CK2 Dev Diary #52: Rhythm is a Lancer

[Fishman786]

Well, we will be careful with the balance, and what the AI will do, etc. The Fabricate Claim job is bad for three main reasons:

• Unpredictable Time
• Unpredictable Cost
  
• Unpredictable Outcome

In this case, I prefer a solution that gives more direct player agency. (There will be appropriate penalties for using the new CB.)

Surely the unpredictability is a penalty in itself? You just have to factor that in when you choose to fabricate. I'm not sure I like this change, asymmetrical mechanics that differ in kind rather than simply having a prestige cost make a game more interesting IMO.

 

[Thanat0S]

(maybe something to do with foreign embassies and arranging marriages, or something to do with Laws. Suggestions are welcome!)

With "Unjustified War" being a thing, you could make the Claims done by “Fabricate Claim” job, free to use (or with a lower Prestige and Piety cost than now)

 

[spinoza013]

I always thought the Pope should be involved more with claims

 

[PK_AZ]

How about turning "fabricate claim" into "justify feud"? Essentially creating incidents so that the world at large consider the conflict justified, but allowing the target to de-escalate by apologizing and paying compensation, resulting in a truce. This way the counts can somewhat protect themselves from their coreligionist neighbors.

It wouldnt solve my main problem with fabrication: it is still long-taking action without much player input. Personally I would probably prefer even copypaste of EU4 claim forging.

Well, we will be careful with the balance, and what the AI will do, etc. The Fabricate Claim job is bad for three main reasons:

• Unpredictable Time
• Unpredictable Cost
  
• Unpredictable Outcome

Some time ago I was thinking about EU4 siege style jobs. I.e. you give your chancellor order to fabricate claim, he go to province in question and make progress bar. Every month or so he get an event which either a) create claim b) move progress bar forward, increasing chances of getting claim c) inform count in question that >>someone<< wants to steal his county ( d) e) f) some CK2-style events like local baron deciding he actually likes you more than his overlord). That way claim forging will still be unpredictable, but imho it would FEEL less unpredictable.

 

[iron0037]

Will the prestige/piety cost increase with realm size? Prestige is practically unlimited at Empire level, and even piety comes in abundance.

Yes, if you're going to examine some of the game's fundamentals, I suggest you take a look at prestige and piety. As a currency, these have always been quite imbalanced. Emperors accrue epic amounts of prestige even if they take no action and are empty caretakers. I would prefer if prestige and piety were gained or lost based on how much the realm's status quo changed (for the better or worse) in your character's lifetime.

 

[Johuotar]

Please don't remove claim fabrication. It's the only way to freely choose multiple counties you want to conquer. (Fabricate 2+ claims anywhere you want then push all claims.) The new CB don't allow that if I understood them right.

Suggestion:
But do make the claims given by pope easier to use. I have never used them because there is no good interface to see where the pope would agree to grant a claim. Map mode would be nice so you don't have to check lone county at once. Or a warning that pope is willing to give claim to following counties.

 

[SchwarzKatze]

It wouldnt solve my main problem with fabrication: it is still long-taking action without much player input. Personally I would probably prefer even copypaste of EU4 claim forging.


Some time ago I was thinking about EU4 siege style jobs. I.e. you give your chancellor order to fabricate claim, he go to province in question and make progress bar. Every month or so he get an event which either a) create claim b) move progress bar forward, increasing chances of getting claim c) inform count in question that >>someone<< wants to steal his county ( d) e) f) some CK2-style events like local baron deciding he actually likes you more than his overlord). That way claim forging will still be unpredictable, but imho it would FEEL less unpredictable.

I suggested that 2 dev diaries ago. Received downvotes without replies.

 

[Tyr Alexander]

Why not make fabricating claims plot only? It would remove the chancellor job slot and be more historical accurate as fabrication was not a one job

 

[Knotz]

Brace yourselves, incredibly wack balance is coming.

 

[iron0037]

Not a fan of the unjustified war. Waiting for a fabricated claim is not that big of a deal.

I am in favor of making sieges more interesting and difficult at higher fort levels. While you're at it, make fort holdings actually interesting, please. There's really no point in building them in provinces you already control...they don't even protect loot.

 

[A_Dane]

We're currently trying 2.5 years to max it out for the Attacker, with Defender Ticking unchanged.

Cool, thanks for the quick reply!

 

[Nyrael]

I always thought the Pope should be involved more with claims

Definitely. The Pope and the Church should be more involved in everything tbh.

 

[PK_AZ]

While you're at it, make fort holdings actually interesting, please. There's really no point in building them in provinces you already control...they don't even protect loot.

AFAIK the whole point of fort holdings is to NOT build them in provinces you already control.

 

[Dragatus]

Is any of this going to require the DLC or will it all be part of the free patch?

 

[SchwarzKatze]

Emperors accrue epic amounts of prestige even if they take no action and are empty caretakers. I would prefer if prestige and piety were gained or lost based on how much the realm's status quo changed (for the better or worse) in your character's lifetime.

There are also the councilor and minor title prestige income. As it stands now, you can make a vassal earn more prestige than the emperor by making him a councilor and dump honorary titles (including regent and commander).

 

[CannotresistDLC]

Your son will most likely inherit her title but won't be your vassal (it is an independent title.) best case is for you to die, your son inherits, then his mother dies and gets that title too. Even if he inherits her title, he will still inherit yours. Stick with it! I kickstarted my current game the same way. It is complex but your mistakes also make for interesting gameplay.

When you press someone's claim, they become your vassal under two circumstances: they are already your vassal or they are of your dynasty. As long as the claim isn't a higher rank than you (e.g.: don't press someone's ducal claim if you are a count.)

Have you considered making claim fabrication an event chain? This could allow you to add more player agency while still maintaining some sort of balance.

The first event might offer a choice of fabricating slowly (free, but unlikely to succeed/slow) or letting your chancellor spend gold hosting parties for the local minor nobility (moderately expensive but makes eventual success a real likelyhood).

A later event might give you a choice between offering a moderate bribe to a local vassal of the title owner (helps a little with the eventual chance of success), doing nothing extra, or paying a lot to have a genealogy made up/"traced" in a nice big illuminated manuscript by a scholar (helping significantly with success and even speeding up the process).

Another event might offer an option to significantly hasten fabrication up or reduce the cost by making rivals of others with claim to the title, a nearby ruler of similar power to your own, or one of your stronger vassals. Maybe by spreading the news of your "rightful" claim around in a way likely to annoy people or something.

Prestige and/or piety could easily be worked into the costs as well. Prestige for being too brazenly underhanded, perhaps, and piety by involving religious authorities.


This could keep the chancellor involved, make fabrication more engaging, and keep it balanced better than a simple gold + time cost ever could. Other variations could keep things interesting and prevent one or two paths from being the best choice all the time.

Edit: doing things this way could get complicated, yes, but so is the Immortality event chain. The difference being that claims are kind of central to the game and fabrication is actually used far more often.

 

[_Perun_]

AFAIK the whole point of fort holdings is to NOT build them in provinces you already control.

Not really. I always build them in provinces won through a holy war. Otherwise they are super vulnerable, especially against raiding.

 

[Jorlem]

It works, but IMO not very well. We're going to tread lightly though.

Honestly, reading this dev diary and #50, I am extremely apprehensive about the direction the game is going in. It honestly feels as if you are trying to strip out all of the strategy that makes CK2 unique, and replace it with the unimmersive pushbuttons of EU4. I am not a fan of the control board style of EU4, where you control your nation by pressing buttons that have precisely predictable outcomes every time, and much prefer having to interact with my country and/or other characters to accomplish things. Tell me, which sounds more fun:

1. I wanted to add a kingdom to my empire, so I found an unlanded lady with a claim on the kingdom, and arranged a marriage between her and my heir. Then, when they had a son, I plotted to murder the current king of the kingdom I wanted, so that the new king would be underage and I could push the claim of my now daughter-in-law. I then pushed the claim and won the war, and then formed a formal alliance with the queen I had just placed on the throne. I propped her up against several rebellions by her vassals, and after two generations, the grandson of the character I started this story with inherited the kingdom I wanted, adding it to my realm.
2. I wanted to add a kingdom to my empire, so I went to the CB menu, selected the new Great Conquest CB, declared the war, and won.

That example is applicable for just about every level of title, just differing the tiers and which of the new CBs you will be adding, as appropriate. I very much prefer the method described in #1, and really hope you change your mind and not allow for #2 to be a thing.



As an aside, I really do need to update my traits mod, as I had a "no CB" CB in that, which was tied to the Arbitrary trait, so players would have an actual reason to want that trait. (I had similar things for all of the negative traits that players usually try to avoid, making them fun to role play with substantial mechanical effects. For instance, having the Envious trait upped the odds that your chancellor would fabricate a claim, speeding things up on that front without making it boringly deterministic like claim fabrication in EU4.)

 

[CannotresistDLC]

As an aside, I really do need to update my traits mod, as I had a "no CB" CB in that, which was tied to the Arbitrary trait, so players would have an actual reason to want that trait. (I had similar things for all of the negative traits that players usually try to avoid, making them fun to role play with substantial mechanical effects. For instance, having the Envious trait upped the odds that your chancellor would fabricate a claim, speeding things up on that front without making it boringly deterministic like claim fabrication in EU4.)

That's a nice idea.

Those negative traits might also be granted by the naughty actions, instead of just being restrictions on who can use them. (This addition might or might not make it too easy to do gamey stuff though.)

 

[Cymsdale]

I'm calling it now, the no CB war will be used by the ai when the patch comes out, cause a huge amount of raging, spend two or three patches being tweaked before becoming player only because everyone will complain everytime its used against them.

That would suck because it's a major mechanic.