>no naval warfare
how do you even take a game like this seriously?
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
>no naval warfare
>no naval warfare
how do you even take a game like this seriously?
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
>Paradox
Why did you even buy it is the real question.
homie who cares? I'm role-playing as a white Irishman cucking all of Italy.
Irish and Meds are the same race.
The game is shit and Naval warfare would have been implemented even more shitty and break the game. Don't worry though, eventually they'll add it in their 30th 10$ dlc and it will break the game (literally and figuratively).
30 dollar naval warfare DLC where 90% of the actual new content are role-playing events about poop, cats and incest
how important was naval warfare in the medieval age? I think their justification was that naval warfare wasnt really that big, tbh it did feel weird as frick sieging constantinople knowing that historically you couldnt do shit to that city without naval superiority
Yeah, Paradox said naval warfare was basically non-existent during the period.
Still doesn't excuse how cheap it is to move a medieval army across the sea. The making of a medieval army is complex, expensive affair and I imagine the procurement of ships to transport them is even more expensive. This is not reflected in the game at all. Paradox is lazy and wants to appeal to the casual market. That's why you have a downgraded naval system.
paradox is a failed state
Yes, but naval warfare did happen, and was important. It was just rare because it was expensive to deal with.
The battles that did happen? Absolutely more important just because they were so rare. Also navies were indeed used for commerce raiding.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Naval_battles_of_the_Middle_Ages
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Sandwich_(1217)
I think this should summarize how it worked pretty well, and it would work really well given CK2/3's mechanics.
You now remember that the time period is some 700 years, and you're showing me... about two dozens, a good portion of them in East Asia.
It wasn't super important historically because of the logistical issues and other problems involved with long range invasions, but in ck3 you can have a landlocked mongolia summon an entire armada out of thin air in the black sea to transport the khan's entire army to england without any real issues. Because you can do this, having a warfleet that can intercept these transports is extremely important to prevent a dominant land power from being able to bring their full might against any enemy anywhere in the world with no way of stopping them. It would also make it so having coastal provinces actually matters for international affairs since you could only build warships in coastal provinces. This would allow the ai to have their handicap of not having to deal with actual transport fleets while also not making the sea just one giant highway to anywhere on the map for a handful of gold.
This is something I noticed during the initial release of the game and I am surprised people don't mention it more. Its such a small thin that has a huge impact on war and diplomacy that seems to have been complicity overlooked by many.
Also you solution is nearly perfect unsurprisingly considering that is basically what CK2 did.
>how important was naval warfare in the medieval age?
As much as today.
I don't think so, with the smaller world we have and force projection and technology navy is far more important than it was before.
Which isn't to say it wasn't important in the past either.
Let me put it this way, trade was incredibly important, the difference is, people were poor, and could only afford like 1 or 2 big ships. This got easier as the economies scaled up, but most ships in a fleet were commandeered trade ships. This also made sense because naval warfare was basically fire arrows and then board the enemy and kill. There might've ramming in this time period, but I think that would've been less desirable to capturing ships, just because of how valuable they would be for trade. Also naval battles entirely decided the life of several minor kingdoms like Aragon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Counts
I think the medieval period is a great time to study for applications of Mann's theory, which is really interesting.
>how important was naval warfare in the medieval age?
How important was incest, creating your own meme religions and cultures, having to deal with inane events when you hold court, or administering a breeding program to create super soldiers and heirs?
>no naval warfare
Should there be?
I really want to like ck3, but 2 is still better given it's finished. All I can do is wait for shit to happen. Put it at speed 5 and wait. Build improvements. For what?
>No money sinks
>Can't upgrade shit until x year
>When you do upgrade something money start flooding you with absolutely nothing (except for mercs) to buy
>Can't gather larger retinue (small boost after year x!)
>No trade
>No government flavour
>No danger after you become larger than one duchy
>Only way your dynasty can go extinct is if nemesis event triggers and some dynasty starts autistically genociding your relatives
Etc etc etc
Naval combat is the least of this game troubles
All of those things also apply to 2 and most of it to 1 (it lacks certain mechanics entirely to even have those issues)
>No money sinks
Wonders and hospitals(and gorillion upgrades to your holdings)
>Can't upgrade shit until x year
No year restrictions in 2(small negative bonus to price only), you could get specific technology up to the maximum in century or less
>When you do upgrade something money start flooding you with absolutely nothing (except for mercs) to buy
See first one
>Can't gather larger retinue (small boost after year x!)
Technology, wonders, counties number, trade posts etc
>No trade
Trade posts along the silk road for everyone and coastal provinces for republics
>No government flavour
Republics, nomads and imperial (not much but multiple times more than 3)
>No danger after you become larger than one duchy
Okay that's fair for all paradox gsg
>Only way your dynasty can go extinct is if nemesis event triggers and some dynasty starts autistically genociding your relatives
Could die out due to low fertility (literally impossible in 3) and epidemics(once again not much but it's better)
Can't speak for one because i tried it after 2 and it was boring
Dogshit game, won't ever be better than ck2 given how braindead the new dev team is.
3D breasts
CK 2 did not have naval warfare either, only a stupid-ass system where you summon boats that may or may not be enough to carry your army depending on your coastal vassal's mood that day.
That stupid system was perfect for exactly what it needed to do. Limiting the number of troops a lord can move across the water, and outright preventing naval movement by those who shouldn't be doing it in the first place like random tribals and completely land locked kingdoms. In the later case they could at least hire merc ships which works well.
>paper doll dynastic sim game
>WhY nO nAvAl CoMbAt?
Alternatlively: name 10 important naval battles from Europe between 1050 and 1450
The Italians, Normans, Byzantines, Arabs all had multiple intense and drawn out conflicts throughout the Mediterranean. The rise of Venice around 1100-1200 involved defeating just about everyone at sea. England, France and the Iberians were constantly engaged in naval battles throughout the course of the 100 yrs war. France famously managed to raid the English coast after destroying the English navy and multiple larger planned French invasions of England were only stopped because the English defeated their navy.
Thread is pointless anyways because naval battles will never be in the game.
I asked you about naming 10 important naval battles, not waffing around what you think about the subject of fleet importance.
The real question is - why morons insist they should be there in the first place?
Don't care, enjoy this and vic3 slop, you killed probably the best pdx game ever in imperator 2.0 just to spite johan, you deserve it
>I'll never get to play a game with the Tudor navy in it.
Feelsbadman.
Mahan, whatever, I haven't done this in a while.
You missed the point of the game if that's what you're looking for.