Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries
Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Crusader Kings II 69949 Bug Reports 19720 User Modifications 10606 Suggestions 5969 Tech Support 6376 After Action Reports
Previous dev diary Next dev diary
Show only dev responses

Dev Diary 11: Stopping The Snowball

Hey! So today we will talk about some mechanics we’ve added to make other rulers react to what happens in the world. We want to slow down the snowball and prolong the time it takes to conquer the world, so it shouldn’t be as easy to do. Snowballs are pretty evil, just like medieval rulers.

Just as with the shattered retreat mechanic we took inspiration from Europa Universalis 4 in our decision to add Coalitions. Our coalitions however are based on an Infamy value instead of Aggressive Expansion. You might recognize the name Infamy from our old games, but even though it shares the name it will work quite differently.

Infamy is limited to be within the range of 0 to 100% and will slowly decay over time based on how strong your max military potential is. When you hit 25% infamy, coalitions will be unlocked and AIs will start joining them based on how threatened they feel.Your infamy will serve as a hint on how aggressive and dangerous other rulers think your realm is. You gain infamy primarily by conquering land through war or by inheriting a fair maidens huge tracts of land.

The amount of Infamy you gain is based on the action you do, how much land you take and how large your realm already is. So for instance the Kaiser of the HRE declaring a war for Flanders and taking it is going to make the neighbours more worried than if Pomerania manages to take Mecklenburg.
capture(56).png


Coalitions themselves are mostly defensive in Crusader Kings, if any member gets attacked by the target of the coalition they will automatically be called into the war. If a member starts a war against the target they only get a normal call to arms which they can choose to decline.

For an AI to join a coalition they will consider the relative strength between the target and themselves, how threatened they think they are and how much infamy the target has accrued. You can view the current coalition someone has against them by the diplomacy field on the character screen.

capture(54).png


But it might not be the easiest way to view it so we also added a mapmode to more easily visualize Coalitions. A nation which turns up white is the nation you have currently selected, blue will be targetable for coalitions, yellow means they have a coalition against them and Red means they are members of the coalition against the currently selected one.

capture(55).jpg
 
  • 310
  • 230
  • 40
Reactions:
Sort by date Sort by reaction score
Damn. If I wanted to play EU4 features, I'd play EU4. Please don't do this. AE is already broken as hell in EU4 as it is, please don't copy it into CK2.

Also, infamy for inheriting land? Really??
 
  • 26
  • 4
Reactions:
Boucicaut said:
I suppose opportunistic alliances such as the ones between the crusaders and mongols or muslins would be too difficult to implement. Remember CKII's AI is immensely dumb as it is.

Coalitions are probably the best we can get.
Click to expand...
It is possible to implment. It works in EU4.

In EU4 in my Germany game I allied with the Ottomans to defeat Austria.

It's not difficult as well, it already happend in EU4. That should be what they "steal" from EU4. Not this.

It's funny too how controversial this addition to the game is. It's going to make people stop playing the game, mod it out, or split the community. Adding more EU4 style diplomacy wouldn't be controversial at all.

Speaking of mods. Mods already address this blobbing problem in what are less intense ways.
 
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
The worst thing about his is in EU4 the "infamy" is based on a relations mechanic that is individual to each AI. This seem it's just a return to the old "badboy" that affects every nation on the map.
 
  • 8
Reactions:
rowt said:
Damn. If I wanted to play EU4 features, I'd play EU4. Please don't do this. AE is already broken as hell in EU4 as it is, please don't copy it into CK2.

Also, infamy for inheriting land? Really??
Click to expand...

I agree. Inheriting Lands can often be something the player has no control over. I HATE playing Empires, and I'm not fond of playing large kingdoms either, but I've wound up inheriting the Kingdom of France several times, along with Aquitaine; and I've inherited the HRE at least twice.

As I've said before, I HATE playing large. right now, in my current 1066 playthrough, I'm Petty Kinf of Mide/Leinster. Last playthrough I was king of Leon, Galacia, and Castile. Three Kingly titles, but only about one half of Spain's total land.

Infamy needs to be limited to large realms, large Kingdoms and up, and it also needs to be limited to actual conquest.
 
  • 10
Reactions:
EU4 is not CK2, just because a mechanic is similar in nature does not mean it is the same.

vandevere said:
Infamy needs to be limited to large realms, large Kingdoms and up, and it also needs to be limited to actual conquest.
Click to expand...

How many times does this need to be answered in this thread?
 
  • 7
  • 4
Reactions:
Dracko81 said:
EU4 is not CK2, just because a mechanic is similar in nature does not mean it is the same.



How many times does this need to be answered in this thread?
Click to expand...

I was also referring to the fact that simply inheriting land can lead to infamy. A simple bumfuck count can suddenly end up with loads of infamy because he suddenly inherits the HRE, or the ERE...

It's happened to me before. So I would think some care should be used in deciding when, where, and why, infamy should be earned. Especially since they're calling it Infamy.

Which means it should be limited to "Infamous Acts" as opposed to "Gee, the Count of Bumfuckland, a really nice guy, who just wound up inheritiing the HRE or the ERE"
 
  • 13
  • 1
Reactions:
Yeah, it would be one thing if he murdered his way to the throne, but I think a really enjoyable part of CKII is that plague or war can suddenly result in a new dynasty taking the throne unexpectedly. It's the emergent twists like that which make the game come alive.
 
  • 6
Reactions:
I'd rather see factions receiving a boost in large empires (distance to capital penalty, perhaps), and Empires progressively receiving military and economic penalties (less levies and gold) the more they grew.
 
  • 7
Reactions:
If some random independent count next to me suddenly became the Emperor of ERE I'd be somewhat worried about his intentions and just how he came to get that power. Rumours go a long way.
 
  • 9
  • 9
Reactions:
Could you elaborate on the mechanics of how a particular sovereign chooses to join a coalition?

Historically, a large part of the reason why the Ottomans were so successful in their Balkan conquest was because the Byzantines, Serbians, and Bulgarians could not get their **** together to mount a cohesive defence. I'm worried Coalitions will become an immersion-breaking artificial handicap because some powergamers just want to watch the world burn.

I mean, on the one hand it would be tremendously irritating attempting to recreate the rise of the Ottomans only to be blocked by an ahistorical Balkan coalition; on the other, it would be pretty cool arranging a loose alliance of nations to fight an invader.

Don't get me wrong, nobody likes (AI)blobbing, but I feel like it would have been better if you guys had concentrated on Empire-decline mechanics and non-marriage alliances instead of railroading the game.
 
  • 18
Reactions:
acsa4 said:
Am I the only concerned as to what happens after a coalition war is successful in ck2? Just a bit curious to hear what lands we will have to give up or what penalties will concur afterwards.
Click to expand...

IMHO lets focus on improving Crusade mechanics before introducing realpolitik and defensive coalitions.
 
  • 12
  • 5
Reactions:
Thank you for the DD.

Four thoughts:
  1. Just because a name and inspiration came from EUiv does not mean the mechanic is an exact copy. I will withhold my judgement until i see the whole DLC
  2. Alliance changes + Coalition/Infamy announcements + changes to laws tab lead me to believe in a HRE- centric DLC theme ...
  3. The Pope and the Patriarch really need to be participants in the Real-Politic aspects of the game they were this Era's biggest Real-politic practitioners, bar none. This is needed in CK2.
  4. The biggest exploit to this system I see right away is the ability to break truces. Not an ai issue but a human does not need to wait until the time-freeze expires.
There were many coalitions made within the Era, and these were based on the dynasty as well as the individual. For a real soap-opera historical example, one just needs to learn about the history of Brittany, the kingdom/duchy that infamy inherited and infamy through marriage is seen throughout its history. Poisoned gloves were not the only intrigued encountered in its history.

Now a few comments to others:

Groogy said:
Yes you can
Click to expand...

I see a very large exploit looming here - I hope it is addressed pre-release.

beartjah said:
gain infamy when inhereting from a 'fair' maiden?

By the time you get the inheritance, it has (probably) been coming your way for quite some time, making it not really a shock/threat anymore to your neighbours.
I think the infmy should be gained the moment the inheritance gets secured(either by mariage to a childless women, or by killing the other heirs until you're on top). The moment it becomes apparant that you're expanding is the moment you've secured the inheritance, not the moment you've got it.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. Sometimes both. In the example of Brittany, both marriage itself and the promise/threat of marriage produced what CK2 would consider infamy - other examples include Plantagenet marriages in Anjou region and York/Lancaster shenanigans. The problems I see with implementation are the non-Christian realms. My historical knowledge is more limited on them so I do not know the applicable nature as well.

delpiero1234 said:
I have the feeling that CK II is going down the drain. I personally stopped playing it when it became too buggy a few expansions ago and on top of that the prices for the DLCs are unjustified, especially compared to EU IV DLCs. When do you guys think will PDX stop working on CK II? After Stellaris release or after HoI 4 release?
Click to expand...

Such hate. It is times when I read these types of statements that I realize that sometimes things are said mindless and without forethought.
 
  • 12
  • 11
  • 1
Reactions:
Groogy said:
If a vassal conquers stuff outside the realm you gain 50% of the infamy he generates. (this propagates up so if a count of a duke conquers something, the duke gets 50%, the king 25%, the emperor 12.5%)

And no, Infamy stays over generations. You can't be a dick then die and think you will get away with it.
Click to expand...
Right. Keep dickishness within the realm.
 
Well, i like the change a lot. I always found it dull that all neighbours seemingly don´t care if someone blobs out in their vicinity.
 
  • 6
  • 3
Reactions:
Unsure about this, however, I would had preferred something with peace or internal matters, rather than something with war and external matters. Nevertheless, now that this is in, we will deal with it, and as there is some historic precedence, I'm not opposed to it. I'm waiting to see it ingame in action and get more details. We will probably get some more unannounced features that might make this look a lot better.
 
  • 7
Reactions:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back