Is paradox really telling us all to quit the game?

[Voidian]

At 17:13 the most common complaint about the game is addressed with "you beat the game, it's over".

If that's really it, who are you even making DLC for?
If you don't plan on fixing the glaring issues with the game, can't you just tell us flat out instead of pretending like you care, like in the conqueror's updates?

This is beyond frustrating, it feels like a giant [CM note: watch the language, please!] after years expecting the game to be fixed.

Besides, we've gone ON AND ON about the issues in the game in many threads such as this one (https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/this-game-is-fundamentally-broken.1661745/) with 49 pages explaining in depth, using data, screenshots, and even videos, proving that the claim that people are just "too good" is absolutely false, the game IS broken, it has nothing to do with players being "too good" or "too smart" to have fun in it.

The AI doesn't do anything, it doesn't build, doesn't develop, doens't form a proper religion, doesn't use it's own properly either, doesn't use it's culture or change it to fit it's gameplay, doesn't use accolades, doesn't station MAA in proper countries (it doesn't even have, because it doesn't build them).

There's literally a video of some dude giving an AI infinite wealth, resources, killing all it's oppositon and still suffering to watch the AI do absolutely NOTHING with all the cheats in the world, and we're supposed to believe we just got "better" than a drooling ape and that's a fine state for the game?

Come on.

You pick ANY game in the same genre that's not abandoned and you'll see far superior AI, try waging war on your borders and watch how the AI will crush you from the other side in Nabunaga's ambition, conquer new lands in Knights of honor 2 and marvel as the AI builds for money in provinces with abundant villages or books in provinces with abundant monasteries, this isn't rocket science, the AI is failing at such a basic level it's safe to say there is NO AI in the game.

We're just wasting time playing by ourselves without any interaction in a dead world full of emperors collecting 0 taxes from desolate provinces they never developed, because of hooks from vassals, stackwiping the entire planet with 2 MAA because nobody else seem to even know what MAA even mean.

The AI would need to improve 10x to reach the level of "terrible"

Seriously, can't we just get the stellaris team in here? Their AI still makes a mismatched random mess for ships but at least they got to program their AI to even undertand the theme of the game it's supposed to be playing.

Sigh

 

[Willy Waggler]

You want a challenge in a sandbox about noblemen relationships?
Really now?

We're just wasting time playing by ourselves without any interaction

You can always go play multiplayer and get all the challenge, and all the cheesy and gamey moves on your tail, as much as you want, and then some more.
You usually don't see people complaining that they owned the bots in CS/CoD, so the game is too easy.

 

[klopkr]

For warfare this whole idea that we're just too good is laughable.

I introduce CK3 to friends that never play video games all the time because it's one of the easiest ones out there. Beyond learning all the buttons and what they do it's mostly just clicking on events and if you want to fight someone you look at their army size vs yours and then annihilate them with your bigger army.

The hardest part is succession and honestly even that is not much of a hurdle.

Sure they wont go from count to emperor of half of europe in one character like most long time players can. But they also won't really lose unless they forget to make an heir.

There are some game overs if you pick a small realm next to a big realm with CBs but it only takes this happening a few times before you realize you gotta play somewhere else or get big alliances.

Play any major faith and make a few kids with decent alliances and you can't even really lose most wars.

This game does turn away a lot of noobs but that's mostly because it's an information over load and a steep learning curve to find all the games buttons and mana and their uses. After that it's no challenge whatsoever. Just fun sims on a big map.

If I 'beat the game' then I beat it 2 months after I started playing CK2 sometime in 2013. I think that's the experience of anyone with enough hours in the game to know what the interfaces do.

EDIT: Also wild, got one of my questions answered in the video. Didn't even notice on the first listen because how they pronounced my user name lmao. Mongol Empire hegemony confirmed.

 

[Ksiendzu]

I was shocked when I heard that "you beat the game, it's over". I really do not have thousands of hours in the game and I still can see it is kindergarten easy. Player do not really need to learn the game to dominate te world, it's rather inevitable. There is no opposition to the player and no AI agency.
There are posts of new players (!) complaining about how easy the game is.
So... there is no hope? No Obi-Wan to save us?

 

[frostbiyt]

Their argument can be defeated with a single question: Why is this practically a non-issue in every other paradox gsg?

You can always go play multiplayer and get all the challenge, and all the cheesy and gamey moves on your tail, as much as you want, and then some more.

You don't need cheesy or gamey strats to make the game easy, you just need to know how the major mechanics work.

 

[Willy Waggler]

Why is this practically a non-issue in every other paradox gsg?

Pretty sure the same vocal minority complain(ed) that ck2, eu4, HoI4, and Stellaris are all too easy.
Like "Ah, 25x crisis! The game finally got a bit harder!"

 

[Voidian]

You want a challenge in a sandbox about noblemen relationships?
Really now?

You can always go play multiplayer and get all the challenge, and all the cheesy and gamey moves on your tail, as much as you want, and then some more.
You usually don't see people complaining that they owned the bots in CS/CoD, so the game is too easy.

You mean a grand strategy game about medieval empires with a double layer of strategy including both the kingdom struggles, and the dynastic struggles, that put all other paradox games to shame, or at least CK2 did?

Yes.

 

[ray243]

You mean a grand strategy game about medieval empires with a double layer of strategy including both the kingdom struggles, and the dynastic struggles, that put all other paradox games to shame, or at least CK2 did?

Yes.

I think what needs to be done is to make the management challenge scale with size, instead of the opposite where management becomes easier the more powerful you become.

Ideally, bigger realm = more difficulties balancing your court and vassal interest = greater challenge in managing big empires long term.

 

[Koppel235]

On contrast the EU5 team wants the game to be really challenging to the players but I guess CK3 devs need to cater to the lowest common denominator which are the Reddit users.

 

[klopkr]

You want a challenge in a sandbox about noblemen relationships?
Really now?

You can always go play multiplayer and get all the challenge, and all the cheesy and gamey moves on your tail, as much as you want, and then some more.
You usually don't see people complaining that they owned the bots in CS/CoD, so the game is too easy.

Yeah why even put Ai in the game at all? They should just randomly get new counties or not and just fold to the player when they declare war! This is a game about silly events after all!

Everyone famously remembers the AI of COD and CS go just standing around in a T pose. The souls series was lauded for their AI just standing by passively as the players completed the game.

 

[ray243]

On contrast the EU5 team wants the game to be really challenging to the players but I guess CK3 devs need to cater to the lowest common denominator which are the Reddit users.

That said, something is to be said about how to make a game beginner friendly while still offering challenges for veterans.

Yeah why even put Ai in the game at all? They should just randomly get new counties or not and just fold to the player when they declare war! This is a game about silly events after all!

Everyone famously remembers the AI of COD and CS go just standing around in a T pose. The souls series was lauded for their AI just standing by passively as the players completed the game.

I don't think I care about AI being smart as long as AI feels immersive as human characters. If my court is make up of dumb vassals, then I should still have big challenges and difficulties trying to stop dumb vassals from killing each other and tearing kingdom apart.

 

[Koppel235]

That said, something is to be said about how to make a game beginner friendly while still offering challenges for veterans.

Easy,you pick an powerfull country to learn the ropes.

 

[Voidian]

That said, something is to be said about how to make a game beginner friendly while still offering challenges for veterans.



I don't think I care about AI being smart as long as AI feels immersive as human characters. If my court is make up of dumb vassals, then I should still have big challenges and difficulties trying to stop dumb vassals from killing each other and tearing kingdom apart.

That's the thing, you cannot care about anything, or anyone, if challenge doesn't exist.

Someone may get a claim to your throne? Why do you care about their traits? They don't matter, the person doesn't matter, there is literally nothing he can do to ruin your game, you don't even need to remember their name or faces.

 

[ray243]

Easy,you pick an powerfull country to learn the ropes.

It should be the opposite, I think. Managing a big powerful country and keeping it powerful is a hard task. Managing a small and weak county is something easier because there's less thing you can mess up as a ruler.

That's the thing, you cannot care about anything, or anyone, if challenge doesn't exist.

Someone may get a claim to your throne? Why do you care about their traits? They don't matter, the person doesn't matter, there is literally nothing he can do to ruin your game, you don't even need to remember their name or faces.

This is why you make the management aspect the greater challenge. So AI might not be able to get claim on your throne, but they can have rivalries with other AI characters that push your realm into divided factions and will lead to them going at each other even if they can't overthrow you as the ruler.

This is what I mean by other kinds of challenges that can build the game around.

 

[klopkr]

That said, something is to be said about how to make a game beginner friendly while still offering challenges for veterans.

I agree. But I again want to reiterate that the challenge of these games is very much the information all being front loaded. From my own personal experience getting people into this game (especially compared to other paradox games), once they're confident with the basic buttons then they don't have any challenge anymore either. I mean where do people even expect to find the challenge in the game currently?

I think things like the important information button (whatever it's called) is good. But even that button is obfuscated in its use and filled with junk. Mostly I think new players need more context buttons that can optionally pop up when they need a way to do something important. Like the raise all levy button (so much easier to see and explain compared to CK2). When you are going to have a messy succession there should be a better "no heir" or "losing title" button that directly brings you to the succession page and suggests what can be done about it. When you have no heir the game should strongly direct you towards making babies with a button. Hell automated marriages are terrible in this game but for new players a "marry my character to any eligible character with enough fertility to pump out an heir" would do a lot. I've had a few friends lose because they were so overwhelmed by the game that every time I reminded them they need to be married and get an heir they would struggle with going through the whole search for a marriage candidate when any fertile wench would do.

And alliances. If they're going to stay the easy win button they are, the game should basically be falling over itself to to offer new players alliance opportunities. Basically pointing them directly to the most eligible alliance with the biggest troops still willing to answer a call to arms.

When you're at war with enemies that have more total troops than you the screen should maybe have some flair to it, like a flaming border. A big button telling you how to make more alliances and get mercenaries would be useful for new players.

I know that i'm going on about single use big buttons that basically point you to the basic information of the game but I think that's what new players want and need.

But having said that. That's what new players want and need. Old players should be able to turn off these UI elements. Lets not turn the game into an over simplified mobile game.

I don't think I care about AI being smart as long as AI feels immersive as human characters. If my court is make up of dumb vassals, then I should still have big challenges and difficulties trying to stop dumb vassals from killing each other and tearing kingdom apart.

The thing is that the state that warfare and snowballing is in, the AI doesn't feel immersive at all. IRL raising levies wasn't this super easy thing where you just raise all your armies at once in a central location then doomstack your opponents. IRL alliances were tricky things and you couldn't just marry the Kaiser and have him send his full army to destroy all your enemies as Navarra. IRL the more vassals you had and the more powerful they are the harder it is to keep them. IRL going up a 'rank' without good legitimacy or a strong base is incredibly hard without instantly being deposed. IRL rulers couldn't just finance buildings and 'development' in an eternal linear fashion and never lose any of the benefits. IRL not every territory was equally worth anything and some were active drains on the finances of realms.

The design phiolosophy of CK3 runs counter to real life history. It snowballs. The big get bigger and stabler and the small are weaker and collpase easier. Once an AI stabalizes a realm of a certain size it's pretty much fixed, just like a player. In real life you couldn't just hide the discontent of the peasants and lower nobility under a single giant king you bribe and hand everything to every few years so they never even think to depose you and is at your every beck and call.

 

[peteoj]

Game rules exists for this exact reason, I get pdx wants to cater to redditors and all but to just completely abandon the large amount of veteran players and say "you won the game sorry :/" seems so astonishingly short sighted, what happens when the games player base begins to contract and smaller and smaller groups of new players come in? If the fear surrounding challenge is scaring off new players then why not use the very robust very cool game rules page already in the game to give the player further customization like actually being able to make the ai proactive, nerfing certain traits and bonuses etc

I'm also very disappointed hearing this because it just means they've probably given up on warfare, navies and logistics as a whole because that would add too much complexity and challenge. Can't wait for trade to be money go up the dlc, no downsides or anything. It's also so funny that they're approaching disasters not as terrifying game shattering events but things you can entirely circumvent with enough gold or whatever.

 

[ray243]

The thing is that the state that warfare and snowballing is in, the AI doesn't feel immersive at all. IRL raising levies wasn't this super easy thing where you just raise all your armies at once in a central location then doomstack your opponents. IRL alliances were tricky things and you couldn't just marry the Kaiser and have him send his full army to destroy all your enemies as Navarra. IRL the more vassals you had and the more powerful they are the harder it is to keep them. IRL going up a 'rank' without good legitimacy or a strong base is incredibly hard without instantly being deposed. IRL rulers couldn't just finance buildings and 'development' in an eternal linear fashion and never lose any of the benefits. IRL not every territory was equally worth anything and some were active drains on the finances of realms.

The design phiolosophy of CK3 runs counter to real life history. It snowballs. The big get bigger and stabler and the small are weaker and collpase easier. Once an AI stabalizes a realm of a certain size it's pretty much fixed, just like a player. In real life you couldn't just hide the discontent of the peasants and lower nobility under a single giant king you bribe and hand everything to every few years so they never even think to depose you and is at your every beck and call.

That's the problem and why people are raising issues, even if they don't quite understand why they find late game easy. People think it's about having every AI being your Augustus, Genghis Khan level of genius that outplays the player....when that's really not the main thing here at all.

When they talk about challenge, what they really want is a game that doesn't snowball but increase in difficulty scale.

Take your RPG games, every game you can level up, but the game makes it harder for you by giving you stronger and stronger boss with higher level.

Level 1 at the start, you might only face off against some level 3 minibosses.

Once you hit level 50, you can fight against level 60 Dungeon bosses.

In CK3, the problem is even for players that hit level 50, they are still facing off the same kinds of challenge in early game with lots of level 3 minibosses around the map.

 

[AHumpierRogue]

Yeah the more I ruminate on this answer I must admit the more sour my expression gets. You do NOT need to put hundreds of hours, let alone thousands, to understand how modifier stacking works and is busted. And frankly the game is already pretty easy before you get into min maxing; you don't have to be playing very well to get men at arms and knights in quantity to be a terror against any foe, and the AI is not capable of building armies to match.

And yeah just saying "you've solved the game" simply isn't an excuse. I'd outright say it's a bad mindset for a dev to have on the game, it basically is an admission of defeat. And why does CK3 need to be super easy? History was not super easy for it's would be conquerors.

 

[TheLeviathanOfLevistus]

I don’t even use modifier stacking. I don’t build military buildings. I don’t ever use any of the Military Cultural Traditions like Only the Strong or Warriors by Merit. Never have, never will. It’s absolutely not necessary to break the combat system. You just need to focus on making money and having as many Men at Arms as possible. You’ll be able to beat basically anyone with maxed out decent Men at Arms, unless it’s something crazy like an entire Crusade’s army or a Scourge of Gods conqueror.

But the AI does not understand how to build up their economy, focus on good innovations, create a competent military, manage their vassals, or anything else in this game that is necessary for success. I regularly send thousands of gold to AI rulers only for them to blow it all on Mercenaries they do not need in a single minor war.

 

[Koppel235]

You people should check the top user post on r/CrusaderKings.Seems this is the crowd they want to cultivate.Dont think the comments here matter much and as shown in ample examples like warfare suggestion or about Turkic tribes they dont really care that much.I would suggest those of us that still care move to EU5.I mean its what they said right ?