Development Diary #107: 1.7.0 "Bastion" Update Notes

[Voodoo Lilium]

• We had a technical issue that only happened when saving saves with an even number of characters, it worked with an odd number. I thought it was funny, QA did not. Then when I realized I had to fix it I didn't find it funny anymore but then QA suddenly thought it was funny, so I guess it evened out.

I have got to ask... how the hell did that even happen???

 

[meii]

Imma buy this just cuz i like Tech Lead Zac. Yall should put Zac in charge of making dev diaries from now on for profit

 

[Stermor]

Hello! When microsoft store version will be avaivable? i can't actually find it.

 

[Diamonds]

• We had a merge that got screwed up so bad that it broke our changelog generation, therefore I had to manually find a lot of entries ( needle, haystack, fun ). Doing the merge itself was also a lot of fun, I'll be releasing a book about it titled "Zack and the Merge That Never Ended" and I'm forcing the design team ( who no doubt made fun of me during the ordeal ) to write it for me, good luck.

What version control are you using?

 

[Toybasher]

I'd have kept the banishing the bishop to confiscate his gold "exploit" but added serious consequences for doing it. HUGE opinion hit with the pope (to the point of almost automatic excommunication unless you're already on very good terms with him) + smaller opinion hit (doubled if character is zealous, 0 if cynical) with all other characters of the same religion if tyrannical.

If a just banishment (I.E. he tried to murder someone), no opinion hit happens, but the Pope is less willing to give you gold for a long time because you already took gold from the church and shouldn't be asking him too.

Sometimes you just have a very serious financial emergency and your priest has a few thousand gold sitting around and won't even upgrade his own church for some reason. I don't see anything wrong with confiscating the gold because I imagine something similar has happened at some point in history. Just add more negative geopolitical consequences for doing it.

 

[prismaticmarcus]

How many game mods will be updated when the game is updated? Or do you have no such plan?

that's a question for the modders

 

[Prpht]

I'd have kept the banishing the bishop to confiscate his gold "exploit" but added serious consequences for doing it. HUGE opinion hit with the pope (to the point of almost automatic excommunication unless you're already on very good terms with him) + smaller opinion hit (doubled if character is zealous, 0 if cynical) with all other characters of the same religion if tyrannical.

If a just banishment (I.E. he tried to murder someone), no opinion hit happens, but the Pope is less willing to give you gold for a long time because you already took gold from the church and shouldn't be asking him too.

Sometimes you just have a very serious financial emergency and your priest has a few thousand gold sitting around and won't even upgrade his own church for some reason. I don't see anything wrong with confiscating the gold because I imagine something similar has happened at some point in history. Just add more negative geopolitical consequences for doing it.

It will be cool if (probably as a part of a more religion-centred DLC) the church coffers (inherited with getting "the job" of realm priest or pope or neoasaturiasalian calif) were separated from the private treasure of the person holding the title.

 

[Parsidius]

- Players are fickle on the best of days and dishonorable on the worst! No longer shall we depend on their assistance when we declare our righteous wars for [GetWarReason]! They may still interfere with our plans, so we will still be weary of enemy player alliances.

This seems like it could be a big improvement. I always avoided marriages outside my realm because I would get multiple calls to war every year from my allies, which always distracted me from my own expansion.

 

[prismaticmarcus]

Some games will release a new version to the more popular mod production team before the version update to ensure that the mod can be updated synchronously. It seems that there is no similar plan for Crusader Kings 3?

CK3 doesn't really have mods that are massive enough in terms of playerbase, as far as i'm aware

 

[Medu Salem]

I'd have kept the banishing the bishop to confiscate his gold "exploit" but added serious consequences for doing it. HUGE opinion hit with the pope (to the point of almost automatic excommunication unless you're already on very good terms with him) + smaller opinion hit (doubled if character is zealous, 0 if cynical) with all other characters of the same religion if tyrannical.

[...]

Had the same thought when I read the changelog.

Should have made it an option with consequences unless there is a really good reason not to have any. In some cases it might even be justified if the bishops are corrupt... to give it "back to the people", but in reality you are just as corrupt and have the option to sack it for yourself. xD

 

[Comrade_Boris]

Very exciting changes! (Not to mention the entertaining write up )

A little disappointed to still see Iberian walls everywhere. They look fantastic but only around Iberian castles. Hope to see an official fix to that next time.

 

[BaronMouths]

Does this patch include the changes to AI that were recently reported in a DD?

EDIT: It does. Just found the note.

 

[The Russian Empire]

• Crossroads with Inn

I went down to the crossroads, fell down on my knees

 

[Medu Salem]

CK3 doesn't really have mods that are massive enough in terms of playerbase, as far as i'm aware

Sadly true.
A lot of the mods (even some that were initially very popular) I subscribed to haven't been updated ever since RC or even longer, which held me back for quite a while now to start a serious play with RC.
And I am growing weary of even subscribing to any newer mods because you never know if it just won't break a savegame soon with a minor patch already when the modder lost the interest to keep it up-to-date.

And I am not even talking about the big conversation mods. But rather stuff with some of the QoL features that the basegame still lacks and which I find necessary to make the game more manageable and endurable for a longer run. I mean, some of them got ticked off the list by the vanilla game already, like the CoA designer, or now the memory system. But some others still remain.

 

[SirShreds]

Any specific reason for that change? I feel like that never was a problem and it seems very easy now.

That's highly dependent on who you are playing as. Its also only really easy for already established religions. Not to mention most of the religions in the gam require you to paint the map in order to hold 3 holy site, or the alternative is to cheese the game to take single counties in various spots around the map....also crappy

 

[Prpht]

Sadly true.
A lot of the mods (even some that were initially very popular) I subscribed to haven't been updated ever since RC or even longer, which held me back for quite a while now to start a serious play with RC.
And I am growing weary of even subscribing to any newer mods because you never know if it just won't break a savegame soon with a minor patch already when the modder lost the interest to keep it up-to-date.

And I am not even talking about the big conversation mods. But rather stuff with some of the QoL features that the basegame still lacks and which I find necessary to make the game more manageable and endurable for a longer run. I mean, some of them got ticked off the list by the vanilla game already, like the CoA designer, or now the memory system. But some others still remain.

Is CK3 modding that harder? The game has an active player count similar to Stellaris and equal to roughly 50% of HoI4. Those are not bad numbers at all. What happened to that ambitious GoT mod and other similar projects?

 

[prismaticmarcus]

Is CK3 modding that harder? The game has an active player count similar to Stellaris and equal to roughly 50% of HoI4. Those are not bad numbers at all. What happened to that ambitious GoT mod and other similar projects?

well, that's still underway as of a few days ago. you've got to expect that it will take time

 

[Toybasher]

Yeah if I remember it correctly the AI will not count on a player joining them in an offensive war, because...let's be honest, we couldn't care less about their offensive wars usually. But they will count player allies of the defender because in the worst case scenario they will join in the defense and we wanted the AI to account for the worst case scenario instead of launching into an offensive war they cannot win by themselves.

I'd like if this could be fleshed out a bit. I.E.:

The AI still taking the player's alliance into account. However, before declaring a war, if the alliance is reason why they feel they have enough force to start the war, and the player is the ally, they will try to wait until the player doesn't seem "busy".

For instance, if the player is already in a war, a large malus to the "Alliance force multiplier" because the player ally clearly has stuff on their plate (an even higher malus if it's a defensive or civil war) and they can't expect the player to come to their aid when the player is already at war with someone else.

Also, it's been a while, but in Stellaris I think alliances or even mutual rivals of the target declaring a war can start a vote. I remember having something like that happen when a random empire contacted me with a vote for declaring a war on one of my rivals.

Alliances in CK3 should do something similar where you can ask for support before you actually start the war. Currently the AI would declare war because the alliance thinks they will be able to win, then they rush to the player (who might be in a defensive war of their own) to beg for help for something they started. If it's an offensive war Call To Arms, they should send a "I want to declare war on X and I need your assistance" letter. If the player accepts, great. If the player declines, don't start the war. (and apply a diplomatic penalty of some sort.

There could even be a "not right now, but soon" option which makes the AI wait about 6 months (if the CB isn't one that will soon expire) before contacting the player again. (at this point the player can only accept or decline outright.) Sometimes I want to join but I'm already in a war, but my only option is to accept right away or fully decline. If they'd wait a bit for me to finish up I'd gladly join but they instead declare a war they can't win while I got my hands full.


Also, one last thing. Can we get the option to nag the AI for compensation (Gold, etc.) like they do to the player when you don't do enough war-score? The AI can do it to us but I've had allies who do jack squat and I'd like to have a middleman solution between letting them get off scot free and tyrannical executions. Heck, if the AI doesn't want to join a war, you can't even send the war invite to them, but when they want you to join a war, you must accept or lose an entire level of fame usually.

 

[prismaticmarcus]

I went down to the crossroads, fell down on my knees

the crossroads are within, man! within!

 

[InsidiousMage]

Are Muslim HoF still bugged where they are always in your diplo range therefore making it harder to take the "Appoint a Righteous Caliph" decision?