Dev Diary 11: Stopping The Snowball

[nOxr]

@nOxr: The only thing I am saying is that it currently seems like the amount of Infamy a character has is global. Exactly how relations, religion, etc. impacts coalitions is unclear, but the screenshots in the OP and Groogy's reply on the matter seems to point towards Realpolitik being the deciding factor. Some Realpolitik would be nice, but it currently seems like coalition members will be forcibly called to defend a coalition member in a holy war even if they share the religion of the coalition target and that they won't face any consequences for this.

If you by Holy War means a Crusade, I agree with you. Joining a Crusade against a member of the Coalition should not trigger the Coalition for Realms of the same religion. But for regional holy wars, I have no problem if the Coalition triggers.

 

[AchedTeacher]

I believe a Dev has stated that Christians will not be as bothered by a fellow Christian taking Muslim land. So no, not a global value.

Going to assume BadBoy is only for people of the same religion, but that the BadBoy itself is still global. A Christian taking land from a Muslim, if that happens once, they can just holy war it back. If it happens at an alarming rate, I'll assume great jihads start. So that covers that.

 

[Nameless_Ensign]

I will end up just reverting to older versions of the game, i use ironman so modding the feature out or editing is not an option for me

It's possible to play a modded game and still use Ironman. If you mean achievement-enabled Ironman, well... That's also possible. I've gotten numerous achievements since Horse Lords after I got tired of AI whoring and modded it out.

 

[richvh]

Steam achievement enabled Ironman with mods is, however, impossible without modifying the executable, which violates TOS and discussion of it is most likely verboten.

If you want achievements with mods with or without Ironman, have Charlemagne, and don't really care if they are displayed on Steam... well, there's a mod for that. (See sig)

 

[Nameless_Ensign]

impossible without modifying the executable, which violates TOS and discussion of it is most likely verboten.

That's not entirely true. But it does skirt the edges of what is 'allowed' (why should I have to care what is allowed in a single player game eludes me but oh well) so I'm pretty vague when I reference it. Just letting people know it is possible.

Your solution also works, hell you could use an achievement unlocker to unlock the achievements on Steam after getting them in your mod. That way it's basically replicating the achievement system exactly. If anyone is really bothered by this there are numerous fixes people can easily do.

 

[Korashy]

Please make this a paid feature so that I can not buy this dlc. Coalitions are bad and need to die.

 

[Tweakee]

I suppose this is to curtail the OP nature of the Seljuks, Abbasids, and others of their ilk. However I do feel that everyone is currently screaming out, WE DID NOT ASK FOR THIS!!!

I'm actually screaming:

The real problem is that BLOBS ARE TOO STABLE!

Great, so now blobs will expand more slowly. That's boring. What we need are for big blobs to be more likely to EXPLODE due to religious/cultural/political strife. Tweaking that system would address the problem AND be far more interesting than, "Oh, guess I'll twiddle my thumbs for a while until people forget I'm huge... then I bash their stupid forgetful heads!"

Infamy is a dumb idea. Taking land doesn't make a nation scary. Being huge and powerful does. All the little countries around Charlemagne/Byzantium/Abbasids should ALWAYS be terrified, not just after a big conquest. When there's an active CB for a behemoth, the AI should be marrying for alliances, offering vassalage, converting religion, etc... anything to prevent war. NOT ignoring the situation unless you take X other land, then forming the United Nations.

I've played the game a ton. If they want to implement a system where Christians -dislike- you for taking Muslim land (and vice versa), I can stop playing. I won't be angry, and I'll have gotten more than my money's worth. But the system they're describing sounds tedious and most importantly, it doesn't address the actual problem. I'm just hoping that someone who works on the game realizes that before this patch hits.

 

[heliostellar]

I'm actually screaming:

The real problem is that BLOBS ARE TOO STABLE!

Great, so now blobs will expand more slowly. That's boring. What we need are for big blobs to be more likely to EXPLODE due to religious/cultural/political strife. Tweaking that system would address the problem AND be far more interesting than, "Oh, guess I'll twiddle my thumbs for a while until people forget I'm huge... then I bash their stupid forgetful heads!"

Infamy is a dumb idea. Taking land doesn't make a nation scary. Being huge and powerful does. All the little countries around Charlemagne/Byzantium/Abbasids should ALWAYS be terrified, not just after a big conquest. When there's an active CB for a behemoth, the AI should be marrying for alliances, offering vassalage, converting religion, etc... anything to prevent war. NOT ignoring the situation unless you take X other land, then forming the United Nations.

I've played the game a ton. If they want to implement a system where Christians -dislike- you for taking Muslim land (and vice versa), I can stop playing. I won't be angry, and I'll have gotten more than my money's worth. But the system they're describing sounds tedious and most importantly, it doesn't address the actual problem. I'm just hoping that someone who works on the game realizes that before this patch hits.

Seriously... what we need is for Blobbisids or Francia to have the potential to burst. I think CK2+ has this ability to dissolve empire tags if certain conditions are met. Slower isn't the solution... turnover is. In this era, many empires grow fast and burnt out within a generation or two.

 

[Nameless_Ensign]

Stronger factions and more instability on ruler death. That's literally all we need.

 

[GC13]

What we need are for big blobs to be more likely to EXPLODE due to religious/cultural/political strife.

That's not particularly realistic. What we need is for internal strife to take up more of a blob's energies so they have trouble expanding (or defending themselves). We have the faction system, but factions are largely toothless right now. Still, even if factions were made scarier they shouldn't be the only foundation upon which anti-blobbing rests: they're only a bit interesting, since mostly you're looking at who has a low opinion of you and trying to get their opinion up.

Realms need more internal wheeling and dealing, and crown authority needs to disappear: the king isn't going to become the supreme authority in the land because his vassals can't see any reason why he shouldn't be, he's going to get there by building up firm alliances that allow him to put together the royal lands he needs to make his word law in his realm. Even still, he has to play vassals off of each other to keep them from clawing back power.

 

[Shebaloso]

dude, this is very sad. This is turning into an "europa universalis: middle ages". I can only hope the negative feedback makes the developers reconsider some of these changes.

 

[Dracko81]

Stronger factions and more instability on ruler death. That's literally all we need.

Were you around when people were complaining that factions were too strong. Regardless of what happens people will complain.

 

[Whiplash7x]

Yeah, I agree. No matter what happens people will think the game is going in the wrong direction. This thread proves that many people have very different visions for what the problem is and what the solution should be. I have trust that Paradox knows their game and how it works. And for everything else there are mods, so whateve.

 

[heliostellar]

Yeah, I agree. No matter what happens people will think the game is going in the wrong direction. This thread proves that many people have very different visions for what the problem is and what the solution should be. I have trust that Paradox knows their game and how it works. And for everything else there are mods, so whateve.

Have you seen Decadence or Seduction in action?

 

[Whiplash7x]

Have you seen Decadence or Seduction in action?

Everyone has what they think is the broken game mechanic. I empathize with Paradox. This is a hard community with a lot of different voices of criticism in it.

I don't really play a Muslim faith much so I can't help you. But I have a mod called amended seduction that has helped quite a bit. Chill and try it out.

 

[Deathwatch]

Infamy is a dumb idea. Taking land doesn't make a nation scary. Being huge and powerful does. All the little countries around Charlemagne/Byzantium/Abbasids should ALWAYS be terrified, not just after a big conquest. When there's an active CB for a behemoth, the AI should be marrying for alliances, offering vassalage, converting religion, etc... anything to prevent war. NOT ignoring the situation unless you take X other land, then forming the United Nations.

I agree with this one. Nations, big or small, should be more concerned on giants next door, not when smaller nations taking a grab at each other. Why we care about a barony taken away from another country near us, while the big France/HRE still standing next door? I agree, taking land does not make nation scary, but being huge and powerful does. Nations should fear you more if you have huge military strength, not when you get some lands in some faraway places. After all, smaller nations should be "happy" that the big nations are swallowing their rival, and not them anyways.

I've played the game a ton. If they want to implement a system where Christians -dislike- you for taking Muslim land (and vice versa), I can stop playing. I won't be angry, and I'll have gotten more than my money's worth. But the system they're describing sounds tedious and most importantly, it doesn't address the actual problem. I'm just hoping that someone who works on the game realizes that before this patch hits.

Yes, it's big problem. If the system is not properly implemented, joining and winning the Crusade is a one-way-ticket to your kingdom's doom from blob armies. And thinking that England and HRE and the Turks themselves will gang up on France after defeating the Turks is an absurd way of logic.

 

[brobman22]

I agree with this one. Nations, big or small, should be more concerned on giants next door, not when smaller nations taking a grab at each other. Why we care about a barony taken away from another country near us, while the big France/HRE still standing next door? I agree, taking land does not make nation scary, but being huge and powerful does. Nations should fear you more if you have huge military strength, not when you get some lands in some faraway places. After all, smaller nations should be "happy" that the big nations are swallowing their rival, and not them anyways.



Yes, it's big problem. If the system is not properly implemented, joining and winning the Crusade is a one-way-ticket to your kingdom's doom from blob armies. And thinking that England and HRE and the Turks themselves will gang up on France after defeating the Turks is an absurd way of logic.

The larger you are the more infamy you get so counts won't get as much infamy as the emperor of the HRE and it decays slower the bigger your army is and a dev said somewhere back in this thread that Christians will care less if you take land from other religions.

 

[Lord_P]

Were you around when people were complaining that factions were too strong. Regardless of what happens people will complain.

Was that before factions were utterly gimped in RoI? Then it's a question of fine-tuning, faction strength isn't a boolean value.

 

[Mafiabrett]

Coalitions and AE/Infamy is single handily the worst decision the Crusader Kings 2 team came up with. Coalitions never formed in the middle ages, the closest possible thing to a coalition at the time was the Crusades... And guess what?? Oh that's right, we already have those!!!

Im a hardcore CK2 fan but if this gets added into the game, it will most likely kill any life it has left in it.

As for the army retreat mechanic. I dont mind it but DO WE really need it? Like others have said its not really needed..

Overall.. I swear CK2 team is just running out of ideas for the game and trying to do what EU4 has done. We the HARDCORE fans dont like that. (You know.. The ones who buy nearly every DLC, owned the game since release, have nearly 1000 hours played? Yeah your most loyal fans)

If you want to do something new. How about adding a new trading system? With trade goods and merchant republics serving a bigger purpose.

 

[Thure]

Coalitions and AE/Infamy is single handily the worst decision the Crusader Kings 2 team came up with. Coalitions never formed in the middle ages, the closest possible thing to a coalition at the time was the Crusades... And guess what?? Oh that's right, we already have those!!!

Wrong. Read the thread we already have posted many historical exemples. The Castillian-Muslim alliance against expanding Leon. The Crusader-Egypt alliance against the Seljuks etc.