What is the trade-off/opportunity cost for unlocking tech/legacies and stats bonus?

[ray243]

Almost everything you can do in CK3 is about unlocking either new tech, new dynastic legacies, getting higher odds of better stats.

But there doesn't seem to be any concept of trade-offs? Not a lot of if I go down this path, I might be weaker in other paths? Even in RPG games if you chose to specialise in one class, you will lose out on traits other class might have, and when facing an enemy you might have to fight and enemy differently because you can't be a tank, or DPS.

CK3 unlocks seems to be more about "I can unlock everything so I become a late game god mode as every single stats is buffed". In RPG terms, it's like you unlocking skills for all of healer, all of tank, all of DPS and everything because there no trade-offs.

 

[prismaticmarcus]

And...?

 

[ray243]

And...?

This is one of the main issue with games becoming easy. I was wondering if there is a way to design tech unlocks, legacies and stats with a more balanced systems of trade-offs.

You increase tech or prestige in some areas, but this will make you weaker or more vulnerable in other areas.

 

[LucasG21]

I agree that techs are currently too easy to gain too many of. I personally think adding a lot more innovations (while reducing the number needed to advance in age) would be a nice way to introduce more of an opportunity cost; you'll have to choose a certain area to specialize in if you want to get all innovations in a certain category before the new age unlocks better ones.

But as for your other concern, so far I've felt that the rate at which new legacies get unlocked begins to slow down greatly once you get more than 2-3 trees completed, so isn't the opportunity cost of not getting other, also relevant legacies enough?

 

[ray243]

I agree that techs are currently too easy to gain too many of. I personally think adding a lot more innovations (while reducing the number needed to advance in age) would be a nice way to introduce more of an opportunity cost; you'll have to choose a certain area to specialize in if you want to get all innovations in a certain category before the new age unlocks better ones.

But as for your other concern, so far I've felt that the rate at which new legacies get unlocked begins to slow down greatly once you get more than 2-3 trees completed, so isn't the opportunity cost of not getting other, also relevant legacies enough?

Have unlocks be tied to various social costs, maybe? Like you unlock paper and printing, but this serves to undermine the scribes copyists who felt their jobs are under threat, and the mass dissemination of religious texts might mean the church becomes weaker.

Unlock mercantilism and this might create a new powerful mercantile class that pushback against your feudal nobility class. Whenever humans introduce new technology or ideas, there's always people or groups pushing back. This tension is so far not at all represented in CK3, despite this being a period where many innovations can be seen as a threat.

Look at how the church react to heliocentrism being challenged as a model for example.

 

[LucasG21]

Have unlocks be tied to various social costs, maybe? Like you unlock paper and printing, but this serves to undermine the scribes copyists who felt their jobs are under threat, and the mass dissemination of religious texts might mean the church becomes weaker.

Unlock mercantilism and this might create a new powerful mercantile class that pushback against your feudal nobility class. Whenever humans introduce new technology or ideas, there's always people or groups pushing back. This tension is so far not at all represented in CK3, despite this being a period where many innovations can be seen as a threat.

Look at how the church react to heliocentrism being challenged as a model for example.

Interesting, but aren't those particular effects tied to the very late-game? It's definitely reasonable, but I wonder if this would have any visible effect in the High Medieval Era?

Also, the example of heliocentrism is a little more ambiguous on the question of how it was received by the clerical classes; after all, the reason Galileo was within reach of the Roman Inquisition in the first place was because of his status as a favored natural philosopher of Urban VIII.

And that's not getting into how religious institutions ranging from the theological colleges of (As)Syria, the Islamic institutions of the Abbasids and their successors, and the abbeys of Western Europe played a key role in both preserving ancient knowledge and engaging in (an admittedly limited amount) of research in the sciences beyond the scope of their ecclesiastical duties.

Given how limited the representation of clerical authorities in the game is, it would be a shame if their role was reduced to acting out the "Stop thinking! God did it!" meme.

 

[ray243]

Interesting, but aren't those particular effects tied to the very late-game? It's definitely reasonable, but I wonder if this would have any visible effect in the High Medieval Era?

Also, the example of heliocentrism is a little more ambiguous on the question of how it was received by the clerical classes; after all, the reason Galileo was within reach of the Roman Inquisition in the first place was because of his status as a favored natural philosopher of Urban VIII.

And that's not getting into how religious institutions ranging from the theological colleges of (As)Syria, the Islamic institutions of the Abbasids and their successors, and the abbeys of Western Europe played a key role in both preserving ancient knowledge and engaging in (an admittedly limited amount) of research in the sciences beyond the scope of their ecclesiastical duties.

Given how limited the representation of clerical authorities in the game is, it would be a shame if their role was reduced to acting out the "Stop thinking! God did it!" meme.

Yes, they are late-game, but I was more using them as examples of how you can design trade-offs with new unlocks.

For gameplay purposes, you might have to play up the downside or trade-offs of each new unlocks because otherwise, the game just give the player a clear optimum path of having more unlocks which makes the game easier and easier as it goes on.

 

[Tom The Viking YT]

If the game is too easy for you, I would advise changing the settings to "hard".

 

[ray243]

If the game is too easy for you, I would advise changing the settings to "hard".

This isn't about hard or easy. It's about giving people meaningful basic decisions to make.

 

[Bisonmask]

This isn't about hard or easy. It's about giving people meaningful basic decisions to make.

They're joking, there is no Hard difficulty

The game is entirely about scaling and how fast you can scale. The opp cost for legacies is missing out on other legacies and the opp cost for techs is missing out on other techs

So figure out which one gets you where you want to go fastest (off the top of my head stewardship, economic buildings, Blood, bombards are all pretty busted) and beeline for those, you'll get everything else shortly

If you last in a game long enough to fill out more than a couple legacies or most of the high middle ages you'll probably have completed all of your goals anyway

 

[ray243]

They're joking, there is no Hard difficulty

The game is entirely about scaling and how fast you can scale. The opp cost for legacies is missing out on other legacies and the opp cost for techs is missing out on other techs

So figure out which one gets you where you want to go fastest (off the top of my head stewardship, economic buildings, Blood, bombards are all pretty busted) and beeline for those, you'll get everything else shortly

If you last in a game long enough to fill out more than a couple legacies or most of the high middle ages you'll probably have completed all of your goals anyway

I guess this is the issue of "finishing" the game? I.e. you rush to the end point as fast as possible before anyone else can catch up, and given AI struggle to catch up in the same way, you have a powerful insane dynasty after a few centuries.

Which is not only historically not accurate but also not really immersive.

 

[Bisonmask]

I guess this is the issue of "finishing" the game? I.e. you rush to the end point as fast as possible before anyone else can catch up, and given AI struggle to catch up in the same way, you have a powerful insane dynasty after a few centuries.

Which is not only historically not accurate but also not really immersive.

Kind of, the problem is you very normal gameplay sets a pace the AI can't hope to match provided you don't lose the game within a couple generations

 

[ray243]

Kind of, the problem is you very normal gameplay sets a pace the AI can't hope to match provided you don't lose the game within a couple generations

Ideally, either you have an AI that keep pace ( but this is more AI behaving more like a human player), or you have an AI that behaves like a historical dynasty ( i.e. slower pace).

When it comes to a game like CK3, I think the main thing is to not make AI behave as good as a human player, but behave well like a historical character/dynasty. But to do the later, you need a game that doesn't reward snowballing.