I like all of what i see in the patch.
I m not concerned about ahistorical stuff if balance comes in, and nerf HRE easyness of cohesion (this term exist?) which is even more bothersome than Byzantine.
I find brilliant that you can help someone to acquire independence, as long as, when you re the ruler, such happens from AI stand point agaisnt you.
I like when the wind that blow this way also blow that way...
If such is not done, this will favor the Player over AI too much, which is already fairly easy unless you play a Dinasty game over cumulative ruler game.
I also hope relationship is reflected in that help, even if in a temporary way, AI could have second intention on your skin even if you help them...(the same way we will automatically have second and third intentions).
Historically most shift in rulership were supported because the supoorters of the newcomers saw/foresaw some personal advantage in the shift.
As for creation of 1 duchy kingdom, i would agree with it, would the fisrt date bein the 7XX 8XX timeframe, where fragmentation were much stronger and vassalisation less proheminent.
So i find fine the 2 duchy limit.
Since history is thrown out the window the moment you press play, and its the main game strenght, i m all for going up to the top of the line and be able to create Empireships. It doesn t matter gamewise that those empires were tied to ROME or whatever.
As for the change of the De Jure to Follow De Facto, i m all for it. But as demonstrated, it should be tied to custom and languages (culture) more than mere Tax domination. De Jure did not happen more often, cause rulers weren t intelectually interested if some part wasn t culturaly absorbed as long it payed their due.
Such interest would only rise when the region, "De cultural", caused consistent troubles that would treaten the coesiveness of his holdings.
Much difering from this situation was religion, as Pope(religion) had much more influence IRL than it has in the game.
But i understand this requires changing in the "absorbtions" mechanics actualy implemented in the game (adding features), althought i think such change would be awesome.
I also believe that trying to implement such cultural, language overlapping could/should be a stress on the kingdom as it would (as it has) provoke revolts that could end up chaining as other regions non culturally aligned would/could preemptively revolt.
Many castles and cities were realocated (razed and rebuilt elsewhere with diferent architectural characteristics just to emphatize the cultural dominance.)
Such would allow one to raze a castle as basis of the land and make it a bishopry or doge, but this may provoke imbalance, or player advantage over AI, which we actually doesn t need.
This patch seem to be a game changer for those that are gamewise inclined and not so pleasing for the historicalwise inclined.
Being one of the formers, i welcome all of the changes.
I hope the third part comes with changes around plots, because in this very moment its the underused area of the game that have IMHO the greater potential to stonewrite this game into one of the stelar games in its genre, and market turning point.
And i hope in the long run more love is given for the Non catholic faction so we can play them with non catholic features.
I am probably one of the few that would love to see a Celtic kingdon, non catholic rise, or whatever.
If cultures and religions are diferenciated gamewise (which could be a programable nightmire) this game would be THE GAME to beat.
But maybe for a CK3 ?
I m not concerned about ahistorical stuff if balance comes in, and nerf HRE easyness of cohesion (this term exist?) which is even more bothersome than Byzantine.
I find brilliant that you can help someone to acquire independence, as long as, when you re the ruler, such happens from AI stand point agaisnt you.
I like when the wind that blow this way also blow that way...
If such is not done, this will favor the Player over AI too much, which is already fairly easy unless you play a Dinasty game over cumulative ruler game.
I also hope relationship is reflected in that help, even if in a temporary way, AI could have second intention on your skin even if you help them...(the same way we will automatically have second and third intentions).
Historically most shift in rulership were supported because the supoorters of the newcomers saw/foresaw some personal advantage in the shift.
As for creation of 1 duchy kingdom, i would agree with it, would the fisrt date bein the 7XX 8XX timeframe, where fragmentation were much stronger and vassalisation less proheminent.
So i find fine the 2 duchy limit.
Since history is thrown out the window the moment you press play, and its the main game strenght, i m all for going up to the top of the line and be able to create Empireships. It doesn t matter gamewise that those empires were tied to ROME or whatever.
As for the change of the De Jure to Follow De Facto, i m all for it. But as demonstrated, it should be tied to custom and languages (culture) more than mere Tax domination. De Jure did not happen more often, cause rulers weren t intelectually interested if some part wasn t culturaly absorbed as long it payed their due.
Such interest would only rise when the region, "De cultural", caused consistent troubles that would treaten the coesiveness of his holdings.
Much difering from this situation was religion, as Pope(religion) had much more influence IRL than it has in the game.
But i understand this requires changing in the "absorbtions" mechanics actualy implemented in the game (adding features), althought i think such change would be awesome.
I also believe that trying to implement such cultural, language overlapping could/should be a stress on the kingdom as it would (as it has) provoke revolts that could end up chaining as other regions non culturally aligned would/could preemptively revolt.
Many castles and cities were realocated (razed and rebuilt elsewhere with diferent architectural characteristics just to emphatize the cultural dominance.)
Such would allow one to raze a castle as basis of the land and make it a bishopry or doge, but this may provoke imbalance, or player advantage over AI, which we actually doesn t need.
This patch seem to be a game changer for those that are gamewise inclined and not so pleasing for the historicalwise inclined.
Being one of the formers, i welcome all of the changes.
I hope the third part comes with changes around plots, because in this very moment its the underused area of the game that have IMHO the greater potential to stonewrite this game into one of the stelar games in its genre, and market turning point.
And i hope in the long run more love is given for the Non catholic faction so we can play them with non catholic features.
I am probably one of the few that would love to see a Celtic kingdon, non catholic rise, or whatever.
If cultures and religions are diferenciated gamewise (which could be a programable nightmire) this game would be THE GAME to beat.
But maybe for a CK3 ?
Last edited: