Nomads/Mongols in ck2 versus ck3

[xking]

This for those that have played ck2. Based on what you have seen of the new DLC. How do nomads/mongols in ck3 compare to nomads/mongols in ck2? Would you say they have less depth or more? What's your opinion on the flavor? Etc

 

[tribnia]

CK3 is DEFINITELY better.

• Nomads are not limited as emperors. In CK2 this made them a perfect target for marriage.
• Vassal nomads are not limited to kingdom tier, DDs didn't talk much about vassal nomads, I hope vassal nomad kings could have nomad dukes as their vassal.
• No longer split clans. It's quite wierd that some no one would suddenly be generated to take over that province. WHO THE F*** WAS HIM?
• New Kurultai still better than nomadic succession, even now I do not know all possible outcomes.
• A best way to play as khagan is to imprison all 8 khans and pretend they do not exist. As you already have enough khans, nomad lands won't rebel for you have too many lands. I'll never say it has any "depth".

 

[TL_]

It's hard to judge this before even getting hands on with the new expansion, but I would say CK3 is hands down the better simulation.

• Actual nomadic play where you give up one area entirely to move to another, CK2 can't model this
  • Plus seasons, fertility, restlessness mechanics to encourage you to actually do it...
• New raid intents are far more versatile than the old Pillaging mechanic from CK2
• Greater flexibility in rank. CK2 nomads could only be empire-tier, even if they had only 1 county.
• New yurt domicile should be much more flexible and interesting than CK2's nomadic capitals (which were a joke to siege)

The only things that CK2 has are...

• Prestige succession in CK2 was cool. I will have to wait and see how I like the new succession system.
• Clan Sentiment was a powerful force for feeling different

 

[Koppel235]

I will reserve my judgement until we get the whole steppe fleshed out because right now only the Mongols gonna get flavor.

 

[FondMemberofSociety]

On the professional side of things, I think this thread would be very useful.
From the player side of things:

• Of course nomads now going from count to emperor in title ranks is a good thing, I hope like religious reform, they retro-implement this into CK2.
• Nomads actually can and need to be nomadic, very good.
• Nomads need less paperwork for conquest, good.
• Quite a lot of Mongol content, good.
• A vanguard step (horde riders convert to nomadic MAA) has been taken to reform warfare, which got my hopes up.

 

[Delterius]

CK2 nomads could be extremely annoying whenever one of you vassal Khans died without an heir and you ended up having to manually redistribute 20+ counties with no possibility of doing so via duchy or kingdom grants. That alone is a massive improvement.

 

[xking]

CK3 is DEFINITELY better.

• Nomads are not limited as emperors. In CK2 this made them a perfect target for marriage.
• Vassal nomads are not limited to kingdom tier, DDs didn't talk much about vassal nomads, I hope vassal nomad kings could have nomad dukes as their vassal.
• No longer split clans. It's quite wierd that some no one would suddenly be generated to take over that province. WHO THE F*** WAS HIM?
• New Kurultai still better than nomadic succession, even now I do not know all possible outcomes.
• A best way to play as khagan is to imprison all 8 khans and pretend they do not exist. As you already have enough khans, nomad lands won't rebel for you have too many lands. I'll never say it has any "depth".

Seems like they really did improve things. Just thought I'd ask and get a idea of what the older player were thinking.