Crusader kings or victoria?

[Chaingun]

Victoria is more stable than EU2 and I am quite sure there are no serious bugs left. CK seems to be buggy (I have ordered it but it hasn't arrived yet so I cannot confirm that), but on the other hand I expect to enjoy in much more than Victoria since Victoria was way too much micromanagement for me.

 

[Chaingun]

I am quite sure I will defect to CK MP now when I have played the game for a bit. I'll really just finish my current EU2 MP games and after that it'll be CK MP all the way .

 

[Chaingun]

I find that CK's current status is 'good', but I expect it if Paradox bothers to fix the AI and UI issues to become 'great'. Also, I do find CK should be somewhat more balanced among human players in MP if they choose approximately the same starting conditions. The fact that any MP in 1.03b without house rules will be a rush for Jerusalem does not mean that players can't compete at approximately equal odds (they each possess about the same capabilities to get to Jerusalem). This is very different from EU2 with its historical events, leaders & monarchs and explorers (not to mention terra incognita).

I do agree that after a couple of games CK will have a more generic feel to it than EU2 though, but that should only allow for better MP competition since power will mostly be based upon skill for the first time. The 'mostly' here comes from the random events that are a major part of CK. However, unlike in EU2 most random events in CK feel plausable or justified (even predictable). In EU2 it's more like "fucking hell, I got a political crisis worth -4 stability" for no apparent reason. Even if I during SP in CK have my main and favourite character die at the age of 20 I can accept it, and there usually are warning signs leading up to it like illness or related disease traits.

Oh: I'm not trying to say that you aren't allowed to think that CK is boring. I rather try to present my own optimism for what Crusader Kings already is and may become.

 

[Castellon]

But like I said a few times alreay, let us end this crap, and get back to this matter next year 26th of July.

Yes sounds like you both need to take some time out from this thread, and a year sounds about right.

 

[Chaingun]

And there is a huge swath of terra incognita in CK. It is called the rest of the world.

My meaning was rather that certain nations can see more than others in most scenarios, and something which does not exist in CK, for the better or worse.

 

[Chaingun]

I don't know. Honestly, your comments sound like you haven't played the game since 1.04 came out, and there has been about a dozen patches since that

1.04 Betas crash way too often on my computer. As far as mechanics can be adjusted without major .EXE changes or no .EXE changes at all (such as with event and scenario scripting), CK is much better now than earlier. However, in my opinion a few basic areas are still funamentally flawed, not in the gameplay department, but rather in the user interface and AI. Yes, kingdoms don't implode as much as they used to but that's because AI has been restrained through somewhat rough rules instead of having been programmed any better. User interface when managing huge amounts of courtiers is still horrible. These issus are so fundamental though so we'll have to see about them in CK2. (Something I do hope for.)