North Korea Mode

[richie05]

this really went on for 33 pages.?
you guys are pathetic. You just took away time from PDS for an imaginary problem.

If i can turn on CK2, play by myself and not worry about the computer doing it, it is not an issue.

 

[Kenlin]

Okay, first i thought you might have legitimate points, then i figured you went to trolling, now im actually considering you are really just dense. NK Mode is a workable model of government. You named it after NORTH KOREA, which last i checked, actually exists. Secondly, and please for the love of god read properly this time, if you remove barons, counts, dukes and kings that are represented vassals, what are you left with? The people that the baron would have HISTORICALLY as vassals under him, people without actual power who help run things. Look at all the minor titles you can give people, example Seneshal, these are based entirely around these offices that ARE beneath a Baron in rank. These people do not hold land, but they help administer it without being in a overseer position.

So, that said, if you have all these people which help run things but arent barons, you control them. The game does not represent them because otherwise you would have MILLIONS of characters, not just a couple 100.000, no actually millions. Im not even going over the rest of your rant because clearly you dont understand what im actually saying, probably because you simply refuse to actually check up on things.

And clearly, you dont read history books or you would know that there were titles beneath a baron, just because they didnt hold land per se does not mean they didnt exist. Thats where BARONS delegate power to, therefore IF we include them in the game? Your entire argument falls flat because you have nothing to argue with. You simply dont. You keep repeating the same pointless, insane mantra of how i am saying something that im not. So again, pick up a damn history book and learn about things before you try to impose your biased, false view onto me.

You are ignoring the problem entirely. What is stopping these people from ousting their absent, tyrannical liege?

In real life, it would be absolutely nothing.

In CK2 as it stands, it is just the granularity of the game mechanics.

I think, and the developers appear to agree, that CK2 should represent the situation of real medieval life as closely as possible within the confines of an entertaining game. Thus, when someone exploits the game mechanics themselves to do something that would not happen, we think that should be fixed.

A few posts up, you said "NK Mode has been made more logically, logistically and historically accurate BY the fix". So what on earth are you disputing? Isn't that what you want? If you are given the choice between that fix and no fix at all, rather than this other feudalism "buff" which isn't currently on the table?

 

[A-D.]

You are ignoring the problem entirely. What is stopping these people from ousting their absent, tyrannical liege?

In real life, it would be absolutely nothing.

In CK2 as it stands, it is just the granularity of the game mechanics.

I think, and the developers appear to agree, that CK2 should represent the situation of real medieval life as closely as possible within the confines of an entertaining game. Thus, when someone exploits the game mechanics themselves to do something that would not happen, we think that should be fixed.

A few posts up, you said "NK Mode has been made more logically, logistically and historically accurate BY the fix". So what on earth are you disputing? Isn't that what you want? If you are given the choice between that fix and no fix at all, rather than this other feudalism "buff" which isn't currently on the table?

Have you read what i responded to? Serious question, it answers your own when you see it.

 

[Grell74]

You are ignoring the problem entirely. What is stopping these people from ousting their absent, tyrannical liege?

... thats kind of the point I (and I think AD) are arguing, Paradox's proposed fix to NK mode does not at all make the ai more inclined to oust their absent tyrannical liege, they should PI's just nerfing the amount of troops they will provide.

I think, and the developers appear to agree, that CK2 should represent the situation of real medieval life as closely as possible within the confines of an entertaining game. Thus, when someone exploits the game mechanics themselves to do something that would not happen, we think that should be fixed.

A few posts up, you said "NK Mode has been made more logically, logistically and historically accurate BY the fix". So what on earth are you disputing? Isn't that what you want? If you are given the choice between that fix and no fix at all, rather than this other feudalism "buff" which isn't currently on the table?

The Devs agree, everyone agrees. No is arguing for NK mode to stay as it is. Yeah hes on his own when he tries to argue NK is historical, but besides that what I (and I think A-D) wants are deeper improvements to feudalism than merely the bandaid nerf to demense limits which is not addressing the true issues of asassination, banishment, gimped feudal levies and vassals who dont reward benign rulership.

 

[A-D.]

Yeah hes on his own when he tries to argue NK is historical, but besides that what I (and I think A-D) wants are deeper improvements to feudalism than merely the bandaid nerf to demense limits which is not addressing the true issues of asassination, banishment, gimped feudal levies and vassals who dont reward benign rulership.

NK Mode is historical but lacks the proper mechanics to actually be represented this way, i.e. you have nobody beneath a baron, which in reality you would have. Thats the entire argument there. And yet somehow, when i actually point this out, people arent happy with that and dislike the idea that besides counts, dukes, kings, emperors and barons anyone held any power during these days. And then they call me delusional..

 

[alphaomega66]

NK Mode is historical but lacks the proper mechanics to actually be represented this way, i.e. you have nobody beneath a baron, which in reality you would have. Thats the entire argument there. And yet somehow, when i actually point this out, people arent happy with that and dislike the idea that besides counts, dukes, kings, emperors and barons anyone held any power during these days. And then they call me delusional..

NK mode as represented in CK2 is not actually historical. It has never happened now (even North Korea itself has and needs a form of bureaucracy) and it certainly would never be able happen with the communications speed of a horse that was the fastest and most dominant form of communication in the Middle Ages.

 

[A-D.]

NK mode as represented in CK2 is not actually historical. It has never happened now (even North Korea itself has and needs a form of bureaucracy) and it certainly would never be able happen with the communications speed of a horse that was the fastest and most dominant form of communication in the Middle Ages.

The system would be historical with the levy reduction, tax reduction we already have and if the game could properly represent basicly officials which dont hold land and are essentially below the baron, like a expanded council so to speak. At least that way you could represent the idea behind a king actually centralizing all the various titles and holdings. As you pointed out even North Korea has a bureaucracy under its dictator/sole leader, which is what isnt represented in CK2 due most likely engine constraints, it would be difficult to properly simulate it and all the thousands of extra characters would probably make the game near unplayable.

Although on the other hand, Paradox could create more dynamic events that pop up which deals with vassals of such nature, for example if you hold a city or barony yourself, you could get events from the populace or your advisors in said holdings, the same applies to the rest of your vassals, with a sort of dynamic relationship modifier, so you can appease them directly, or piss them off and actually..interact with them, even the ones that essentially dont exist for flavour. Basicly it would be possible to simulate the "one king governs all" approach rather realistically, warts and all and it could actually be a interesting difference if done correctly, i.e. not having to use an exploit to achieve it.

 

[alphaomega66]

The system would be historical with the levy reduction, tax reduction we already have and if the game could properly represent basicly officials which dont hold land and are essentially below the baron, like a expanded council so to speak. At least that way you could represent the idea behind a king actually centralizing all the various titles and holdings. As you pointed out even North Korea has a bureaucracy under its dictator/sole leader, which is what isnt represented in CK2 due most likely engine constraints, it would be difficult to properly simulate it and all the thousands of extra characters would probably make the game near unplayable.

Although on the other hand, Paradox could create more dynamic events that pop up which deals with vassals of such nature, for example if you hold a city or barony yourself, you could get events from the populace or your advisors in said holdings, the same applies to the rest of your vassals, with a sort of dynamic relationship modifier, so you can appease them directly, or piss them off and actually..interact with them, even the ones that essentially dont exist for flavour. Basicly it would be possible to simulate the "one king governs all" approach rather realistically, warts and all and it could actually be a interesting difference if done correctly, i.e. not having to use an exploit to achieve it.

North Korea mode refers to holding all the titles in your realm and making-imprisoning-banishing vassals whenever you need money. While a system might be set up like that, it wouldn't last without fast communication, which was not fast enough in the Middle Ages. It would utterly collapse and splinter in real life Middle Ages, but in current CK2 it is a viable method.

 

[BaronIronmaggot]

To sum up NKmode Fix opposition: "Whaa, whaa, but muh levies?"

 

[Kumicho]

To sum up NKmode Fix opposition: "Whaa, whaa, but muh levies?"

What are you, 12? Congratulations on lowering the respective maturity level in here by 20 years. I'm sure PDX loves it that people like you are defending their decisions with such dignified and respectful remarks. It makes them look GREAT, let me tell you...

 

[BaronIronmaggot]

What are you, 12? Congratulations on lowering the respective maturity level in here by 20 years. I'm sure PDX loves it that people like you are defending their decisions with such dignified and respectful remarks. It makes them look GREAT, let me tell you...

Please, tell me more, how you judge them - or anyone else for that matter - by my very own actions. Please do, I am intriqued.

 

[Kumicho]

Please, tell me more, how you judge them - or anyone else for that matter - by my very own actions. Please do, I am intriqued.

Trust me, you're not doing them any favors. They're making a change that some people agree with and some don't. Your childish behavior makes it look like things were done out of spite, without regards to the people who don't agree with it. In fact, it's people like you that make me less likely to support PDX, and to buy future expansions. It turns me off on the entire game itself, and the ridiculous immaturity of the entire situation. It's why threads are locked before they get out of hand with childish name-calling. PDX has lumped all of the discussions here in the hopes that it won't infest the rest of the site, and I'm guessing that's the only reason why this wasn't locked days ago.

But that's ok, go on ahead with the childish name calling. I'm sure that the warm fuzzy feeling that you feel deep down inside makes up for lost revenue and pissed off customers.

 

[BaronIronmaggot]

Trust me, you're not doing them any favors. They're making a change that some people agree with and some don't. Your childish behavior makes it look like things were done out of spite, without regards to the people who don't agree with it. In fact, it's people like you that make me less likely to support PDX, and to buy future expansions. It turns me off on the entire game itself, and the ridiculous immaturity of the entire situation. It's why threads are locked before they get out of hand with childish name-calling. PDX has lumped all of the discussions here in the hopes that it won't infest the rest of the site, and I'm guessing that's the only reason why this wasn't locked days ago.

But that's ok, go on ahead with the childish name calling. I'm sure that the warm fuzzy feeling that you feel deep down inside makes up for lost revenue and pissed off customers.

Ahh, that's the stuff, tell me more, how I am the one calling people with names.

 

[daemonofdecay]

Anyone going over their demesne limit will be impacted. Period.

Yes, you've proven my point: anyone going over the limit will (and should) be punished, but "not to the same degree".

You go over the limit a little, you get punished a little. You go over the limit a lot, you get punished a lot. How is this a bad thing?

 

[TheRealAlu]

One thing at a time, one thing at a time, dude.

Exactly. All the more reason why less time should be spent wasted fixing something that doesn't need to be fixed.

This idea that NK Mode isn't easier than feudalism is nonsense.

Show me an AAR that did a WC faster than this. WC as Nantes by 892 with NK Mode.
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?734972-How-to-conquer-the-world-in-25-years

You're confusing "faster" on an in-game timescale with being easier.

That's like saying it's easier to kill off an entire dynasty by using a kill cheat to eliminate every living member. Rather than just invading the one territory they have left, and letting them die off in other people's courts naturally over time. Yeah the cheat way only took like one in-game day but the legit way was much less personal effort.

Exactly. If you have a ruler who doesn't have the ability to maintain his empire/kingdom/duchy, then having uprisings and revolts against his rule sounds like a perfectly acceptable result. That's one of the core elements of the game, in fact.

Having things be pure black and white is the dumbest thing you could do in a strategy game. There has to be a middle ground. Where it's not recommended you go two or three provinces over the cap, but it's still very manageable and playable.

For a lot of people, keeping vassals above 60+ relations is "really difficult" so they get "constant factions."

Factions have nothing to do with why people use NKM. People go NK because they're trying to scrape the bottom of the realms barrel for all available men to fight wars for them. Because in theory your realm could have like 20k men that are capable of fighting. But with vassals you only have access to like 2.5k of them instead. There's no bonuses for having vassals like you to increase the number to a more reasonable level. But there's very harsh penalties that make it so a vassal can give you 0 levies if they hate you enough.

So you go NKM to skip the useless middlemen and have access to the men you used to control pre 2.0 patch. You could use NKM before the patch there was just no reason to ever do so.

 

[daemonofdecay]

Having things be pure black and white is the dumbest thing you could do in a strategy game. There has to be a middle ground. Where it's not recommended you go two or three provinces over the cap, but it's still very manageable and playable.

Isn't that what has been said? Someone who goes ten provinces over is going to suffer more than someone who goes one over. If you want to go over the limit you can manage then it gets worse the more you go over the limit.

 

[TheRealAlu]

I'd say the same about you, but A-D exists...

You'd only think as much because, like every other one of your opinions, you're horribly misguided.

I guess I'm surprised that you're so shameless in demanding the game be made easier and then denying that you're doing any such thing.

No.
1. NK Mode being removed is not a punishment.
2. Not all patch changes should make the game easier for the player.

Making feudal vassals actually USEFUL is not making the game easier. It's a change that goes across the board and effects both you and the AI. Things the AI will never do is make republic vassals to help boost their economy. So unlike the player they're stuck with feudalism whether it's optimum for them or not.

Your only argument for why its 'easier' is that the AI supposedly can't manage big armies like the player can. Which is just silly. They have their own advantages and disadvantages. The human brain can only juggle so many things at once. Even if you make generous use of the pause function. So while you're focused on two or three army stacks they could control a dozen of them effortlessly. That's balanced by them not always making the wisest decisions. Like attacking you with a weaker army and crossing a river at the same time or something.

But guess what?

This next patch is also heavily improving how the AI handles its armies. (Sourced from either the latest dev diary or the stream they just did)

Funnily enough you're living proof of how the human brain can only focus on a few things at a time. Since your view is narrow enough to the point where you think paradox should be wasting their time with something like this. While I'm actually looking at the bigger picture. Finding the root of why people use NKM in the first place, and think that problem should be addressed first. Instead of throwing a bandaid on a surface issue and praying for the best.

Just like every other "fix", the changes will catch up plenty of normal players who aren't utilizing exploits. Just like the Prince-Archbishop nerf...

Bingo.

I never used a pure 'bishop only' realm. The most duke-tier religious vassals I ever had was one for every holy site. As a nice little roleplay thing.

Now part of my ability to roleplay in this game was diminished. All to balance out an issue that only a small minority of players were ever using. So yeah, to everyone who complained about that issue... THANKS for that! Really made the game much more enjoyable for me (spoiler: Not)

 

[Iron Chariots]

You'd only think as much because, like every other one of your opinions, you're horribly misguided.



Making feudal vassals actually USEFUL is not making the game easier. It's a change that goes across the board and effects both you and the AI. Things the AI will never do is make republic vassals to help boost their economy. So unlike the player they're stuck with feudalism whether it's optimum for them or not.

Your only argument for why its 'easier' is that the AI supposedly can't manage big armies like the player can. Which is just silly. They have their own advantages and disadvantages. The human brain can only juggle so many things at once. Even if you make generous use of the pause function. So while you're focused on two or three army stacks they could control a dozen of them effortlessly. That's balanced by them not always making the wisest decisions. Like attacking you with a weaker army and crossing a river at the same time or something.

But guess what?

This next patch is also heavily improving how the AI handles its armies. (Sourced from either the latest dev diary or the stream they just did)

Funnily enough you're living proof of how the human brain can only focus on a few things at a time. Since your view is narrow enough to the point where you think paradox should be wasting their time with something like this. While I'm actually looking at the bigger picture. Finding the root of why people use NKM in the first place, and think that problem should be addressed first. Instead of throwing a bandaid on a surface issue and praying for the best.

Well, given that most people in this thread advocating for "fixing feudalism" mean "bringing levies back to pre-2.0 numbers," it would make it significantly easier for the player-- because the "levies nerf" primarily impacts larger realms, and the player's realm is basically always the largest after the first century or so.

 

[TheRealAlu]

That doesn't seem to make sense. Every state in the game is suffering these same issues, right? I mean, if your vassals are hypothetically never giving you any benefit, then your enemy also gets no benefit from them. If all the "players" in the game are suffering the same checks on their power, then it is hardly an issue.

That's a smart question. Thanks for asking it instead of immediately attacking the guy because you didn't share his opinion. So let me answer it for you...

On paper it might look like you're giving both the player and AI the same checks and balances on their power. But in execution you're honestly just hurting the AI more than anything.

The player is going to be smart enough to do these things:

1. Own every possible holding in a capital (even the temples and cities) then throw his marshal in there to train troops and buff his personal demesne as high as possible.

2. Make sure his capital is on a rich 6-7 holding county, instead of whatever the 'official' capital of the empire/kingdom is. Which is more commonly a 3 holding county.

3. Utilize the fullest extent of their demesne cap. A player mostly isn't going to be happy with anything less. Depending on how much his vassals like him, he may even push it further to 2 or 3 holdings above the cap.

4. Focus on militarization techs to buff his retinue ASAP. On top of making smart retinues instead of just picking stuff seemingly at random.

5. Boost their economy... by doing stuff such as use republic vassals, set tax laws high (AI usually prefers to keep them low), borrow+expelling the jews, asking from the pope, etc. All this helps you win the mercenary race. A player good enough at this can even keep mercenaries as a permanent standing army and still make profit.

6. Go out of their way to vassalize possible holy orders.

And so on... there's just so many things the player can do that the AI can't or won't. So with vassal levies at the way they are now you could argue that the game is actually easier.

 

[Strumpetplaya]

This thread is the best.

Also, yay for fixing bugs and exploits that completely undermine the entire point of the game.

Sorry I don't have anything more constructive to offer, but I'd rather not get involved in a multi-page discussion about creating vassals out of thin air and banishing them as a main income stream being historically plausible, or about how game design inherently includes telling you how you can play the game, how easy it would be to get North Korea Mode back by editing one or two numbers in defines.lua, or the weird argument that the existence of North Korea Mode is okay because the AI can't play as well as a player.