Stop the stat hoarding and exploiting....HIDE THE STATS!

[flame7926]

I don't understand all the comparisons with other Paradox games here. In EU3, V2 and HoI3 you are playing as the invisible force behind a nation. In CK2, you are an individual human being with all the disadvantages that come with not being a god. To preserve realism, this must be considered in every bit of information available to the player. If your medieval character would not have access to it, nor should the player. If the player has access to it, it must be justifiable by some story of how the character might have been able to acquire it.

The problem is that the information available in the game right now would require a network of agents which would put RL Byzantium to shame and is simply not believable.

But you still aren't a person, there is lots of abstraction. I like the information, and it should be kept, since the AI has it.

[Aulus]

But you still aren't a person, there is lots of abstraction. I like the information, and it should be kept, since the AI has it.

Hm, there's probably lots of room for debate on the point of AI, but I had considered that an argument for hiding information. The AI, after all, needs every advantage it can get in such a complicated game. It would noticeably increase the difficulty level of what right now is a rather easy game.

The AI could always be told to ignore this info if it came to that, though, like a lot of games do with info about areas hidden behind the fog of war.

[robc04]

I also have to disagree with the OP (although if it were an option then everyone wins). Games are about making interesting (hopefully informed) choices. Otherwise it is just a guessing game and has nothing to do with strategy. Maybe for people who just like to role play this would be a good option, but hiding information in a strategy game is a bad idea.

[Darknesskilla]

Only thing is I think the DISPLAY features of the game are HARD CODED....which means no can do.

The Magna Mundi guys managed it in their mod, maybe you could ask them how to do it ?

[robc04]

I played around with the files. This example is from the "character_selection.gui" file in the interfact folder. You can hide a field by setting its position to off screen (see position):

instantTextBoxType = {
name = "character_diplomacy"
position = { x = 9999 y = 7 } <-------------- I changed the value to 9999 so it isn't rendered on the screen. Now the diplomacy rating isn't displayed on the screen where you appoint council members.
textureFile = ""
font = "vic_18_black"
borderSize = {x = 0 y = 0}
text = "0"
maxWidth = 30
maxHeight = 20
format = centre
Orientation = "UPPER_LEFT"
}

[Ambigore]

Thank you! I've been wanting to start this thread for a while now. Honestly, the only things that matter here are realism and believability. Information can be bad if it is realistically unavailable to your character. Those arguing otherwise may as well permanently lift the fog of war and automatically know of every plot attempted in the game. Simply put, anything which gives the player immersion and makes him behave like a true medieval lord is good while anything which continues to make him feel/behave like a guy playing a game is unacceptable. Knowing everything about a character thousands of miles away displayed as a simplistic number system clearly falls into the latter category.

What is realstic is reputation. People have reputations to give others an idea of what they're good and bad at, and secrets, such as certain genetic traits. There is no question that, in the name of believability, stats need to be replaced with sentences covering a small range of numbers. If you're not particularly bright, what would you expect people to say: "He's a bit slow," or "he's clearly got an intelligence level of 3?"

Traits ought also to be more hidden, considered on a one-by-one basis. There's no way to hide your lisp from those around you, so it should be displayed for the world to see - it's a part of your reputation. You're known as a great theologian, so this trait would naturally be made visible, but quite a lot of personal traits, particularly things like deadly sins or homosexuality which could be practiced in secret, should only become available for all to see if caught doing something and unable to stop the rumours.

There is only one number I can think off-hand which should always be available to the player: His own treasury, and perhaps even that should be approximated unless he has the "greedy" trait and is always counting it.

+1

[AllThat4Nothing]

people tend to scream "realism!" without considering what makes a game and what makes a hardcore simulation. CKII is meant to be a game. Because it's based on a real historical period, some people take that to mean it should be as close to 100% authentic as can be. do they ever stop to consider the price you pay in enjoyableness (lol if that's a word, sorry)? it's too easy to say "well I like realism so yes I would enjoy it being like that" but you really can't say that for sure as that is just not how the game is designed.

and let me tell you something about sales and marketing: even a game as masterful as CKII must be tailored to the lowest common denominator. even among the PDox crowd, where we value depth and intricacies, there still must be a certain level of "ease" for PDox to meet to keep their sales. I really don't like to use that argument, but fact of the matter is, that's half the reason right there. even among our group, those who like a little more thought and care and development, there still is a certain threshold between what is accurate, and what is just plain frustrating. and PDox takes that seriously. in the end, they are still a company, and they have a bottom line.

and another thing; CKII is an extension of a certain type of game model that PDox has continued to use, in varying forms, based on success in the past. if this was not the best way to keep the most players entertained, and if history has not proven that the majority prefer this model (and thus sales continue to generate...) rest assured PDox would have gone back to the drawing board.

now as for my personal opinion, I believe CKII for the most part is a good example of PDox applying "lessons learned" and for any of its faults, it has delivered from day one and continues to deliver.

[Squaldon]

You could argue that those out of your court might have more vague information, but given that we can't personally meet with/get to know our court and such, such things would need their own abstractions. A number is as good as any other choice for such abstracted details.

Personally, I don't see anything gained from a gameplay standpoint from hiding the numbers, and as well causing a bit of a slippery slope problem. Notably, one could figure out the skill via the modifiers they provide, do we hide those as well? If you hid the modifiers, I could tell the skill on i.e. a steward by seeing how my income changes, hide that too? Some mechanics are based on those numbers (i.e. Diplomacy 15 being the check point for falsifying duchy titles), having no idea if you've met the requirements for something would be a bit frustrating and people would go out of their way to find out if they meet the requirements anyways by some means.

If the goal is simply to increase difficulty, there are probably better ways to go about that than obscuring game mechanics.

[AllThat4Nothing]

You could argue that those out of your court might have more vague information, but given that we can't personally meet with/get to know our court and such, such things would need their own abstractions. A number is as good as any other choice for such abstracted details.

Personally, I don't see anything gained from a gameplay standpoint from hiding the numbers, and as well causing a bit of a slippery slope problem. Notably, one could figure out the skill via the modifiers they provide, do we hide those as well? If you hid the modifiers, I could tell the skill on i.e. a steward by seeing how my income changes, hide that too? Some mechanics are based on those numbers (i.e. Diplomacy 15 being the check point for falsifying duchy titles), having no idea if you've met the requirements for something would be a bit frustrating and people would go out of their way to find out if they meet the requirements anyways by some means.

If the goal is simply to increase difficulty, there are probably better ways to go about that than obscuring game mechanics.

completely agree

[Garak]

I see nothing fun or entertaining in the notion of having hidden numbers. Picking people at random is not fun. It becomes a boring crapshoot. There are already considerations beyond base stats that impact your decisions. For example, I've found a guy who would make a better chancellor than my current one. But my current one is also a powerful duke. Do I really want to hack him off by firing him? Also, this argument that you wouldn't know anything about people is silly. You can talk to a person and assess whether they're any good with money, whether they have a diplomatic temperament, if they've shown any promise leading troops or fighting at all, etc. Real rulers wouldn't just pick someone at random because they like their haircut. Yes, they would have had to take political concerns into consideration, but we already have to do that, anyway.

Numbers or generic sentences, it's all an abstraction. The numbers are just more precise, is all. Not sure why some people act like hiding the numbers makes them smarter or more serious or somesuch.

[Sylon]

In the first Crusader Kings, Paradox attempted to hide the amount of BB a player had. This design decision would go on to spawn innumerable 'how do I see the amount of BB I have?' threads, much confusion and scratching of heads, and frustration for many players.

Since then, Paradox has displayed BB as a numerical value in their games.

Needless to say, those who prefer less numbers and more vague values are in the minority.

[Paraipan]

A nice way to solve this would be "scouting" characters, just like in the football manager games. Stats should be hidden, but if you have interest in some character you could send your "scout" to find out more about him\her.

[Sir Garnet]

Let incompetence be determined by trial an error. Wife doesn't have kids within 2 years? incompetent murder her. lol You can still let them see "traits" but not the numbers, then choices can be made by personality instead of hrmmm should I take this 17 or 18?

-1 for the idea, but rave on, McMagic!

[ghengilhar]

Why not introduce something from the world of Football Manager (never thought I'd be talking about FM on the Paradox Forum!!) and have a "fog of war" stats. YOu can see all the stats from people in your court and within your Kingdom but outside that some of the stats are obscured. If you want to find out more information on them then send your spy master out to "scout" them although the slight disadvantage to this is the person being spied on has a small chance to developing the paranoid stat.

[Aulus]

people tend to scream "realism!" ...

People who talk about opponents in a debate "screaming" tend not to be giving enough credit.

even a game as masterful as CKII must be tailored to the lowest common denominator.

Sadly, here we're agreed.

Nonetheless, insofar as the game isn't perfect we should do what we can to change that.

I see nothing fun or entertaining in the notion of having hidden numbers. Picking people at random is not fun. It becomes a boring crapshoot. There are already considerations beyond base stats that impact your decisions. For example, I've found a guy who would make a better chancellor than my current one. But my current one is also a powerful duke. Do I really want to hack him off by firing him? Also, this argument that you wouldn't know anything about people is silly. You can talk to a person and assess whether they're any good with money, whether they have a diplomatic temperament, if they've shown any promise leading troops or fighting at all, etc. Real rulers wouldn't just pick someone at random because they like their haircut. Yes, they would have had to take political concerns into consideration, but we already have to do that, anyway.

Numbers or generic sentences, it's all an abstraction. The numbers are just more precise, is all. Not sure why some people act like hiding the numbers makes them smarter or more serious or somesuch.

Who said anything about "more entertaining," "smarter" or "serious?" The question is how to make the game more realistic and immersive. Say you're a medieval ruler interviewing someone for the job of marshall. Do you say to yourself, "Hm, this guy has a MIL of 10" or "Hm, this guy seems a decent commander?" Numbers make the game, well, "gamey" in that you feel like you're sitting in front of a numbers-based computer programme. Technically you are, but it breaks immersion to be reminded of that every time you look at a character screen.

Besides, in replacing numbers with evaluative sentences we're only asking for an option. Anyone who dislikes realism and/or immersion is welcome to turn it off.

A nice way to solve this would be "scouting" characters, just like in the football manager games. Stats should be hidden, but if you have interest in some character you could send your "scout" to find out more about him\her.

Never played Football Manager, but that's an excellent idea.

[Goldor2005]

I would not find this enjoyable in the least, I bought a paradox game, and expect it to stay one.

[ghengilhar]

A nice way to solve this would be "scouting" characters, just like in the football manager games. Stats should be hidden, but if you have interest in some character you could send your "scout" to find out more about him\her.

Always good to see a fellow FM enthusiast!

[AllThat4Nothing]

I

Numbers or generic sentences, it's all an abstraction. The numbers are just more precise, is all. Not sure why some people act like hiding the numbers makes them smarter or more serious or somesuch.

That's pretty much the crux of the matter right there IMHO.

People who talk about opponents in a debate "screaming" tend not to be giving enough credit.

I actually only had 1 person in mind, I just refrained from calling out by name is all. No offense to anyone making clear and thoughtful statements on the matter. Which I'm glad to see is the majority of those in this thread.

Why not introduce something from the world of Football Manager (never thought I'd be talking about FM on the Paradox Forum!!) and have a "fog of war" stats. YOu can see all the stats from people in your court and within your Kingdom but outside that some of the stats are obscured. If you want to find out more information on them then send your spy master out to "scout" them although the slight disadvantage to this is the person being spied on has a small chance to developing the paranoid stat.

Now THIS idea I like much, much more. Makes total sense I think.

[Staal]

While I have no intrinsic problem with hiding numbers, the number will have to be replaced by something else. In real life there are ways of determining if someone is skilled at something. The numbers merely reflect a character's proven value in a particular field.

If you want 100% blindless before appointing someone with zero track record then I will have to disagree. That is hardly realistic. Yes, maybe the penalty for changing advisors should be higher which will simulate a king having to keep certain advisors for political reasons. In addition the King's diplomacy skill should determine the penalty, maybe with a random factor that occurs as a pop-up event. Thus a "content" character is more likely to accept your decision whereas an "ambitious" character is more likely to be angry.

If you do this however then I want an option to reshuffle my council without penalty. Sometimes you want your Steward to become your Chancellor but to do that you have to take the rep penalty which is silly as you are not really firing him.

[AllThat4Nothing]

If you do this however then I want an option to reshuffle my council without penalty. Sometimes you want your Steward to become your Chancellor but to do that you have to take the rep penalty which is silly as you are not really firing him.

I totally agree with that. Lateral transfers, especially when they fit a character's skillset, should have no penalty. It would need its own interface however, to circumvent the penalty you speak. A seperate screen where you can only move a council member from one position to another, no penalty, but no other option either as to not exploit it for a "free fire."