CK3: Tours and Tournaments - The Vision

[naq29]

If by "realistic" you mean the closest to what happened in real life, no count of Toulouse has ever worked for the french king in any sort of position (and certainly not one which could be assimilated to a "councillor").

in any case I think a duke would not be sent to develop a small territory such as Paris. If he was, then he would probably send some one else in his place, like one of his knights or retainers.

 

[Duzgun]

I think Saint Louis' brother Alphonse might disagree on that point.

Even with this very specific example (being the actual end of the county of Toulouse), what councillor position is he supposed to have had for the french king while ruling the county of Toulouse ?
(he actually never really ruled the county of Toulouse and spent all his life elsewhere but even if he had, I still don't get it...)

Edit : I also forgot to mention that Saint Louis' brother Alphonse was not the title holder, he was the (forced) husband of Joan of Toulouse, she was the title holder of the county of Toulouse. This marriage was forced in order to incorporate county of Toulouse to the french crown.

 

[apollo1989vieten]

Reenact Henry IV’s humiliation trip! Have some excommunicated people have to plan a trip to Rome to beg for forgiveness.

 

[Duzgun]

So the Count of Toulouse would certainly be able to be steward to the King of France.

I was actually talking of what happened IRL. And you might not be aware of what french/occitan relations were and about occitan history...

Anyway all this is concentrating on details, my initial questions were much more general questions on what interactions were going to be linked to position or not…

 

[oreopirate]

I'm just very confused and concerned about what's going with the team over Crusader Kings 3. I doubt it's the same team that developed CK2 and it shows. If something works and is beloved why change the formula? You guys legit have a perfect blueprint in front of you with CK2 and a whole bunch of community comments but choose to go in the opposite direction experimenting with things you "think" are wanted. This is supposed to be a sequel not a spin off.

At this point after having CK3 over a year I have zero achievements because I just simply can not play vanilla. Its's so bland and unseasoned, I find myself in the workshop more then actually playing the game to add some flavor. If this game didn't have mod support and was only relying on dlc's I'm not sure if this game would have stayed relevant past the first year. I usually give huge games like this a year to take off and get some content so that's what I did. After 3 years now it's exactly the same besides new unmeaningful events . There has been no substance added as far as gameplay maybe I'll count in the Iberia struggle but that's only for one small portion of the world and doesn't help in the long run, you should've instituted it to around 4 or 5 different regions around the world maybe like England or something who had similar things going on.

This new DLC looks cool but it doesn't solve the problem. I don't think we need anything new for a while. Instead maybe 2 or 3 huge quality of life updates that brings in many gameplay mechanics and features that worked or were good from CK2. You can even make it a dlc if you want "Times Of Old Returns" for 30 bucks and I'll be happy to pay. This game need love shown to its core gameplay and its foundation first before you add icing on top with events.

CK2 was not a perfect formula, and never has paradox made a game that was a 2.0 version of the prior entry. Absolutely never. I personally bought CK3 to buy something that was different yet similar to CK2. And that's what I got. If I thought for one second that this would be CK2 with fancier graphics. Sequels are supposed to be different, not just a 2.0 version. And if you ask me, this model, even with it's slow development, is better. Because when things get rough, they can add a Custodian Iniative like Stellaris did to keep it fresh, and increase how long the engine will be able to live. So you way want CK2 2.0, but there are plenty of us who don't, and plenty of us who don't think that CK2 was the "perfect blueprint".
CK2 is such a ham handed mess of mechanics, that while fun, struggle to run after a few hundred years. All of those mechanics, they can do absolutely better, like this upcoming regency system. They need to be given the time to do it, as they have spent the time release to now beefing up their coding for mechanical focused releases, hence the focus on rp expansions. They said this blatantly in the 109 dev diary.
But good for you, that you never tired of being born the antichrist, or having 1/3 rulers murdered by satanists, and having the deepest mechanic being supernatural even chains. And that you enjoy all republics and theocracies feeling the exact same, and you enjoyed having many rivers to play in, and the deepest one is six inches.

 

[Bootymcboots]

So I've voiced my approval of this DLC in an earlier post, but thinking about it somewhat I outright love the idea. I had just played a game where I was going to feasts constantly, like a half dozen a year at least. Adding travel times and decisions to all of those will add a lot of weight. Is your king just going to party all the time? And then I was thinking about rulers who are very far from their holy sites. If I'm a Buddhist in Britain do I get to travel all the way across the world to India for a Pilgrimage? Sounds absolutely incredible. And these travels will account for wars, so do you go straight through them or go ahead? You're the one planning the trip.

Before, these events were just mandatory buttons that added piety, opinion or prestige in terms of their primary functions (There's a lot more to them but that's the fundamental). Now there will be meaningful gameplay and decisions to the whole thing, and even if you outright ignore the fact that you can plan your own travel route, the fact that the system will now account for whatever travel route it does have will mean increased variety of event.

 

[wilcoxchar]

Okay, what's the problem then? Murder connected with celebrations is absolutely recorded in history within the period. And it's not just Clan Scotland like the most google savvy might tell you.

Olga of Kiev immediately comes to mind too.

 

[wilcoxchar]

That's literally what monarchic rulers who weren't marrying locally did, though!

Terms had to be agreed, via envoys, before arrangements could be made for a young woman (and her chaperone and military escort) to be sent hundreds of miles to meet her prospective husband.

Sometimes it really feels like a lot of the people demanding "real" medieval history don't actually know real medieval history and just know the pop history but are hipsters about it.

 

[NarcomancerPL]

Same thing with hostile schemes. Orchestrating a murder in your own court where you have a lot more control and information available should be way faster than doing it anywhere else.

Like I agree with your point about seduction, schemes is something completely different.
Schemes and intrigues relayed on spy networks not proximity. Distant ruler can have much better spy network than one ruling these lands, because it depends on many things charisma, intelligence and popularity of ruler, recruiting agents (I.e. spymaster) or prestige of country itself. Counterintelligence is the thing in proximity to the ruler [theoretically depending and supporting him or the state], that counters foreign intelligence. So CI can be weaker in smaller country than foreign intelligence in the same country of the bigger neighbour/rival

 

[SeraphAscending]

Like I agree with your point about seduction, schemes is something completely different.
Schemes and intrigues relayed on spy networks not proximity. Distant ruler can have much better spy network than one ruling these lands, because it depends on many things charisma, intelligence and popularity of ruler, recruiting agents (I.e. spymaster) or prestige of country itself. Counterintelligence is the thing in proximity to the ruler [theoretically depending and supporting him or the state], that counters foreign intelligence. So CI can be weaker in smaller country than foreign intelligence in the same country of the bigger neighbour/rival

I completely agree that the effect that distance should have should be vastly different depending on what scheme you are running.

Swaying or fabricating evidence against someone could be done reasonably well remotely if competent, but abductions and murders would be hard to pull off without notable investments.

Maybe we can get a real espionage expansion at some point.
I already did a cyprus-only run in which i built cyprus to be the most wealthy powerhouse at merely a dukedom under the byzantine empire. It's really profitable, but at some point abducting the pope for the 7th time to get a hefty ransom gets rather stale. I would like some more options and some improvement to how fast i can run schemes where and what i can use hooks on foreigners for. Something like blackmailing a ruler to divorce their spouse to break off their alliance.
That would make coop spymaster play really fun. Weakening all your liege's enemies before a war by disrupting their diplomatic efforts.

 

[Flockingbird]

This is coming in a few pages late, but the dev quote provides some useful info.

Royal Court was a high-risk release, and whatever one's personal opinion is, I think it's fair to say that the risk did not pay off.

DLCs have a bit of a way of generating their own myths about how well they do or don't do. I think this is partially because, if you're a publically traded company, you often can't release exact figures on things like how many people bought a specific DLC, how many people played a specific DLC, comparisons vs. other products, and so on, not even getting into things like user research and the people we have who just collect up general community sentiment and pain points on the regular that probably technically could be made public but aren't.

So if there's a bunch of negativity around a release (and, like I say, Royal Court did have its problems), oftentimes the only information people have to go on are the release complaints that echo around for months or years &, worse than that, aggregate Steam reviews, which can be generally pretty prone to review bombing around a negative release and thus how much bearing they have on actual quality or perception of a product is variable. Neither of these are really good metrics, but they're all people have, so truisms start to get bandied about about this or that DLC doing horrifically badly based on smoke and rumours.

I uhh, I do appreciate that it must be frustrating for me to sit here and say "I've seen the numbers and that's just incorrect" when my sources for that have to, implicitly, be "just trust me bro". I guess I'm not really saying this to change your mind about public perception of Royal Court, more to give my POV as someone inside PDS on how the DLC went for us, operating from a lot more data. That totally exists and just goes to another school and you don't know them but they're real and we text with the metrics every night.

Contrary to a wide-spread forum opinion, RC went well for the company.

 

[DreadLindwyrm]

That question is kinda rude and disrespecting for the forum and modding community.
For nearly 20 years users developed uncountable solutions for that - written and easy accessible.
As well as many mods doing that are avaible for downloads.
As well as other Paradox Games (many which are forgoten now, small or medium projects) - that were actually good at delivering usable Theocracies in aformentioned time period.

I wasn't aware of anything that had done it well, and I was genuinely asking what steps the other person would be needed to make a generally non-dynastic inheritance system work in a dynastic game that will send you into a game over if you don't have a dynastic heir.

Other games where you're not playing dynastically (say EU3/4) don't have this problem, because you don't have a game over when the dynasty changes.

As for having had solutions for 20 years - I'm not aware of the original CK having had an active modding scene, probably due to the internet and data transfers being far weaker (and more expensive) than we have now.


How is asking "how would you make this work?" disrespectful?

 

[Desolator Trooper]

This is not a scale or amount of content I am willing to pay 30$ for.

 

[NarcomancerPL]

I wasn't aware of anything that had done it well, and I was genuinely asking what steps the other person would be needed to make a generally non-dynastic inheritance system work in a dynastic game that will send you into a game over if you don't have a dynastic heir.

Other games where you're not playing dynastically (say EU3/4) don't have this problem, because you don't have a game over when the dynasty changes.

As for having had solutions for 20 years - I'm not aware of the original CK having had an active modding scene, probably due to the internet and data transfers being far weaker (and more expensive) than we have now.


How is asking "how would you make this work?" disrespectful?

And have you read what I uploaded?

 

[kawamuratc]

Contrary to a wide-spread forum opinion, RC went well for the company.

I’m not surprised. The forum is a particularly small echo chamber and, as such, us forumites gotta keep in mind that whatever we obsessively focus on (Iberian wall gfx fix, cat-a-pult, probably Grand Bloody Wedding from now on) is a result of that echo chamber effect.

 

[DreadLindwyrm]

And have you read what I uploaded?

Briefly. I want a clear head when I go over it properly.

A concern I did have on a first reading was that it seems to unnaturally encourage having your entire court as a bishop being your relatives so that you can game the succession.

 

[LebaneseDude]

Wonderful new mechanics. I imagine modders are going to have a field day with these new features.

 

[klopkr]

Wonderful new mechanics. I imagine modders are going to have a field day with these new features.

CK3 has some of the most talented modders I've seen yet. I expect these features to be turned into something truly amazing in no time.

Gonna be very cool to see the arena in Elder Kings too! Hope I can get myself an adoring fan!

 

[BloodyPuma]

I wasn't aware of anything that had done it well, and I was genuinely asking what steps the other person would be needed to make a generally non-dynastic inheritance system work in a dynastic game that will send you into a game over if you don't have a dynastic heir.

Other games where you're not playing dynastically (say EU3/4) don't have this problem, because you don't have a game over when the dynasty changes.

As for having had solutions for 20 years - I'm not aware of the original CK having had an active modding scene, probably due to the internet and data transfers being far weaker (and more expensive) than we have now.


How is asking "how would you make this work?" disrespectful?

Bro, I will be honest - the lesser the CK was AAA game, the more super hardcore fan creators and real life analitycs (?) where involved in helping developing a game. I remember times were paradox was giving a green light to adding user made stuff to the official patches. Sadly those guys are gone. And thats sad. Simplicity of the game killed die hard community. They can return - just the devs need to return to the good path.

If PDX coudnt do something (muslim in OG CK1 werent playable) - boom - ladyfabia muslim mod. Users made Islam nations palayble. And the game was really hardoded to not allow it.

Trust me - PDX received great, two decade long support from fans. Im one of them. I love this game. Im just sad at what is happening now.

My another problem - CK is hard for 50 years - after that it is a map painter now. Game with no mid and endgame. One-two rulers and you are done. There is nothing to achieve more. Fix that - and then add all those juicy additions.

 

[DreadLindwyrm]

Bro, I will be honest - the lesser the CK was AAA game, the more super hardcore fan creators and real life analitycs (?) where involved in helping developing a game. I remember times were paradox was giving a green light to adding user made stuff to the official patches. Sadly those guys are gone. And thats sad. Simplicity of the game killed die hard community. They can return - just the devs need to return to the good path.

If PDX coudnt do something (muslim in OG CK1 werent playable) - boom - ladyfabia muslim mod. Users made Islam nations palayble. And the game was really hardoded to not allow it.

Trust me - PDX received great, two decade long support from fans. Im one of them. I love this game. Im just sad at what is happening now.

My another problem - CK is hard for 50 years - after that it is a map painter now. Game with no mid and endgame. One-two rulers and you are done. There is nothing to achieve more. Fix that - and then add all those juicy additions.

"Bro" I was saying *I'm not aware of", not denying that it existed. As someone who played the original CK, I never saw any mods for it, even when I'd come to these forums.

And the game being simpler and more accessible is *good* - it even makes it easier for people to make mods for the game. Complexity for the sake of complexity isn't good, and looking down on the newer fans - or those that weren't as "die hard" (or rather active in the community areas you were part of) - isn't helpful.

And these juicy addons are meant to give you things to do through the mid and late game, and maybe move away from the concept of playing it as a map painter into playing the game in line with the characters you have at the time.
I seem to remember there not really being a mid or endgame being an issue in CK and CKII as well though, in that once you were established, you were established and could be more or less untouchable.