• 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.
Time again for my monthly (well, roughly) pastime of developer diary writing! Last month, I might have mentioned plots and intrigue, but I think I'll hold off on that a bit more... Instead, let's talk about units and the combat system.

Like in the first Crusader Kings, military units are of variable size and composition. Each can contain any number of each of the seven troop types (light and heavy infantry, pike men, light cavalry, knights, archers and horse archers.) Most units are raised from a corresponding settlement (castle, church or city), their size and composition dependent on the improvements constructed there. Others belong to a mercenary group or holy order, etc. Units are discrete and cannot be merged or split into smaller parts, though of course they can be grouped together in armies. The basic system should be familiar to anyone who has played the original Crusader Kings.

Crusader Kings II Alpha - Harold vs Harald.jpg

Combat, however, is different from our other games. As soon as they are grouped together in a larger army, units are are assigned to one of three positions; left flank, center, or right flank. This is done automatically, but can be altered manually by players so inclined. On the battlefield, each position fights separately - normally against the corresponding part of the enemy army. Combat between positions is divided into three phases; skirmish, melee and pursue/flee. My left flank can be skirmishing against the enemy's right flank while my center is locked in melee, etc. The seven unit types have different strengths and weaknesses, so that for example archers excel at skirmish and knights at melee. The leader of each flank (a character), will pick combat tactics, which determines if his position should strive to close for melee, or avoid melee, etc. When an enemy position breaks, it will flee, and the pursue phase ensues. The longer the phase lasts, the more losses that contingent will sustain, but on the other hand, the pursuing force will not be assisting against the remaining enemy positions - also a tactical decision by the flank commander. Combat tactics are similar to the combat events of Rome, but more developed. (Btw, combat tactics are fully moddable.)

Crusader Kings II Alpha - Siege of York.jpg

Apart from combat tactics, there are also more traditional combat events, for example when commanders get wounded, killed or imprisoned, or when they improve on their martial skills. Sieges work in a similar fashion, but emphasizing morale loss, and with a different set of combat tactics. A commander with a high Intrigue skill might even manage to bribe some defenders into opening the gates. What about fleets? Unlike CK, ships do exist in Crusader Kings II, similar to the galleys in Rome. They are raised like normal troop levies in coastal provinces, but can only be used to transport troops - not to fight or block straits (large scale naval battles in the period were rare to say the least.)

Crusader Kings II Alpha - Battle of York.jpg

Oh, I almost forgot to mention that if an army is victorious, all commanders will bask in the glory and gain prestige. Conversely, the shame of defeat results in prestige loss. So, choosing to lead the army yourself can be profitable in terms of prestige, but of course, war is a dangerous business...

Enjoy the screenies and stay tuned for the next dev diary - sometime in August. :)



Henrik Fåhraeus, Associate Producer and CKII Project Lead
 
Good to hear how combat will work. I'm sure it will be interesting.

On the second screenshot, what is the garrison composition? I see 112 next to the castle icon, and 71 next to another icon of three men. Is the second number some kind of militia? Thanks.
 
I like CK1 army composition system, so I'm happy to retrieve this. I just have a question for sieges. As we'll have to build ships for transports (and limit troop transport in this case), will we have to build siege engines, as they must be have a "cost" in time or ressources and could limit siege conduct ?
Perhaps will we have another DD dedicated to sieges for this answer ?
 
Looks like the combat will be quite interesting.

One thing I'm not sure on is the sieges, they're (paraphrasing) 'similar but based on morale loss'. Does that mean it will actually be possible for the attackers to loose a siege without external intervention?
 
Looks like the combat will be quite interesting.

One thing I'm not sure on is the sieges, they're (paraphrasing) 'similar but based on morale loss'. Does that mean it will actually be possible for the attackers to loose a siege without external intervention?

Yes. A siege is quite similar in concept to a combat. The defenders in a siege is divided into two parts:
  • the levy, which can be raised
  • the garrison, which always stays with the settlement

Someone asked about assaulting in a siege(by a button press). This will probably not be permitted(but don't quote me on this once the game is released ;) ). However, if your leader has enough force and the correct traits, he will take a decision to assault the settlement himself.

Likewise, a defender leader might try and attack the army laying siege if his levy is big enough(but yet again, if he is a coward, he might not). Thus if the defending force attacks the sieging force and wins, the attackers need to flee themselves :)
 
Likewise, a defender leader might try and attack the army laying siege if his levy is big enough(but yet again, if he is a coward, he might not). Thus if the defending force attacks the sieging force and wins, the attackers need to flee themselves :)

This sounds awesome.

One of my pet peeves in EU3 is when a 3000-strong garrison is under seige by 500-strong rebels for an eternity, never losing, but also never venturing beyond the walls so smack the attackers.

I never played CK1, but this game sounds amazing.
 
Interesting, both CKII and Magna Mundi seem to be going in similar directions as to how battles work. Magna Mundi is a little more complicated, partially cause that's just how they roll, partially because tactics were more developed by then, but still!
Very exciting! Why can't you just release this game already :(
I jest, take all the time you need. I'm just impatient. :D
 
Oh, I see. So if the levy is not raised already, you can raise it to help garrison a besieged province? Is that what you meant?

Currently it's not you, but rather the character leading the defenders of the settlement. It won't appear as a unit on the map either, it just takes place in the siege combat. This might also change(so you can raise the levy yourself), but as of now the fate of the levy in the barons hands.
 
Currently it's not you, but rather the character leading the defenders of the settlement. It won't appear as a unit on the map either, it just takes place in the siege combat. This might also change(so you can raise the levy yourself), but as of now the fate of the levy in the barons hands.

That's an interesting approach. I like the AI characters taking a bigger role in warfare and other things, too. Another thing that I thought about was how mercenaries will figure into combat. (1) Will you be able to assign mercenary leaders to lead a wing into battle; and (2) I thought that it would be interesting if you could detach a mercenary unit to defend a certain county or barony, say hiring John Hawkwood's White Company with orders to defend Milan, like you can assign provincial units in EU Rome.
 
Great DD!
Just a question: Will army composition, size, terrain and character traits/skills somehow affect the movement of the army?

For example, will an army consisting of 5000 heavy infantry lead by a coward(or someone who lacks military skill at all) across mountains be infinite slower than an army consisting of 500 light cavalrymen lead by someone with a high martial skill across open plains?
 
Dislike the new ship system ... would be better to link transportation to special harbour provinces (can be improved my - well, improvements, I guess ;-) ), like in CK.

But this way, they can limit the amount of people you can transport, which is much better than the 'pay lump sum based on army size and distance' thing they had in CK. It also models how naval transport actually worked in the period MUCH better!
 
Dislike the new ship system ... would be better to link transportation to special harbour provinces (can be improved my - well, improvements, I guess ;-) ), like in CK.

Well at least there is some use to building harbor improvements. What did having a grand shipyard in my Valencia in 1200 do for me in CK1? It was pretty and some income bonuses, but investing in shipbuilding industry should give you some good benefits in CK2. I would say that there should be some nasty events for losing your fleet or an enemy using fire ships to burn your fleet in harbor.

EDIT: good point, Gwyn ap Nud! Plus it shouldn't cost me a few years' income to ship a small army between Sicily and Malta.
 
Love the DD. :)

Some questions re: sieges. Tegus mentioned that sieges are per barony (which is awesome). Does the player get to choose which castle to besiege first in a county? Is the county only conquered when all castles are taken? Is it possible to capture and hold onto one castle in a county without being able to take the rest? Oh, and what sort of improvements may be built in castles?

The per-barony siege mechanism has incredible strategic ramifications.
 
Love the DD. :)

Some questions re: sieges. Tegus mentioned that sieges are per barony (which is awesome). Does the player get to choose which castle to besiege first in a county? Is the county only conquered when all castles are taken? Is it possible to capture and hold onto one castle in a county without being able to take the rest? Oh, and what sort of improvements may be built in castles?

The per-barony siege mechanism has incredible strategic ramifications.

You can have baron titles in a county where you don't hold the county title, so it seems likely that it's possible to conquer castles and keep them if you don't "own" the county
 
I think that it was mentioned somewhere that county is owned by the owner of a "capital" barony, so probably baron of York is also the count of York.

That should make for some interesting outcomes. If you only have a claim on a non-capital barony, you can declare war on that baron and likely his liege and his liege's liege might get involved.
 
Very interesting. It sounds like we won't get quite the amount of distinction between militia and regulars (well, professionals - people whose business is fighting) that I would like, but the levy system and the dislike of having the feudal troops out is at least a step in the right direction. I also like the new sea-transport system.


Why would I want girly-men in my armies? :p

(Sorry, I invented this joke when I was twelve and it still amuses me.)
 
Can we burn ships stationed in an enemy captured por to prevent them to use it later, or at least steal them?
When a siege is over, do we have the choise of let the troops pillage for a moral boost or something?
Can we destroy, or kill the population of an enemy barony to hurt his economy (specially heatens)?
 
As an addendum to the ship issue, is it possible for armies to cross a sea without owning port/coastal provinces? Or will the Emperor of Germany have to ship his troops via the North German ports to Jerusalem if he loses control over his Italian provinces?