Umm, I have to doubt that every lord in Japan was a) absolutely loyal to clan and state (what do you think plots are for) and b) forgetable. I'm pretty sure you can be selfless and loyal while still being a very colorful person.
-
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.
Umm, I have to doubt that every lord in Japan was a) absolutely loyal to clan and state (what do you think plots are for) and b) forgetable. I'm pretty sure you can be selfless and loyal while still being a very colorful person.
I beg to differ here, as the Diplomacy attribute makes up much of the relations values, if it's high, and will keep your vassals very happy despite numerous penalties in such a situation. Likewise, a low Diplo rated Clan Leader will have problems keeping his vassals in line due to having a penalty. Not only that, but it adds to an army's morale. Other clans tend to refrain from attacking you, if you have relations "in the green".
To a lesser degree, the Martial skill of army generals can make a bit of a difference in casualty numbers if it's higher than the enemy general's rating by a ways. Intrigue.. isn't so noticeable, however.
Like I said in the sentance after you quoted, having a half decent diplomacy stat is all you really need. Military isn't that useful as its easy enough to have other characters with better military stats lead a battle by timing your unit movements well. And other than defending against ninja attacks I'm not even sure what intrigue does. You hardly feel the difference between a 5,0,0 and a 15,15,15 ruler. If you actually read what I said carefully, I didn't say they made no difference, but that it wasn't a huge difference.
Last edited:
I have a level 18 master of the guard and I keep uncovering plots against me straight away (my ruler's diplo is 0 and he's craven and arbitrary so very unpopular with everyone) I can hire ninjas far more regularly than on any other game I've played and that's without any theatres. I'm actually noticing a huge effect to my warped stats between my ruler and his advisers. Having to play a very different game and really enjoying it. If it wasn't that my military advisor was also 17 in marshal I would have died by now but he can whip up castles in half the time I'm used to. Plenty of ninjas to assassinate plotting vassals and restless neighbours or just make them loose honour so they won't attack. I take back criticism for the stats not doing much.
Geez.. 18 Intrigue? So you can just point your finger and send a stream of assassins at whomever you want? :laugh:
In a Nanbu game of mine, I had a base 21 Martial clan leader (great base stats + luck on traits + great wife). He was nearly able to fight 2:1 battles against him with the average 8-14 Martial leaders. I took full advantage of this and used him to conquer 30% of Japan during his lifetime (he lived to be 72 years old). The stats matter, but they do not seem to matter as much as they did in say EU3.
Outcomes are determined by stats but not in such a mattering way you would base a dynasty developpment on fixating traits.
By accumulating traits, you might add five or six points to a stat. At present, it is not worth the effort as you wont feel the difference.
Inbreeding is an option easy to avoid currently. Might no longer be the case if you are building a dynasty and the people that gather the traits you want to groom are to be found in your family only.
Too early to tell if the game is lifeless. As certain traits are inherited, I suppose selective breeding policy is part of the game plan. Once installed, events that could provide more life are possible.
Imagine you want to developp a dynasty of poet warriors and the wife with the proper traits sleeps out, resulting in adulterous children, losing the traits you are looking for, spoiling the effort. You might remember that woman.
By accumulating traits, you might add five or six points to a stat. At present, it is not worth the effort as you wont feel the difference.
Inbreeding is an option easy to avoid currently. Might no longer be the case if you are building a dynasty and the people that gather the traits you want to groom are to be found in your family only.
Too early to tell if the game is lifeless. As certain traits are inherited, I suppose selective breeding policy is part of the game plan. Once installed, events that could provide more life are possible.
Imagine you want to developp a dynasty of poet warriors and the wife with the proper traits sleeps out, resulting in adulterous children, losing the traits you are looking for, spoiling the effort. You might remember that woman.
That is not causal developpment but a series of random events with random outcomes which leads to a certain kind of character.
Humble parents giving 60pc chance to have an humility education event to fire up, itself resolved by an 50/50 outcome that the child acquires the trait humble/proud is not causal developpment.
Causal developpment is best illustrated in a previous in a post where the behaviour is linked to the outcome, behave kindly and get the trait kind etc...
Imo, gaining traits through actions is actually a bad thing. For starters, it encourages the player to do what he wants to do rather than what your character should be doing. For example, if I'm playing as an honourable, merciful, honest individual, why would he orchestrate the murder of his nephew so he could become King or in this case, Shogun? I do think random traits are actually a step forward, as it means the person is developing "naturally" (even if its still random chance) as opposed to players trying to power game their way to victory.
Regards,
The Great
Regards,
The Great
So... you means that if your character has "mercy" trait, he won't be able to do nasty things like murdering his nephew?
In my case, strategy somehow includes to draw the most from what you have.
If a character happens to be merciful, organizing murders through him should not be the best way to advance the clan's best interests. The guy should allow to obtain similar results through other ways.
If a character happens to be merciful, organizing murders through him should not be the best way to advance the clan's best interests. The guy should allow to obtain similar results through other ways.
I agree, and I'm really looking forward to CK2 where this happens. But if your character doesn't have a trait that would effect the outcome of an event, then you should be free to pick either option with a chance of gaining the trait.
Sengoku is to vanilla CK 1.0 as CK2 will be to CK: DV + beta patches and mods.
But why don't the devs learn from what they did with CK? I understand it would take more time and effort to add all the events and flavour to make Sengoku as good as CK: DV, but why release a game when its not going to be as fun as one from 7 years ago? Whats the point releasing it if its only going to be as good as CK 1.0, and why should we pay for it? I've already got bored of playing Sengoku singleplayer and have actually started playing CK again, and I'm enjoying it alot more. IMO they should just spend a bit more time adding these things before they release it and charge a regular price. Instead we have to now wait for expansions and hope that they can really bring Sengoku alive.
It is probably because Sengoku was supposed to war focused game with some RPG/character elements to it rather than Crusader Kings 2. That said, I would like more focus on the RPG/character elements of the game. I think the child raising events will be nice when the new patch comes out, and if it turns out to be as popular addition as I expect, then we may get more additions to the game like it.
If thats the case why haven't they improved the how wars are fought? The mechanics have been copied and pasted from EU3. Have you seen how battles work in CK2? Its going to have multiple flanks each led by different leaders with the player will actually be able to choose how their army is lined up, and combat events happening mid battle. To see what I mean: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?547990-Crusader-Kings-II-Dev-Diary-10-Combat
And thats a game thats focusing on characters rather than war...
And thats a game thats focusing on characters rather than war...
I have to agree. My main problem with Sengoku is the lack of character events. There is not a single event for non-ruler or heir characters, last I checked, and the events that do exist are so very spartan. This, coupled with the lack of an advanced diplomacy system (a justified exclusion, at least), the game tends more to feeling like a Japan-themed amoeba simulator than I'd like.
That said, it's got potential, it runs extremely well, and it's relatively bug-free. I honestly feel that a more CK-like level of characterization would maximize the potential of the game. As is, most characters are just numbers on a list, whereas each and every character in Crusader Kings has the ability to be significant to the gameplay without the player having to make it so.
That said, it's got potential, it runs extremely well, and it's relatively bug-free. I honestly feel that a more CK-like level of characterization would maximize the potential of the game. As is, most characters are just numbers on a list, whereas each and every character in Crusader Kings has the ability to be significant to the gameplay without the player having to make it so.
Well, for one who knows a bit about japanese history of this time, then I can say that women did have a lot to say. And characters did do both good and bad depending on situations that suited their purpose. Many would sacrifice their family members or sacrifice themselves for their family. Mitsuhide´s mother went as a hostage (a death sentence) to promote her son. The problem here with this game is that you lose honor for no apparent reason. It is the time of war but you lose honor when you declare war. A bit strange as that was the way of life. And the constant demand for titles and land is a bit strange as well as loyal subjects got rewarded when the lord wanted to reward not. Not by demanding. Demanding would more often get you killed. So a bit strange all in all. Have had to kill my way through a lot of my own people so far in this game. Although it was quite common to get your people killed, this is a bit too much.
I agree for the most part. Rome was the first paradox game (of these in depth risk type strategy games) that I had played and even that seemed to be much more character driven...bastard sons could fight for control, the senates-republics were extremely active in your actions and much more. Although I must admit I wanted more indepth character plots from Rome I put it aside because it didn`t seem to be such a character driven game. Sengoku on the other hand, with every vassal having his own famliy and appointing them to various political positions, heads of their armies (or units) and really just the what appears to be heavy emphasis on the role of individuals interacting with others in general sems to be lacking and it appears as though there are just as many random events if not more that dictate your characters traits and relationships as those that you actually can more or less decide.
Most likely because Paradox was taking advantage of the engine which they decided to make the game on when the project started. CK2 is still in development, and I would not expect to see any of its features in other games until after its release.
Sengoku is actually at the scale for combat and characters which its developer diaries showed off to us. I am well over my 40th hour of play now, and I still enjoy playing the game for what it is. There is room for improvement in the game, but I am enjoying the rate at which patches and feature additions are coming to us.