Crusader Kings II

[longlee]

i think the idea about lower noble classes is good but i think that ck needs more overthrows between family members and a distiction needs to be made between differant branches. so if my brother says i am unfit to rule if he has better stats i need to have a reason to fight on and it will make characters more interesting.

 

[unmerged(75409)]

Above all, CK2 needs a mechanism whereby a crown can pass from person A to person B without B defeating A in war, or A dieing and B being the #1 heir. Right now there is no way to model palace coups (which happened a lot in Byzantium), abdications (which also happened every now and then) or husbands usurping the power from their queen-brides.

 

[Cèsar de Quart]

The thing of a lesser noble title (the "estate", was suggested) is, in my opinion, excessive, for it would need four or five times the provinces of today's game and much more control and micromanagement from the player. I think that this lesser noble class should be represented more like the noble estament in every province, but to represent the concession of fiefs in that province. The ruler has his royal demesne, but in there he can give away royal lands in order to get money at one time and loosing tax income later. He can also give more freedom to the lower people, or deny them some rights (after building the windmill, giving them away the right to use it, that would increase the income but lower the happines and the supply cappacity), in a manner similar to provincial decisions in EU3.

It would represent well the loss of power and influence that suffered some royal families in Europe by 1300-1400 (the House of Barcelona suffered a lot because of that, mainly by fault of some stupid kings as Alfons III the Gentle, Joan I the Hunter or Martin I the Human) by giving away most of the royal demesne to the nobles.

It would be great also to make, somehow, that great families without title to be fixed at your land. It's very hard to maintain a family in your court, the sons usually leave the court. You should be able to give them some privileges in the royal demesne (I want to keep them as advisors, not to give them a whole county and lose their council).

 

[Waffen9999]

I'm not to picky except for one thing. I really wish the AI wouldn't revoke its vassals and replace them with its own relatives. It just doesn't seem realistic in the sense of the counts/barons/all nobility going along willy nilly. Unless they allow for non hereditary titled counts.

That and prestige loss from children not having their own lands needs to be removed. It's unfair to be a 1 province count in the HRE and through no fault of your own have like 7 sons or something from your wife. You're poor, you'll never gain land in any significant time, and once they all become of age your prestige is going to tank big time.

 

[unmerged(17324)]

I'm looking forward to a Crusader Kings II in 3D!! Woohoo I hope they have more Dynasty things to do like being able to marry or allow your courtiers to marry and have more kids. And bring back assassinating of family and court members for decreasing bad boy.

 

[Count of Reval]

That and prestige loss from children not having their own lands needs to be removed. It's unfair to be a 1 province count in the HRE and through no fault of your own have like 7 sons or something from your wife. You're poor, you'll never gain land in any significant time, and once they all become of age your prestige is going to tank big time.

Taken into account the spirit of CK, maybe there should be also something like "bloodline score" in the game, measuring the ruler's ability to manage his dynasty, and the "quality" of it? This score could be reflected in the monthly prestige change.

Currently marrying your daughter gives you onetime prestige bonus; and adult sons without a land, and unmarried daughters cause a prestige diminish every month. That's pretty much it.

But when assessing success of dynasty and reflecting it in prestige, why not to do it on broader bases?
For example, some basic factors that the hypothetical "bloodline score" could take into account might be:
* number of sons, children, and grandchildren;
* some weighted average of ruler's, and his childrens', and grandchildrens' character stats (martial, diplomacy etc);
* per cent of children and grandchildren having "diseases traits" (especially inbred, maniac, and schizophrenia);
* social positions the children and grandchildren have (in feudal system (kings/dukes), and in courts (advisors));
* social positions of husbands of married daughters;
* claims on titles that ruler, his children, and grandchildren have;
* some weighted average of parents' and grandparents' "bloodline score" (with a fade factor).

This score would capture some important indicators of dynastical success, and compress this broader picture into one figure (which would in turn become one of the factors that influence monthly change of prestige). And it would deepen one of the main strengths of CK - the human, and role-play component - even further.

(In that way, for example, the penalty of having sons without a land is somewhat relieved by the effect having sons at all. Etc.)

 

[unmerged(133919)]

Was Rome a big success? Don't know ...

I suppose in the mind of the common customer, EU Rome was competing with Rome Total War, which, thanks only to its battles is what most people would prefer to buy.

Don't get me wrong, RTW is an amazing game with some staggeringly good mods, but it's a bit arcade-ish, thus Paradox games will always reign supreme, even if they don't sell as well.

Interesting how many people don't seem to like the 3D map. I'll admit, it takes getting used to, but it's not that bad. Ideally I'd like a 3D 2D map. As in you play it out on a 3D map that resembles an actual map on a table, like in Imperial Glory.

 

[unmerged(106651)]

I suppose in the mind of the common customer, EU Rome was competing with Rome Total War, which, thanks only to its battles is what most people would prefer to buy.

Don't get me wrong, RTW is an amazing game with some staggeringly good mods, but it's a bit arcade-ish, thus Paradox games will always reign supreme, even if they don't sell as well.

Interesting how many people don't seem to like the 3D map. I'll admit, it takes getting used to, but it's not that bad. Ideally I'd like a 3D 2D map. As in you play it out on a 3D map that resembles an actual map on a table, like in Imperial Glory.

I think that they are both two different games in their own rights. I like each for their own reasons. What I don't like are the 3d gaming in RTW. I like the strategy based gaming in DV. Flaming pigs get boring after awhile

At the rate that things are going, though... will there ever be DV II or CK II?

 

[Andrelvis]

I think that they are both two different games in their own rights. I like each for their own reasons. What I don't like are the 3d gaming in RTW. I like the strategy based gaming in DV. Flaming pigs get boring after awhile

At the rate that things are going, though... will there ever be DV II or CK II?

Well, we have to hope at least one team or individual is looking into CK's source code and making a new version, which could improve on the game. As for a CK II from Paradox... I'm guessing it's more likely for us to see a new medieval game in the EU3 engine than a proper continuation of CK in that same engine.

 

[Nick B II]

Well, we have to hope at least one team or individual is looking into CK's source code and making a new version, which could improve on the game. As for a CK II from Paradox... I'm guessing it's more likely for us to see a new medieval game in the EU3 engine than a proper continuation of CK in that same engine.

CK itself is built on the EU2 engine. So it would make sense for them to make CK2 on EU3's engine.

In business terms CK2 is probably a no-brainer. CK outsold Vicki (Johan said so), so we're likely to see CK2 before Vicki2. There's a sizable market for Middle Ages games, and they've already got most of the research done.

Right now Paradox staff seem to be really focused on HoI3. So we probably won't hear anything about their next project for quite some time.

Nick

 

[Andrelvis]

CK itself is built on the EU2 engine. So it would make sense for them to make CK2 on EU3's engine.

I know... what I meant was that it will probably be a new medieval game concept by Paradox in EU3 engine, and not CK2 in EU3 engine. Same as for Vicky: I don't think there will be a Vicky 2, I think probably there will be a new 19th-century game at some point in the new engine, but that that game won't be Vicky 2.

 

[unmerged(106651)]

Well, we have to hope at least one team or individual is looking into CK's source code and making a new version, which could improve on the game. As for a CK II from Paradox... I'm guessing it's more likely for us to see a new medieval game in the EU3 engine than a proper continuation of CK in that same engine.

Would it be called CKII or DVII? Or, would it be a whole new game title?

 

[Mrdie]

Would it be called CKII or DVII? Or, would it be a whole new game title?

CKII. Deus Vult was the subtitle of an expansion.

 

[Andrelvis]

Would it be called CKII or DVII? Or, would it be a whole new game title?

I meant a whole new game title. But if CK sold as well as Nick B is saying, there would be no reason to not make a sequel to it.

 

[TempestDK]

I meant a whole new game title. But if CK sold as well as Nick B is saying, there would be no reason to not make a sequel to it.

Well Nick's statement didn't actually say that it sold well ... just that it outsold Vicky, which I believe was one of the least sold titles of Paradox.

But still ... CK is a Johan favorite, so if he can convince the company to CK right, it could happen

 

[Nick B II]

Would it be called CKII or DVII? Or, would it be a whole new game title?

He was referring to the new program where random people can re-code Paradox games. You have to have a business plan, and some evidence that you can actually pull it off, but it's still really cool.

I doubt Paradox would let them call it CK II, or DV II. It'd probably be marketed as an expansion pack.

Nick

 

[Quintarka]

Well Nick's statement didn't actually say that it sold well ... just that it outsold Vicky, which I believe was one of the least sold titles of Paradox.

But still ... CK is a Johan favorite, so if he can convince the company to CK right, it could happen

It is strange that two of the most revoluntionary strategy games are the two worst sellers for paradox. I hated EU Rome i play that craps for no more than 5 hours but ck-dv is amazing and i still play it because it captures teh fuedal system wonderfully, and i still play victoria revolution because i love the economic componet of the game it caputres the industrialization of the world perfectly, you can actually make uruguay an industrail power i want paradox to make sequels for both ckdv and ricky

 

[TempestDK]

It is strange that two of the most revoluntionary strategy games are the two worst sellers for paradox. I hated EU Rome i play that craps for no more than 5 hours but ck-dv is amazing and i still play it because it captures teh fuedal system wonderfully, and i still play victoria revolution because i love the economic componet of the game it caputres the industrialization of the world perfectly, you can actually make uruguay an industrail power i want paradox to make sequels for both ckdv and ricky

The problem probably was that both games were so different, and didn't really focus on wars and conquest that much. I tried Vicky for a while but was too micro-managy for my taste. Many probably felt the same about CK.

Sadly though many probably only tried Vicky and CK in version 1.00.

With their hybrid game Rome, I am rather confident that Johan &Co. would consider building a CK2, since the character aspect of Rome was what most Rome players enjoyed the most. And I believe Rome sold very well.

 

[unmerged(141178)]

Isn't CK the least popular Pdox title?

True, but then consider that McDonalds is one of the world's most popular restaurants, and some of the finest restaurants in the world are virtually unheard of by the masses

 

[unmerged(39545)]

I have many wishes for CK II, but not time to write them all.

Most importantly, inheritance could be done better. Death of the ruler frequently led to times of troubles in medieval kingdoms. In CK, succession is always smooth. There should be possibility that the heir is challenged by his younger brother, an uncle or an older sister's son. In that case, the player would be asked if he plays further as a legitimate ruler, or as the pretender. Vassals would back one or another rival, depending theirs traits and family ties. They could also change sides if their party lost battles or provinces. This would make civil wars less exhausting, though still dangerous for the kingdom. If the civil war were not settled for long time, the kingdom/duchy could be even partitioned.

Other wish, I think that vassals should be more rebelious, especially when they have different culture than liege, and the same culture as their country. . Aslo, their should be less prone to rebel if closely related to the king/duke. It would be incentive to marry daughters to vasals (as it refresh family ties). There is bonus to vasal's loyalty when daughter or courtier is maried to his court in CK, but it is artificial.
My solution would prevent player build vast empires too easily and make dynasty managament more important task in the game.