• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

CK3 Dev Diary #3 - War

Greetings!

War. What is it good for? You may ask. A whole lot I’d say. You can use it to press that juicy Claim you have been holding on to for a while, or perhaps you’d rather use it to put the unbelievers to the sword. Whichever strikes your fancy. The topic of the day is war, and more specifically, how we go about waging war.

I aim to give you an overview of how wars will be fought. I will not go into details about CBs or anything like that this time. Bear in mind that the game is still very much in development and everything talked about here is subject to change.

Let’s start by taking a look at what an army is made up of. Just like in Crusader Kings 2, the bulk of your armies consists of Levies. Levies in Crusader Kings 3 are made up of their own unit type, simply called Levy. These are essentially conscripted peasants forced to do your bidding and are not very impressive on their own. In great numbers, however, they are an efficient meat shield meant to complement the troops of your armies that have a far higher impact: Men-at-Arms.

dd_03_armynumbers.png


Men-at-Arms are the equivalent to the Retinues of CK2. They are trained troops that come in several different unit types which excel in their given role. There are base variations available for everyone to recruit, such as Light Cavalry and Heavy Infantry, but the really interesting ones are usually unique to certain cultures or specific regions of the map, though all have their own stats and uses. Speaking of stats, there are four different values present on a Men-at-Arms regiment that you need to keep track off:

Damage - This is obviously the amount of damage a single soldier of this type is able to inflict on the opponent.

Toughness - This is how much damage a soldier can take.

Pursuit - In the aftermath of a battle (more on this below), Pursuit increases the amount of damage you can inflict upon a routing enemy.

Screen - The opposite of Pursuit, Screen allows you to protect fleeing soldiers from being killed.

dd_03_pikemen.png


Not all Men-at-Arms are equal. You will have access to a few immediately from the start and unlock access to additional regiment types as you progress throughout the game. Some will be similar to each other, but may be tailored towards a certain terrain type. Others may just be a straight upgrade, but will in those cases be much more expensive than their weaker counterpart.

Men-at-Arms allow you to customize your army for any given situation. If you know where or who you will fight, certain Men-at-Arms will be far superior. Is there a lot of hilly terrain in your region? Then Archers are the way to go. Are you facing a lot of cavalry? Bring Pikemen! A smaller army will stand a much higher chance of winning if you bring a Men-at-Arm type that counters those of the enemy. When a regiment is countered, it’s efficiency in battle will be lowered, with its Damage output significantly reduced. If the countered regiment is greatly outnumbered by the countering type, efficiency will reduce even further. There’s a limit to how much a Men-at-Arm’s Damage can be reduced though, as to not make your expensive troops completely useless.

Next we have a special kind of Men-at-Arms: Siege Weapons. Medieval warfare was all about sieges. Castles and sieges are very iconic for the time frame, so we felt that it was necessary to have that properly represented. You’ll start off with access to a rather weak catapult, but it will still allow you to besiege holdings faster than without one. Later on, you’ll unlock improved siege weapons, such as trebuchets, that are able to speed up sieges significantly.

dd_03_siegeweapons.png


You can only own a certain number of Men-at-Arms regiments at any given time, so choose carefully which troops you decide to recruit!

Levies and Men-at-Arms are not the only soldiers available to you. As a ruler, you have a number of Knights at your disposal. These are the vassals and courtiers of your realm with a high Prowess, which is the equivalent to Combat Rating in CK2, and represents how good a character is at fighting and is used when they participate in battles. You can normally only have a few dedicated Knights, but there are various ways to increase the number of Knights, as well as their effectiveness.

dd_03_knight.png


Finally, we have the Commander. An army can only have a single Commander, who uses his Martial skill to improve the troops under his command. There are plenty of different commander traits available, which either have a direct effect on battles, such as terrain bonuses, or give the Commander bonuses outside of battles. One such example is the ability to have supply last longer (more on this below).

dd_03_commanders.png


dd_03_holywarrior.png


With armies out of the way, let’s have a look at battles! At the very start of any battle, a combat width is set that decides how many troops are able to fight each other at the same time. The width is set to the relative size of the defender, depending on the terrain type you are fighting in, being larger in flat and open terrain, and smaller in rough terrain and mountains. I would generally advise against attacking larger armies in plains for example...

The single most important part of a battle is Advantage, which is essentially a modifier that increases the damage of all troops on either side. When a battle starts, all sources of Advantage is taken into consideration. It can come from traits, terrain, buildings, etc. but most importantly, the Martial skill of your Commander. All of these are added together for both sides of the battle. The difference is then added as the Advantage bonus for the side with the higher Advantage.

Example: Your army has a total Advantage of 40, and attacks an enemy army that has a lousy total of 10. This means that you will have an Advantage bonus of 30 during the battle, which then translates into a rather significant damage bonus for your troops.

In addition to the starting Advantage, each Commander also makes a roll every few days in an attempt to increase their Advantage or even it out. This tug of war can be further expanded by various modifiers and traits. For example, the trait ‘Cautious Leader’ will decrease your potential max roll, but also increase your lowest possible roll, trading a high potential for a higher average. These exist to make even battles a tad bit unpredictable, but will rarely be the deciding factor.

Soldiers on the combat line damage the enemy on every tick. When a soldier “dies”, he will be considered to be either a Casualty, or to be Routed. Casualties, you guessed it, are considered dead and will have to be replenished over time. Routed soldiers, on the other hand, are troops that are injured or fled the battle and are added back to the army once the battle is resolved. Battles are resolved once either side runs out of fighting troops.

Once the battle is won, it enters the Aftermath phase which lasts for a few days. This is when the victor has the opportunity to chase down and kill any survivors (the Routed troops). As mentioned earlier, this is the time for certain Men-at-Arms to shine. With a high Pursuit you can kill a larger amount of the enemy to really capitalize on your victory. Alternatively, you can have a high amount of Screen to make losing battles less penalizing. Keep in mind that battles will grant you a fairly limited amount of War Score. Which brings us to sieges!

Besieging and occupying enemy holdings is the main way of gaining War Score and winning wars. As mentioned in lats week's map dev diary, Baronies are their own provinces. You will not have to siege all of them in order to occupy a full county or seize your War Goal, only fortified holdings have to be besieged. Castles and County Capitals are all fortified by default, with how difficult it is to besiege these holdings being decided by their Fort Level. Fort Level can be increased by certain buildings and modifiers.

Each Fort level increases the amount of Siege Progress you need to get before it gets occupied. You gain a base amount of Siege Progress every tick, which can be increased further by heavily outnumbering the garrison or having Siege Weapons. This constant progress won’t change over the course of a siege. It allows you to know what the maximum duration of the siege will be and you can take that into account as you plan your next move. Sieges also have what we call ‘siege events’, which occur with a fixed interval, and can make the siege progress faster by giving you a one time Siege Progress bonus, or increase your base Siege Progress. Siege Weapons are required to get the ‘breached walls’ event, which in turn allow you to directly assault the holding. This is a risky maneuver since it will cost you troops, at the benefit of vastly increasing your daily Siege Progress.

Being attacked while besieging a holding will make you the attacker of the battle, making you lose out on any usual defender bonuses you would get from the terrain. Sieges are therefore slightly riskier, and assaulting the holding to gain control of it before the enemy attacks might well be worth the cost.

A few final words on moving armies around. As I mentioned briefly in last week’s DD thread, major rivers have designated fords for crossing. You can no longer cross them freely as in CK2, and will often have to move your army to find a good place to cross. Beware though, crossing a major river will make you lose Advantage should you engage an enemy in battle on the other side, making river crossings for perfect places to catch your opponent. Along with the increased amount of Impassable Terrain, there are plenty of bottlenecks that you can use to your advantage (pun intended).

Have you ever been annoyed by walking into a province just for a short while in CK2, only to go above the Supply Limit and lose a bunch of troops? Fear not. Armies now carry an amount of Supply with them. Supply is drained whenever armies are in Baronies with a lower Supply Limit than their size. You can therefore safely march through a few Baronies with a low Supply Limit without troops dying. If you army runs out of Supply however, it will start to take attrition and lose troops over time. Supply is increased as long as you are below the Supply Limit in territory you control. Beware though, your army might not take attrition on low Supply, but it will suffer an Advantage Penalty in battles!

Chasing armies deep into enemy land is certainly not recommended. Marching into a County controlled by the enemy, that doesn’t border anything you control and is not on the coast, will make your army take a single and quite significant attrition hit. If you have a huge amount of troops to spare though, then perhaps you don’t need to worry about it.

Phew. That turned out to be a bit lengthier than expected. I hope you’ve gotten a fairly good (although slightly summarized) picture of what to expect when waging war in Crusader Kings 3!
 
Last edited:
  • 13Like
  • 3
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:

Josep Zamoyski

Recruit
33 Badges
Oct 21, 2014
4
0
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2
  • Darkest Hour
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
A realistic thing would be to add a thing: when you have a negative relationship with the commander of one of your flanks, he has the option of deserting or even going to the enemy's side. In this way, the player would be obliged to maintain good relations with commanders. What do you think about it? :cool:
 

General Karthos

General
62 Badges
Aug 24, 2008
2.380
1.380
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Cities: Skylines - Campus
  • Surviving Mars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Surviving Mars: Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • 500k Club
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
A realistic thing would be to add a thing: when you have a negative relationship with the commander of one of your flanks, he has the option of deserting or even going to the enemy's side. In this way, the player would be obliged to maintain good relations with commanders. What do you think about it? :cool:

I don't find this realistic at all. It would be a good idea to keep good relations with all your commanders (though flank commanders are no longer a thing it appears), so let's say Knights. But while a Knight might retreat during battle, or be less likely to engage as enthusiastically for your side, betrayal, going to the enemy's side would be almost unthinkable. No liege lord would ever be able to trust him again. (After all, if he betrayed his last liege lord, what's to say he won't do so again?) Knights have expensive needs, the patronage of a wealthy lord and/or the land granted him by his liege (all of which would be lost if he betrayed) is a necessity.

I could see bribing greedy knights to fight with less enthusiasm/effectiveness though....
 

Cruxador

Colonel
93 Badges
Jul 27, 2008
1.153
1.970
So wings are cut from the franchise? Seems like a step backwards, like not allowing baronies to be separate from counties, but I guess I only care a little.

How much like retinues are men at arms? Are the types related to your holding types?

What is the cost of levies? Presumably there's some manner of economic cost, but is it one time or longer term like a penalty to province development?
 

Lord Cuddlesworth

Second Lieutenant
73 Badges
Aug 2, 2015
132
54
  • Island Bound
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Prison Architect
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
One question I have is if we'll be able to take more than a single title per war. Always bugged me that I had to be content with taking one county from a massive empire when I'd completely shattered their armies and devastated their lands if I couldn't find a Duchy claimant I could persuade to join me.
 

Josep Zamoyski

Recruit
33 Badges
Oct 21, 2014
4
0
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2
  • Darkest Hour
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
I don't find this realistic at all. It would be a good idea to keep good relations with all your commanders (though flank commanders are no longer a thing it appears), so let's say Knights. But while a Knight might retreat during battle, or be less likely to engage as enthusiastically for your side, betrayal, going to the enemy's side would be almost unthinkable. No liege lord would ever be able to trust him again. (After all, if he betrayed his last liege lord, what's to say he won't do so again?) Knights have expensive needs, the patronage of a wealthy lord and/or the land granted him by his liege (all of which would be lost if he betrayed) is a necessity.

I could see bribing greedy knights to fight with less enthusiasm/effectiveness though....
Or maybe some commanders, for example, with a character trait: a coward, weak, would have a tendency to betray the Lord.
 

nmcj1996

First Lieutenant
78 Badges
Jan 1, 2010
228
323
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Semper Fi
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • The Kings Crusade
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Surviving Mars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Victoria 2
How are knights supposed to be balanced? I mean, they seem totally insignificant in big realms. In case of minors, however...

I mean… assuming I am one province, high-diplo king (Navarra?) or emperor (Latin Empire?) in somewhere, I imagine I would be able to invite 1412651 high martial no-names to my realm. (It certainly is easy in CK II.) How would you prevent me from just stream rolling all opposition with my knight hordes?
Edit:
This is actually a great change. I mean… fortifications were oft build in difficult terrain for a reason – and without this all you would get from mountain fort was ‘oh, so you thought having a castle in defensible terrain was a good idea? You poor fool, try preventing its capture now[/i].

I get your point but I just feel that could be handled better by lower hostile supply limits and greater siege times.

With the new system, by the middle of the game when almost every single barony is fortified you would never be able to take advantage of defensive terrain in enemy territory.

Maybe a workaround could be that if reinforcing a besieged barony neither side would benefit from terrain bonuses?
 

Arbus

General
119 Badges
Jun 3, 2009
1.781
3.096
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
I don't understand why Paradox love making the attackers count as defenders when reinforcing a fort. All it does is incentivise fighting battles on your own territory when in reality in this period rulers would rather have fought on their opponents territory so as to prevent looting of their territory and ensure their legitimacy, proving themselves as defenders of the people.

It also seems unrealistic that a sieging army wouldn't have found themselves at least a somewhat defensible position around a castle, or would retreat to one when facing an opposing army.

It does make perfect sense though. The defenders only have an advantage because they get to choose the terrain. A besieging army doesn't have that luxury, they have to fight where they stand. They can't lift the siege to find a more defensible position because if they do, the besieged would be able to resupply as well, and that defeats the whole purpose. So they can't leave camp, they have to keep the besieged inside the walls, and they have to fight the reinforcing army where the reinforcing army chooses to attack.
 
Last edited:

Arthur_Revan

Corporal
60 Badges
Apr 14, 2016
26
3
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • BATTLETECH
  • Tyranny - Bastards Wound
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • BATTLETECH - Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • War of the Roses
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Tyranny - Tales from the Tiers
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
The more I read, the more I have a feeling of damn EU4 creeping into CK, and I not a fan.

1) Only one commander - BAD!!!
On so many levels (+ ahistorical), if you (player) are lazy enough, to appoint proper commanders to each flank, in order to use their strengths, then it's your problem that your loosing.

2) No tactics, no skirmish - WHY?
And wat the hell is screening?!
When the army is running it running, there are no magical defenders that appear from nowhere and start protecting everyone from damn cavalry, and if they are special troops, then what the hell were they doing during the battle itself, was waiting to lose?

3) Little war score from battles - WHAT?
If your army was annihilated, your chances of victory are significantly diminished, and it may be time to sue for peace.

4) Carpet sieging - REALLY?!
6 thousand men will go around the country and siege every damn castle for 20 years in order to take one province.

In summary:
I know it only DD № 3, but it already feels downgraded from CK2, and that those damn EU4 mechanics will turn good "Strategy" game into another "map painter".

And to people who like it:
I want to think 50 years ahead with strategy and use tactics to win battles, not to paint the whole world with blobs of men.
If CK2 is too hard for you, go and play EU4 or Imperator.
 

Arbus

General
119 Badges
Jun 3, 2009
1.781
3.096
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
And to people who like it:
I want to think 50 years ahead with strategy and use tactics to win battles, not to paint the whole world with blobs of men.
If CK2 is too hard for you, go and play EU4 or Imperator.

What? In CK2 you amass your stack of doom to kill the enemy stack of doom and then proceed to blitz-siege the hell out of every province. How is that "too hard" or strategic?
 

nmcj1996

First Lieutenant
78 Badges
Jan 1, 2010
228
323
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Semper Fi
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • The Kings Crusade
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Surviving Mars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Victoria 2
It does make perfect sense though. The defenders only have an advantage because they get to choose the terrain. A besieging army doesn't have that luxury, they have to fight where they stand. They can't lift the siege to find a more defensible position because if they do, the besieged would be able to resupply as well, and that defeats the whole purpose. So they can't leave camp, they have to keep the besieged inside the walls, and they have to fight the reinforcing army where the reinforcing army chooses to attack.

I see it more as they go to meet the other army a few kilometres away from the siege not literally under the walls of the siege, otherwise the siege garrison would take part in the battle and suffer casualties from it. I know that another poster mentioned Richard I in the Crusades of when this did happen, but I cant imagine its is common that a commander would literally just let the opposing army march up to them without moving at all to find a somewhat defensible position.

To your point about resupplying, I think you are underestimating the amount of supplies that lifting a siege would need - it would require tonnes of heavily weighed down caravans that could be stopped by just a few of the sieging army's scouts blocking roads - they don't need to literally form a constant wall of men around the castle.
 
Last edited:

Failtier

Comprador
45 Badges
Jul 6, 2011
114
164
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Tyranny - Bastards Wound
  • Tyranny - Tales from the Tiers
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Tyranny: Gold Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
This is awesome! That's everything I hoped you would implement for an upcoming EUV (to make the battles more dynamic and realistic, and to take a defense bonus for buildings into consideration).
 

RedBaronFlyer

Captain
99 Badges
Jul 30, 2016
391
148
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Semper Fi
  • Sengoku
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Rome Gold
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
I hope there’s ways to increase the amount of men-at-arms you can raise. It felt kind of gamey having to spam palaces to increase my retinue cap.

I'd be neat if there could be localizations for the knight title, which would be nice for different cultures and for mods as well.
 
Last edited:

CrazyRat

Sergeant
74 Badges
May 26, 2019
96
140
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • War of the Roses
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Pride of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • The Showdown Effect
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Sengoku
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Divine Wind
  • March of the Eagles
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2
It does make perfect sense though. The defenders only have an advantage because they get to choose the terrain. A besieging army doesn't have that luxury, they have to fight where they stand. They can't lift the siege to find a more defensible position because if they do, the besieged would be able to resupply as well, and that defeats the whole purpose. So they can't leave camp, they have to keep the besieged inside the walls, and they have to fight the reinforcing army where the reinforcing army chooses to attack.
Well, he is also kinda right. It really depends on tactic besiegers choose. Besieging army may construct fortified camps and towers along the roads to harass the defenders instead of just circling the city. Sure, difficult terrain would probably still be to besieged advantage, but not so much as to say that they ‘choose the terrain’ if pitched battle would occur. Relieving a siege with 10000 soldiers shouldn’t really use mountain bonus - they still have either to get to those camps, or stand there until castle will fall.

Now, what I feel CK II lacks here is possibility to actually make sudden attack – that would be risky, that would have limit on number of participants (as its much easier to stealthily strike foe’s camp with 200 followers than with 1000), but that would potentially either allow besieged to escape from besieged city, to strike siege engines or whatever. If forts could reliably defend itself, here is where terrain could sensibly make difference.

The issue here – I think – is that at least in CK II terms every holding will be conquered unless relieved by army. If we had more dynamic sieges – and I think Imperator is getting them, with possibility to really lose siege? – then this ‘terrain bonus for relieving army’ wouldn’t be necessary,.
 

Denkt

Left the forums permamently
42 Badges
May 28, 2010
15.763
6.368
1) Only one commander - BAD!!!
On so many levels (+ ahistorical), if you (player) are lazy enough, to appoint proper commanders to each flank, in order to use their strengths, then it's your problem that your loosing.
You have Knights now so the amount of characters involved in a battle may actually be more than CK2 and having one commander instead of three will likely mean the commander is more impactful so there are some advantages to keeping it simpler in that regard.

2) No tactics, no skirmish - WHY?
And wat the hell is screening?!
When the army is running it running, there are no magical defenders that appear from nowhere and start protecting everyone from damn cavalry, and if they are special troops, then what the hell were they doing during the battle itself, was waiting to lose?
They have replaced phases by making units have counters. Having longbows destroy Everything Before the melee phase was quite unrealistic and made it hard to use melee units. I think the new counter and terrain system will be more interesting than CK2 system.

Do you actually think that your whole army would completely collapse if it run out of morale. Screening represent units ability to counter enemy pursuers and thus reduce the amount of damage the enemy can do to your army when it retreats.

3) Little war score from battles - WHAT?
If your army was annihilated, your chances of victory are significantly diminished, and it may be time to sue for peace.
We don't know how easy it is to rebuild the army if lost and how much war score you get likely depend on how much damage you dealt to the enemy army. But there are cases in history when a victor could not win the war or atleast not make as much progress as they wanted to because they could not siege down the enemy defences.

4) Carpet sieging - REALLY?!
6 thousand men will go around the country and siege every damn castle for 20 years in order to take one province.
Not Everything will have to be sieged and not Everything even have walls and thus auto captured and given that siege speed depend on how large your army is, it may be better to simply keep your army together.
 

Muhu

Corporal
11 Badges
Feb 20, 2012
38
329
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Magicka
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • War of the Roses
  • 500k Club
  • Magicka: Wizard Wars Founder Wizard
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
I am extremely disappointed by the changes to the battle system. When Henrik was talking about how he wanted to make CK3 more user friendly without reducing complexity the battles in CK2 were the first thing that came to my mind. It was an elaborate system that had a nearly perfect balance between abstraction versus simulation, but it lacked clarity and you had to delve into third party sites to actually understand the system fully. It was a perfect candidate for improved approachability without dumbing things down, all it needed were better and more visible explanations of the tactics, phases and flanks ingame. And then you could build on that by making the characters leading the flanks and the relations between them more important.

But instead of that, what we have here seems to be just a modified version of the RNG heavy and frankly, uninspired EU4 system. I don't know about you, but when I see a CK2 battle, I'm actually immersed and even though I'm watching an abstraction, I can imagine the actual battle represented unfolding. I can see volleys of arrows, cavalry charges, a collapsing center being narrowly saved by a flank that managed to defeat it's opponent, etc. When I'm watching an EU4 battle, I can see... dice being rolled and I hope my number is larger than the enemy's. Not exactly what I would call exciting or immersive.
 

Arbus

General
119 Badges
Jun 3, 2009
1.781
3.096
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
I see it more as they go to meet the other army a few kilometres away from the siege not literally under the walls of the siege, otherwise the siege garrison would take part in the battle and suffer casualties from it. I know that another poster mentioned Richard I in the Crusades of when this did happen, but I cant imagine its is common that a commander would literally just let the opposing army march up to them without moving at all to find a somewhat defensible position.

To your point about resupplying, I think you are underestimating the amount of supplies that lifting a siege would need - it would require tonnes of heavily weighed down caravans that could be stopped by just a few of the sieging army's scouts blocking roads - they don't need to literally form a constant wall of men around the castle.

A few sieging army scouts could also be easily defeated by a few resupplying forces. The moment people noticed that the besieger army was leaving, they would get ready to resupply the castle. Even if it was just to fight a few kilometers away, the besieger camp needed to be garrisoned, so in game that would mean you can fight as an attacker as long as you leave a force x times stronger than the castle's defenses, and it also implies that your attacking army would be reduced in strength. I don't see the pointing of adding that much complexity.
 

Denkt

Left the forums permamently
42 Badges
May 28, 2010
15.763
6.368
I don't understand why Paradox love making the attackers count as defenders when reinforcing a fort. All it does is incentivise fighting battles on your own territory when in reality in this period rulers would rather have fought on their opponents territory so as to prevent looting of their territory and ensure their legitimacy, proving themselves as defenders of the people.

It also seems unrealistic that a sieging army wouldn't have found themselves at least a somewhat defensible position around a castle, or would retreat to one when facing an opposing army.
Mostly to make sieges more risky and harder to finish since if you stay your risk fighting at a penalty but if you leave you lose your siege progress. Looting and other penalties are likely in and not Everything will be walled in early game. On other hand the besieger would have to risk their supply lines which could be cut of and suddenly the besiger are themself besiged and their army would likely have to be spread out which reduce its ability to organize a defence and they have to worry about sallies from the garrison so the defence penalty for a besieger is not without its merits.
 

Arbus

General
119 Badges
Jun 3, 2009
1.781
3.096
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
Well, he is also kinda right. It really depends on tactic besiegers choose. Besieging army may construct fortified camps and towers along the roads to harass the defenders instead of just circling the city. Sure, difficult terrain would probably still be to besieged advantage, but not so much as to say that they ‘choose the terrain’ if pitched battle would occur. Relieving a siege with 10000 soldiers shouldn’t really use mountain bonus - they still have either to get to those camps, or stand there until castle will fall.

Now, what I feel CK II lacks here is possibility to actually make sudden attack – that would be risky, that would have limit on number of participants (as its much easier to stealthily strike foe’s camp with 200 followers than with 1000), but that would potentially either allow besieged to escape from besieged city, to strike siege engines or whatever. If forts could reliably defend itself, here is where terrain could sensibly make difference.

The issue here – I think – is that at least in CK II terms every holding will be conquered unless relieved by army. If we had more dynamic sieges – and I think Imperator is getting them, with possibility to really lose siege? – then this ‘terrain bonus for relieving army’ wouldn’t be necessary,.

The terrain bonus is just an abstraction that granted doesn't make sense. Even if the terrain is hilly the city/castle itself can be situated in a flat area. Even if the terrain is a plain the city/castle can be on a hilltop. It shouldn't matter. For "siege battles" terrain modifiers should simply be ignored for both sides and the besieger army would get a "besieger penalty".

And why should the besiegers always get a penalty? Because they are in the worst position, by default. The besiegers need to bring more men just to even the odds, and I'm sure they guarded their camp as best as possible, because if the besiegers were besieged by a relieving army, they would be in the very worst of scenarios. Maybe we could have a siege within a siege in the game but for the sake of simplicity and sanity CK3 is simply giving the relieving army an advantage.
 

MemeItUp

Corporal
4 Badges
Jan 14, 2018
41
4
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
I'm kinda sad that battles won't give a good amount of war score, as battles where decisive in the medieval era however ck2 did give too much warscore for one battle so hopefully it doesn't become negligible and its also a shame that we aren't allowed 3 commanders per flank, sure we have knights but i would have liked them to retain the 3 commanders per flank it adds a risk factor to it that you could potentially lose your most trusted and greatest commander who won numerous battles