Confirmed CK III - Muwaliddism and Asharism new muftis are not replaceable

[mohamedz87]

Short summary of your issue
Muwaliddism and Asharism new muftis are not replaceable

Game Version
1.4.0 (azure)

What OS are you playing on?
Windows

What platform are you using?
Steam

Do you have mods enabled?
No

Have you tried verifying your game files (Steam only)?
Yes

How much "pain" is this causing you?
8

Please explain the issue you experienced in the most condensed way possible
whenever i start a new game, or whenever my previous mufti dies and a new one is auto-selected, I can't replace him. tried on both muwaliddism and asharism as a duke under the ummayads and abbasids.

Please explain how to reproduce the issue
create a new game as a duke under the ummayads or abbasids. try to replace the mufti that appears.

Is there anything else you think could help us identify/replicate the issue?


I have attached a save game
Yes

Upload Attachment
File(s) attached

 

[_Camomile]

I also have this issue. Buttons are all enabled and then nothing happens.

 

[Duke Reginald of Chutney]

Greetings mohamedz87,

After looking into this a little further it seems to affect all Temporal For Life clergy and is not intended. They should be replaceable using the appoint button.

I will push this ahead on our end. And while I could find no direct workaround for this at the moment, I noticed that swapping another council member into the position still works. It's not ideal but perhaps could help in the meantime.

Thank you for the detailed report!

 

[BulletTrain]

They really should have put an "Early Access" caveat when they released this game. It would have saved everyone a lot of pain as it clearly isn't a finished product 10 months after release. But I suppose if they did that they could not justify releasing DLCs for more money. Good Ol' Paradox... it must be nice to have no real competitors in the Grand Strategy market. You make it hard to love you. LOL

 

[Grand Admiral Edward]

They really should have put an "Early Access" caveat when they released this game. It would have saved everyone a lot of pain as it clearly isn't a finished product 10 months after release. But I suppose if they did that they could not justify releasing DLCs for more money. Good Ol' Paradox... it must be nice to have no real competitors in the Grand Strategy market. You make it hard to love you. LOL

Are you forgetting Firaxis (Civ series), Stardock (Gal Civ series), and Creative Assembly (Total War series)? But those games are Grand Strategy games. CK3 IS NOT one. This is more like a Medieval Dynasty Sims simulator. It looks like a Grand Strategy game, but if you play it as one, it sucks because of domain and duchy limits.

 

[BulletTrain]

Are you forgetting Firaxis (Civ series), Stardock (Gal Civ series), and Creative Assembly (Total War series)? But those games are Grand Strategy games. CK3 IS NOT one. This is more like a Medieval Dynasty Sims simulator. It looks like a Grand Strategy game, but if you play it as one, it sucks because of domain and duchy limits.

As much as I would love to have this debate, it would simply distract from what the point which is the game came out in a sad buggy state (as have other Paradox releases in the past few years) and there is not as much money in bug fixing as there is in DLCs. If any of the series you mentioned are an adequate replacement for Paradox games then I am very glad for you.

 

[Grand Admiral Edward]

As much as I would love to have this debate, it would simply distract from what the point which is the game came out in a sad buggy state (as have other Paradox releases in the past few years) and there is not as much money in bug fixing as there is in DLCs. If any of the series you mentioned are an adequate replacement for Paradox games then I am very glad for you.

I wouldn't say they are replacements for CK3. Civ and Gal Civ are both 4X games, where you explore, settle, and build up a civilization. Still a grand strategy game, but has as much in common with CK3 as Final Fantasy has with Mass Effect. Medieval 2 Total War is CK3's closest competitor, but even that comparing would be like comparing chicken to turkey. Medieval 2 is a war game (being part of the Total War series you should say "No duh, it's a war game"), where as CK3 is a Dynasty management game. If you try to play CK3 as an upgraded Medieval 2, you will be sorely disappointed (I know I was). That's not to say that CK3 ISN'T a good game, but it's not a strategy game. Not to say there's no strategy involved, but you can "win" CK3 by just being the Jarl of Iceland for 400-600 years, depending on start date. You don't HAVE to expand. To be honest, I guess I would say it's the inverse of Warcraft 3 Frozen Throne's Orc campaign. That was an RPG inside of a strategy game. This is an RPG disguised as a strategy game. And even as an RGP, it is totally different from other RPGs.
As to games being released in an incomplete buggy state, Paradox is is just following the trend of modern games to release a half baked game, then charge a buttload of money for DLCs that make it a complete game, then rinse and repeat. Pokemon Sword and Shield's Dexit is a perfect example. Game Freak "claimed" that releasing 900 Pokemon would strain the game or some bullshit reason like that, but later DLC (that may be free or you have to pay for, I dunno) added more Pokemon from previous generations, belying that claim on how there are too many Pokemon.