Learning from 3KTW

[EricMN93]

All the talk on forums in China and the rest of Asia has made me want to play a quick game of Three Kingdoms Total War. I think most strategy game fans have tried different games and know that each has its pros and cons. However, Three Kingdoms Total War (3KTW for short) has some things that would fit very well with Crusader Kings 3.

Greater interaction with kings and emperors:

In 3ktw the underage emperor is in a specific location, he is not there by chance since through the game's narrative he has been captured and is being manipulated.

Upon conquering the enemy capital, the emperor moves to live elsewhere (representing that we have freed him and taken him "home to protect him").

The text is in Spanish, but I think the change of address is noticeable. How could this be adapted to ck3?

From tours and tournaments, we've had the travel mechanic, which expands with each DLC. However, I think there are several things that don't make sense:
1. When we besiege the enemy capital and capture a member of the royal family, we automatically free them when signing the peace.
2. When a character travels and passes through a war zone, there are no consequences.

Suggestions:
1. Upon winning a war, we'll have the option of what to do with the ruling family: free them (as is the case now), take a hostage while we free the king/emperor, or capture the entire royal family.
2. If our character passes through a war zone, there's a chance the enemy army will kidnap or even kill us (I even think some event could help add more immersion).

I think these suggestions would help improve immersion and roleplaying with the travel system. Obviously, besieging our king's capital in a war and capturing the king and his family should have an effect, and that brings us to...

New factions

(Example of the internal situation of the empire in 3Ktw, as well as who has more power and who controls the emperor)


Currently, we can find out who a king's powerful vassals are by looking at the tab, but we can't see the current state of the kingdom. I think a map where we could see by color which vassals and counties are rebels and which are loyal would be great.

I think factions should be modified, and when starting a faction, all vassals should join one of the faction's three sides: Supporters of the faction, Neutrals, and Defenders of the status quo (those loyal to the current king).

If someone were to capture the king or the emperor, a new faction of loyalists would have to be created to save them.

If someone captures the ruler, a situation of chaos would ensue in the kingdom, in which a relative or a vassal very loyal to the king would rise up as the king's liberator, and the rest of the vassals would have to choose whether to join the loyalists, remain neutral, or participate with the captors. The conspirators would have to choose someone (similar to how you elect a representative in the Crusades) to be the beneficiary if they won the situation.

The vassals could declare war on each other to appoint a supporter or opponent of the kingdom (this already happens in Legacy of Persia).

This situation would end when one side completely defeated the opposing vassals. Neutral vassals could choose at any time to side with one side or the other.

Council power

(Example in 3ktw of the decisions of the counselors)

In CK3, the council feels very empty. One idea 3ktw gave me is that it would be nice if every so often the council met and held an event or something similar where the ruler would have to choose how to approach the problem. For example, once a year, a court event would be held in which they would say you have a powerful neighbor and whether you want to prepare militarily, economically, diplomatically, or through intrigue.

I think these ideas from 3ktw could be used to improve ck3. What do you think? Do you think improving the interaction with the ruler, whether king or emperor, would help improve the game?

 

[ray243]

The guanxi system is also a valuable mechanic that can work great for CK3.

 

[AlexPhantom]

3K has so many ideas that could work very very well if the devs adapted to CK3. The relations between political players in a realm, like your two best councilors hating each other, the council giving advice and missions, the fight for the control of puppet rulers giving a reason to be loyal to your liege and not just take the throne for yourself, the anarchy in succcession, the natural dissolution of old empires to the birth of new polities. All of this are things that 3K represnt very well, and CK3 should also represent it but it fails, and the game suffers from it.

 

[EricMN93]

I think we can find three types of relationships in 3ktw:

1- Family relationships. In this case, I think ck3 is already better, offering us more options and more interactions with family members.

2- Internal kingdom relationships. Here, I think ck3 could learn a lot, and my suggestions were aimed at improving this aspect.

I think one interaction that could also be improved is "influence." This interaction shouldn't simply improve opinion, but perhaps even condition the ability for certain traits to change.

Example: A drunken king who is influenced by a moderately powerful vassal and an authoritarian woman should gradually change his traits. In fact, this is one of my complaints with ck3: once you acquire a certain trait, it's very difficult to change it.

Attributes like excommunicated, murderer, or dynastic assassin should have big repercussions, right now it doesn't matter if you're a big assassin beyond opinion.

3-Spy system.

Conspiracies in ck3 are similar, but I think they could be significantly improved.

 

[PAnZuRiEL]

1. Upon winning a war, we'll have the option of what to do with the ruling family: free them (as is the case now), take a hostage while we free the king/emperor, or capture the entire royal family.

You already have the option of taking a hostage when you enforce your demands in most wars. You can't take the ruler, of course, but I'm pretty sure you could take their heir.

 

[EricMN93]

You already have the option of taking a hostage when you enforce your demands in most wars. You can't take the ruler, of course, but I'm pretty sure you could take their heir.

I know, but that won't trigger anything. There won't be a war to free the heir, there won't be multiple factions created to control the heir, etc. I understand that this is a game and that there are certain limitations, but I think there are key characters who should trigger a situation of chaos/reaction.

The clearest example is the Pope. I invite any player to conquer, kidnap, or assassinate the Pope; nothing will happen. It doesn't matter if you play as a Catholic, a Muslim, or a pagan. Kidnapping, conquering, or killing the Pope won't cause the Christian kingdoms to react. It doesn't matter if you're excommunicated, it doesn't matter if you're an assassin, it doesn't matter if you capture an important figure; all that will happen is an opinion penalty. Precisely these situations should trigger a reaction. This is something I think 3ktw does well and ck3 has the potential to do much better.

 

[Positronius]

All the talk on forums in China and the rest of Asia has made me want to play a quick game of Three Kingdoms Total War. I think most strategy game fans have tried different games and know that each has its pros and cons. However, Three Kingdoms Total War (3KTW for short) has some things that would fit very well with Crusader Kings 3.

Greater interaction with kings and emperors:
View attachment 1281532

In 3ktw the underage emperor is in a specific location, he is not there by chance since through the game's narrative he has been captured and is being manipulated.

View attachment 1281536

Upon conquering the enemy capital, the emperor moves to live elsewhere (representing that we have freed him and taken him "home to protect him").

View attachment 1281537

The text is in Spanish, but I think the change of address is noticeable. How could this be adapted to ck3?

From tours and tournaments, we've had the travel mechanic, which expands with each DLC. However, I think there are several things that don't make sense:
1. When we besiege the enemy capital and capture a member of the royal family, we automatically free them when signing the peace.
2. When a character travels and passes through a war zone, there are no consequences.

Suggestions:
1. Upon winning a war, we'll have the option of what to do with the ruling family: free them (as is the case now), take a hostage while we free the king/emperor, or capture the entire royal family.
2. If our character passes through a war zone, there's a chance the enemy army will kidnap or even kill us (I even think some event could help add more immersion).

I think these suggestions would help improve immersion and roleplaying with the travel system. Obviously, besieging our king's capital in a war and capturing the king and his family should have an effect, and that brings us to...

New factions

View attachment 1281544

(Example of the internal situation of the empire in 3Ktw, as well as who has more power and who controls the emperor)


Currently, we can find out who a king's powerful vassals are by looking at the tab, but we can't see the current state of the kingdom. I think a map where we could see by color which vassals and counties are rebels and which are loyal would be great.

I think factions should be modified, and when starting a faction, all vassals should join one of the faction's three sides: Supporters of the faction, Neutrals, and Defenders of the status quo (those loyal to the current king).

If someone were to capture the king or the emperor, a new faction of loyalists would have to be created to save them.

If someone captures the ruler, a situation of chaos would ensue in the kingdom, in which a relative or a vassal very loyal to the king would rise up as the king's liberator, and the rest of the vassals would have to choose whether to join the loyalists, remain neutral, or participate with the captors. The conspirators would have to choose someone (similar to how you elect a representative in the Crusades) to be the beneficiary if they won the situation.

The vassals could declare war on each other to appoint a supporter or opponent of the kingdom (this already happens in Legacy of Persia).

This situation would end when one side completely defeated the opposing vassals. Neutral vassals could choose at any time to side with one side or the other.

Council power
View attachment 1281582

(Example in 3ktw of the decisions of the counselors)

In CK3, the council feels very empty. One idea 3ktw gave me is that it would be nice if every so often the council met and held an event or something similar where the ruler would have to choose how to approach the problem. For example, once a year, a court event would be held in which they would say you have a powerful neighbor and whether you want to prepare militarily, economically, diplomatically, or through intrigue.

I think these ideas from 3ktw could be used to improve ck3. What do you think? Do you think improving the interaction with the ruler, whether king or emperor, would help improve the game?

Very interesting suggestions indeed. A court event related to some of the intern council conflicts within its members could be a recurrent mechanic from time to time in a regular basis that could constitutes a way to represent the intern rulership of your kingdom in an active way. Council members could actively suggest agendas for the course of actions on the kingdom or ways on how to approach other court events that we could follow or not. After all, they are our "council".

The factions system en CK3 has indeed way too much space for improvement. The suggestion of creating factions around the control of a puppet ruler sounds as an interesting idea that could be expanded from the system of entrenched regencies. But now we have not only one regent but a faction behind it that can antagonize other factions within the realm for the control of the throne by wich the "possession" of the puppet ruler (or another legitimate candidate) would be key. This would be very tipical and representative for the historical events of China or Japan (among others). It reminds me about the mechanic of the papacy controller back in CK1, but it was very simple and low developed in that case. A revision on that regard applied for the papacy could be interesting, but I understand that Paradox prefer to be cautious changing core mechanics involving the papacy.

Dinamic events for your character while he/she is travelling a warzone is something that has crossed my mind too, but I assume that as far as battles are very common it would make travelling way too dangerous for balance purposes. Besides, it would be hard to program without the risk of being a high source of bugs.

 

[EricMN93]

Very interesting suggestions indeed. A court event related to some of the intern council conflicts within its members could be a recurrent mechanic from time to time in a regular basis that could constitutes a way to represent the intern rulership of your kingdom in an active way. Council members could actively suggest agendas for the course of actions on the kingdom or ways on how to approach other court events that we could follow or not. After all, they are our "council".

It's true that tours and tournaments have served as a good foundation for building upon and improving the game through various DLCs, but we often forget about the Royal Court. Many people have expressed ideas about laws, councils, parliament, etc., and I think leveraging the Royal Court foundation to build more elements would be interesting.

It reminds me about the mechanic of the papacy controller back in CK1, but it was very simple and low developed in that case.

I've seen a lot of posts from people talking about CK2, but I think this is the first time I've seen someone reminisce about CK1. How did this work? How would you adapt it to CK3?

Dinamic events for your character while he/she is travelling a warzone is something that has crossed my mind too, but I assume that as far as battles are very common it would make travelling way too dangerous for balance purposes. Besides, it would be hard to program without the risk of being a high source of bugs.

I don't know to what extent it is feasible to connect the battles with the travel system, I suppose that the activation of certain events would be interesting, perhaps should only be activated at times in very large battles or very specific moments.

I seem to remember that in the diaries of the steppe khans, they talked about "situations." As I understand it, this is an evolution of struggle. In my opinion, the correct way to create a certain connection in the world would be through certain temporary situations that activate certain elements.
For example, if someone conquered, killed, or kidnapped the pope, a temporary situation should be created in the Christian kingdoms that would allow them to fight a common enemy. If the conqueror is also Christian, perhaps an antipope should be appointed.

If a character is excommunicated, the pope should interact and foment war with the excommunicated ruler.

Many people have already expressed great ideas, but I just wanted to comment that the use of time-based situations could help greatly improve the game and create much more realistic, fun, and exciting internal and external combinations.

I don't know if something like these situations would be possible in the game it would be nice to know how deep this system can be.