• 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 #18 - Men-at-Arms, Mercenaries and CBs

Hello everyone, and welcome back!

This week we’ll be talking about a lot of additional details surrounding warfare. Just a few bits and pieces that have changed since CK2.

Casus Belli
One thing that is as it ever was, however, is that you need a Casus Belli to go to war, and that CB determines what happens when the war is won (or lost!). The most common ones are for pressing claims, as you’re familiar with from CK2. In different situations there will be a different options, of course, and some are even unlocked in special ways, such as the ones unlocked by perks, as shown off in the Diplomacy Lifestyle dev diary.
Declare war view.PNG


War Declaration Cost
One thing that has changed a little is the fact that different CBs come with different “declaration costs” attached to them. This is usually Prestige or Piety, depending on whether you are starting a war against a fellow believer or someone from another faith. On the other hand, we don’t want to keep you from taking advantage of a great opportunity just because you’re missing 10 Prestige at a crucial moment, so the costs are optional, in a sense.

You can declare a war without paying its cost, at which point you’ll instead pay something bigger, such as a Level of Fame or Devotion.

Levels of Fame/Devotion brings their own benefits, so ideally you want to avoid this, but it’s not as big a problem as - say - truce breaking. It’s not going to cripple your play, just set you back a little bit in exchange for getting to raise your armies and take some new titles while your enemy is weak. This is also one of the ways that Piety and Prestige gain has become more valuable than it was in CK2. You want to use it for more stuff, and it’s always useful to have lying around!

Men-at-Arms
We have talked about armies before, where we talked about the difference between your levies and your Men-at-Arms. Your levies are your unwashed masses, indistinguishable peasants more than willing to die for the few measly pieces of gold you throw their way. Men-at-Arms, on the other hand, are more specialist troops, and the component that gives you more control over precisely how you win your wars. They are in many ways your elite troops, ready to march through mountains and marshes for you.
MaA view.PNG


You have a maximum number of Men-at-Arms regiment slots for your army, and in addition they have an upkeep cost. It’s small when they’re unraised, but the moment you have them stand up to go to war, they’ll demand a lot more pay!

Even though you can max out your MaA slots, there are other ways you can expand your army. Each MaA regiment can be increased a set number of times, to field even more of your deadly warriors. This will naturally increase their maintenance cost as well (both raised and unraised) so think twice before hiring twice as many soldiers!

There are many different types of MaA regiments, and what their type is determines a number of things, such as what terrain they are good at fighting in, and what kind of MaA Regiments they are good at countering, or get countered by. Over time, you may also be able to acquire new types of MaA Regiments. This means that the bulk of armies are likely to be quite different if you start in 867 compared to when you reach the end of the game.
Create MaA view.PNG


MaAs also include siege engines, which is one of the easiest way of speeding up your land grabs. However, siege weapons are almost useless in regular combat, and taking them uses up one of your MaA slots, so it’s a decision that has to be carefully thought through.
MaA siege engine.PNG


In addition to a standard slate of MaA types, different cultures gain access to different unique MaAs. These will vary greatly across the world, but are generally specialised in the conditions of warfare that’s typical for the culture in question.
Camel Riders.PNG


You will also be able to look at battle reports to get an indication of what kind of impact specific types of MaAs have on your battles. This can let you figure out whether your strategies are paying off, or whether it’s finally time to get some Pikemen to counter the Light Cavalry that your rival is always fielding.

So to sum it all up, Men-at-Arms are great for countering specific troop types, adjusting to specific types of terrain, and directly bolstering the number of soldiers in your army! Sometimes, strategising and countering isn’t enough, however, and that’s where Mercenaries come in!

Mercenaries
Mercenaries are familiar to any CK2 player, of course, but they have changed a little now.

First of all, you no longer pay monthly maintenance for them. Instead you pay their cost for three years up front, and then they’re yours for that time to use as you see fit. They’ll stay with you through thick and thin (although mostly the thick of battle).
Mercenary company screenshot 3.PNG


Once the three years are almost up, you’ll receive an alert warning you that the Mercenaries are about to pack up and get on their way! You’ll then have the opportunity to pay them for another three years of service. This also means that they aren't going to betray you the second you go into debt, which I know will sadden a lot of you, but this new system makes it a lot easier to keep track of what you have and don't have during war.

So Mercenaries are an expensive way of doing warfare, but sometimes it’s the only way you’ll survive. However, in order to find a Mercenary Company that fits you in both size and shape, we have a new system for generating them to make sure there's always a wide range to choose from.
Mercenary Hire view 2.PNG


Each culture generates between one and three Mercenary companies depending on the number of counties of that culture, with each additional company being bigger and more expensive than the previous one. They will also pick a county of their culture to keep as their headquarters, and will be available to be hired by anyone within a certain range of that county.

With each culture generating Mercenaries, their names and coats of arms are either picked from a generated list of names specific to their culture so that you can get historical or particularly flavourful companies in there.

On top of everything else, Mercenary companies come with one or more specific Men-at-Arms types, which means that you may want to consider not only which company is the biggest one you can afford, but which is the best suited for the war you’re about to fight.

This should all offer you a lot of varied strategies for how you go about your wars. Is it worth saving up for the CB cost or mercenary-Gold ahead of time? What Men-at-Arms should you be using against your ancestral enemies? Who would win in a fight between the the White Company and the Company of the Hat??

You’ll just have to wait until release to see...
 
  • 10Like
  • 3Love
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
How will units like the Varangian Guard be represented?

Since the topic of armies developing over the course of the game came up, will gunpowder armed units be represented in the late game?
We've seen a model of a Bombard in a previous dev diary, so I assume we'll at least get that. Since the Hussite Wars happened in the time period though, it'd be nice to be able to get some firearm MoA.
 
I really like the idea of "cultural types" of troops. Does it means that you could actually benefit from having different cultures within your realm (so you could combine their unit types in your army)??
Men at arms can be tied to regions and Culture according to DD3.

We've seen a model of a Bombard in a previous dev diary, so I assume we'll at least get that. Since the Hussite Wars happened in the time period though, it'd be nice to be able to get some firearm MoA.
Handgoons was a thing, maybe quite popular weapon during the end of the game timeframe.
 
How is the war declaration a step back from CK2. It's literally exactly the same. Prestige/Piety cost was there before. "Men at arms are watered down retinues" doesn't seem like what you're talking about, so what is it? I don't get it.

Can people who are saying this is simpler explain what exactly they're referring to?
CK2 was released almost ten years ago. It's a step back to refuse to improve on this system in any way.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
CK2 was released almost ten years ago. It's a step back to refuse to improve on this system in any way.

Do you know what it means for something to be a step back? Something being the same isn't a step of any kind. It's not a step forward for certain. I'm disappointed it wasn't changed somewhat myself, but I'm just confused by people calling it a step back when it's exactly the same.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
CK2 was released almost ten years ago. It's a step back to refuse to improve on this system in any way.

But the guy he's replying to specifically said "Yet another step back from ck2...".

I agree it would be better to improve it so its a wasted opportunity, but that guy is wrong thinking its moving backwards rather than stagnating.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
How is the war declaration a step back from CK2. It's literally exactly the same. Prestige/Piety cost was there before. "Men at arms are watered down retinues" doesn't seem like what you're talking about, so what is it? I don't get it.

Can people who are saying this is simpler explain what exactly they're referring to?
I worded that badly sorry, the first was just a general comment on how I felt, on the Prestige I was commenting in general that I just find it grating and confusing on why I'm supposed pay in fame/notoriety to start wars? It never made sense to me. I feel like men at arms are just simpler retinues with less of the freedoms they had in ck2, the army system as a whole has gone backward with the generic levies. The mercenary systems is a definitive improvement, paying up front so half you army doesn't magically disappear in the middle of a battle is a great step up.
 
Why does war cost piety, or prestige, or fame, or devotion? A won war should never cost anything so intangible, only a lost war, which was already a mechanic.
Piety and prestige are currency while fame and devotion are the long term effects of gaining prestige and piety, they tell how people think about you and give various bonuses, such as fame give more Knights.
 
I worded that badly sorry, the first was just a general comment on how I felt, on the Prestige I was commenting in general that I just find it grating and confusing on why I'm supposed pay in fame/notoriety to start wars? It never made sense to me. I feel like men at arms are just simpler retinues with less of the freedoms they had in ck2, the army system as a whole has gone backward with the generic levies. The mercenary systems is a definitive improvement, paying up front so half you army doesn't magically disappear in the middle of a battle is a great step up.
That makes more sense. I for one think retinues were executed poorly in CK2 to begin with, tbh, so I kind of think of this as somewhat of an improvement. Have to agree paying set unit costs to declare wars doesn't really make sense.
 
But the guy he's replying to specifically said "Yet another step back from ck2...".

I agree it would be better to improve it so its a wasted opportunity, but that guy is wrong thinking its moving backwards rather than stagnating.
One could make the argument he was referring to some other part, but yes I agree on a technical level leaving a decade old mechanic that nobody likes unchanged is a not a step back and also a huge mistake
 
That makes more sense. I for one think retinues were executed poorly in CK2 to begin with, tbh, so I kind of think of this as somewhat of an improvement. Have to agree paying set unit costs to declare wars doesn't really make sense.
The retinue system combined with the levy system makes far, far more sense than having this half-assed "unwashed masses" nonsense combined with what is essentially a retinue system. You can't tell me this is how feudalism works!
 
  • 3
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
I really like the idea of "cultural types" of troops. Does it means that you could actually benefit from having different cultures within your realm (so you could combine their unit types in your army)??

Men at arms can be tied to regions and Culture according to DD3.
Let's look at the actual quote from DD3:
"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."

Let's combine this what Voffvoffhunden has shown today:
"In addition to a standard slate of MaA types, different cultures gain access to different unique MaAs. These will vary greatly across the world, but are generally specialised in the conditions of warfare that’s typical for the culture in question."
index.php


From the pic, we see that camel riders seem to excel in the desert, so that's probably the *region* you can recruit them in. Mubarizun seems to be a cultural type of man-at arms.

If I had to guess, based on how retinues worked in CK2, you will only have access to a specific cultural retinue while you are of that culture (in CK2, you could retain the cultural retinue after a culture switch, but that may or may not be the case in CK3). In CK2, you weren't able to create retinues based off of your vassals' cultures, so why would it change in CK3?

As a result, I would guess that we probably won't be able to mix and match cultural men-at-arms types in our armies (though you might be able to retain an old cultural man at arms after you culture switch).
 
The term "regiment" is ahistorical. That only came about with stronger military organization after the middle ages.

I like that you have complete control over troop types. The CK2 tactics system fails considering that almost everything you can hire had fixed percentages (which aren't even shown anywhere). Saying that you had more "freedom" in CK2 doesn't make any sense whatsoever, considering that the generic retinues are all mixed units and that some of the cultural retinues are mixed too
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure if anyone has asked this, but what about peace deals?
Will they be like EU4 or something else?
 
That makes more sense. I for one think retinues were executed poorly in CK2 to begin with, tbh, so I kind of think of this as somewhat of an improvement. Have to agree paying set unit costs to declare wars doesn't really make sense.
The issue with CK2 retinues if you could simply rush the defender with them and not allow them to raise their levies so I can see why they don't want that to happen in CK3.

I feel like men at arms are just simpler retinues with less of the freedoms they had in ck2, the army system as a whole has gone backward with the generic levies.
CK2 did not have a counter system between retinues, it did not have characters as Knights, had nothing like the duchy buildings which allow you to improve your army. CK2 however did not have a generic levy like CK3 will have but without playing the game it is hard to tell how that will work but the idea seems that the men at arms will be more unique than in CK2.

From the pic, we see that camel riders seem to excel in the desert, so that's probably the *region* you can recruit them in. Mubarizun seems to be a cultural type of man-at arms.
Sound logical.

Do we gain something for kicking the attacker's butt as the defender other than mere prestige and gold this time?
It is a good question, but I don't think you will gain any titles as the defender given the similarties between CK3 and CK2 CB system.

The term "regiment" is ahistorical. That only came about with stronger military organization after the middle ages.

I like that you have complete control over troop types. The CK2 tactics system fails considering that almost everything you can hire had fixed percentages (which aren't even shown anywhere)
You should provide a better name if you know one.

I'm not sure if anyone has asked this, but what about peace deals?
Will they be like EU4 or something else?
Look like CK2 if you look at the screenshot you can see victory, White Peace and defeat.

index.php
 
Interesting dev diary. One thing I really like is that there's not only a bit of cultural diversity in the man-at-arms, but that there will be new types of troops available depending on the year (technology?). I think that can really help to give some sense of 'progression' through the centuries, especially if depending on the tech level, other types of troops are better (new siege units becoming more valuable while older ones are obsolete for example). Together with different types countering each other, I think that's much better than the CK2 retinue system (yes, in CK2 there were hidden combat modifiers but how many players actually cared?).
The mercs seem fine too, I like that they have a big upfront cost instead of just a high upkeep. That makes them very different from regular troops, since you have to hire them for three years, not just a few months. Just one question: Where do they spawn when hired? In their 'capital'? Or in yours? If so, does it take some time until they arrive?

I'm not so happy with the CB system - again we only got the three outcomes from CK2. I'd have liked to see a more detailed system.
And I really don't get the declare war prestige cost. Doesn't make much sense from a logical perspective (you should probably gain prestige for declaring a war, at least in some cultures or circumstances instead of loosing it). Just imagine a danish king, let's call him Erik wants to be known as a fearsome warrior. So he says to his people: "Let's go and conquer England!". "Not so fast", his advisor says, "you should consider that you will be seen as less prestigious for declaring this war. And I'm afraid to say that you lack the required prestige so you will loose fame. Everyone will consider you to be a fearful coward because you are declaring this war. Are you sure?"
Isn't that a bit weird?
Also form a gameplay perspective it doesn't make much sense too: To declare a war, you need prestige. To get prestige, you need to win wars... Doesn't sound like a good system.
 
Few questions!

Can we still be able to construct our own merchanery companys and send them out of world, if so can we chooce what merchanery companys consist of what men of arms they have and how much levys they have.

Can we upgrade MoA expertise level or do they get bonuses from combat experience?

If we upgrade MoA Size do they still use one MoA Slot or take more. So thoretically it would be possible to go full professional army.
 
Will it be now possible to declare war over more than one claim or will the choice still be between "press x claim" and "press all claims"?

Also, I like the new dynamics and the rp potentiality of losing/gaming prestige, piety, fame and devotion according to wars.

Good work, and not really a step backwards IMHO
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I cannot see any filter and/or filter to order the mercenaries by cost, levy size etc... Is this implemented?
Another thing, do we have the ability to raise only peasants and not MaA? It's not clear looking at the screenshot you gave us.