Dev Diary #109 - Floor Plan for the Future

[PDXOxycoon]

I don't like how AI is shoved off into a forgotten corner of this floor plan. It should occupy one of the largest central rooms, since it has doors connecting it to just about everything else.

Certainly not forgotten, placement and size on the floorplan does not represent scope or priority!

I don't think that's an unsolveable problem at all, FWIW.

*nervous programmer noises* (;´༎ຶД༎ຶ`)

how much of the code in ck2 is salvagable and able to be repurposed for ck3?

Very little the way I see it. Even if code could be directly transferred to CK3, I think we'll want to recontextualise it and lift it up to modern design standards. I think several of the features in CK2 to be conceptually interesting, but implemented in a poor and uninteresting manner. Take the Court Positions, or Minor Titles as they are called in CK2: they're pretty much just things you hand out for opinion, where in CK3 they also serve other functions. Another example is the regencies, which I believe and someone will have to correct me if I'm wrong: they just blocked you from doing things, nothing really interesting about it. "Oh you want to send a gift to someone? Nooooooo...". Epidemics too is another system that I want in, but cannot really say how it worked in CK2, but I doubt it'd be transferable 1:1, better make a modern interpretation of it.

somehow, i really think the system from vic 3 with fronts and no direct control would fit very well in CK3.

I so much want to rip parts of that system, CK3-ify it a bit and have that be part of our warfare. Which ties into:

Please allow to hand over the war command to your marshal, not every ruler want to drive around all his armies

Automated Warfare - add to PC !
It will help.
For some who are not interested in warfare(maneuvering units) at all, or do not like it, or completely role-playing.
(Please see thread in forum - "Automated Warfare - add to PC")

I want war to be like herding cats of you needing to manage your commanders in an interesting manner, prissy nobles who're shit at commanding but want "the glory of leading our knights into battle" that get angry when you appoint a skilled commoner to lead the armies: "how dare you appoint a commoner to lead us? I am of noble blood, that clearly makes me more suitable for this!". A good start here is my desire to port the automated warfare to PC. One day... one day... A girl can dream...

 

[PDS_Noodle]

I have to agree with this but maybe what the Devs mean is that many of the systems in CK2 were put in for their own sake and did not add to roleplay. So they only want to add a mechanic if it can meaningfully add to RP. They don't want anything to become a minigame by itself.

Sorta true? The bit that's right there is that we definitely don't want to just add some isolated features just for the sake of them being in. Dovetailing features in with pre-existing ones is exactly what we're aiming for. Lots of small minigames helps little, after all.

Where I think I'd disagree is the bit about only adding RP-heavy mechanics. I think there's a lot to be said for increasing the roleplaying side of things, but we do have to strike a balance in this hybrid-genre game. I play CK3 extremely roleplay-heavy, but not everyone does, so we need to ensure as many sides can be catered for as possible without compromising design principles or playability.

 

[DebbieElla]

Thread cleaned up. Stay on topic, stay kind.

 

[PDS_Noodle]

Societies were one of my favourite parts of CK2, and I'm gutted that they won't be making a return.

The stress feature of CK3 actually makes them more viable without being "bonus factories", because society membership might have stress-causing events (or ambient stress) that limits your time to do other things.

What makes them great is that they're the thing I tended to put my focus into when playing peacefully, giving me a sense of achievement and status. Without them, I just feel like I have to map paint until I become emperor of Europe.

I hear this sentiment a lot, actually, so it's worth taking some time out to address it. I actually went back and played a little bit of CK2 the other day for the express purpose of confirming or disputing my preconceived notions on societies explicitly.

Societies as a concept is actually really solid. Splitting up blocks of characters into the equivalent of interest groups and then tying unique content to them is an undeniably good idea. Giving you a reason to interact with a whole new block of characters you usually don't interact with is neat. This sort of international system adds a sort of depth that's quite welcome.

On the other hand, though, I think with the benefit of hindsight we can say that the implementation left a little to be desired. The mechanics didn't dovetail particularly well with other ones, and the barrier to entry to join them was trivial. As such, players often just found themselves falling sideways into a society in which they were then handed this relatively isolated content. This, combined with the balance - Hermetic was _notably_ powerful, whereas monastic orders were the opposite (unless you were Buddhist) - meant that it resulted in quite a wonky experience a lot of the time. I'm sure I'd have had other thoughts a few years ago, but my brain needs something of a refresher beyond a quick 2 hour CK2 play session!

As a result, when people ask for Societies when I tend to think isn't "ah, they want CK2 Societies" but more "they want all the benefits that Societies offered, including deeper religious gameplay and more things for a ruler to do during peacetime". Now the former is something we almost certainly won't do, because I reckon CK2 Societies simply weren't as good as many make them out to be, but the latter is absolutely something we all want to do. CK3 has a far deeper and richer religious system than CK2 so that's always fertile ground to build upon, and giving the player stuff to do and interact when they're not actively involved with waging wars and stabbing children is something we want to be addressing as soon as possible.

tl;dr Societies not actually that good, the principles of the ideas behind Societies good, want to take those ideas forward whilst leaving Societies in the past

Sorry for this somewhat disjointed post, I was up for an early morning!

 

[PDX-Trinexx]

About a year later, when looking at this Diary, how does the production team evaluate your work?

We're definitely looking back at the year and the work we've done so far, even if the year isn't quite over yet. We plan to discuss this at length in the near future, so keep an eye out.