system than what they've included.
>It then uses the event framework to feed relevant content.
Oh boy, can't wait to get the event where my jester farts on the road!
I'm sure we won't start seeing the same events over and over again very quickly!
The events themselves and the system that they populate are different things. In terms of immediate effect they're related, but future development and modding will also build on the system.
Yeah, just like the Royal Court system?
Like the cultural tradition system – that was the big free system that came with Royal Court. Non-court artifacts would also be in the same category. The thing that's equivalent to the actual royal court system itself in this DLC (the part you're paying $30 for) is just the "grand activities". Tournaments and weddings and grand tours. Essentially, some bigger specific things that use the new system but are not important themselves.
Man, do you cuck cultists understand anything?
so what makes you despise ck3 with every single fiber of your being?
is it the constant bombardment of joke/reference/wacky events?
is it how your army has teleportation abilities and can walk on water?
is it the fact that there are no succession negotiations? or how primogeniture is a 13th century invention?
is it because there are no peace negotiations and diplomacy can be summed up to "spend prestige to make ally help you"?
is it because meaningful interaction with your vassals is so limited, you cannot even help your vassal family members with internal rebellions?
is it because the ransom function is ridiculously limited, meaning you could have your brother imprisoned but the function will only be available to his liege? so you just spam either your brother or his liege with gifts, without any guarantee that the AI will use the money correctly or that the enemy party would accept the offer?
is it about how the entire setting is treated as a monty python gig?
is it how religion has become meaningless? and how each country has just 1 abstracted bishop?
is it the mobile look, the uncanny idle animations and cartoonish proportions of characters?
is it how the AI is utterly braindead and directionless and the character events just try to distract you?
is it the cringe skill tree? where studying economics for 5 years lets you discover the idea of asking people for money?
is it how it utterly butchers the feudal system, fails to represent how other centralized western european monarchies functioned and even applies it to non-feudal societies like the ERE? how shitty and shallow the "vassal contract" system ended up being?
is it how they ended up sticking through with that shitty council system, where your powerful vassals (their number predetermined by hardcapped rank-based values, not comparative strength or wealth) will be angry for not having some arbitrary office that makes them defacto hostages?
is it the rock/paper/scissors retinue system?
what is it?
Almost all of it. Now I took the imaginationpill and just daydream about being a historically-accurate monarch in christian Europe; the experience is much more fulfilling.
>how primogeniture is a 13th century invention?
This annoys me. I feel like succession should be linked to crown authority.
>he complains about the Shrek event
There is really no pleasing you people, no wonder they just advertise and sell to reditors and casuals
Why do you need high crown authority to institute male only succession?
Which troony dev came up with that one?
>Why do you need high crown authority to change the most important law of the land and consolidate the power of the crown
gee anon that's a tough one
New dev diary just dropped
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/dev-diary-123-hastiluding-for-glory.1577736/
You guys excited?
the summary
The Tournament Dev diary
>Hastilude is a generic term used in the Middle Ages to refer to many kinds of martial games. The word comes from the Latin hastiludium, literally "lance game". By the 14th century, the term usually excluded tournaments and was used to describe the other games collectively; this seems to have coincided with the increasing preference for ritualistic and individualistic games over the traditional mêlée style.[1]
Tournament setups
>either host yourself, or get notified of an upcoming tournament
>each tournament has a limited number of Contests, depending upon Era and Traditions: possible options are the Melee, Archery, Recitals, Jousts, Wrestling, Duels, Board Games, and Horse Races
>four formats: knock-out, teams, turns, and races
>cost depends upon local barony buildings, as otherwise can get very expensive, in addition to the accommodations and prize pools
>host can choose which of his knights are spectating or participating, or assign a Personal Champion via the Court Position
>cool bucket helms now
Locale View
>The Settlement, Religious Building, Tourney Grounds, Tavern, Artisan’s Quarter, The Camp, giving you choices for which events you wish can attend/or will be picked by your character's intent
>can reduce stress, increase Qualification odds, recruit knights, get in fights, etc
>appears to be quite moddable, using plugin widgets
The Tourney
>need to qualify first to be entered in the tournament, dependent on stats/events
>once qualified, can enter the event, place bets, and attempt some sabotage
>checks can now be a combination of two skill checks instead of separate options
>Pivotal Moments are the required actions of the tournament and see how you do
Hastiluder Trait
>foot, bow, horse, wit skill tracks, which are stacking, but it's allegedly difficult to make all of the tracks
>Hastiluder Trait
>>foot, bow, horse, wit skill tracks, which are stacking, but it's allegedly difficult to make all of the tracks
this seems OP
>bracers improve score
Can tell these frickers didn't consult any actual archer
This seems actually kind of good for what it is. The problem is that "what it is" is a minigame that doesn't connect to other parts of the game and has nothing to do with grand strategy. Once they make the grand strategy part of the game actually fun, I bet these little add-ons will be neat.
I agree with you but please tell me what they should do to improve the grand strategy?
We need more stuff that isn't tied to single characters where you can progress and get qualitative change in gameplay, rather than just "keeping up". Right now the only thing that does that is dynasty renown, which isn't even really tied to the land or very directly connected to what you do. Cultures do this okay but are a little underwhelming and also not super closely connected to the map. The change to how buildings will work is arguably one of the best changes in the upcoming patch and will definitely be an underrated improvement. As for specific examples of what they could do that's achievable in the scope of an expansion:
1. Custom monuments: Duchy buildings and special buildings that have discrete parts, along the lines of the wonders and republic manors in CK2. This gives you a thing to care about that's actually on the map. Can also be tied to royal court effects or this new travel stuff, I guess.
2.
2. Dynasty legacies also need to be more like the bloodline mechanic in CK2. For starters, effects other than the ones that you pay renown for (dynasty modifiers) should be displayed visually. More importantly, there should be more of them, and the renown-based ones should be de-homogenized in their requirements; they should have prerequisites and perhaps slightly less renown cost, so that what they do more directly reflects what you've achieved, rather than just what you want.
3. Expand the "struggle" mechanic and apply it in lots of places to have dynamic run-specific things to achieve with some actual narrative to them. This one they're probably already planning to do gradually.
And one bigger idea, that would probably take its own expansion while also benefiting from building on in subsequent updates: More impactful laws. Basically just do Conclave again. The new diarchy framework (currently for regents) is an inferior model for this kind of mechanic, but isn't necessarily mutually exclusive. A way more in-depth way of centralizing power and doing societal reforms that are more legal in nature rather than cultural traditions would address the need to differentiate major empires and late game states compared to the "barely-beyond tribes" low nobility of the early medieval period.
It would also lay a solid foundation for more eastward expansion – although I know people here don't want it, they're leaving money on the table to a frustrating degree by not including Asia and not localizing non-European languages. This should be obvious from how popular mods doing that are. But they may as well make the game better before doing that kind of thing.
Just give us the republic DLC already dammit
yawn
People talk about a Byz DLC but the way the HRE is potrayed is absoloutely horrendous.
>terrible election system
>no itinerant court
>no investiture
>no guelphs/ghibellines conflict
>you can just form a kingdom whitout asking the emperor
>archbishoprics have nothing going on for them and can be annexed by anyone without consequences
>total lack of monuments
Iberia to Persia flavour packs took 1.5 years, so yeah can't wait for a proper HRE experience in 2026.
How is the fallen Eagle mod? It looks really cool but it also looks like it's on rails and that it forces you to do a lot of things.
barely any meaningful content besides larping as x, feels very vanilla in that aspect
Is the new GoT mod any good?
it's still CK3 but it looks like a better throughout experience given the available mechanics
No, barely anything to do.
Which is par for the course for CKIII, I suppose.
I like it but CK3's dumb mechanics hold it back in some areas . Seeing the iron throne in 3d is so cool.
>shovels of shekels
this can't be real
it's, dev comment:
>For those of you who are confused: This wasn't entirely intentional. Sometimes we put in placeholder loc to entertain ourselves, and this got left in on accident. It will be patched out soon.
kek. why can't these homosexuals grow a spine and keep it?
at least they didn't forget to make jon snow a homosexual in every playthrough
when will they make playing as a small but powerful vassal (duke or even a count) viable?
playing tall should have this but the knights limit in ck3 and the retinues limit in ck2 makes it unviable for me.
powerful as in having bigger income and army than an emperor.
Bros why is ck2 still a better fricking game
I miss republics
I miss government types based off of religion
Why is open government not a thing
I miss trade posts
I miss the old combat system
Why is every religion in ck3 play the same fricking way
I MISS SOCIETIES
I MISS SUPER NATURAL EVENTS
I USED TO COMPLAIN ABOUT DYING TO CHESS, I DIDNT KNOW WHAT I HAD
>why is ck2 still a better fricking game
because it has YEARS of dlcs and mods.
real crusades™ weren't a thing until the end of its lifespan.
I feel like you ck3babs have a completely fricked sense of time
It has been almost 3 years since the release of your little toy. You have literally gotten NOTHING but flavorshit, with paradox's definition of "flavor" being "you shat yourself" events
You don't have republics, ERE is feudal and despite that you still get flavor garbage announcements like "tours and tourneys" or "friends and foes" all these years later
By comparison, CK2 would have already been a complete game by that point, though it is understandable that many of you may have been toddlers in 2015 and thus not aware of it
So unless you people are legit fricked in the head and somehow forgot that CK3 is a 2020 release and wasn't released a few months ago, I cannot fathom your mindless optimism, your "2 more decades" attitude or your blatant lies regarding CK2's development cycle
>you ck3babs
why are you calling me this?
i first played ck2 years ago and just now i'm doing a run in 3.
i like how you completely ignored my point about crusades.
idk if paradox will make 3 as good as or better than 2 but they still have time.
they can't chase roleplay and flavor forever.
Some people don't seem to realize that many of the "core" DLC of CK2 were released very early. Meanwhile CK3 has nothing major yet.
>because it has YEARS of dlcs and mods.
by this time of its development ck2 had a ton of mechanical adds.
everything they add to ck3 is weak flavor shit. even this travel mechanic is pointless too afraid to punish the player to be interesting.
Remember when you could actually get injured during battles in CK2?
Remember how the CK3 devs refused to let non-AI characters be knights in case de pwayew mwight dwie?
I remember in CK2 you could die at any moment. In CK3 that barely happens.
>because it has YEARS of dlcs and mods
Strange, when CK2 came out it wasn't an inferior version of CK1. Even Imperator was technically an all-around improvement over EU: Rome.
>Strange, when CK2 came out it wasn't an inferior version of CK1.
CK3 had an ok release. It had a lot going for it. The problem is the last 3 years. It was a good canvas for the future, and it still is nothing but a good canvas for the future.
I agree, I bought it when it came out and it was fine. I figured in a few years it'd be great. But it hasn't progressed much. Did it not sell well enough?
No, they just decided to muck around adding in a 3d court (which ended up as a glorified event box) for the Sims players, which took them a few years.
is my court lagging normal?
Lagging? You are forced paused if you do engage with any associated court events.
>Lagging?
idk the correct terminology. fps drops/stutters. when the camera moves to the throne mostly.
It sold well, but their momentum was crushed by COVID and never really recovered even though the team is big. Partly it's a matter of where they're focusing development. I do expect the upcoming free patch that goes with this DLC to be good though. The activities might seem like a lot of nothing but I think they have potential to give you something interesting to do besides war that's actually worth paying attention to and not a trap option, and the change to how buildings work is hugely underrated because it addresses the game's biggest problem: that there's almost no actual progression outside of a single character. That said, although it's underrated it's nowhere near enough by itself.
>covid
shit cope. sweden didn't have lockdowns.
They didn't have government mandated lockdowns but PDX still closed their offices because they might be stupid, but they're not as stupid as the Swedish government.
Ah ha ha, good troll my friend.
Bro the AI cannot say no to blood weddings. This DLC could just be a fluff DLC like royal court.
Are you sure you understand the post you're replying to? There is no portion of the post that what you posted is relevant to.
The relevant part was crushing the delusional hopes and insufferable optimism of yet another parashill who somehow found himself lost here
Nobody here is a parashill, moron, and nobody here thinks the DLC itself is gonna add anything more important that what Royal Court does. Going "somethings are bad so there can be nothing positive and no nuance whatsoever" is just as stupid as the worst of the paradrones. And although development is slow, that also means that the time which has passed counts for less when it comes to predicting future content. In other words, it's not like Stellaris where it's safe to say that the game will never become fun at this point.
exactly! nobody is a parashill here (other than you), which is why you need to frick off
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/dev-diary-124-celebrate-good-times-come-on.1578426/
Grand Weddings
>Tours & Tournament required
>For betrothed, which can now include adults if you specify a grand wedding
>Have 3 years to commit to costs once date arrives
>recreation, murder, seduce, diplomacy, matchmaking intents
>entertainment, food, and venue Options
>3 phases: Ceremony rituals, Banquet feasts, and the Bedding sexy times
Bloody Weddings
>require the penultimate Diplomatic perk (Accomplished Forger)
>reduces Prestige level by 3, piety losses, Excommunication, negative opinion mali, and a House Feud with survivors, but we know this doesn't mean much
Feasts
>dish complexity and number of courses Option
>recreation, murder, seduce, befriend intents
>can appoint honorary guests for the center of attention, can be toasted towards (or yourself)
>pulse actions from other characters involved at feasts
Murder Feasts
>requires the penultimate Torturer perk (Forever Infamous)
>casualties and (allegedly) consequences
Grand Blots
>sacrifices option
Grand Rites
>Witch coven events
Playdates
>kid events
Next dev diary about Accolades and Knights
OH MY SCIENCE
BEDDING CEREMONIES?
THIS IS JUST LIKE MY GAME OF THRONES!
DO YOU THINK THERE WILL ALSO BE AN EVENT WHERE YOUR VASSALS INSIST THAT YOU DO THE BEDDING AND YOU YELL AT THEM, JUST LIKE BASED TYRION DID TO THAT INCEL JOFFREY?!?
I FRICKING LOVE HISTORICAL GAMES!!!
But bed ceremonies were a historical thing though...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedding_ceremony
typical deranged incel
Taking a shit was also a historical thing so what the F is Paradox doing not implementing chamber pots
Weddings were very public ceremonies, but the marital relationship of the new couple is a much-needed interaction
As for pooping, you can have a smelly court if you dont pay the event to clean your sewers (and the Erfurt latrine disaster, too!)
Well where's my public grape stomping event huh? Where are the feet traits? The ankles?
OH MY SNOPES FACTS!
IS THAT A WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE THAT DID NOT EXIST BEFORE 2017?
PEOPLE... CONSUMATED THEIR MARRIAGES?? AND HAD MARRIAGE CELEBRATIONS??? EVEN BACK THEN?!?
IT REALLY IS JUST LIKE GAME OF THRONES!
JUST LIKE THE BLOODY WEDDING, WHICH IS BASED ON THE RED WEDDING, WHICH IS BASED ON THE HISTORICAL GLENCOE MASSACRE
YES IT WASN'T EVEN A WEDDING AND IT HAPPENED 3 CENTURIES AFTER THE MEDIEVAL PERIOD WAS OVER BUT IT IS STILL FRICKING EPIC HISTORY AND ABSOLUTELY HAS A PLACE IN CK
"A LANNISTER ALWAYS PAYS HIS DEBTS" WINK WINK (ONLY HARDCORE HISTORY FANS WILL GET THIS REFERENCE!)
Dude's really reaching for the GoT comparisons here, huh. What next, the game has swords in it, so it's actually a GoT reference?
it's not that far of a Reach(get it?)
>Dude's really reaching for the GoT comparisons here
the poster or the devs
Both
>The consummation itself, i.e. the couple's first sexual intercourse, was not witnessed in most of Western Europe.
The incel screams incel in the hopes of not being found out and doesn't even read his wikipedia link which his school teacher would not let him use as a source.
tibetan girls belong to BDC
Your bad dragon dildo isn't going to suck itself homosexual. Pay attention to your inanimate soulmate instead of polluting the board with your witty comments.
When will they add the hot prisoner forceful bedding ceremony
Were tournaments even a big thing? Why have something focusing on just that?
I want to fricking lynch whoever thought that character focus trees and dynasty perk trees were a good idea.
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/dev-diary-125-the-most-valiant-of-them-all.1579721/
>it's just A Knight's Tale references
>Update 1.9/T&T coming 5/11
Accolades
>rewards for 8+ prowess unlanded and baron-rank knights
>can have 5 acclaimed knights, pending rank (king+1, emperor+1), innovations (bannus+1, knighthood+1), and the renowned name dynasty legacy (+1)
>gain Glory XP through two simultaneous attributes
>attributes depend upon personality/experience traits: outrider (cavalry) requires Open Terrain Expert or Horse Hastiluder experience, thug (dread) for wrathful, arbitrary, impatient, arrogant, or reaver characters
>charmer, scoundrel, master of revels (party), valiant, politicker, idealist attributes referenced
>MaA-boosting Accolades unlock a extra strong MaA that has double the counter efficiency and receive more bonuses from innovations
Glory
>fighting in winning battles, defeating enemy knights, winning combats, attending activities, participating in tournaments, when their liege wins wars against higher-ranked war targets, random events--can also lose glory if losing those
Accolade Succession
>a way of retaining accolade progress
>automatically appointed, while you can designate one, or just generate one with prestige
>primary attribute must remain the same, while the second can change
>if you fail to find a successor, accolade is made inactive and can be revived later
Acclaimed Knights
>Recruit intent for Grand Tournaments can find various specialties
>still no proper knight manager
>he who will rock you
HAHAHA
I UNDERSTOOD THAT REFERENCE!
ANYONE ELSE WHO UNDERSTOOD THAT REFERENCE?!?
PARADOX DID IT AGAIN!!!
I don't get it
I like it.
Thank god they didn't go with Rajas of Africa or Jade Chinks or whatever, expansion on what thematically mostly fits European continent is the right direction.
The absolute state of CK3. They added literal XP to what is supposed to be a Grand Strategy game.
XP has been in the game since the start
As bad as the lifestyle system is, it is tied to something solid instead of literally being straight up level up XP.
>he who will rock you
>eugenicsy
Isn't that one of CK's main selling points?
yeah but it should be HoI's
I really hope they don't listen to people like this, Eugenics is one of my favorite parts of the game.
fret not
>I really hope they don't listen to people like this
What is the devs are people like that?
>muh ableism
our civilization is in a race to the bottom isn't it
What does that even mean?
>Having intellect be genetic is also problematic
I refuse to believe this homie's post wasn't bait
a mod that overhauls the stupid knights, levies, MaA and warfare systems in ck3 when?
i can't believe they managed to make it worse than ck2.
bro it's all hardcoded, what do you want
>it's all hardcoded
nyooooooooooooo
>what do you want
tldr; i can't be stronger than my united vassals unless i beat them and hire mercenaries first.
as an emperor and somewhat invested in knights, you can have ~34 knights. that's as much as 6 counts.
and you can have 10 MaA regiments in the end game. that's as much as what, 3 counts?
if your vassals ganged on you, you're done. (this doesn't happen because the AI is moronic).
levies being generic doesn't help either.
i want to be able to match or even outmatch my vassals if i build tall like in ck2.
i want to have specific unit types if i build their buildings like in ck2.
back then, i didn't bother with light infantry and archers. and only in the late game i started upgrading heavy infantry buildings.
my levies were superior to my vassals' when compared 1:1 because they had a lot of light infantry and archers mixed in while i did not.
even then, i got more levies (of much higher quality) from my own domain than from my vassals.
>counts start with 5 knights
>each level of fame adds one knight
it's perfectly normal for a count to have 6-7 knights
>counts get a MaA regiment for each era
>they start with 2 for being a count
counts can have 6 MaA regiments in the late era
>an emperor has as many knights as 5-7 counts
>an emperor has less MaA regiments than two counts
idk how parashit thought this was ok.
I don't even understand need to cap MAA.
They already cost gold, so poorer vassal couldn't afford them. Why is there need to introduce cap?
Truth is that the game gets harder without the cap, because the vassal will have much more MAA, and when they revolt, their armies have better quality.
i think they capped them to try keeping the player weak.
if you could beat armies triple your size like it's nothing, you won't need to suck your vassals' wieners anymore.
but it's funny how broken the game is, once you've got 100k levies, dangerous factions stop triggering even on succession.
the only ones that trigger are peasant revolts and those can be handled with MaA only.
>if you could beat armies triple your size like it's nothing, you won't need to suck your vassals' wieners anymore.
But in CK3 vassals send levies and not MAA, unlike in CK2...
It's stupid that every army is made 90% of levies, while historically levies served auxiliary role, so there wasn't a point in recruiting more than 50% of your army to be them.
I mean, most battles succumb to a rout after 20% of the army was dead.
>But in CK3 vassals send levies and not MAA, unlike in CK2...
exactly. allowing you to beat armies triple your size regularly because you have your OP MaA and knights while the AI doesn't have the money to match you with MaA leaving it dependent on levies.
you could only do that in ck2 if you had minmaxed demesne or with your retinue.
i couldn't beat triple my numbers except with mt retinue.
my demesne levies did double their numbers.
it isn't about being afford to, mid-game all AI lords have maxed out their limit by the same arbitrary MAA cap player has preventing them from spending more money
Is ck3 good yet, haven’t played it in like a year
Try again at the end of the decade
how did people receive T&T?
Not well
is this guy from the future?
how did the above guy know what will happen?
paradox are too predictable
He doesn't know. He is from Plebbit. They like to have paragraphs of stories to tell for upvotes.
it's not out yet