Another tidbit they removed was being able to choose start dates. Unlike most people I actually used them to be in particular exact time periods that interested me from wiki or shows I used to watch.
It's a ton of work on their end compared to just having a certain number of bookmarks though, since they have to adjust all that for most major updates. I'm not a fan of cutting options, but sometimes the cost/benefit just doesn't justify something.
And what? Whether the practice is changed, it's still people's history.
This is true of literally everything in the game, though. Trying to call out this one thing on those grounds is disingenuous and overdramatic.
It's only true of most things in the very abstract sense, since most things show a reasonable attempt at accuracy, and when inaccurate, aren't specifically insulting or portrayed as if accurate. The only thing that can be considered a similar level of callous indifference is that the code contains a Hebrew name for God, meaning that observant Jews are forbidden from installing the game. But even that is simply careless, not malicious.
All I know is CK3 better not have the "mana" game mechanic system EU4 has.
It doesn't have that kind of mana. There are various pools of points, but not so universally overapplied as in EU4. It seems like prestige and piety are becoming more mana-like though, as they did over the course of CK2's lifespan.
Technology transfer was more fun in CK2 with either using your spy or councilors to gain tech. It made it so that you didn't have to pay attention to it like mad all the time.
Tech may be more like current CK2, where it's an active thing that you make decisions about. But it seems like it'll actually be more like CK1 and early CK2, where it progresses gradually, except with the key difference that tech is per culture instead of per province, and whoever's most influential lord of the culture gets to decide what the priority for speedier development is, so even more background than CK2, comparable to CK1. Mind, I'm less certain of this than of some things; unless I've missed a dev diary they've been relatively vague about it.
Developing your dynasty will be a bit more like tech, maybe. Tech is confirmed to unlock new unit types now, though.
Another peeve about CK3 that ties into this is that they apparently have discarded varied levies altogether.. which is less than ideal. I liked that about CK2 the most.
This is basically just a terminology change, though. Troops in general are more varied. You've got men at arms of varied types, knights, and your peasant levies are more of an emergency backup. Which is by no means ahistorical, although Crusader Kings these days covers such a vast time and area that no single way can be said to be historical for the entire span.
(hideous though it may be)
With the exception of the terrain-oriented glamor shots that don't represent how you'll likely be playing the game and a few of the worst CK2 portrait packs, I find CK2 significantly more visually appealing than CK3 (or, for that matter, CK1).