Print

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

[ductape]

I just thought I would create a quick little thread mentioning Knights of Honor, another Paradox title.

Best way to describe it is a cross between Crusader Kings and some sort of real time tactical battle game. It would be fair to call it Crusader Kings lite, you have a king and you can marry, have kids, die and have your kids take over your rule. You can have vassals and the diplomacy has many of the features of Crusader Kings, but not all.

What it lacks in depth of the family dynasty end of things, it tries to make up for in the city management and battle end of things. Your towns have various buildings you can upgrade with and produce a variety of trade goods from your raw resources and troops to fight with. Trade and relationships are very important and without them you wont be making much money in the early game. I was playing as the Berbers and managed to marry off my eldest princess to Byzantine as soon as she was old enough. They had been expanding their reach and the trade relationship that resulted paved my way to expansion myself. However, when my king died they layed claim on my throne because the princess was my first born (i guess). My prince refused and so we were flung into war with Byzantine. Luckily they were very far away.

You promote knights in your realms for a variety of tasks such as marshal for your troops, cleric, spy, merchant. Espionage is pretty effective if you can get your knight hired into the target kingdom. Troops move across the field in real time, the whole game is real time and there's no way to speed it up (a flaw, for sure). When you meet with battle on the field, you switch to a separate screen where you troops slug it out with the enemy in real time, a sort of poor mans 2d isometric Total War. It's not amazing, but its fun and fast nonetheless.

http://store.steampowered.com/app/25830/

I linked the Steam page because it has some good screenshots.

[Fanofgaming]

Troops move across the field in real time, the whole game is real time and there's no way to speed it up (a flaw, for sure).

You can speed it up to eight times normal speed and slow it down to half normal speed with the + and - keys, I think.

It's a pretty good game, but I just feel that it's a bit too shallow, especially if we're going to go about comparing it to Crusader Kings.

[Taricus]

Quite fun this.

Tip: Don't marry your princesses off to anyone more powerful than you, You don't need the loss of land (Or a war)

[ductape]

Troops move across the field in real time, the whole game is real time and there's no way to speed it up (a flaw, for sure).

You can speed it up to eight times normal speed and slow it down to half normal speed with the + and - keys, I think.

It's a pretty good game, but I just feel that it's a bit too shallow, especially if we're going to go about comparing it to Crusader Kings.

Well yeah, I did call it Crusader Kings lite. I think they were trying to make some sort of fusion game, taking just some of the elements of Crusader Kings and mixing in some tactical combat and city building elements. Its fun, and I like it.

About my marrying my princes off to powerful kingdoms, the trade I got afterward was insane, something like 100 gold per click and at that early of a stage of the game, I was quite wealthy, in fact I had so much gold I was using it to insta-finish town buildings to form my army. That was pretty fun but the worst part was my trashed relations with not only the kingdom in question but all my other allies.

[Taricus]

Also, the best trade deals come from large, friendly kingdoms. And having multiple traders works well too.

[lordcooper]

How do the battles compare to the Total War series?

E: Actually following the link made me sad.  This looks like AoE2 or something.

[FunctionZero]

E: Actually following the link made me sad.  This looks like AoE2 or something.

What? It looks nothing like AoE2.
If I had to compare, it's more like a polished Stronghold 2. Both graphically and gameplay-wise. (in battles).

[Fikes]

I was wondering how it compaired to TW as well. Paradox games have too much going on and provide too little information for me. TW isn't perfect, but I like it more than EU.

[lordcooper]

E: Actually following the link made me sad.  This looks like AoE2 or something.

What? It looks nothing like AoE2.
If I had to compare, it's more like a polished Stronghold 2. Both graphically and gameplay-wise. (in battles).

I generally dislike 'typical' RTS games and often use AoE2 as a prime example.  Clunky battles that generally consist of simply sending more troops into battle than your enemy in order to win.

Of course, I'll be incredibly happy if you can honestly tell me I'm judging this game wrong.

[FunctionZero]

E: Actually following the link made me sad.  This looks like AoE2 or something.

What? It looks nothing like AoE2.
If I had to compare, it's more like a polished Stronghold 2. Both graphically and gameplay-wise. (in battles).

I generally dislike 'typical' RTS games and often use AoE2 as a prime example.  Clunky battles that generally consist of simply sending more troops into battle than your enemy in order to win.

Of course, I'll be incredibly happy if you can honestly tell me I'm judging this game wrong.

That I cannot, since you're kinda right.
(almost) Every RTS in the end boils down to steamrolling your enemy.

[dogstile]

I wouldn't say so. Some of my friends can utterly destroy people with just a few units in most of the RTS's they've played.

[FunctionZero]

I wouldn't say so. Some of my friends can utterly destroy people with just a few units in most of the RTS's they've played.

Sure, but that's still steamrolling in a way. You just have ultra-strong units, effective as multiple "regulars".

Not much tactics there.

[dennislp3]

I would agree that the controls and speed of movement and everything doesn't lend for very tactical battles most the time...not that you cant be tactical! doing so has saved me more than a few times

[Akura]

Unfortunately, the singular best tactic I've seen is simply two ballistae, and you win. Add Longbowmen or Ballistics skill for overkill(especially since they're Local Unique units, which means anyone can just conquer more or less any territory in England to get them). Add both for superoverkill.

Plus, I don't know why it labels swordsmen as the "standard" unit in Europe, since that title historically goes to spearmen. And even then, Peasants are surprisingly effective, probably due simply to sheer numbers(a single Peasant squad has nearly twice the men as anything else, and are focktastically cheaper than everything).



One good idea is to make damn sure your king's children get married, especially before he dies. As far as I know, the current monarch only has children if they're married(durr) and not assigned to any duty. An interesting thing I've found is that everyone but the king(and the Patriarch of an Independant Orthodox) is effectively immortal, although the Heir's age is counted for when he takes the throne. Also, any other princes simply become regular knights when their brother takes the throne.

[USEC_OFFICER]

Ah, Knights of Honor. I had lots of fun playing this for hours on end. The AI was terrible though. You could be spitting out army after army of Feudal Knights and Templars while your enemies were still experimenting with armoured swordsmen. And the silly limitations on the number of agents, buildings and units you could have always bugged me.

Question: Did anybody keep on using Landlords, Builder etc. after the start of the game? Usually, once I was established enough, I would get only one cleric (for conversions and adopting cities) and the rest of my agents would be knights, to maximize my rate of asskicking. Most of my guys would also be the second/third sons of my kings, to minimize the trouble spies would cause me.