Crusader Kings 2 Thread III: Keeping Up With The Karlings

[Aotrs Commander]

What if your ruler was immortal... with straight 0 stats?

Come now, tonberrian, do you REALLY think that I would actually ever LET the game give me a ruler with straight 0 stats in the first place...?

I don't ironman for a reason.

[Flickerdart]

Could be an interesting challenge - custom 0/0/0 character, intentionally make your heirs as bad as possible, can you survive the test of time?

[Leecros]

From what I understand, Conclave gives you less control of what your wards become - and it was that, even, more than the council, which was why I was not so bothered about it.

I, for one, enjoy variance in my Grand Strategy Games. If you have the perfect ruler/army/situation/whatever every time, then it leads to less surprises and upsets and the way one deals with the game getting suddenly harder is what makes (to me) Grand Strategy Games more interesting than say...Total War where you, as a player, can pretty much decide just about everything.

Of course, I was also one of the few people who cried manly tears when EUIV went from complex terrain that was based on a percentile to determine what type of battlefield a battle would happen on, to the significantly less interesting Simple Terrain which just made any one province just have a single terrain type.

Older Paradox games used to have way more variance and percentiles involved that would often lead to interesting scenarios...especially in games like EU III. They have sacrificed a lot of that in exchange for being appealing to a larger audience.

[Aotrs Commander]

I, for one, enjoy variance in my Grand Strategy Games. If you have the perfect ruler/army/situation/whatever every time, then it leads to less surprises and upsets and the way one deals with the game getting suddenly harder is what makes (to me) Grand Strategy Games more interesting than say...Total War where you, as a player, can pretty much decide just about everything.

Of course, I was also one of the few people who cried manly tears when EUIV went from complex terrain that was based on a percentile to determine what type of battlefield a battle would happen on, to the significantly less interesting Simple Terrain which just made any one province just have a single terrain type.

Older Paradox games used to have way more variance and percentiles involved that would often lead to interesting scenarios...especially in games like EU III. They have sacrificed a lot of that in exchange for being appealing to a larger audience.

Personally, I'm, the opposite. I dislike randomisation for the sake of it (our group dropped rolling for stats, for example, years ago and have never looked back) - I get my fun from planning and execution, not adaption. I don't want to make the best of a bad job, I want to do a good job.

So anything that increases randomisation is not something I enjoy.

I like the Paradox Grand Strats, but in spite of the RNG, not because of it.

[Flickerdart]

Personally, I'm, the opposite. I dislike randomisation for the sake of it (our group dropped rolling for stats, for example, years ago and have never looked back) - I get my fun from planning and execution, not adaption. I don't want to make the best of a bad job, I want to do a good job.

So anything that increases randomisation is not something I enjoy.

I like the Paradox Grand Strats, but in spite of the RNG, not because of it.

If you were actually doing a good job, then you would have a plan for when things go pear-shaped.

[Aotrs Commander]

Meaning I should "git gud," as they say?

I'll pass, thanks; I'll continue to play... what is the inverse of "git gud?" Be a filthy casual? Nah, 175 hours is still too much for "casual" to be appropriate, right?. Um... "Stai badd?" Or something? If it's all the same to you.

At the end of the day, I just plain don't like randomness, I never have and I never will and I'm afraid nothing will ever convince me otherwise.

I don't even play board games or card games; when my group calls a gaming session off because the DM is unavilable and have card-games evening, I politely cry off. I just don't find it engaging. (As DM, I roll my dice behind my screen and well. You, as player, don't need to see the resultion of the mechanics any more than you need to see my stat block write-ups.)

Rolling dice doesn't do anything for me; it's a means to an end. It's subsidiary to the game, not the game itself, and I feel the same way about RNG. Enough random crap happens in real life that I REALLY don't want it getting in the way of the things I personally do to relax.

(No Man's Sky, which is basically randomisation taken to the extreme, more or less in exclusion to everything else, is... extremely divisive.)

That I have to deal with it in almost all strategy games (and many RPGs) is unfortunate, but unavoidable; that's just the way these things are made, generally. Sometime enduring a long sequence of fighting the RNG is the price of admission to these things *shrug*. But that's unavoidably what you get if you have to have things run by an automatic system; the computer can't "DM" or adjust the game to make it the most fun for the particular players in question like you can in a table-top RPG or a wargame. (With regard to which, I am non-competative enough that whether or not the game is fun is much more important than who wins.) With too much randomisation, the set of "games that are possible" and "games that are fun" do not always occupy the same phase-space. (Anedotally, a chap at our wargames club used to run a homebrew Star Trek game. But his scenarios started to get to the point where the randomisation for everything got to the point where you could do absolutely everything right tactically and still fail utterly at everything you try on the dice. And that's not fun, because you have no control.)

So, yes, I'm away it's a staple of multiple generas, but that doens't mean I have to like it anymore than I have to like some ever-present aspects of other media or mediums; I just have to unlive with it and minimise it's impedment to MY specific sort of fun.

(I am also anti-competative to the point I don't particularly dervive any satisfaction from Doing A Hard Thing - all I tend to get I a sense of relief that nonsense is over, so I can get on to something fun.)

So, (and assuming there is anyone still awake); no, Conclave has not sold itself to me on either Council of Education levels.

[Guancyto]

Hmm. An interesting perspective, especially for this genre. I'm guessing you're more fond of adventure, puzzle and RTS games? (where if there is a bad situation, it is generally one of your own making?)

[Aotrs Commander]

Hmm. An interesting perspective, especially for this genre. I'm guessing you're more fond of adventure, puzzle and RTS games? (where if there is a bad situation, it is generally one of your own making?)

Yep. My game list basically consists of Stuff What Tells Stories (RPGs, RTS (emphasis on single-player campaigns a la C&C or Starcraft II), point-and-click adventures) or Stuff What You Makes (emcompassing stuff like city-builders and strats, where What You Makes is an empire) - plus a few flight-sims (e.g. TIE Fighter). Sandbox-y stuff doesn't appoeal to much either, even with city-builders I tend to only play the campaigns and missions. Strats are obvious an exception, since generally, if there is a campaign, it's usually pretty bleh. What I do with them (from Civ II to CK2) is tend be, to use the Paradoxism, is map-painting.

I've even argued that even my table-top wargames might be said to be less of a "game" in the traditional sense, and more of a "puzzle" to be solved.



What I do like about the PDX Grand Strats (and why, despite only starting this year with them at all, I've wracked up more time than on them than anything else I know the time for (i.e. on Steam) is they are very plan/goal orientated friendly. There's always a new little goal leading to a larger one, and another - but that slowly, very slowly work towards the big end-goal. That they've (apparently) made blobbing harder is something of a boon in my case, because it means there's always another goal. Taken Pows, ten years and I can grab the next one; in the mean time chip away at Abbasid and Villano; work on snagging all the coast to stop the copious the Norse raiders etc... My EUIV game (my first and currently only) was Portugal and about half-way through, the goal for that became "grab every piece of land/island/strait outside the Med and Baltic," which I achived (between me and my minion France¹) before end game.

(PDX strats are perhaps one of the only times I fear I might be slightly addicted to a game. While free-to-play stuff never appelas to me at the best of times, I can, through a dim lens, perhaps view how insidious they could be.)

I play on the lower difficulties (e.g. easy on CK2, usually no higher than whatever is Normal on most games) and never ironman. I'm quite happy for the AI to set me up a long line of metaphorical dominos to slowly knock down (I'm defintely part of the "roll over spearman in a tank while laughing in Civ II" sort of camp!) as opposed to the... more Dark Souls-ish, hardcorish sort of game a lot of you fine folks play with PDX strats. (Indeed, I like that PDX have made it so that they can so nicely cater to both ends of the spectrum.)



¹I still can't quite believe I lucked into a PU with France...! Let it be said, while I am not a fan of what I consider excessive randomisation, that I don't mind some level of randomisation, nor that when something as daft as that happens (and given my level of nonluck, that is so VERY rare for me), I am not deeply amused...

[Leecros]

¹I still can't quite believe I lucked into a PU with France...! Let it be said, while I am not a fan of what I consider excessive randomisation, that I don't mind some level of randomisation, nor that when something as daft as that happens (and given my level of nonluck, that is so VERY rare for me), I am not deeply amused...

In my most recent EUIV campaign as Spain, I managed to get a PU with Russia without even trying. That was certainly something....


I should really go dig up the old EUIV thread considering the new DLC is coming out...

[The Great Wyrm]

That's funny, given that I've also been playing Spain, and recently got PUs over France and Denmark. It seems like there are ~20 year periods every century where PUs happen like crazy, even if there's no shared dynasty. My Prestige was stuck at 100, so that might have helped.

Also, what have you done to Ming?
Did you not feel like making them your protectorate?

(I agree that we should start the EU4 thread back up.)

[Aotrs Commander]

(I agree that we should start the EU4 thread back up.)

What d'you mean? It's, like only halfway down the front page...?

[Leecros]

Also, what have you done to Ming?

I was hungry

What d'you mean? It's, like only halfway down the front page...?

well, only because I posted there right after I posted the comment here about digging the thread up...

[Manticoran]

I got an error when importing my last save game of CK2 into EUIV, where all of the country names show up as Z000 or whatever. Anyone have any idea how to fix it? The internet said to go in and "Just save it with another encoding type" but that didn't seem to work?

[GloatingSwine]

Started a new game with Reaper's Due.

So far King Offa of Mercia has had the flu, partied hard, played with toy soldiers, and beaten up some peasants.

Game is starting strong. Now just need to get me some claims so I can get on with conquering.

[Aotrs Commander]

Watch out for the Black Death. It's REALLY nasty; -75% to your income, -4 supply, before you even get to the actual depopulation.

(Nasty to the point that it rather detracted from the game for me as it basically shut everything down completely for the duration.)



I has a very solid 100/month income - during the plague, it dipped down to the point I was very concerned I was going to be unable to support my retinue...

[Eldan]

I've hit random a few times on my newest play through, to get something unusual. Got a Zunbil Afghan count. It's a nice religion, only three provinces in the entire world have it.

Looking pretty good, though. I'm in the hird generation now, King of Afghanistan, conquered Samarkand for sweet Silk Road money and just snatched the third holy site for reformation. THough this King is already nicknamed The Butcher for being constantly at war (you need a lot of 1-province wars to get moral authority up to 50.)

He's only thirty now, so I think he'll sit back a bit. Maybe try and learn how the silk road works.

THere was some luck involved, though. I'm right up against the Abassids, who could totally stomp all of Afghanistan flat, if they wanted to. Luckily, they had a corrupt dynasty and internal revolts immediately, so Persia is a dozen small nations now, the Duchy of Medina covers most of the Arabian Penninsula and Egypt is independent and it's not even 850 yet. So, bye-bye muslims, so far. Though the Byzantines and Franks aren't doing so well either. In fact, and this is pretty unusual for a Charlemagne start, I'm not seeing any super-large nations. No Frankia or France, no Abbassid Arabia, no giant Byzantium Blob or Khazaria.

Edit: as for Reaper's due, I had a series of absolute quacks as court physicians who got a dozen or so potential heirs killed. The last one was amazing, though, until he sacrificed himself in a blood ritual that saved the king from smallpox. He'll get a statue in my new Zun temple. Now we're back to goat urine and leeches.

[GloatingSwine]

Watch out for the Black Death. It's REALLY nasty; -75% to your income, -4 supply, before you even get to the actual depopulation.

With a 769 start and the black death on "historical" start, it's a way off yet.

There's an outbreak of smallpox in Northampton though, which is no more than they deserve but is right next to my capital province, and is in my demense so I was hoping to get its prosperity up and get some stuff built.

Oh well, all the other petty kings around me start off as tributaries, so I'll just have to use them to bootstrap my own economy.

[Aotrs Commander]

With a 769 start and the black death on "historical" start, it's a way off yet.

There's an outbreak of smallpox in Northampton though, which is no more than they deserve but is right next to my capital province, and is in my demense so I was hoping to get its prosperity up and get some stuff built.

Oh well, all the other petty kings around me start off as tributaries, so I'll just have to use them to bootstrap my own economy.

With the new prosperity rules and a much longer headstart than I did with a converted save, you might be able to get enough hospitals up to migitate the damage somewhat to at least your own domain.

[GloatingSwine]

With the new prosperity rules and a much longer headstart than I did with a converted save, you might be able to get enough hospitals up to migitate the damage somewhat to at least your own domain.

Yeah, I've dropped a hospital in my capital province, but it's only the most basic one because those upgrades are expensive, and you start with basically nothing in 769 unless you're the Byzantines.

Will have to see how prosperity works out. There are lots of neighbours who need to learn who is in charge, and y'know, let he who wants other people's stuff prepare for war and all. I suspect there'll be an initial few generations of stomping the neighbours to go through before I can settle down and try and get prosperous.

[Flickerdart]

Just do what the Polish did - be a nowhere backwater so no travellers go there, ever. Boom, no plague.

[Leecros]

Will have to see how prosperity works out. There are lots of neighbours who need to learn who is in charge, and y'know, let he who wants other people's stuff prepare for war and all. I suspect there'll be an initial few generations of stomping the neighbours to go through before I can settle down and try and get prosperous.

You can fight wars all the time and have your provinces still be prosperous. You just have to make sure that the areas you want to be prosperous don't get sieged down.

Sadly, I learned the hard way that it includes you sieging down your own subholdings in the case of rebellious minor vassals. There was a baron in my capital province that joined a plot against me and I tried to imprison so he could die in my dungeon and I could get his land and unfortunately he rebelled against me and sieging down his rebellious castle caused me to lose my prosperity bonus in the capital.

[GloatingSwine]

You can fight wars all the time and have your provinces still be prosperous. You just have to make sure that the areas you want to be prosperous don't get sieged down.

Sadly, I learned the hard way that it includes you sieging down your own subholdings in the case of rebellious minor vassals. There was a baron in my capital province that joined a plot against me and I tried to imprison so he could die in my dungeon and I could get his land and unfortunately he rebelled against me and sieging down his rebellious castle caused me to lose my prosperity bonus in the capital.

That's OK then, I should be able to add some prosperity to my nice inland demense whilst soon enough the neighbours will be putting up with their stuff being raided by adventuresome vikings, giving me yet more economic advantage!

[Corvus]

Good news everyone!

They are reworking the CK2-EUIV converter and it is going to be much, much better.

Development in EU4 will now be based on the state of the world in CK2. Holdings, Buildings, Hospitals and Prosperity all count when determining if your capital should be the new Paris or not. The development of the default 1444 EU4 provinces (within the converted area) will be redistributed in a way that makes sense for your world.

Dynamic fort placement. No longer will forts be placed exactly as they were in the default 1444 setup, instead forts will be placed in strategically appropriate areas for each nation.

Revamped Tech Groups. Now, as Tech Group no longer actually affect your technology cost (that’s handled by institutions), your group will be based on the geographical area of your capital. This is then used to improve your experience in many ways, i.e. through custom idea generation!

Dynamic ideas. No longer will your nation simply have the ‘National Ideas’ set, instead a unique one will be generated for you based on your situation in EU4. These idea sets will give you appropriate ideas, so no naval ideas if you are landlocked or just have one port.

Institutions have been revamped to account for the vastly different world that is a converted game. The institutions will spread in a much more dynamic way, and no longer discriminates in favor of Europe (especially not if India or the Middle East manage to get a high Development converted over!). Institutions such as the Printing Press do not necessarily have to spawn in Germany, either.

Converter-centric idea picking for the AI. With most converted games missing a Portugal, and in some cases even a Castille or England, the AI has been readjusted to dynamically assume these positions. One nation will try to assume the role of Portugal - be it Iceland, Scotland, Korea or Majapahit you won’t know until you play!

Traits now convert over from CK2. Did you have a midas touched genius ruler or a possessed imbecile lunatic ruler? No matter what, you will recognize them by their traits in EU4.

Improved Sunset Invasion setup. For all of you who wanted the New world empires to be even mightier we’ve improved the High Americans with new missions and unique units. High American units tend to have many Fire pips, so beware their power!

The Converter will be updated alongside the release of Rights of Man on the 11th. That’s all for now, but I have even more Converter stuff to talk about next week.

[Corvus]

For the longest time I'd ignored forcing people to pay tribute to me as I thought it was weak. Turns out I was very wrong.

Prior to The Reaper's Due, I'd started playing around with an Old God's Lesser Poland game to get a taste for it and it was then I discovered the joys of tributes. By the end of his rule he had not just reformed the Slavic faith and formed Poland, but he could have feudalised but I didn't go that route as there was no need - his only son had died after producing just one son himself so gavelkind wasn't an issue.

Not only was he King of Poland, but of Lithuania, Saxony and Pommerania and pretty much all of Europe but Scandinavia, England, Lombardy, Byzantium and Spain was paying him tribute. Tributes kind of just snowball.

The 40% of income paid is nice - especially if you grab a richer fuedal state to pay while you are still tribal.

Having their troops fight for you is amazing. Grab one and then have him help with the next, and then those help you with the next and so on and before you know it you have massive armies at your beck and call. It was how I forced Francia to pay tribute. Sure they had 20,000 troops but I had 40,000 by that stage.

What is really great for a tribal ruler is that your vassals love it when you force others to pay tribute. +10 opinion for 5 years and it stacks so you keep finding new people to go beat up on for tribute :)

[Flickerdart]

Don't tributes wear off as soon as your or their ruler dies?

[Eldan]

Either ruler even, I think.

[Rockphed]

Don't tributes wear off as soon as your or their ruler dies?

So it is more effective long term to build your empire using vassals, but blobbing up a bunch of tributaries to improve your economic situation might be worthwhile. It is easier to declare tributary war than conquest war, right?

[Grim Portent]

So it is more effective long term to build your empire using vassals, but blobbing up a bunch of tributaries to improve your economic situation might be worthwhile. It is easier to declare tributary war than conquest war, right?

Yeah, you can declare tributary war with no casus belli beyond wanting to, while actually taking land has all those little requirements. Tributaries are very handy for factions with a lot of land to conquer on their borders, on a couple of occasions as the Norse I've made the Franks my tributaries and used their armies to help me conquer the other pagans of eastern Europe.

[Corvus]

Don't tributes wear off as soon as your or their ruler dies?

When your ruler dies, yeah, so your heir can do it all over again. Doesn't work if the tribute died - in fact if they have gavelkind it seems to make all of his heirs pay you tribute.

The other good thing about it for tribal rulers is that it gives you a big bunch of prestige as well (200 from memory) which you just plough straight back in to upgrading your holdings.

Oh, and a nation that pays tribute to you can't join a holy war against you. It came in very hand in a Semien Jewish campaign I'm playing. Forced Gondar to pay me tribute then used their troops to help me force Abyssinia to pay me tribute while they were in the middle of a holy war against the muslims and then forced them to fight on my side in the holy wars I started against the rest of east africa. I could never have managed it if I had to fight Abyssinia, the biggest military in that region, rather than have them fighting for me.

[Squark]

So, I'm feeling like trying out CK II again. I stopped playing shortly before Horse Lords dropped- Are there any new mechanics I need to be aware of? Also, is seduction still a problem to the point I might want to download a mod to curtail the AI, or did Paradox tone it down enough times?