Broken Dev regrets

[apollo1989vieten]

Dev posts in the past made mention of some regrets from the CK2 DLC, yet it seems some of the things are being repeated.

They mentioned they were unhappy with the cheesiness of reviving Hellenism in CK2, yet RtP adds a cheesy way to revive Hellenism by restoring the Roman Empire to its fullest extent.

They said that they were unhappy that CK2 nomads made the steppe full of want to be Ghenghises, yet that is what the CK3 nomad DLC is shaping up to be.

 

[Willy Waggler]

Them regretting it doesn't mean it doesn't sells, or is objectively bad, or isn't demanded by management.

 

[Videogames]

It might be that when they talked about the steppe being full of aspiring Genghis Khans, they were referring to how every steppe ruler was emperor tier, and non-war diplomacy was limited between them. Now, nomads can be any tier, can be subjects of other nomads in various ways, and can also band together in confederations. I think the devs managed to accomplish what they intended.

For the Hellenism, I do wonder if that was a matter of one dev thinking it was a bad idea in CK2, but then leaving the team and being replaced by someone who didn't think it was a bad idea. (For the record, I agree that it was a bad idea.)

 

[Mercedes Romero]

Reforming the Roman Empire is pretty popular with a bunch of players. I don't care for it, but why is it bad for the game if the option is there?

 

[InsidiousMage]

They mentioned they were unhappy with the cheesiness of reviving Hellenism in CK2, yet RtP adds a cheesy way to revive Hellenism by restoring the Roman Empire to its fullest extent.

Well, they'd certain get yelled at by a certain segment of the fanbase if they didn't include an "easy" to revive Hellenism. Catering to fan wants isn't the same thing as avoiding them and, in fairness to the devs, you can avoid reviving Hellenism if you want to.

They said that they were unhappy that CK2 nomads made the steppe full of want to be Ghenghises, yet that is what the CK3 nomad DLC is shaping up to be.

I mean, its not really. Its true everyone can become Great Khan but there can still only be one and there is clearly some thought put into the post-conquest phase of becoming the Great Khan. Plus, there is plenty of non-conquest stuff in KotS.

 

[apollo1989vieten]

Well, they'd certain get yelled at by a certain segment of the fanbase if they didn't include an "easy" to revive Hellenism. Catering to fan wants isn't the same thing as avoiding them and, in fairness to the devs, you can avoid reviving Hellenism if you want to.


I mean, its not really. Its true everyone can become Great Khan but there can still only be one and there is clearly some thought put into the post-conquest phase of becoming the Great Khan. Plus, there is plenty of non-conquest stuff in KotS.

They could have stuck a balance between the gamey way that it was previously and the RtP way. Maybe restoring Rome completely allows for a secret Hellenism revival with schemes to convert vassals before opening declaring you the new Julian.

It is shaping up for the goal of every steppe campaign is to become the GOAT Khan. It would be better if the steppe was more than a race to be Ghenghis. The extra content is really just side dressing compared to the main gameplay of becoming Ghenghis first. It remains to be seen if the AI can pull it off.

I understand Paradox is a business. They do sometimes have to add features that aren’t necessarily the best but have better market appeal, but some of these decisions don’t make gameplay sense and fly in the face of the previous desire for CK3 to be less silly than CK2.

 

[InsidiousMage]

They could have stuck a balance between the gamey way that it was previously and the RtP way. Maybe restoring Rome completely allows for a secret Hellenism revival with schemes to convert vassals before opening declaring you the new Julian.

See, I don't think there is a non-silly way to revive Hellenism. The very concept itself is silly and complaining about that seems kind of pointless to me. There is no "realistic" way to restore Hellenism in the Middle Ages. This is also true with Zoroastrianism in Persia with struggle mechanics there. And the problems with reviving Hellenism are problems with the game generally, like everyone eagerly converting to whatever incest, cannibal cult the player comes up with.

It is shaping up for the goal of every steppe campaign is to become the GOAT Khan. It would be better if the steppe was more than a race to be Ghenghis. The extra content is really just side dressing compared to the main gameplay of becoming Ghenghis first. It remains to be seen if the AI can pull it off.

The problem with this argument is that it assumes that becoming a powerful emperor isn't the end goal of the game generally, even though it very clearly is. In Europe alone you have restoring the Carolingian empire, reviving the HRE, revving Rome (non-RtP method), two separate endings for the Iberian struggle, West-Slavia, Slavia, and unifying Italy. The devs literally just added to new empire formation decisions with 1.15. So yeah, becoming Great Khan was obviously going to the end goal KofS but it is also clearly not the sole focus of being a ruler in the steppe.

 

[apollo1989vieten]

See, I don't think there is a non-silly way to revive Hellenism. The very concept itself is silly and complaining about that seems kind of pointless to me. There is no "realistic" way to restore Hellenism in the Middle Ages. This is also true with Zoroastrianism in Persia with struggle mechanics there. And the problems with reviving Hellenism are problems with the game generally, like everyone eagerly converting to whatever incest, cannibal cult the player comes up with.


The problem with this argument is that it assumes that becoming powerful emperor isn't the end of the game generally, even though it very clearly is. In Europe alone you have restoring the Carolingian empire, reviving the HRE, revving Rome (non-RtP method) two separate endings for the Iberian struggle, West-Slavia, Slavia, and unifying Italy. The devs literally just added to new empire formation decisions with 1.15. So yeah, becoming Great Khan was obviously going to the end goal KofS but it is also clearly not-the sole focus of being a ruler in the steppe.

People in the Middle Ages knew next to nothing about Hellenism. So reviving Hellenism is very silly for the medieval period. The end struggle way to re establish Zoroastrianism in Persia is silly, but the concept itself is less so because Zoroastrianism was still dominant among the commons of Persia during the early medieval period. Both things would need to be worked on in order to be less silly. After reviving the Roman Empire to its fullest extent, you get an event chain that can lead you to Hellenism. You have to keep it secret. Similar to the convert to witchcraft scheme, you can convert others to your secret faith via scheme. When you are ready, you can openly declare your secret faith, which would cause a civil war between those who follow your secret faith and those who don't.

After adding new mechanics, becoming the GOAT Khan is the main focus of the DLC. Everything else is just flavor and side dressing. There should be some other goals that can be pursued in the steppe besides just being the GOAT Khan.

 

[InsidiousMage]

After reviving the Roman Empire to its fullest extent, you get an event chain that can lead you to Hellenism. You have to keep it secret. Similar to the convert to witchcraft scheme, you can convert others to your secret faith via scheme. When you are ready, you can openly declare your secret faith, which would cause a civil war between those who follow your secret faith and those who don't.

Yeah, this is all still dumb and silly but you its a type of dumb and silly you prefer, which is not inherently better.

After adding new mechanics, becoming the GOAT Khan is the main focus of the DLC. Everything else is just flavor and side dressing. There should be some other goals that can be pursued in the steppe besides just being the GOAT Khan.

Okay, like what though? And becoming supreme ruler of the steppe, or as close as one could get, was generally a goal of real life steppe empires anyway, its just that Genghis Khan was so successful it kind of over shadows all of the other attempts. Establishing dominance over your neighbors was generally what politics in the steppe was all about so having the end goal of the DLC being to establishing yourself as Great Khan is entirely reasonable.

 

[Koppel235]

See, I don't think there is a non-silly way to revive Hellenism. The very concept itself is silly and complaining about that seems kind of pointless to me. There is no "realistic" way to restore Hellenism in the Middle Ages. This is also true with Zoroastrianism in Persia with struggle mechanics there. And the problems with reviving Hellenism are problems with the game generally, like everyone eagerly converting to whatever incest, cannibal cult the player comes up with.

The CK2 way of secretly converting to Hellenism with high Learning is closer to what historicaly happened with people like Psellos,Italos or Pletho compared to what we have now.And also more challenging.

 

[InsidiousMage]

The CK2 way of secretly converting to Hellenism with high Learning is closer to what historicaly happened with people like Psellos,Italos or Pletho compared to what we have now.

Doesn't make it not silly though.

And also more challenging.

I find it odd that people still think that making the game challenging in any kind of meaningful way is something the devs are at all interested in despite almost five years of evidence to the contrary.

 

[Koppel235]

Doesn't make it not silly though.

Its not silly though,silly is the system we have now.

 

[InsidiousMage]

Its not silly though,silly is the system we have now.

Any Byzantine emperor who went up to someone and said "Let me tell you of the divine message of Jupiter Optimus Maximus and his good friend Zoroaster" would be immediately overthrown and blinded, if not worse. No, converting the Byzantine empire to Hellenism in any way, shape, or form is itself inherently dumb and silly. Arguing over what the best way to allow the player to do so in game is just people arguing over the kind of dumb and silly they prefer.

 

[Willy Waggler]

would be immediately overthrown and blinded

Varangians would strongly disagree to that. Especially considering their faith having more in common with hellenism. And even more so if said emperor is a capable and generous ruler otherwise.

 

[Cyhort]

The Varangians didn't try to convert the entire Empire though.

Look, I love the alternate history options this game gives you. I think it's super fun to do things that never happened, or never would have happened, in real life. I generally don't complain about the game letting you do things that are ahistorical because technically everything you can do in this game that doesn't follow what happened in history is ahistorical, and more options for playthroughs is what keeps me coming back to the game.

But let's not pretend that a lot of these scenarios aren't silly. The idea that Hellinism could have made a comeback in the timeframe of this game is ridiculous. It never would have happened. It's a fun scenario to play, but it's still silly to pretend that there's any "realistic" way it could happen.

 

[klopkr]

Any Byzantine emperor who went up to someone and said "Let me tell you of the divine message of Jupiter Optimus Maximus and his good friend Zoroaster" would be immediately overthrown and blinded, if not worse. No, converting the Byzantine empire to Hellenism in any way, shape, or form is itself inherently dumb and silly. Arguing over what the best way to allow the player to do so in game is just people arguing over the kind of dumb and silly they prefer.

IDK. The Emperor that just restored the Roman Empire?

Yes people would turn against him, but with enough prestige and power emperors and most rulers could probably introduce some wild new religious ideas. Would they last? Probably not.

But lets not forget that christanity in Rome literally originates with such an Emperor.

Just because nobody was strong enough for this to happen does not mean it couldn't have. All the necessary pieces in history are there for the one in 100 billion chance.

 

[Willy Waggler]

But let's not pretend that a lot of these scenarios aren't silly

Immortal ancient hellenic horse having a deadly rivalry with your beloved Glitterhoof is silly. Or bears trying to take over the world.
Emperor getting too much into classics is no more silly than, for example, another emperor deciding to burn all the icons and tapestry, because he lost some battles to saracens.

 

[InsidiousMage]

Just because nobody was strong enough for this to happen does not mean it couldn't have.

Yeah, no. Orthodoxy was actually central to how the Byzantines viewed themselves. Even at the very end of the empire when embracing the Catholic view of Christianity could have brought them some aid they stuck with Orthodoxy. It was core to who they were.

Hellenism is silly nonsense and nothing more.

 

[Videogames]

I find it odd that people still think that making the game challenging in any kind of meaningful way is something the devs are at all interested in despite almost five years of evidence to the contrary.

I will never give up the dream!

 

[apollo1989vieten]

IDK. The Emperor that just restored the Roman Empire?

Yes people would turn against him, but with enough prestige and power emperors and most rulers could probably introduce some wild new religious ideas. Would they last? Probably not.

But lets not forget that christanity in Rome literally originates with such an Emperor.

Just because nobody was strong enough for this to happen does not mean it couldn't have.

Christianity had been a growing force in the Roman World before Constantine had his experience and made it his personal religion. Julian the Apostate was the closest Hellenism had to prevent Christianity from officially becoming the state faith of Rome. How effective he could have been if he had lived longer is debated.