Print

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

[pisskop]

Ive had it work 1.5 times without scumming.

Once as the king of italy, i passed and I ended up quitting that game 60 years later out of boredom.  The trials themselves just felt . . . right, like they were never going to fail.

Once as a king of Finland I managed to get a recurring event for three 'generations' before the gravelkind forced me to play as his older sibling.  I went the wisdom route of immortality, apparently failed/guy was a sham, and I was reincarnated as a baby.  Then, it happened again, with the baby.  Then it happened a third time, but this time not even the oubliette would kill the heir and allow this reincarnated king to rule.

[ZeroGravitas]

So this weekly-challenge-for-microtransaction-points is actually pretty good. I probably would have played a lot more CK2 instead of other games if these weekly challenges had come about earlier.

Have they confirmed this means no more DLC for CK2?

[scriver]

Spoiler: What challenge is having five sons, when you have an eternity to sire them? (click to show/hide)

Yeah, It happened again

[birdy51]

My first Immortal was Norse, but he died pretty quick to rival after a few years, so I never reaped the full benefit.

The second Immortal I received was what passes for an African version of Satan. Joined a cult, murdered children and elders, trapped his immortal rival in a perpetual motion machine, formed an empire. His kids somehow still loved him, despite being an utter bastard of a man.

[Malus]

Lots of new CK3 info out.

Here's an article, and here's a reddit comment from a journalist at PDXcon.

Spoiler: reddit comment (click to show/hide)

BONUS ROUND (Stuff that didn't make it into the article):

• There will be five unique graphics sets for clothes at launch: Western (European), Middle Eastern, Sub-Saharan, Indian, and Steppe. Everyone else uses whatever is the closest match. In terms of physical appearance, the new DNA system can represent all ethnicities, so we probably won't see face packs again. No era-specific clothing at launch.
• Clothing is partly based on rank. A Western Count and a Western Duke might wear a similar style clothing, but one wears linen and one wears silk and you will be able to see that difference.
• No more static event pictures. Events will feature the actual character models posed against some kind of background, and they can have props like knives, crucifixes, etc. Currently they don't animate to actually interact like getting into a fight.
• Tutorial is described as "Stellaris-like", and they've improved the ways the game can give you suggestions on what you want to be doing. More approachable, but not dumbed down.
• Custom religions you found can have Holy Orders. Not ready to talk much about that.
• The tech system is more tied to characters than it was in CK2, but not ready to talk about it yet.
• Councilor jobs like Steward are now an "office" that is placed on the map instead of a person, so you don't have to re-assign it when the councilor dies. The office itself can even still keep working without a holder, just at a very reduced effectiveness.
• The new Doctrines and Tenets are being used to represent more historically accurate versions of real heresies like Catharism. The AI will found these, and they are weighted to appear at the place and time they did historically. The AI will stick to founding historical heresies and won't abuse the system to create random weird ones. That's the player's job.
• Zoroastrians can still have incest, naturally, and you can reform any religion to allow it now.
• Historical events like the Mongol Invasion are in. Dynamic epidemics from Reaper's Due are not in, as they didn't feel that feature worked very well. No word on how the plague will be handled.
• Characters still get sick and are treated by Court Physicians.
• Provinces now have Development, which is like civilization value in Imperator. Tribes don't care about it but feudals get more taxes from it.
• Revolt Risk has been replaced by Control, which is going to work a bit differently.
• If your heir when you die is an old guy who has already invested all of his perks, you can respec his lifestyle tree once if it sucks.
• Splendour is like your Dynasty XP. It's used to buy Legacies, which are kind of like national ideas in EU4 and stay with your dynasty forever. One of these lets you increase the chances of inheriting congenital traits, if you want to create a dynasty of stong genius ubermensch. It's not realistic but it is a playstyle they want to support.
• Foreigners don't care about Dread, only your own vassals.
• Fleets are now handled like CK1. You just pay money to turn into boats. Naval combat is a possibility in the future. Henrik thinks it would be cool, especially for the Mediterranean.
• Vikings can still sail up rivers.
• There is a big dragon hanging out in the Terra Incognita on the Eastern edge of the map and it looks like they've left plenty of room to add China in the future. They wouldn't say anything about it. No Chinese Emperor interactions at launch.
• No plans for a CK3 to EU4 converter.
• You only need to siege the fortified holdings to occupy an entire county. Castles are automatically fortified, but cities and churches are not unless you have built walls in them.
• Factions are back. Peasants can now found factions. One example given was that Norwegian peasants living under a Danish king can found a self-rule faction, and Norwegian culture nobles will join them. Like a combination of a CK2 faction and a peasant revolt, very powerful.
• Henrik is not interested in non-dynastic play (Holy Orders, etc). Playable mercenaries are a possibility, being landless and using your armies to make money. Adoption is also a potential mechanic. Neither one will be in at launch.
• Much more events that deal with interpersonal drama and people important to the player, like family/friends/rivals.
• Events can look back at how the relationship between two characters has developed over many years and generate content for them dynamically.
• Poetry generator that will actually make your poetry better or worse based on character skill.
• Double the number of content designers working on CK3 as CK2 had at its height.
• Direct vassals will always matter. So the previous comment about Barons not being important doesn't necessarily apply if you're a Count.
• No crazy fantasy events (immortality, Satanism, child of destiny) at launch. Undecided if they will be added later, but if they will, there will definitely be game rules to turn them off. CK3 should feel more historical compared to CK2. This was a goal.
• There will be special mechanics for Crusades but they're not talking about that yet.
• Playing pagans feels "significantly different" from CK2.
• You can reform from tribal to feudal.
• Control is more of a short-term thing and Development is more long-term. For example, Control in a province is reduced when it changes owners but recovers quickly.
• Religions have degrees of relation. Abrahamic > Christian > Catholic.
• Eastern Religions are still more tolerant of heresies.
• Ecumenism: Catholics/Orthodox/Coptic don't treat each other as heresies for purposes of CBs and stuff. There are steps of tolerance. It's not just "True Faith, Heretic, or Heathen".
• Converting foreign rulers with your chaplain will not be in at launch.
• Investiture system and antipopes will not be in at launch.
• When you found a new religion, some vassals and some provinces will convert. Based on things like opinion modifier and traits (Zealous/Cynical)
• Terrain type has an effect on Development in provinces, but climate currently does not.

A couple things stuck out for me:

Henrik is not interested in non-dynastic play (Holy Orders, etc). Playable mercenaries are a possibility, being landless and using your armies to make money. Adoption is also a potential mechanic. Neither one will be in at launch.

A fully-fledged expansion adding landless play and merc play could be a lot of fun. (Also, a developer on reddit mentioned the restrictions on playing theocracies/republics is trivially changeable for modders, they just don't want to officially support that style of gameplay.) I'm interested in seeing what modders can do.

No crazy fantasy events (immortality, Satanism, child of destiny) at launch. Undecided if they will be added later, but if they will, there will definitely be game rules to turn them off. CK3 should feel more historical compared to CK2. This was a goal.

This is surprising given how popular the fantasy elements are.

[Sime]

Does CK2 really need a sequel?  I get the impression that paradox sequels are never as good.   And if an engine needs a rewrite,   every effort should be made to support the porting of earlier content.  Otherwise everyone is just reinventing the wheel for the sake of the new engine.

[ZeroGravitas]

Does CK2 really need a sequel?  I get the impression that paradox sequels are never as good.   And if an engine needs a rewrite,   every effort should be made to support the porting of earlier content.  Otherwise everyone is just reinventing the wheel for the sake of the new engine.

yeah, ck2 needs a sequel.

are paradox sequels as good? well, ck2 was better than ck, and eu4 is better than eu3. hoi is kind of a garbage fire all-around, so i can't really compare those directly.

[Cruxador]

It is definitely time for a new game. There's already quite a few things confirmed in CK3 game that weren't remotely possible in CK2. And what more can they add to CK2 at this point? Sure, there can always be more content, but modders can (and inevitably will) do that better anyway. In terms of systems, all the things that people have been wanting the whole time either were wrapped up in Holy Fury (which was sort of a grab bag of things they'd been saying they wanted to do for years, or that were in CK1) or aren't really possible with the way the game is coded. On top of that there are things that don't really work that well but which they can't change too much because they were already sold to people as DLC features, like merchant republics and Muslim decadence. Sure, they could let CK2 sit a while without any update, but why?

When it comes to porting, I do think they should have gone through and ported many of the CK2 and CK1 events, where it makes sense to, and preferred to include rather than exclude. But many events either tie into specific systems that are being changed anyway, or were specific narratives that CK2 players have already experienced. It makes sense not to carry too much over.

As for whether it's a good sequel, that's still up for debate, but even if it's not, CK2 still exists and the price is only going down.

eu4 is better than eu3.

That's very subjective. It has gotten a lot of good support since launch, but it still relies very heavily on the core mana system. They may have polished that turd up a lot better than with HoI or Stellaris, but that doesn't mean it's better overall.

[A Thing]

No crazy fantasy events (immortality, Satanism, child of destiny) at launch. Undecided if they will be added later, but if they will, there will definitely be game rules to turn them off. CK3 should feel more historical compared to CK2. This was a goal.

This is surprising given how popular the fantasy elements are.

Yeah I don't know how to feel about that, satanism, immortality, etc sure since that actually changed the balance. But losing stuff like the portal to hell I feel like gets rid of some of the character to Crusader Kings. I dunno, maybe putting more effort into being historical means they'll actually put work into making Muslims being compelling to play since they're kinda important for the time period.

Do we know if they're keeping India? I know the map supposedly goes to eastern tibet, but does that include India? And if so, are they going to rework India or is it going to be in the same mediocre state as in CK2?

Edit: Malus' repost mentions Indian outfits so presumably India is in. Welp, let's hope they put more effort into them and this isn't another Imperator Rome where there's tons of cultures that are very samey.

[Karnewarrior]

I'm definitely sticking with CKII for the time being, especially if playing a republic isn't an option. I've greatly enjoyed all my republican playthroughs of the game, even if I played feudal this last time.

Same for the supernatural events, which were always fun for me - exception being chess with death, but apparently that only popped if the character was going to die anyway so I'll give it a pass.

[IronyOwl]

I don't mind the loss of supernatural events too much since modders will do it better anyway... but that applies to pretty much anything they could do or not do. I don't think it's hyperbole to say they'd be better off making amazing mod tools and letting the community build the game for them.

The bigger concern is the philosophy behind it. CK3 is never going to feel like an actual historically accurate drama. They sort of know this because characters move along a talent tree, but here now they're trying to be all stuffy as if the best parts of ck2 weren't absurd bullshit. Combined with the hardcore graphical update and content cut, I get the feeling they're taking themselves way too seriously and the game's going to suffer from pretentiousness.

[A Thing]

I don't mind the loss of supernatural events too much since modders will do it better anyway... but that applies to pretty much anything they could do or not do. I don't think it's hyperbole to say they'd be better off making amazing mod tools and letting the community build the game for them.

The bigger concern is the philosophy behind it. CK3 is never going to feel like an actual historically accurate drama. They sort of know this because characters move along a talent tree, but here now they're trying to be all stuffy as if the best parts of ck2 weren't absurd bullshit. Combined with the hardcore graphical update and content cut, I get the feeling they're taking themselves way too seriously and the game's going to suffer from pretentiousness.

Yeah I kind of have that same feeling too. It's a bit silly to go "well we're historical serious business now" and then also include the ability to respec a person's skill tree once they becomes the new ruler (which probably isn't a bad thing considering Pdox AI, it just doesn't fit with historical.) It gives a bit of a whiff of the Total War Rome 2 feeling, where they try to be more historical* but end up gamey as hell anyways. I dunno. I doubt it'll be as bad as all that (Paradox already sacrificed Imperator Rome for that one,) but I hope they lighten up on it a bit.

*To be fair, Rome Total War 1 did have "'Mummies Alive' Egyptians" as Europa Barbarorum put it so that was a bit more justified on the devs part.

[Cruxador]

I don't mind the loss of supernatural events too much since modders will do it better anyway... but that applies to pretty much anything they could do or not do. I don't think it's hyperbole to say they'd be better off making amazing mod tools and letting the community build the game for them.

The bigger concern is the philosophy behind it. CK3 is never going to feel like an actual historically accurate drama. They sort of know this because characters move along a talent tree, but here now they're trying to be all stuffy as if the best parts of ck2 weren't absurd bullshit. Combined with the hardcore graphical update and content cut, I get the feeling they're taking themselves way too seriously and the game's going to suffer from pretentiousness.

I can't say I agree. I really prefer the game not to be infested with their Swedish sense of "humor". All that nonsense about horse culture and secret bears is, at absolute best, only funny the first time. I'd rather they take themselves a bit more seriously than they have been lately.

As for supernatural events in general, I think it's only sober and reasonable to keep it out of the base game. Immortality was never in CK2 for most of its history either, after all, at least not as something that you could access through normal play. I expect that a supernatural DLC is one of the possible candidates that they've considered, though.

Yeah I kind of have that same feeling too. It's a bit silly to go "well we're historical serious business now" and then also include the ability to respec a person's skill tree once they becomes the new ruler (which probably isn't a bad thing considering Pdox AI, it just doesn't fit with historical.) It gives a bit of a whiff of the Total War Rome 2 feeling, where they try to be more historical* but end up gamey as hell anyways. I dunno. I doubt it'll be as bad as all that (Paradox already sacrificed Imperator Rome for that one,) but I hope they lighten up on it a bit.

*To be fair, Rome Total War 1 did have "'Mummies Alive' Egyptians" as Europa Barbarorum put it so that was a bit more justified on the devs part.

I'm definitely not going to defend their trait tree decisions specifically, but game mechanics being abstract is quite different from lore not being grounded.

[scriver]

CK2 had no supernatural events at the start either. The few events that broached it were all extremely ambiguous. I think that it's better to start with a clean slate when it comes to that and they maybe add it in expansions later on.

No crazy fantasy events (immortality, Satanism, child of destiny) at launch. Undecided if they will be added later, but if they will, there will definitely be game rules to turn them off. CK3 should feel more historical compared to CK2. This was a goal.

This is surprising given how popular the fantasy elements are.

Yeah I don't know how to feel about that, satanism, immortality, etc sure since that actually changed the balance. But losing stuff like the portal to hell I feel like gets rid of some of the character to Crusader Kings. I dunno, maybe putting more effort into being historical means they'll actually put work into making Muslims being compelling to play since they're kinda important for the time period.

Do we know if they're keeping India? I know the map supposedly goes to eastern tibet, but does that include India? And if so, are they going to rework India or is it going to be in the same mediocre state as in CK2?

Edit: Malus' repost mentions Indian outfits so presumably India is in. Welp, let's hope they put more effort into them and this isn't another Imperator Rome where there's tons of cultures that are very samey.

If I understood it correctly then the map covers about the same area as ck2's current one, plus a going a bit more south in Africa. Reasonably they want to fit in the southwestern parts of the Indian Ocean trade theatre. Kongo was mentioned somewhere. All feudal characters will be playable -- no certainty as to whether Muslims (or other non-European societies in general) count as Itqa, as in current ck2, or Feudal as they did in the earliest iterations of ck2.

And lastly I feel I must add but with great speculationty that I've somehow become inundated with the idea that they also were going further South East with the map. But I don't remember if this was speculation/interpretation on the forums or from an actual source, so I don't feel I can say it with pathos.

[Sime]

I don't quite understand CK2 players dislike of supernatural events.

For the greatest magical power that nobility has in CK2, is surely  their  omniscient and accurate  real-time geopolitical knowledge of the world, hundreds of years before the invention of approximately accurate maps, radio communication and the internet.     Not to mention  their  perfect knowledge of the personality traits, family trees, health and personal relationships of courtiers living thousands of miles away in remote dynasties in a level of detail that puts Facebook and Linked-in to shame.