Dev Diary #113 - Community Choice Event Pack

[FunGaming]

Rassin' frassin' makin' me defend L&L...


The point of these packs is mainly to flesh out the content associated with certain aspects of the game. Friends and Foes was intended to broadly make your friends, rivals, lovers, etc. more relevant and fleshed out and impactful. It did include new events that generate these relationships because friends were quite uncommon before. Love and Lust may include new events that generate lovers, it would depend on how common it would be for players to encounter this content.


The pitch for Love and Lust explicitly states it will focus on lovers and married life

So basicly exactly what I said more lovers which will result in more bastard sons and daughters as if we don't have that enough already, I mean I rather have you guys fix the base game issue first that generates way too much cheating events with each playthrough resulting in many bastard sons and daughters. I mean it becomes a bit too much as if someone is addicted to these events whoever made them. Hope it gets looked at and not more of these added.

 

[4matic]

I mean, the dev response to the concerns about Love & Lust was literally a hint at the pitch regarding the focus on married life. So i think it will be fine.

I didn't see this. I'll try and find it, but if that's the case I'll switch my vote for what it's worth.

 

[heliostellar]

Given the changes we've seen to seduction since the ck2 royal court update, is it really a stretch to think the lust events proposed will only serve to expand unrealistic fortification?

No. I think that's exactly the point. Make this game even more of an orgy simulator to get the lulz on the soc media.

Can anyone name for me an actual, real-life married noblewoman who successfully pulled off an affair in history? Not saying it didn't happen, but if it did happen it would have been a beyond-the-pale scandal and likely result in the woman's immediate execution--see Anne Boleyn.

EDIT: 5 disagrees and still no one has answered my question... point made

 

[Duzgun]

Not them, but while I hate using Wikipedia "list of X" articles to prove anything (as they tend to be eclectic mixes of things with poorly defined criteria and more focused on "this is somebody I've heard of" rather than any attempt at being systematic), that list actually includes a bunch of regencies well before the 11th century.

More broadly, the Romans and Byzantines regularly employed regents (who might or might not usurp the crown); indeed, part of Charlemagne's claim to the imperial title was that the Byzantines were ruled by a woman, Empress Irene, who had originally been a regent for her son. It's notable that your linked list doesn't include the Romans or Byzantines at all, when they famously used regents extensively.

It was less common among early western kingdoms, who tended not to follow as clear rules of succession, but even then you have some examples.

Ok so maybe Byzantines should start with regency innovation and not the others in this case.
As you say, there shouldn't be children rulers in western Europe in 9th/10th centuries.

 

[Rubidium]

Ok so maybe Byzantines should start with regency innovation and not the others in this case.
As you say, there shouldn't be children rulers in western Europe in 9th/10th centuries.

I didn't say there shouldn't be any (there were quite a few, such as Edward the Martyr and his brother/successor Ethelred the Unready, and of course the aptly named Louis the Child), just that there were fewer.

For that matter, there are even a few examples of kings allegedly crowned in utero (Shapur II of Sassanian Persia being the most notable, albeit a few centuries before the game starts).

As a general rule, the only constant of pre-modern royal successions is that there were no constants.

 

[Audio-Man]

All these votes for Villains and Vagabonds are absurd.

Every character is a child at some point, and you usually are a guardian for your own children, so Wards and Wardens hits about 100% of characters

Almost every character dabbles in love or romance, or just being married, so Love and Lust hits about 95% of characters

A significantly smaller population of characters (let's be generous and say 50%) deal with dread and tyranny, so Villains and Vagabonds hits about 50% of characters


I can understand wanting to expand dread and tyranny out with events, but the amount of characters that will engage with them is far lower than those that will engage with W&W or L&L

It's almost as if people were tired of constant forced seduction events and instead they wanted playing as a tyrant to be actually interesting

 

[Herennius]

I have an idea for how to get dread to work on the player.
If you take an action against a character with high dread, you get Stress. Stress gain would be reduced by certain traits (Brave, Wrathful) and increased by others (Craven).

Yes, that would be also my prefered way to mimic the intimidated stance of a player characters vs. an AI character. However, if my alter ego is so fearful that (s)he is terrified of a NPC, I think even the hard rules the AI has to obey should be applied (not able to join/start scheme/faction).

 

[rizeli_533]

Please dont charge people for 10 events thats embarrassing

 

[Herennius]

Please dont charge people for 10 events thats embarrassing

I don't think it was anywhere stated that the content of one of these pack would be only 10 events, so I'm not sure whats the intention of that remark. Do you really fear that this will be the content of these packs? The OP indicates of something along the lines of Friends&Foes, which means a much bigger number of events plus even a minor mechanic (feuds). It is also stated that a feature relalted to the content of the pack will show up in a free patch:

...and we know roughly what free feature we’d like to add to the update that will accompany the event pack: generally we'll be aiming for something with a similar size and impact as Friends & Foes' Memories system, which heavily ties into the events we're making but is relevant across the game as a whole.

 

[krissuyx]

Please dont charge people for 10 events thats embarrassing

Last one had over a hundred, so I don't know what you're going on about.

 

[rizeli_533]

I just dont like event packs dont looks worth the money i guess people would be ready to buy all the 3 event packs as one dlc for 10 euros. I mean look at the reviews of friend and foas on steam doesnt look that good.

I don't think it was anywhere stated that the content of one of these pack would be only 10 events, so I'm not sure whats the intention of that remark. Do you really fear that this will be the content of these packs? The OP indicates of something along the lines of Friends&Foes, which means a much bigger number of events plus even a minor mechanic (feuds). It is also stated that a feature relalted to the content of the pack will show up in a free patch:

 

[Herennius]

I just dont like event packs dont looks worth the money i guess people would be ready to buy all the 3 event packs as one dlc for 10 euros. I mean look at the reviews of friend and foas on steam doesnt look that good.

You are free to have the opinion that F&F isn't worth it's price because of not having enough content, but claiming that it has only 10 events is obviously wrong - and there is no indication given that the announced community choice event pack will be smaller than F&F and of the size you claim. Call it nitpicking and splitting hairs, but I just disagree with that needless exaggeration. If you think F&F's 100+ events are not enough, fine - but then just add that "0" to behind your figure.

 

[jberger]

ok here is my theory:

since the broader goal was to bring a great connection between characters and geography, and the picture is of a bridge, i think that the next dlc will involve mechanical effects for controlling certain areas of geographic importance, such as a bridge or a pass. i dont know too much about medieval things but i remember in game of thrones there was some busted ass count that no one liked and was basically forgotten but he controlled a bridge so he still had to be taken into consideration when more powerful actors were making strategic choices. also i might be misremembering it. anyway that is my theory, based on my interpretation of a picture of a bridge and a half remembered (and possibly invented) recollection of a tv show. hell yeah

 

[Rubidium]

ok here is my theory:

since the broader goal was to bring a great connection between characters and geography, and the picture is of a bridge, i think that the next dlc will involve mechanical effects for controlling certain areas of geographic importance, such as a bridge or a pass. i dont know too much about medieval things but i remember in game of thrones there was some busted ass count that no one liked and was basically forgotten but he controlled a bridge so he still had to be taken into consideration when more powerful actors were making strategic choices. also i might be misremembering it. anyway that is my theory, based on my interpretation of a picture of a bridge and a half remembered (and possibly invented) recollection of a tv show. hell yeah

I already made a Frey reference earlier in the thread.

But they've said it won't be a trade DLC.

 

[Grell74]

I find it odd that the three main things people keep asking for:

-Trade
-Improved Religion/Crusades
-Byzantines

Paradox have specifically said they are not going to do NEXT. I didn't see any clamouring for Royal Court, Consoles or overpiced event packs. Such a shame the pretty good initial release has not had any decent content since (besides modders). I get the impression the experienced A-Team Devs got moved onto other projects after release.

 

[Herennius]

I find it odd that the three main things people keep asking for:

-Trade
-Improved Religion/Crusades
-Byzantines

Paradox have specifically said they are not going to do. I didn't see any clamouring for Royal Court, Consoles or overpiced event packs. Such a shame the pretty good initial release has not had seen any decent content since. I get the impression the experienced A-Team Devs got moved onto other projects after release.

Maybe "people" in the sense of the majority of the forum users here - but I'm not sure how representative that is for the overall demand. Let's take port to Consoles...me being someone solely playing on PC, it is nothing from interest to myself. And it is not unlikely that the majority of the people posting in this forum will agree. But does that automaticakky mean that not enough other console players out there will purchase CK3 to make the portation a valuable invest for Paradox? I'm not sure sure. So as odd as it may sound: I don't care for CK3 on Consoles, I don't deem a port necessary myself and I would prefer the ressources being spend elsewhere...and still I understand why it is probably done.

 

[krissuyx]

I find it odd that the three main things people keep asking for:

-Trade
-Improved Religion/Crusades
-Byzantines

Paradox have specifically said they are not going to do. I didn't see any clamouring for Royal Court, Consoles or overpiced event packs. Such a shame the pretty good initial release has not had any decent content since (besides modders). I get the impression the experienced A-Team Devs got moved onto other projects after release.

"Specifically said they are not going to do"? I only know that they've said that they don't want to do a flavor pack just for the Byzantines(or something along those lines). I've not seen them denounce the others anywhere.
In fact, dev diary 109 suggests that religion/crusades, trade and merchant republics(which is something that would improve trade) and imperial mechanics(which would very much relate to the Byzantine empire) are all part of their current "roadmap".

 

[Karlington]

I find it odd that the three main things people keep asking for:

-Trade
-Improved Religion/Crusades
-Byzantines

Paradox have specifically said they are not going to do. I didn't see any clamouring for Royal Court, Consoles or overpiced event packs. Such a shame the pretty good initial release has not had any decent content since (besides modders). I get the impression the experienced A-Team Devs got moved onto other projects after release.

I think the culture rework was great, and I think the court grandeur system and the addition of artifacts were good features. Other than that I more or less agree that there hasn't been much to cheer about, as we say in Sweden.

 

[BrotherJonathan]

I find it odd that the three main things people keep asking for:

-Trade
-Improved Religion/Crusades
-Byzantines

Paradox have specifically said they are not going to do. I didn't see any clamouring for Royal Court, Consoles or overpiced event packs. Such a shame the pretty good initial release has not had any decent content since (besides modders). I get the impression the experienced A-Team Devs got moved onto other projects after release.

Also the console port is handled by a third-party dev, so the implication that it's somehow sucking resources away from development of the main game is questionable.

 

[Duzgun]

For that matter, there are even a few examples of kings allegedly crowned in utero (Shapur II of Sassanian Persia being the most notable, albeit a few centuries before the game starts).

This is not exactly what I call "western Europe" but good point even so.

As a general rule, the only constant of pre-modern royal successions is that there were no constants.

I agree with this and I think that should be better reflected in the game. There is also a difference between king's succession and counts/dukes succession.
It would be nice if the game could better reflect all this...