Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Crusader Kings II

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Show only dev responses
"A wargame is a game that represents a military operation."
Click to expand...

That is the only portion that matters as to what a wargame is. Marriage is a side effect during a war not the actual war. Just like CK's dynasty building portion is a mere part of the wargame because if you want extended play of the wargame you have to produce offspring. It's no different than Total War series in that respect. If you don't produce a male heir you're kaput in that WARGAME.

Plus you hit the nail on the head of exactly how I play. I have lots of time I see no reason to be in a hurry I actually play on slow and very slow settings just so I can manipulate my army in this wonderful WARGAME. I play the dynasty game because as I said it is PART of playing the WARGAME. Also you seem to think I don't use all the elements of the game to play. Assassination is a part of WAR as well, and I use them on subjects that are causing me frustration in my wargame thus, making this a wonderful WARGAME as I said.

I have no troubles with old farts as I keep my court well packed with replacements as I don't send every daughter and every brother out into the world to reap their own rewards. I use them to pack my court full and get a lot of level 20 Miltary, Stewards, Spies and Diplomats. Yes the game has some nice breeding for STATS elements and I use those game mechanics for my WARGAME production elements.

I could care less how they look though as that is just plain silly when playing a wargame. I marry up my family based on stats not on looks. I build for POWER in my wargame. I get to manipulate those power settings by the events that happen to me during the game. If you have a low intrigue it's because you choose to have one. I have great intrigue numbers and can control many provinces. I breed for excellence and power. ;)

Also, I'm pretty sure the designers meant for this to not only be a dynasty building game, but, a wonderful wargame as well. Else they would have just abstracted the wars completely and just had reports sent to you. There wouldn't have been manipulations of militia, pikemen, heavy infantry, cavalry, mounted archers, archers and knights. A wargame dosen't have to be WW2, Civil War, War of the Roses, Battles of Napoleon or Caesar's Wars to be a wargame. As the definition says all that has to be in place is "representing a military operation". Crusader Kings does "representation of a military operation" very well. Not detailed of course, but, still a representation. ;)
 
I personally would like it if my court and other characters would be represented by 3d 'sim'-like characters.

Your ruler would live in a 3d castle, in that castle there are several rooms, like f.e.

- A room where you deal with your family
- A room where you deal with your court
- A room where you deal with your vassals
- A room with a table, with a map on which you can march your armies. So when you click on the map, it will fill the whole screen just like it now does.

It's probably not going to happen though. And there will be players who wouldn't like this at all but then again we each have our own taste. And we all need to respect that. (this is a hint, regarding the last few posts in this thread :) )
 
@w/respect to Veld &, um, 'Winner':
So far, the 3d offerings from Paradox have been quite ugly. I'm not against it on principle, but if they can't realistically create something better looking, absolutely, there's no point in wasting coding time and CPU memory on rendering it.

Particularly, the desire to replace CK's portraits with cubist art in the name of aesthetics appears misguided.

@"You see, this is what I am talking about here - similar DNA should lead to similar physical traits."
But, 'Winner,' you [edit:appear to have forgotten some things.] The DNA code goes to the image files for various body parts and counts over. The reason they don't line up is because CK was a rushed game and syncing up the male and female files didn't make the list.

If you want to go through and organize them all to your satisfaction, you can do so now, and post it up as a mod. None of this has anything to do with 2d/3d or with 3d's superiority or even smaller memory size.

That said, you're right that the images could use expansion, followed by the DNA manipulation being improved. We don't have Irish red-heads or black Nubians, we could use more attractive features, and I don't think that the 'mutant' children go to an image between their parents (probably just something random.) Aging would also be nice to see. But 2d looks much nicer, fits with parchment,* & it's simply laziness on the coding end to replace it with unappealing textures.

*Veld's right: if they do switch over to 3d, it should involve a Sim-like set-up. I wouldn't mind seeing something like that for the battles or sieges, but it seems kinda silly for anything short of an immersive world on the portrait end.
 
I would not like a 3D installment ... danger is too high that the game will be too much SIM-like. Instead of this, I would prefer a deeper interaction between the characters, not just friends and rivals. Specific boundaries for teacher - disciple, knight - knave, lovers, different kind of friendships (with a history of the friendship), mentors ...
 
My votes for CK2:

- no 3-D engine; instead make even more beautiful 2D graphics; going from the beauty of EU2 to the ugliness of EU3 was the main factor that caused me, an EU fanatic and very loyal customer, not to purchase EU3

- more dynastic/court RP fun like the rivals/friends system

- fewer but more exciting battles; real medieval wars often went on for years, but were decided (or not) with only a few battles; take a page from IRL history and make battles rarer, more dramatic, more decisive and above all more fun, by...
- including a simple, graphics and processor-lite battle mini-game similar to the table-top wargame DBA

- more conditions and effects for us modders

- start after Manzikert, not after Hastings; this removes tons of issues with getting Byzantium and the Sultanate of Rum to have a performance that is satisfying to us history buffs

- get the AI to be able to handle money

- allow play as republics, Muslims, pagans & Jews

- have the game mechanics reflect the huge change in 'feudalism' and the way medieval troops and vassals were recruited and paid (or not) that took place from the beginning of the game (the end of the Early Middle Ages) through to the end of the game (The tail-end of the Late Middle Ages); IRL the military-political system of 1450 was totally different from that of 1066 and there's lots of interesting gameplay potential in reflecting the relevant changes

- something like the 'national ideas' of EU3, but with an option to have them more tailored to a nation's IRL history

- changing troop types to satisfy idiotically nit-picky military history geeks like me: pikemen are the best possible exemplar of heavy infantry, not a separate troop type from heavy infantry; IRL medieval light infantry and light cavalry are generally missile- or javelin-armed troops, not poorly trained troops who fight in formation; 'cavalry archers' are just light cavalry and Spain and the Muslims should have plenty of cavalry archers; Mongol troops should be renamed 'Steppe Cavalry' to reflect their unique fighting style (which actually blends light cavalry with other cavalry types); and many more nit-pickety fixes... If any Paradox people are interested (I'm sure they're not :)), I'd be happy to send in suggestions for revised troop types backed up with references to books published by top military historians from top universities.

- change the rock-paper-scissors configuration of troop types over time: heavy cavalry should be really good against the typically unarticulated heavy infantry of 1100, but fairly meh against the disciplined heavy infantry formations of the Late Middle Ages

And that's it. CK is a great game and I hope CK2 is too!
 
I agree with almost everything above, except

loseth said:
- start after Manzikert, not after Hastings; this removes tons of issues with getting Byzantium and the Sultanate of Rum to have a performance that is satisfying to us history buffs
Click to expand...
Should not be the only game start, but just an available scenario (1204 springs to mind.) The 1187 scenario should happen after Hattin, etc.

- something like the 'national ideas' of EU3, but with an option to have them more tailored to a nation's IRL history
Click to expand...
Also seems rather confusing, given how mobile the dynasties can be. Maybe 'dynastic ideas' (the Angevins get a bonus for killing each other off...)

If any Paradox people are interested (I'm sure they're not :)), I'd be happy to send in suggestions for revised troop types backed up with references to books published by top military historians from top universities.
Click to expand...
Absolutely we are, but it's the kind of thing that falls under discussion of the next game unless you can talk someone into slogging through code-modding CK's battle engine.
 
Llywelyn said:
Should not be the only game start, but just an available scenario (1204 springs to mind.)
Click to expand...

Yeah, totally agree. Give me 1071 as an option and I'm happy.

Llywelyn said:
Also seems rather confusing, given how mobile the dynasties can be. Maybe 'dynastic ideas' (the Angevins get a bonus for killing each other off...)
Click to expand...

I agree that 'dynastic ideas' are a cool concept, but I think it would also add a lot of flavour to the game if we also had some game mechanic to reflect the tremendous effect that national character had on a ruler's options, especially militarily and financially:

What troop types can you expect to recruit? When you call up militias from towns or non-feudal regions, will they be well-trained or basically useless? When you call up feudal troops, will they show up on their best horses and in their best armour, eager to fulfil their chivalric images of themselves? Or will they turn up in rusty old mail armour, riding nags and doing every thing they can to go home early? When you call your feudal troops up, do they decide when they want to go home or do you? Does your nation have institutions of professional recruitment in place? Do your vassals have a tradition of elective kingship? If so, how easily can you undermine it? Do you need to call the estates general or negotiate with city councils in order to levy extraordinary taxes? Or can you just say 'pay up chaps’ and expect them to accept the situation? If you slap your nobles around with a trout, will they take it? Or will they get all Magna-Carta/Declaration of Arbroath on yo’ ass?

The answers to all these questions depend to a greater or lesser extent on the national traditions of the place you're ruling (or at least of the place that your barons come from), and I'd love to see that kind of local colour reflected in game mechanics.

Llywelyn said:
Absolutely we are, but it's the kind of thing that falls under discussion of the next game unless you can talk someone into slogging through code-modding CK's battle engine.
Click to expand...

Hey cool! I'll put together a short document for you guys, but yeah, I'm definitely talking about ideas/suggestions for CK2 rather than modding CK1.
 
Is there any shred of comment on CK2 from Paradox?
 
delra said:
Is there any shred of comment on CK2 from Paradox?
Click to expand...

There was an interview with Johan (a link wast posted a while back ago on the HOI3 forum, can't find it though) where he said that they had started working on a new project and it wasn't CK2.

So that's bad news for us.
 
Well, at least we might get a DV patch, perhaps with some easy-implemented goodies?

More free traits, cultures, effects, religions, improvements would help. Some modding assitance would be great ...

I just hope they don't forget us, the CK fans.
 
Last edited:
Landwalker said:
Seconded. The Middle Ages always seem to get the short end of the stick.

Cheers.
Click to expand...

Thirded, CK has always been my most favourite Paradox games, even with all it's flaws, the idea behind it is pure gold. There must be a CK II!
 
How would a CK II look like, if we think of EU III, In Nomine, Rome: VV, HOI 3 ... ?

As far as we know, CK II won't be the next paradox game. Anyway, if PI will make a CK II, they surely will use the new features of the EU III/HOI III engine. So, what changes will be adopted for CK ?

- 3D map
- dynasty decisions
- weather system
- rebels with a cause

What do you think?
 
performer said:
As far as we know, CK II won't be the next paradox game. Anyway, if PI will make a CK II, they surely will use the new features of the EU III/HOI III engine. So, what changes will be adopted for CK ?

- 3D map
- dynasty decisions
- weather system
- rebels with a cause

What do you think?
Click to expand...

Merged with the CKII thread

CKII (if it comes), will with 100% certainty have a 3d map.
 
Woohoo 3D map. I hope BB is fixed too as it's too easy to exploit right now. Plus I don't think a duke should be able to control 36 vassal provinces and 8 of his own as I'm doing right now with a +1 stability to boot. There should be more uprisings and civil wars after 25 I think. Heck I think in numbers I'm the greatest power on the map right now and just a mere duke of Ostergotland and all the other duke titles I have conquered. ;)
 
JohnnyReb said:
What about the poor Dark Ages, they don't even have a game. :(
Click to expand...

It's true, and I've yet to forgive Creative Assembly for passing over them in its own lineup. I certainly wouldn't object to the Dark Ages coming along in a Paradox work, either.

Cheers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back