Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[notquitethere]

Where's the option to demand independence? Would I need to start a faction for that?

[Teneb]

Where's the option to demand independence? Would I need to start a faction for that?

It's a CB vs your liege.

[notquitethere]

Ah, of course. I'm being dense. I've played this game loads but hardly ever as a count with a liege.

[pisskop]

Having a duke as liege has some uses.  They protect you from the worst counter-attacks, and they buffer you from the Emps if you decide to go dicking around the royalty.  Growing under them and establishing yourself and a stable court is a good thing.

[Great Order]

I've discovered a nice way to plunder the monasteries vassals.

Imprison a fair number of them, swap out your religion, then start mass revoking (Assuming you have religious revocation, ofc). It seems that characters are most likely to go to courts of characters of the same religion, culture, and ruler. As a result, once unlanded your prisoners become part of a vassal's court.
Then you revoke THAT vassal's land, and suddenly you've got loads of prisoners with a few hundred gold each sitting in your prison that you can banish.

Netted myself a nice ~2000 gold. The irony of getting all of this wealth as a Fraticelli ruler isn't lost on me.

EDIT: Game is actively malicious, I swear.
After throwing myself 1.5k into debt and sacrificing 10k prestige to try and found the Alexander bloodline, the game decided my character should die before the event comes to a close. Then the plague came, making it impossible to do anything with my retinue aside from watch it wither away to nothingness because everywhere had 1k supply and my vassals kept raising their levies for what seemed to be no reason other than to make them attrition away to less than 1k troops. Now there's a crusade targetting me, and the game's not letting me look at any details for it because if it can't dick me using game mechanics, it'll dick me by bugging out.

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

Given the first part of your post, I think the latter part is karma.

[Malus]

Well, Crusader Kings 3 has been announced at PDXCon -- and CK2 (the base game, anyway) is free forever. Confirmed features for CK3 so far are vastly improved graphics (obviously), cadet branches, dynasty heads, and "more customization for your ruler and your religion": dynamic heresies, maybe? Sounds like they went into the project rearchitecting systems so they could support things that just weren't feasible to add to CK2.

I'd like to see baronies represented on-map (and a map with Imperator-style detail) and maybe playable landless/adventurer characters, but who knows if we'll get that. It would be interesting to be able to play a noble-in-exile instead of just getting a game over if you lose your titles. Release date is set for 2020 but "game development is hard" so no guarantees.

Hopefully more details in ~15 minutes.

Edit: First article is out. Sounds... pretty different. Characters level up, and there are skill trees. Custom heresies are confirmed, and yeah, baronies are represented on a map that is "4x larger" than CK2s, while still covering the same amount of geography. Also, every ruler will be playable from the start, though I'm not sure if that includes theocracies. The article also has screenshots of the map and one of the skill trees.

Edit 2: So, from the post-announcement interview, there was mention of a few interesting new features. "Secrets" (if you murder someone, even if no one else knows, it becomes a secret that's tracked and can presumably be leaked) which you can use to blackmail characters, and if you have a secret on your liege he can't revoke your title. Merchant republics are cut completely (which also implies no theocracies). The genetics system has been completely redesigned: expect Habsburg jaws with enough inbreeding. They aren't importing the CK2 events; everything is custom.  Nomads aren't in, but tribes are. They're approaching CK3 with a much larger focus on the RPG mechanics. We're full Machiavelli, now: you can rule through fear instead of just love. (No word on love and fear, but it seems likely.)

[Teneb]

Well, Crusader Kings 3 has been announced at PDXCon -- and CK2 (the base game, anyway) is free forever. Confirmed features for CK3 so far are vastly improved graphics (obviously), cadet branches, dynasty heads, and "more customization for your ruler and your religion": dynamic heresies, maybe? Sounds like they went into the project rearchitecting systems so they could support things that just weren't feasible to add to CK2.

I'd like to see baronies represented on-map (and a map with Imperator-style detail) and maybe playable landless/adventurer characters, but who knows if we'll get that. It would be interesting to be able to play a noble-in-exile instead of just getting a game over if you lose your titles. Release date is set for 2020 but "game development is hard" so no guarantees.

Hopefully more details in ~15 minutes.

Edit: First article is out. Sounds... pretty different. Characters level up, and there are skill trees. Custom heresies are confirmed, and yeah, baronies are represented on a map that is "4x larger" than CK2s, while still covering the same amount of geography. Also, every ruler will be playable from the start, though I'm not sure if that includes theocracies. The article also has screenshots of the map and one of the skill trees.

Edit 2: So, from the post-announcement interview, there was mention of a few interesting new features. "Secrets" (if you murder someone, even if no one else knows, it becomes a secret that's tracked and can presumably be leaked) which you can use to blackmail characters, and if you have a secret on your liege he can't revoke your title. Merchant republics are cut completely (which also implies no theocracies). The genetics system has been completely redesigned: expect Habsburg jaws with enough inbreeding. They aren't importing the CK2 events; everything is custom.  Nomads aren't in, but tribes are. They're approaching CK3 with a much larger focus on the RPG mechanics. We're full Machiavelli, now: you can rule through fear instead of just love. (No word on love and fear, but it seems likely.)

I am unwisely hyped.

Shame about the non-feudal govs, though.

[scriver]

Well, I can't say I expected this. I kinda wished for it, but I didn't think it would happen.

Sounds mostly like good changes to me. Love the secrets. It's something I've wanted for ck2 for a long time -- alongside secret traits, which was sort of implemented at ck2's end parts. Not sure how much I like the level up and ability trees. Will have to see how that turns out.

Expected merchant republics to get cut though. They were basically a ramshackle hack and because of that never really worked like they should -- in particular after the government type changes the game got over time. Of they're eventually revisited I hope they learned from experience and don't make the same mistake twice.

I also hope they're not spreading their initial focus too thin for the initial release. While I do think the "it's called Crusader Kings so they can't expand beyond Christians/Europe" argument is bullshit I do think Europe should be the focus -- particularly for the base game content. I feel ck2 did the correct thing in that way: I don't know how many or you remember it but at the beginning of ck2 every character was playable but the content was 99% flavoured for Christians. They then quickly patched the game to only allow Christians (but you could still use country selection exploits to play as others for a long time). I think having a less broad focus will benefit the game. Christian World and/or Europe is plenty variable enough to begin with. What I really fear is that too little focus will result in the same blandness that Imperator unfortunately launched with.

All in all I feel more resigned than hyped. I already know I'm going to buy this game at launch because I love ck2 and I know myself -- I won't be able to not want to play it's sequel. I just hope it will be a good one.

Edit: So I head over to the paradox forums to check it out and see that this is the controversy of the day (from here):

6. There’s no “Deus Vult”.
In the years since CK2’s release, “Deus Vult” – an eleventh century crusader battlecry – has become a vile meme beloved of racists on the internet. I asked how Paradox’s community team felt about this, and was told emphatically that the words will not appear in Crusader Kings 3. That’s refreshing, but in a game set during a time of conflicts fetishised by modern fascists, it’s the tip of the iceberg. I’ll be writing more about how Paradox are handling the political sensitivities of making a game about the crusades, and how they’re handling the representation of non-European cultures, in the weeks to come.

*emphatic sigh*

[Teneb]

Edit: So I head over to the paradox forums to check it out and see that this is the controversy of the day (from here):

6. There’s no “Deus Vult”.
In the years since CK2’s release, “Deus Vult” – an eleventh century crusader battlecry – has become a vile meme beloved of racists on the internet. I asked how Paradox’s community team felt about this, and was told emphatically that the words will not appear in Crusader Kings 3. That’s refreshing, but in a game set during a time of conflicts fetishised by modern fascists, it’s the tip of the iceberg. I’ll be writing more about how Paradox are handling the political sensitivities of making a game about the crusades, and how they’re handling the representation of non-European cultures, in the weeks to come.

*emphatic sigh*

Dogwhistlers gonna dogwhistle.

[scriver]

It's not like Deus Vult being in the game or not is going to change any of that, though. Removing it's use in the proper historical context because of improper modern usage by a tiny fringe group doesn't exactly make much sense.

[Trekkin]

It's not like Deus Vult being in the game or not is going to change any of that, though. Removing it's use in the proper historical context because of improper modern usage by a tiny fringe group doesn't exactly make much sense.

There's reason to believe the "historical" usage may well have been apocryphal, though, above and beyond the usual problems with chroniclers.

[scriver]

I believe the belief is not that it was apocryphal but that it was quoting-the-spirit-of-what-was-said-rather-than-the-literal-words (I can't remember the right word for that right now, it's some fancy latin thing). Regardless, even if it wasn't actually said by the Pope himself it was still written by the monk who penned it as such, so the historical context is still the same.

[A Thing]

The deus vult thing is what it is. *shrug* I'm more interested in the dynamic religions and heresies. I know Rolan will be rolling up in here soon to talk about making Catharism 2.0.

Tribals seem to be in, no word on Muslims, but hopefully they're playable in vanilla too so we can actually get some flavor for them in free updates this time around. I think I played nomads and merchants all of twice, so I don't really miss them. I do hope they come back at some point, just, y'know, better this time around. Has anyone seen anything on naval combat? I don't really care if it's in or not, but I know it's something a lot of people wanted in CK2.

Secrets sound fucking rad, and also will make the AGOT mod work a lot better in regards to *certain* characters I'm sure.

Also, here's the baby murder trailer since it hasn't been posted here yet.

[scriver]

Secret fathers is actually a thing already -- the GoTmod already uses this for spontaneous variations on you-know-what-happened-like events.

...At least I am under the impression that it does. I have never experienced it myself.