Should there be more options for wars that dont reward you with new lands?

[Luka031]

I sometimes like to play small-ish. Like a big duke or a smaller kingdom and dont want to expand any more untill i get a good duchy or kingdom claim from my parents.

I mostly get alliances so i can fight but without expanding. Its such a shame when you get a beast of a son who is the next reincarnation of Alexander the great but he just sort of chills in his castle for 50 years.

It would be great if there were for example tributary wars where you make ypur neighbours "vassals" where they pay you but they arent really your vassals. Or when somebody kidnaps (talking about you vikings) your daughter and you can just declare war for her return.

 

[Dlin369]

Yeah I really wish they’d add Return Captives CB back from Ck2 -> you used to be able to take hostages to prevent other factions from invading you for land, and the return captives CB was one way you could roleplay as rescuing people

 

[Fallofthepurple]

I just want proper peace treaties man, with terms and conditions and all.

 

[melarkhan]

I mean the vikings you mention are actually perfect for this kind of playstyle. If you don`t want to expand just go pillaging some far off lands and take their lives, their wives and their riches.

Otherwise you could expand but never fight your kin after succession. And try to keep them in power while they do stupid stuff.

Or try to be a good vassal and support your liege in all of his (almost certainly at some point foolish) endeavours.

But yeah, some more personal wargoals might be nice.

 

[merlinium]

you can always give land and independence to dynasty members. its a great way to increase your renown income.

 

[Vanhal]

Problem is war score. Everyone who ever waged few year war with dozens thousands of troops against Byzantium just to took that one county know what i mean.

 

[Torredebelem]

I absolutely agree there should be more CBs that don't involve conquests and the AI should get involved in picking them many times, otherwise the mechanics of the game lead the player by the nose to just blob in an unavoidable way, unless the player makes a significant effort to refrain himself in doing so.

Things like Trading rights, Ransom of anyone in prison (not just relatives), tributes, rights of passage (the terrain of the defeated would count as home for the victors armies' attrition), ability to marry any of the descendants of the defeated independent from their acceptance level, "weakening" the enemy politically making any plot participant of the same court of the defeated increase their plot power, etc. should all be considered as different types of CBs that would enhance the game without the risk of immediately snowballing the power of one's own kingdom by the boring game of always conquest and conquest and conquest.

 

[klopkr]

Specifically a non land grabbing CB doesn't appeal to me. But peace treaties where I can demand things like captives, hostages, alliance, money, piety, etc HELL YEAH

 

[boorkie]

I'm hoping for some CBs which target certain family heirloom or ones for freeing family members from prision in the next patch

 

[Voy]

I'm missing a lot of wars fought over principles rather than land.

 

[JonathanViking]

I sometimes like to play small-ish. Like a big duke or a smaller kingdom and dont want to expand any more untill i get a good duchy or kingdom claim from my parents.

I mostly get alliances so i can fight but without expanding. Its such a shame when you get a beast of a son who is the next reincarnation of Alexander the great but he just sort of chills in his castle for 50 years.

It would be great if there were for example tributary wars where you make ypur neighbours "vassals" where they pay you but they arent really your vassals. Or when somebody kidnaps (talking about you vikings) your daughter and you can just declare war for her return.

We had that in CK2 and they Dident put it in CK3 so i quess DLC in 1-2 years Maybi