I'd like to see that the A.I. would get into debt as well. As of now it's a huge advantage which, in many cases, is totally unfair and unrealistic.
-
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.
The reason for this currently is that the AI is too stupid to handle it's money. So if it did go into debt, you would steamroll every realm before 1300 as not many provinces would ever be able to afford any province improvements at all, and those that would get built would probably be sold during the next war.
All the newer Paradox games have a much improved AI, so I am sure that CK2's AI would be sufficient to not get this sort of cheat, and still be a challenge to players.
Agreed, I play Vicky a lot, and love it. But I don't think a sequel is really needed for Vicky, as much as it is for CK. They could make a great game out of it, possibly as good as EU III. European medieval is a popular setting among the whole world, if they don't fuck up like they more or less did with Rome, this will be gold.
As long as they would keep the feel and gameplay along the same lines as the current CK, I don't think they could steer too much wrong.
There are loads of enhancements and features they could add ofcourse (which I hope they would do).
If they build on the EU-Rome engine, and (greatly) expand on the character part of that, it shouldn't take them years to complete.
There are loads of enhancements and features they could add ofcourse (which I hope they would do).
If they build on the EU-Rome engine, and (greatly) expand on the character part of that, it shouldn't take them years to complete.
One nice thing would be to stop the nation-forming spam; the various Knightly orders will ask you again and again and again if you want to form them, no matter that you've said no 50 times already, no matter that you're the King of Jerusalem and Arabia, and obviously far better equipped to lead a crusade in the Holy Lands than they could possibly be, no matter how much money, prestige, or piety you have. It is, in short, extremely annoying. In fact, this would be a nice thing to do for DV 2.1.
Actually, what's really needed is an overhaul of the whole crusade system. I really doubt a crusade for Burgos would have lead to Spain being split between Bohemia (!), Sicily, and France (well, the last two are somewhat plausible). I also really doubt a crusade for Rome would have left that city in the hands of some Norwegian vassal, or for that matter in anyone's hands but the Pope. Similarly with other crusades. I'm not quite sure what's needed, but some more dynamic sort of crusade target selection (instead of just certain fixed locations), based perhaps on the internal politics of the Church, any crusader states that might exist, and powerful interested 'secular' states (the Kingdom of Jerusalem, for example, might want to crusade into Syria, but Sicily wants to go for Africa or Egypt. The Pope, England, France, and Germany, meanwhile, don't want to do anything) would be really, really nice. A better system for detecting the end of a crusade would also be nice. (As it is, a crusade which is obviously and completely finished can just drag on and on and on and on...)
Actually, what's really needed is an overhaul of the whole crusade system. I really doubt a crusade for Burgos would have lead to Spain being split between Bohemia (!), Sicily, and France (well, the last two are somewhat plausible). I also really doubt a crusade for Rome would have left that city in the hands of some Norwegian vassal, or for that matter in anyone's hands but the Pope. Similarly with other crusades. I'm not quite sure what's needed, but some more dynamic sort of crusade target selection (instead of just certain fixed locations), based perhaps on the internal politics of the Church, any crusader states that might exist, and powerful interested 'secular' states (the Kingdom of Jerusalem, for example, might want to crusade into Syria, but Sicily wants to go for Africa or Egypt. The Pope, England, France, and Germany, meanwhile, don't want to do anything) would be really, really nice. A better system for detecting the end of a crusade would also be nice. (As it is, a crusade which is obviously and completely finished can just drag on and on and on and on...)
Crusades should at least spam less often. Often you're already in the eleventh Crusade before 1166...
I change of subject:
I think it'could be a good thing to enable the "fantoch Kingdoms"...
I explain: sometimes, i play game where i'm a glorious 12 duchy titles owners, and the only Kingdom i can create is....Rus...ok?!
So I think, when you control a certain province's number the player ( and the IA) could create new Kingdoms...; For exemple, I play Lubeck, i became duke of Mecklenbourg, pomerrania, pommeralia, holstein, and Brunswik: 5 Duke'stiltles and control ( including vassals) 17 provinces I think I can become King of something, my culture is Western slavic, I became "king of West Slavici" etc...
What do you think of it?
I think it'could be a good thing to enable the "fantoch Kingdoms"...
I explain: sometimes, i play game where i'm a glorious 12 duchy titles owners, and the only Kingdom i can create is....Rus...ok?!
So I think, when you control a certain province's number the player ( and the IA) could create new Kingdoms...; For exemple, I play Lubeck, i became duke of Mecklenbourg, pomerrania, pommeralia, holstein, and Brunswik: 5 Duke'stiltles and control ( including vassals) 17 provinces I think I can become King of something, my culture is Western slavic, I became "king of West Slavici" etc...
What do you think of it?
Yes, more king titles would be very nice, and custom titles like that would also be very nice.
As for Empires that get REALLY big, I would like to see some concessions (or at least options) for that. By concessions, I don't mean, things tha twould make the game much more benevolent, because as we know, ruling a giant empire isn't easy.
Primarily, the ability to appoint Regional Rulers, in Roman Fashion, to large portions of land. While this never happened in real medieval history, I would assume the traditions of the Roman Empire would carry over. But at the same time, leave the player the option to remain completely centralized and absolute.
I would also like to see specific military units count more in battle - I usually don't even bother to look at the mixture of units I have, and usually numbers win. If I am playing as Germany, and I field a Swiss army, I want to see lots of pikemen, and I want to watch them destroy some heavy cavalry. Likewise, fielding a unit of presumably Noble Cavalry and Knights from say, Il-de-France, should yield especially good heavy armor that would be few in number.
Primarily, the ability to appoint Regional Rulers, in Roman Fashion, to large portions of land. While this never happened in real medieval history, I would assume the traditions of the Roman Empire would carry over. But at the same time, leave the player the option to remain completely centralized and absolute.
I would also like to see specific military units count more in battle - I usually don't even bother to look at the mixture of units I have, and usually numbers win. If I am playing as Germany, and I field a Swiss army, I want to see lots of pikemen, and I want to watch them destroy some heavy cavalry. Likewise, fielding a unit of presumably Noble Cavalry and Knights from say, Il-de-France, should yield especially good heavy armor that would be few in number.
Playing as the mighty catalan de Barcelona family, controlling all of Iberia, I am a bit annoyed at getting spawned courtiers with berber dynasty names, just because my capital is in Valencia. This means that the catalan dynasties won't spawn there, since they are province specific.
What I would like is for them to be culture specific instead. So they would spawn in any province with that culture.
So in my game, as long as my capital is berber, i would get (predominantly) berber named courtiers (with appropriate culture, not my culture). But once I manage to convert the culture to catalan, I should start getting the appropriate catalan dynasties instead.
You could justify this by saying that a culture change of the province is done through the process of giving power to catalan nobility at the expence of the exisiting berber nobility, thus facilitating a change for the whole province.
I still think that the province specific dynasties could work alongside this. Meaning that if I change the culture of the entire peninsula, all courts would get mostly catalan named courtiers, but there would still sometimes be spawned a local courtier with a castillian culture and family, or berber or portugese or whatever.
I just don't like seeing courtiers spawn with a catalan first name and a local berber dynasty (like Sulayman).
What I would like is for them to be culture specific instead. So they would spawn in any province with that culture.
So in my game, as long as my capital is berber, i would get (predominantly) berber named courtiers (with appropriate culture, not my culture). But once I manage to convert the culture to catalan, I should start getting the appropriate catalan dynasties instead.
You could justify this by saying that a culture change of the province is done through the process of giving power to catalan nobility at the expence of the exisiting berber nobility, thus facilitating a change for the whole province.
I still think that the province specific dynasties could work alongside this. Meaning that if I change the culture of the entire peninsula, all courts would get mostly catalan named courtiers, but there would still sometimes be spawned a local courtier with a castillian culture and family, or berber or portugese or whatever.
I just don't like seeing courtiers spawn with a catalan first name and a local berber dynasty (like Sulayman).
My two cents: I'd like to see more reliable assassinations linked to spending more money on them. The assassination system now is fine, if you want to go cheap with it. But if you've got double or triple the required money, it seems like you should have double or triple the chance of success. Top it out at 95% or something, since there will always be conspiracy theorists, even in medieval times.
It seems like an assassination would definitely succeed if you could spend enough money on it - I could assassinate my disloyal leper wife myself and pay the guard the GNP of North Africa to look the other way and spend his retirement in Holland not talking about it. Done deal.
It seems like an assassination would definitely succeed if you could spend enough money on it - I could assassinate my disloyal leper wife myself and pay the guard the GNP of North Africa to look the other way and spend his retirement in Holland not talking about it. Done deal.
I found assissination quite useful to take care of the crazy heir to my throne who had low stats in everything.. and the second in line to the throne had awesome stats.... but, geeze... I felt like a Kennedy after I killed off my oldest son because they were looney!!
What I would like to see is more kingdoms and duchies (Big suprise there...) but also a few more important things.
-Choosing you title. In one of my first games i was a saxon dynasty that rebelled against the king and conquered Wales. Some time later i conquered England. And it was really annoying to see the welsh flag over a english kingdom. (I was a saxon after all.)
- More faces, clothes and other things in the portrait area.
- Ability to create your own kingdoms. It would be awesome if after conquering the scandinavian countries I would be able to create Scandinavia. This could be represented by a in game editor in which a player would be able to choose the needed provinces and the game would show you how much gold and prestige making and then claiming such a title would cost.
Can't think of anything else right now.
EDIT: Oh, and it would be great if I wouldn't see a french controlled Moscow in the middle of a byzantine empire rulled by saxons. Such things can happen thanks to the AI.
-Choosing you title. In one of my first games i was a saxon dynasty that rebelled against the king and conquered Wales. Some time later i conquered England. And it was really annoying to see the welsh flag over a english kingdom. (I was a saxon after all.)
- More faces, clothes and other things in the portrait area.
- Ability to create your own kingdoms. It would be awesome if after conquering the scandinavian countries I would be able to create Scandinavia. This could be represented by a in game editor in which a player would be able to choose the needed provinces and the game would show you how much gold and prestige making and then claiming such a title would cost.
Can't think of anything else right now.
EDIT: Oh, and it would be great if I wouldn't see a french controlled Moscow in the middle of a byzantine empire rulled by saxons. Such things can happen thanks to the AI.
Little idea for improving how culture is handled (culture is strange, it has little to no affect on gameplay, but seemingly big effect on player's enjoyment!)
I think all cultures in CK should be compound cultures i.e. made up of two parts. for example scotland would be Anglo-Scots in the south, Scots-Gaelic in the highlands, and Norse-Gaelic in the isles. If rulers share at least one part of their culture, they get along with no problems, but if both parts are different, then you get some dischord. So the Anglo-Scots could rule over the Scots Gaelic okay, and the Anglo-Saxons, but not the Norse Gaelic.
I don't know about every region but it would serve the british isles well, you could watch the Norman French slowly turn Anglo-Norman, then Anglo-Saxon. So it would be more dynamic.
I think all cultures in CK should be compound cultures i.e. made up of two parts. for example scotland would be Anglo-Scots in the south, Scots-Gaelic in the highlands, and Norse-Gaelic in the isles. If rulers share at least one part of their culture, they get along with no problems, but if both parts are different, then you get some dischord. So the Anglo-Scots could rule over the Scots Gaelic okay, and the Anglo-Saxons, but not the Norse Gaelic.
I don't know about every region but it would serve the british isles well, you could watch the Norman French slowly turn Anglo-Norman, then Anglo-Saxon. So it would be more dynamic.
That is so annoying. I don't know why, but it seems that culture matters very little in ruling terms. Welsh nobles should rebel if they have an English or Saxon king.
Well the English didn't rebel when they had kings who were culturally French
, well they did rebel sometimes but not because of the culture of the ruler but because of bad government. Also what will the Welsh do when they are ruled by a Greek or an Italian ?
Well the English didn't rebel when they had kings who were culturally French
Also what will the Welsh do when they are ruled by a Greek or an Italian ?
and theres good reason for this - serfs especially often times didn't care who they were ruled by, and sometimes didn't even know. People didn't consider themselves "Frenchmen" or "Englishmen" - all they knew is that they served under a lord, who might have served under another lord who served under a king. The land that mattered to peasants were the lands that they worked on. The only land that mattered to the clergy were the lands that the church owned, and the only land that mattered to the knights were the ones they fought and died on. Nobody had any nationalistic feelings about any land that didn't directly influence or belong to them, maybe with the exception of a king or emperor. Nationalism wasn't really even an issue untill the mid 1500s and it didn't become popular untill the 1600s. As long as the ruler provided protection for the serfs, the serfs would continue to work the land. As long as the ruler provided war for the knights, the knights would continue to serve him or her faithfully. And as long as the clergy and the ruler shared the same religion, things would be smooth for the most part. Often times the biggest threat of rebellion came from the middle class, but they were too small to be able to do anything anyway and were continually stepped on.
Without reading the entire thing to find a simple little answer, I'll just pose the simple little question instead. Did Paradox say that they are or will be working on CK2?
No, but Johan has said that he would like to return to CK at some point given the chance, so there's possibility of CK2 coming up some day.
Given the dynastic nature of this game, maybe add something about the human player 'helping along' other family members gain offices\prestige\piety outside their family titles besides conquest & marriage.
Eg) Financial support to help sibling, cousin, uncle become a Cardinal\Pope, dowry for female members.
Another one was something along the lines of reaching x amount of stats in martial, diplomacy, intrigue or stewardship will open up more options.
Eg) Intrigue totaling 10 gets assassination option, 15 assassin & turn 2 allies into rivals?
More females ingame, ie) bastard children should also have a chance at being girls & their mums should appear as courtiers & potential rivals of spouses
Eg) Financial support to help sibling, cousin, uncle become a Cardinal\Pope, dowry for female members.
Another one was something along the lines of reaching x amount of stats in martial, diplomacy, intrigue or stewardship will open up more options.
Eg) Intrigue totaling 10 gets assassination option, 15 assassin & turn 2 allies into rivals?
More females ingame, ie) bastard children should also have a chance at being girls & their mums should appear as courtiers & potential rivals of spouses