• 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.

catzcatzlol

Private
34 Badges
Oct 27, 2022
20
195
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
Since the devs have stated the game is not difficult enough, one low-hanging fruit they can fix is to nerf player strategies based around eugenics. Here’s the problem:
  • Only the player arranges marriages for congenital traits, so it creates disparity with the AI over time
  • Eugenics as a strategy is not immersive at all; historically medieval rulers who married strategically ended up less healthy and more inbred, not becoming superhuman.
  • The Blood dynasty legacy should probably be removed entirely. From an immersion or historical perspective it makes no sense. The other legacies perhaps abstract away the idea that your dynasty is focusing on a certain way of ruling or living, like a martial or legalistic way. What does the Blood legacy represent? Genetic modification? The bonuses it confers are also extremely powerful such that it’s basically suboptimal not to take them at some point, making the choice of legacies less interesting. On top of that, many if not all of its bonuses are unique, whereas some of the bonuses from other legacies can be attained in other ways. Because the devs likely won’t remove an entire piece of “content” from the game, at least significantly nerfing the benefits is worth doing.
  • Even with plagues, producing enough living children to secure the succession is easy throughout the game. So the risk of marrying, say, an older spouse just for the traits is minimal. And the Beautiful trait boosts fertility anyway; same for the Hale line of traits and health. The fact that securing the succession is barely a problem is another problem with difficulty in CK3.
  • Marrying for congenital traits is not punished enough, if at all, by game mechanics. Now with Legitimacy, marrying a lowborn for traits is somewhat punished. But the decrease in Legitimacy is still manageable, and more importantly, the prevalence of such traits among nobles is high enough, and the consequences of marrying a random noble of the wrong religion and culture nonexistent, that you can still easily perform the strategy. And once the traits are in your family, you never have to worry about marrying lowborns again.
  • For all these reasons, a player trying to play optimally more or less has to opt into eugenics, which is a tedious and repetitive strategy, especially when you have to use it game after game. And it displaces the more interesting (for the player) strategy of marrying powerful nearby dynasties or noble families in your realm, which could look differently every game. Of course, strong alliances are not even necessary to win wars and defend oneself, but that owes to separate issues like MAA bonuses being way overtuned.
On a final note, I see artifact bonuses and MAA stationing bonuses as also in the category of comically overtuned, difficulty destroying features that the devs have left in (and not nerfed) to promote player “fun” and agency but in fact undermine the core gameplay loop by encouraging repetitious, uninteresting strategies. The game in general suffers from a lack of interesting choices and trade-offs. They show up in events (particularly due to personality traits and the Stress mechanic), but there’s little to no downside to accumulating a dozen stat sticks through the Artifact system or marrying for eugenics. What do you all think?
 
  • 25
  • 10
  • 5Like
Reactions:
Personally, I’d love for the traits to be far less inheritable (at least without the Blood Legacy; two Comely people should have not insignificant chance to have just a normal child), but more likely to appear randomly. I like seeing occasional Intelligent or Handsome Characters, but far too often it is only either pregenerated characters, or player family (if they have bred for the traits).
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Perks need to be entirely nerfed, you should have a higher chance inheriting painful and disastrous traits than you do inheriting good ones. The fact that you can breed your kids together and get an ubermench is so deeply stupid and unserious.
 
  • 14
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
What we really need is for most congenital traits to be hidden for parts of a charchters childhood, you shouldn't be able to tell if your kids agenius from birth. The genius/imbecile line should become visible somehwere around 4-8, while the comely and hale lines shouldbecome visible around the start of puberty. On the inverse the ugly and frail lines should show up before age 5, and many neutral and negative trait sshould still be visible from birth, giant/dwarf, albino, bleeder, inbred etc. Finally, stammerer should appear when a child begins to speak. Currently it's really weird that you can tell a child is an amazonian genius before they even open their eyes.

On a mostly unrelated point, there should be a fully hidden congenital traitthat makes a child guaranteed to become eccentric, seeing as eccentric is partially meant to represent neurodivergence.
 
  • 8Like
  • 3
Reactions:
The game is already over by the time you have your second or third heir let`s be real. So I don`t feel like the eugenics traits make the game easier at all. I don`t even remember the last playthrough I have bothered chasing positive traits. What`s the point?

If anything they should create more positive and negative traits, and make them more impactful. At the end of the day a dwarf or weakling should not be able to easily be able to win a duelling competition because they are running around with overpowered artifacts, unless the overpowered artifact in question is a machine gun.

As an ugly person there really are not enough ugly people in game. I hope Paradox can give us ugly people some more representation. I`d say the same for being overweight. Why are there not fat kings all over the place?
 
Last edited:
  • 7Like
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
No one's forcing you to marry your character and their descendants off based on inheritable traits. If you want to marry for politics, go for it. I don't think there's anything wrong with people having the option of prioritizing congenital traits.
 
  • 7
  • 6
Reactions:
What we really need is for most congenital traits to be hidden for parts of a charchters childhood, you shouldn't be able to tell if your kids agenius from birth. The genius/imbecile line should become visible somehwere around 4-8, while the comely and hale lines shouldbecome visible around the start of puberty. On the inverse the ugly and frail lines should show up before age 5, and many neutral and negative trait sshould still be visible from birth, giant/dwarf, albino, bleeder, inbred etc. Finally, stammerer should appear when a child begins to speak. Currently it's really weird that you can tell a child is an amazonian genius before they even open their eyes.

On a mostly unrelated point, there should be a fully hidden congenital traitthat makes a child guaranteed to become eccentric, seeing as eccentric is partially meant to represent neurodivergence.
Heck, traits in general should be hidden by default and something you have to work to discover. Imagine if you didn't know right off the bat the personality and capabilities of everyone, but had to discover them via interactions, espionage, or throwing them into the deep end and seeing how they float. It could also tie into prestige, more famous characters could have their traits "publicly" known, making them easier to scope out. It'd really push historical gameplay when scoping someone out is a part of interacting with them.
 
  • 7Like
Reactions:
The game is already over by the time you have your second or third heir let`s be real. So I don`t feel like the eugenics traits make the game easier at all. I don`t even remember the last playthrough I have bothered chasing positive traits. What`s the point?

This, mostly. The Blood legacy is actually one of the least 'meta' dynastic legacies to invest in. The bonuses simply take so long to manifest that any sort of power-maxing player would already have reached dominance, and once you're on the top the marginal difference is, well, marginal. If you want to talk 'actual' power legacies to get and stay dominant faster, instead of the first three blood legacies, you could have +1 tier marriage alliance potential and +1 MAA-boosting accolade, or +15 dread to neutralize vassals more easily, , or -30% feast/hunt activity cost for prestige scaling for casus belli, and so on. Things that make a credible difference in the taker's own generation.

Blood is mostly a power fantasy legacy for the people who want to pursue eugenics for its own sake.
 
  • 7Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Many people have pointed out that eugenics are not really a major source of imbalance as compared to other strategies that get immediate, tangible results. However, as far as I can tell no one has refuted your central idea that marriages were never based on physical characteristics - which isn't true. Medieval rulers were extremely interested in finding fecund wives. Fertility and production of heirs was a queen's first objective. Dr Elena Woodacre, perhaps one of the most established scholars on the subject of medieval and renaissance European queens, notes that beauty was often thought to be associated with greater fertility and thus sought after in a potential marital partner. The most famous of these cases is outside our time period with Henry VIII obsessing over getting a male heir, but think about this: Edward IV comes 100 years earlier and famously "married for love and beauty". The Siete Partidas (13th century on) command Spanish monarchs to marry beautiful queens. 12th century King John spurned politics to marry Isabella of Angouleme who was famously beautiful and the mere daughter of a count - some people accused her of being a "siren" and using her beauty to win him over. I think all of these sufficiently justify the fecund, beautiful, and to some extent hale line of traits (remember, general good health is associated with childbirth and in-game gives a bonus to wetnurses). Certainly some rulers (perhaps based on personality) should be marrying for these physical traits.

I also feel that it goes without saying that for the same reason it is reasonable that a wise arranger of marriages in medieval times would also, on occasion, AVOID physically unhealthy traits - sterile especially, but we don't really have to argue about medieval rulers avoiding marriage with hunchbacks, surely? I can't even find a single example of a queen who was hunchbacked.

Now, I know what you are really complaining about - which is the genius line of traits. As far as I can tell from my (light) research, no king or noble ever explicitly married for an intelligent wife. Dr. Woodacre who I cited above says that an intelligent wife could be a big advantage to a medieval ruler as she would often help run the domain and serve as a close advisor; she points out several famous witty queens; however no evidence that someone was married FOR their intelligence. It's not at all clear that intelligence would assist with childbirth and unlikely to be considered.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Since the devs have stated the game is not difficult enough
Wait, did they say that? I haven't been paying too much attention recently to be honest. I just peek at the forum from time to time because I still do enjoy reading a lot of the threads, so I may (probably) have missed that.

Haven't played in a long time but I can say for certain I never once married my ruler to take advantage of congenital traits. I always married a spouse that could boost my main skill to a high level. I always found having a very high skill in diplomacy or intrigue, if I went that route, was much better than being pretty or strong or whatever. Maybe that in itself is a problem with the game, since I never felt the need to marry for an alliance, since I found I rarely needed to ally myself with anyone. And I believe a king marrying for an alliance and not some random lowborn with high skills is more historically accurate.

So I don't see marrying for eugenics being something that needs to be nerfed. As was stated earlier, it is entirely optional. If you want to do it, do it, if you don't, then don't.
 
No one's forcing you to marry your character and their descendants off based on inheritable traits. If you want to marry for politics, go for it. I don't think there's anything wrong with people having the option of prioritizing congenital traits.
Maybe that in itself is a problem with the game, since I never felt the need to marry for an alliance, since I found I rarely needed to ally myself with anyone.
This is exactly the problem with CK3’s eugenics mechanics.

Blood legacy and bad genetics system aside.

When you are a small weak count, you’re not incentivized to marry for alliances it’s better to marry for eugenic traits and built up your power from there. When it should be entirely backwards.

Only when you’ve achieved power should you have the luxury of eugenic marriages.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
This is exactly the problem with CK3’s eugenics mechanics.

Blood legacy and bad genetics system aside.

When you are a small weak count, you’re not incentivized to marry for alliances it’s better to marry for eugenic traits and built up your power from there. When it should be entirely backwards.

Only when you’ve achieved power should you have the luxury of eugenic marriages.
Eh?

Being a weak count is exactly when alliances matter most (as they let you hit above your weight in any war). Indeed, it's basically the only time that that matters. The King of England or whomever will happily fight your wars for you at the point, and press your claim to whichever duchy/kingdom you desire.

Once you are a mega-duke (or even a king/emperor), you can marry whomever you want without concern, as allies are no longer useful except maybe to prevent factions (which younger siblings/daughters are fine for).
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
  • Eugenics as a strategy is not immersive at all; historically medieval rulers who married strategically ended up less healthy and more inbred, not becoming superhuman.
I mostly agree, but physical traits must have influenced the decision. Emperor Otto III's betrothed, Zoe Porphyrogenita, was chosen over her sisters by the Archbishop of Milan because she was the most attractive of the three. It certainly didn't help that one sister had smallpox, but he could have chosen the younger but plainer Theodora Porphyrogenita, who was the same age as Otto III.