• 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.

ray243

General
34 Badges
Oct 19, 2010
2.380
7.056
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Cities: Skylines - Campus
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Cities: Skylines
In EU5, they have talked a lot about how pops, or the relationship between food availability and population are the two key resources that underpinned everything else about the world of EU5. CK3 being a middle age setting, should have made population an even bigger key currency in the game than other currencies.

Nomads, tribal governments are especially determined by its available population, as rulers power is all about how many people you can get to follow you as a chieftain. But this also applies to feudal, clan and admin governments too.

Feudal contracts are all about locking in local workforce as serfs so they are tied to the land, rather than free tenant farmers able to just pick up and move to different farms in another county without your say so. Ensuring there are enough farmers in an area is a big concern for every settled ruler in this time period.

Highly developed cities like Rome and Constantinople should be affected by population as well. Even if a province like Rome or Constantinople has high development at game start, if the population is low, then a lot of the buildings might be frozen in function as they aren't enough people to keep the various buildings working.

As a ruler, you can invite settlers to come to your realm to become farmers and work on the available land if you don't have enough manpower, or you can conduct wars which capture your enemy population and bring them over to your land to work on your lands.

Your manpower is both your source of income which can be translated into gold as food is produced, more food = more workers and craftsmen in other areas being fed, and also the basis of your political power.
 
  • 41Like
  • 5
  • 3
  • 1Love
Reactions:
But the devs want like ten types of mana resources to represent how much people respect you before adding food and manpower.

Honestly, a manpower and food system can translate into those other types of mana much better if the two resources are foundational to everything else. There's no use having high prestige if you don't have many people in the world to admire you, or lots of gold if there's your entire population dead and dying from disease or starvation.

It would solve issues like herd and provisions as well, since in-game we already have provisions for landless adventurers. The magic button of automatically refilling provision from a single province seems unrealistic as increased demand for food should affect things like supply and cost of food.
 
  • 9Like
  • 3
  • 2
Reactions:
But the devs want like ten types of mana resources to represent how much people respect you before adding food and manpower.
I don't know, is it fair to blame the devs as a whole? Devs to me seems cool people and someone of the team want more strategy-historical game. Should't we blame the the game director or whoever is setting the overall design direction? idk, i am not sure who decide what
 
  • 3
  • 2Like
  • 2Haha
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I don't know, is it fair to blame the devs as a whole? Devs to me seems cool people and someone of the team want more strategy-historical game. Should't we blame the the game director or whoever is setting the overall design direction? idk, i am not sure who decide what
Devs as in everyone invovled in development, not just specifically coders.
In EU5, they have talked a lot about how pops, or the relationship between food availability and population are the two key resources that underpinned everything else about the world of EU5. CK3 being a middle age setting, should have made population an even bigger key currency in the game than other currencies.

Nomads, tribal governments are especially determined by its available population, as rulers power is all about how many people you can get to follow you as a chieftain. But this also applies to feudal, clan and admin governments too.

Feudal contracts are all about locking in local workforce as serfs so they are tied to the land, rather than free tenant farmers able to just pick up and move to different farms in another county without your say so. Ensuring there are enough farmers in an area is a big concern for every settled ruler in this time period.

Highly developed cities like Rome and Constantinople should be affected by population as well. Even if a province like Rome or Constantinople has high development at game start, if the population is low, then a lot of the buildings might be frozen in function as they aren't enough people to keep the various buildings working.

As a ruler, you can invite settlers to come to your realm to become farmers and work on the available land if you don't have enough manpower, or you can conduct wars which capture your enemy population and bring them over to your land to work on your lands.

Your manpower is both your source of income which can be translated into gold as food is produced, more food = more workers and craftsmen in other areas being fed, and also the basis of your political power.
The feudal contract isnt just about tying people to the land, but also assigning land to someone and giving them the rights over it to collect taxes and set markets
 
  • 4Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Certainly, they were very important historically. But, my great takeaway is that, given the current systems, I don't think the way CK3 was developed makes it the correct game for them, because they would require too much reworking of too many tied-in systems to be fully functional and rewarding.

I've tried out some of the older mods that used to have Pops attached to them, and, quite frankly, they didn't add any in-game complexity, even when they matched the level of depth to what you described. They were just a modifier that gave more taxes and levies, which is what Development already kinda represents. I got events about fires and earthquakes, but, after, 5 years, I stopped caring about the number that went up, down, up, down, etc, because having 1,000 burghers or 10,000 farmers didn't contribute as much as Manor Houses. There's no character attached to them and there wasn't any real tragedy or cost associated with them--I felt more impact from the mod that made it so that sieges could destroy buildings and actually damage my economy.

Inviting farmers to work your fields; you mean spending money to get an income increase? That's called upgrading a building. The economic systems of CK3 already have better terrain baronies produce better economic buildings (manor houses > farms & fields > most buildings > forestry/desert agriculture), so the pops would already flow into this dynamic. What would it take to attract pops away from high development provinces that would be fun to interact with? The game just represents the Ostsiedlung with a Development and Cultural Conversion bonus, and, without any kind of event spam of "GERMAN SETTLERS WANT TO MOVE IN, JAH ODER NEIN?" the level of interactivity isn't that exciting.

So, addressing the above, unless a complete economic rehaul was made involving pops, the building system, and development, the best we can get is a loss of income due to low Control after an enemy attack. Paradox said they'll be adding merchants [republics?] in Chapter V, but I don't think they'll go so far as to implement EU5's Goods mapping.
If anything, as you mentioned about Freezing buildings, or at least reducing their efficiency pending an amount of pops needed to work them, could be a stopgap, sure, though it's a kind of binary (not met = worry, met = ignore) kind of issue.

Meanwhile, what if pops were connected to levies/MAA? Well, the creators have already said the reason why levies replenish so fast is because the AI can't handle their armies and, after losing them, would just be dogpiled into oblivion. The same could be said for pops, as well, with AI unable to manage their military and pop growth, and, thus, collapse into 100-person counties as plagues sweep through their lands, their cities deserted without peasants to feed them.
Meanwhile, a large kingdom would always just be better because more land = more pops; playing tall would require some very careful gardening to prevent plagues and other sources wiping out your workforce and be unable to resist larger neighbors--would being unable to resupply your MAA due to a vast number of factors out of your control be a fun feature? Or would it just be a noob trap that makes new players quit?

Would having local food supply contribute to a siege's length be a great feature? Yeah! But, then again, high economic buildings provide greater development which makes for stronger counties to put money into stronger defensive buildings. Supply is a flat number and barely gets touched, even if a 100,000 strong army sites there, laying siege for 36 months.

Looking at the military side, this too, would mean a full military, building, supply, and AI overhaul would be needed, which, quite frankly, has been a day 1 complaint here on the forums.

At this point, we're already tearing out and re-wiring two base systems which the AI presently struggles to use correctly, and making them more complex so that some background numbers can give us more income in our high development/good terrain provinces. Now add in whatever systems All Under Heaven are going to change to the east, and there's another array of complexity that'll probably need its own beast to deal with.

This is even before we start conceptualizing minority mechanics, treatment of relgious sites, and what associated kind of interactions could be used for pops, as we presently just have Control and Public Opinion. That means more menus, more granularity in religions and cultures, and more things that detract from finding marriages, going hunting, or launching wars. Hisyoric taxes provide a lot of data to study, but having to scroll through submenus to alter a city's market contract rights can be burdonsome. Representing the history of things like Frederick II's Lucera Archers or Köln's protection of its Jews during the Rhineland massacres are interesting displays of cross-religious interactions, but what would make it worth the player's time when archers are a poor MAA and Cologne's Farms and Fields produce more income than its minorities?
Meanwhile there's plenty of action like the mobs of Rome affecting papal elections, the burgher's revolt of the Jacquerie that nearly upstaged Paris, and the countless peasant movements of China during times of turmoil. Then there's how Traveling populations would work, particularly with nomadic realms and unsettled baronies. All of the calculations wouldn't help players struggling with all of the current Administrative schemes, let alone what'll come with China, and then there's the event spam of "10 Norse-Mashriqis were killed in a feud with a powerful Ethiopian family. Will you spend 500g or lose 10 Public Opinion from the Norse-Mashriqi?" These would then all have their mechanical implimentation, because a 10 year modifier for "bad weather" is just silly.

If they had been idealized from the start, like how EU5 shifted away from EU4's Mana-based Development (which, in itself, had been added via an expansion that has now been integrated into the base game), I think it could be possible, but, unless serious dev time is taken to get under the layers of CK3's exterior I think it's much more likely to be painted on a fresh canvas in CK4.

1747080114713.png


Edit: I wouldn't be opposed to an abstracted pop system that can influence things like peasant rebellions, involve a few options for common law, and portray the rise of urbanization, but I wouldn't have it as any high priority
 
Last edited:
  • 12
  • 6Like
  • 1
Reactions:
But the devs want like ten types of mana resources to represent how much people respect you before adding food and manpower.
What really grinds my gears is that taxation nearly everywhere in the world especially during the middle ages was mostly “food” and “manpower”.
 
  • 9Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Certainly, they were very important historically. But, my great takeaway is that, given the current systems, I don't think the way CK3 was developed makes it the correct game for them, because they would require too much reworking of too many tied-in systems to be fully functional and rewarding.

I've tried out some of the older mods that used to have Pops attached to them, and, quite frankly, they didn't add any in-game complexity, even when they matched the level of depth to what you described. They were just a modifier that gave more taxes and levies, which is what Development already kinda represents. I got events about fires and earthquakes, but, after, 5 years, I stopped caring about the number that went up, down, up, down, etc, because having 1,000 burghers or 10,000 farmers didn't contribute as much as Manor Houses. There's no character attached to them and there wasn't any real tragedy or cost associated with them--I felt more impact from the mod that made it so that sieges could destroy buildings and actually damage my economy.

Inviting farmers to work your fields; you mean spending money to get an income increase? That's called upgrading a building. The economic systems of CK3 already have better terrain baronies produce better economic buildings (manor houses > farms & fields > most buildings > forestry/desert agriculture), so the pops would already flow into this dynamic. What would it take to attract pops away from high development provinces that would be fun to interact with? The game just represents the Ostsiedlung with a Development and Cultural Conversion bonus, and, without any kind of event spam of "GERMAN SETTLERS WANT TO MOVE IN, JAH ODER NEIN?" the level of interactivity isn't that exciting.

So, addressing the above, unless a complete economic rehaul was made involving pops, the building system, and development, the best we can get is a loss of income due to low Control after an enemy attack. Paradox said they'll be adding merchants [republics?] in Chapter V, but I don't think they'll go so far as to implement EU5's Goods mapping.
If anything, as you mentioned about Freezing buildings, or at least reducing their efficiency pending an amount of pops needed to work them, could be a stopgap, sure, though it's a kind of binary (not met = worry, met = ignore) kind of issue.

Meanwhile, what if pops were connected to levies/MAA? Well, the creators have already said the reason why levies replenish so fast is because the AI can't handle their armies and, after losing them, would just be dogpiled into oblivion. The same could be said for pops, as well, with AI unable to manage their military and pop growth, and, thus, collapse into 100-person counties as plagues sweep through their lands, their cities deserted without peasants to feed them.
Meanwhile, a large kingdom would always just be better because more land = more pops; playing tall would require some very careful gardening to prevent plagues and other sources wiping out your workforce and be unable to resist larger neighbors--would being unable to resupply your MAA due to a vast number of factors out of your control be a fun feature? Or would it just be a noob trap that makes new players quit?

Would having local food supply contribute to a siege's length be a great feature? Yeah! But, then again, high economic buildings provide greater development which makes for stronger counties to put money into stronger defensive buildings. Supply is a flat number and barely gets touched, even if a 100,000 strong army sites there, laying siege for 36 months.

Looking at the military side, this too, would mean a full military, building, supply, and AI overhaul would be needed, which, quite frankly, has been a day 1 complaint here on the forums.

At this point, we're already tearing out and re-wiring two base systems which the AI presently struggles to use correctly, and making them more complex so that some background numbers can give us more income in our high development/good terrain provinces. Now add in whatever systems All Under Heaven are going to change to the east, and there's another array of complexity that'll probably need its own beast to deal with.

This is even before we start conceptualizing minority mechanics, treatment of relgious sites, and what associated kind of interactions could be used for pops, as we presently just have Control and Public Opinion. That means more menus, more granularity in religions and cultures, and more things that detract from finding marriages, going hunting, or launching wars. Hisyoric taxes provide a lot of data to study, but having to scroll through submenus to alter a city's market contract rights can be burdonsome. Representing the history of things like Frederick II's Lucera Archers or Köln's protection of its Jews during the Rhineland massacres are interesting displays of cross-religious interactions, but what would make it worth the player's time when archers are a poor MAA and Cologne's Farms and Fields produce more income than its minorities?
Meanwhile there's plenty of action like the mobs of Rome affecting papal elections, the burgher's revolt of the Jacquerie that nearly upstaged Paris, and the countless peasant movements of China during times of turmoil. Then there's how Traveling populations would work, particularly with nomadic realms and unsettled baronies. All of the calculations wouldn't help players struggling with all of the current Administrative schemes, let alone what'll come with China, and then there's the event spam of "10 Norse-Mashriqis were killed in a feud with a powerful Ethiopian family. Will you spend 500g or lose 10 Public Opinion from the Norse-Mashriqi?" These would then all have their mechanical implimentation, because a 10 year modifier for "bad weather" is just silly.

If they had been idealized from the start, like how EU5 shifted away from EU4's Mana-based Development (which, in itself, had been added via an expansion that has now been integrated into the base game), I think it could be possible, but, unless serious dev time is taken to get under the layers of CK3's exterior I think it's much more likely to be painted on a fresh canvas in CK4.

View attachment 1297124

What would be really useful is making things more easy for nomadic governments as their development is not rigidly tied to the land itself. Likewise, the formation of mercenary bands, and recruitment of retinues would also be more tied to the global game system as you need to actually find people to join such units, and this have to come from a population from somewhere in the world.

Right now, retinue and mercenaries are recruited from gold, and there's never a specific population they are recruited from, even from overseas.

Wars can also be handled with a different dynamic as many people would fight wars to capture slaves and working population from elsewhere. The impact of Black Death with massive population lost meant suddenly there's a premium for whoever is left to work.

A good population system would be a great balance between power held by a feudal nobility, vs power held by non-nobility.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Food security could work as a modifier like general opinion. It could also serve as a way to resupply armies/raids. Agricultural buildings should raise the food security along with having trade deals with more rural realms, etc. It could also be a way to avoid development farming in the long run with your steward as having too high of a development could lead to over consumption of food if your technology is not up to par or you don’t have advanced/proper buildings.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Developers made the deliberate choice of abstracting away these aspects into County Development and Control, and so far I find it is working quite well. I'm glad the focus of simulation aspect of this game focus on interactions and relations among characters, instead of EU and Vic franchises where economics is a big role. Being different from other PDX franchises should be considered a good thing. It's not like the devs have perfected the personal interaction and relationship aspects of this game, and there are still a lot rooms to improve to the point that adding deeper economical simulation would not be a realistic expectation for CK3.
 
  • 5
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Developers made the deliberate choice of abstracting away these aspects into County Development and Control, and so far I find it is working quite well. I'm glad the focus of simulation aspect of this game focus on interactions and relations among characters, instead of EU and Vic franchises where economics is a big role. Being different from other PDX franchises should be considered a good thing. It's not like the devs have perfected the personal interaction and relationship aspects of this game, and there are still a lot rooms to improve to the point that adding deeper economical simulation would not be a realistic expectation for CK3.

Development becomes really funky when you have to deal with nomadic powers. Not to mention even high developments cities like Rome and Constantinople faded in population and many of its buildings went out of use when population is too low to use it.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Developers made the deliberate choice of abstracting away these aspects into County Development and Control, and so far I find it is working quite well. I'm glad the focus of simulation aspect of this game focus on interactions and relations among characters, instead of EU and Vic franchises where economics is a big role. Being different from other PDX franchises should be considered a good thing. It's not like the devs have perfected the personal interaction and relationship aspects of this game, and there are still a lot rooms to improve to the point that adding deeper economical simulation would not be a realistic expectation for CK3.
My personal issue is that the system is really static. There is a very little chance for any ‘good’ (e.g. with good special building, and probably built up) County to truly decline in a manner that cannot be remedied in a few years. Development may be lowered, but come on. It may make good Counties even better, but it won’t be enough to counterweight the (rather static) Special Buildings, already built buildings, etc.; and it just seriously limits any lasting damage wars, epidemics, etc., can do.

and this sort of ‘cannot damage Constantinople bad enough’ situation also contributes to the general durability of in-game empires, because even if something really goes wrong for them, it probably means setting their goals back just a few years.

It also makes late game feel same-y. I mean, I will probably still see the seats of power in the same place as before, and no ‘the capital grew less than biggest vassals’ capitals’ upsets and emergence of different dynamics

That of course doesn't mean that there have to be Pops, or food system, but IMHO improved economy would make for better emergent narratives.
 
  • 8
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Developers made the deliberate choice of abstracting away these aspects into County Development and Control, and so far I find it is working quite well. I'm glad the focus of simulation aspect of this game focus on interactions and relations among characters, instead of EU and Vic franchises where economics is a big role. Being different from other PDX franchises should be considered a good thing. It's not like the devs have perfected the personal interaction and relationship aspects of this game, and there are still a lot rooms to improve to the point that adding deeper economical simulation would not be a realistic expectation for CK3.
But this isn't the The Sims, this is The Ruling Sims. There's need to be a population to interact with as a character. It doesn't have to be as complex as Victoria 3, but it needs to be there, we need to feel that we have subjects. We might even need some class struggle.
 
Last edited:
  • 8Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I agree in principle, but expecting a fundamental overhaul for CK3 away from the holdings system to a pops system is something I will not hold out for.
But I can sit and wait for CK4.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
I agree in principle, but expecting a fundamental overhaul for CK3 away from the holdings system to a pops system is something I will not hold out for.
But I can sit and wait for CK4.

I hope CK4 would offer a chance to radically rethink about game design for CK4, rather than the current model of stretching an older game design to its limits and watching it crack because you need a lot of work-arounds for things to make sense for the time period.
 
  • 5Like
Reactions:
I think a population system would have been great in CK3, but that doesn't mean things can't be improved.

Khans of the Steppe have shown us that a food system and even very basic trade are possible. Many will disagree with me, but I think fertility and herds could be considered a first resource.

Suggestions and changes for implementing a food system:

1-Each county will produce food:

Depending on the terrain and the buildings constructed, this value will increase or decrease.

At the beginning of the game, counties should have a food value of 0 or slightly positive. Over time, this value should increase (if agricultural buildings are built) or decrease (if urban buildings, more possessions, or a level increase are built). I believe this is intended to simulate the transformation of territories in the Middle Ages from more agricultural to more urban areas. Obviously, it shouldn't be possible to have many highly urbanized and improved counties, forcing us to carefully choose which county to improve.

2-The supply limit shouldn't depend on development:

The supply limit shouldn't depend on development but rather on the amount of food in that county. You can have a very underdeveloped county with plenty of food stored.

3-Armies should have a food reserve:

When advancing through enemy territory, they should first be depleted and then begin to be affected by the county supply limit.

Only professional armies should be able to have this reserve; levies should remain exactly the same, thus simulating that having more professional armies allows them to organize themselves better.

4-New trade interactions:

If we rely solely on our food production capacity, we would be unrealistic.
Many trade-related events or bonuses should be transformed into dynamic, actionable bonuses. If I get along well with another independent character, I should be able to sign a trade agreement (an interaction) in which we can agree on how much food I import or export each month in exchange for gold. If one of us fails to comply with the agreement, it could trigger an economic casus belli.

Let's be realistic, many people will tell me that there are currently no trading mechanics etc. but it seems that at some point there may be some trading in CK3, so I think starting with basic food resources could help have a trading base that can be expanded in the future.

5-Improve cities and mayors:
One of the problems with not having populations is that you can't represent the changes in the Late Middle Ages after the Black Death.
Allowing certain exclusive mechanics with mayors could help with that. For example, certain technology could unlock the option to convert a city into a free city (a different feudal contract), allowing mayors to earn a lot of gold or even trade food.

6-More laws:

I think having a set of new laws for food would be great,
for example, one option to centralize food in the capital (to allow for the expansion of urban buildings), another option to distribute food equally throughout the kingdom, and a third option to favor more remote areas.

These are some of the ideas that could be implemented to use food in CK3 that don't require populations.

I've read several times on these forums that the developers don't want to make major changes that would scare off new players. However, I think they can implement easy-to-understand, yet difficult-to-master mechanics that will make both new and veteran players enjoy it.

After 1,000 hours of playing CK3, I've liked the changes that Khans of the Steppe has brought. It's been a breath of fresh air, a light at the end of the tunnel, and I recognize that it's helped regain some confidence in what CK3 can improve.

I understand that many veterans coming from CK2 or who have spent many hours playing CK3 often feel frustrated by the slow progress of the game, but I believe that with constructive ideas that are easy to implement and difficult to master, we can help.
 
  • 3Like
  • 2
Reactions: