CK2Plus - Suggestion Thread

[Rylock]

This is for suggested changes to CK2Plus based on playthroughs--things that aren't bugs, but which you think should be changed. Bigger suggestions, such as things that merit a great deal of discussion (such as new features, or large-scale changes to event chains), should really go into their own thread... this thread is more for smaller things, and especially things that are based on having played the mod.

A note before posting here:

• Be aware that we may not respond to every suggestion.
• Be polite to each other. Feel free to disagree, but there is no need to argue with someone's suggestion because you assume that a lack of argument means it will automatically go into the mod.

Other than that? We welcome any suggestions for improvements.

 

[loup99]

Good initiative, I will open this up with quoting daniloy on this suggestion:

CK 3.0.0 Steam:

-Shouldnt King Richard be Occitan? He spend only 6 months in England, barely spoke English and considered Aquitaine his home.

 

[zeress]

Depending on how Paradox handles Iceland, perhaps a mini-event chain starting with Iceland being "uncolonized" (i.e. no holdings built TI). A mini-story would unveil with a Norse character (perhaps even a small chance of a noble?) exploring westwards and finding the isle beset by the Irish monks. Depending on the personality of the "adventurer" they could become Catholic to begin with, or stay Norse and the holdings would start to open up.

 

[Rylock]

Depending on how Paradox handles Iceland, perhaps a mini-event chain starting with Iceland being "uncolonized" (i.e. no holdings built TI). A mini-story would unveil with a Norse character (perhaps even a small chance of a noble?) exploring westwards and finding the isle beset by the Irish monks. Depending on the personality of the "adventurer" they could become Catholic to begin with, or stay Norse and the holdings would start to open up.

Can you have a province with no holdings and no ruler?

 

[zeress]

Yes, it is just terra incognita (of that specific province) until you (by event) build a holding there. Then a random baron will get the land if you don't define one. There used to be a colonization mod for just that type of thing

 

[Rylock]

Good initiative, I will open tis up with quoting daniloy on this suggestion:

My main concern relates to gameplay. What is the benefit of giving him the "foreigner" opinion malus with all his vassals (many of whom will be Norman and not Occitan)? The Melting Pot event covers Occitan, so that's not an issue, but I'm uncertain what that would actually improve.

 

[Rylock]

Yes, it is just terra incognita (of that specific province) until you (by event) build a holding there. Then a random baron will get the land if you don't define one. There used to be a colonization mod for just that type of thing

If that's possible, it might be worth looking at--though I think I'd prefer to wait until we see what happens with Iceland in Charlemagne, if anything.

 

[zeress]

yeah, like I said it's just an idea but I thought I'd throw it out there in-case/once I forget and they do decide to just pop Iceland there with Norse already

 

[loup99]

My main concern relates to gameplay. What is the benefit of giving him the "foreigner" opinion malus with all his vassals (many of whom will be Norman and not Occitan)? The Melting Pot event covers Occitan, so that's not an issue, but I'm uncertain what that would actually improve.

Well, I think it could give him a bost in the Aquitaine-area and show that he was an occitan king and was not so popular amongst the english (norman and saxon) nobility.

 

[loup99]

If that's possible, it might be worth looking at--though I think I'd prefer to wait until we see what happens with Iceland in Charlemagne, if anything.

I think they are going to add irish monks there. I would love a such chain too as it would feel a lot more historical.

 

[DoktorZaius]

Just played some 867 Norse...it was really enjoyable, but I think there may need to be some furthering tweaking on captures after sieges. With the capture rate up as high as it is, I think it's a bit too simple to get a hold of valuable prisoners (counts, dukes, even kings) and make a quick fortune. I want to emphasize that I really like the direction CK2+ is moving in -- I think in the past it was too difficult to capture characters -- but the current capture rates seems to go a bit too far in the other direction and causes balance issues.

I was playing a rather poor single county count (Faerayar sp?), and I had come into quite the fortune 10-15 years into the game. If I were playing Harald Fairhair, or any of the even stronger Norse duchies at start, I suspect it would be trivially easy to go on an absurdly lucrative duke/count kidnapping spree right from the start.

Other feedback: As far as raiding balance goes, I like that you guys noticeably slowed down how long it takes to get on/off ships. The super fast ship boarding of old permitted some abusive tactical behaviors.

 

[Rylock]

Just played some 867 Norse...it was really enjoyable, but I think there may need to be some furthering tweaking on captures after sieges. With the capture rate up as high as it is, I think it's a bit too simple to get a hold of valuable prisoners (counts, dukes, even kings) and make a quick fortune. I want to emphasize that I really like the direction CK2+ is moving in -- I think in the past it was too difficult to capture characters -- but the current capture rates seems to go a bit too far in the other direction and causes balance issues.

I was playing a rather poor single county count (Faerayar sp?), and I had come into quite the fortune 10-15 years into the game. If I were playing Harald Fairhair, or any of the even stronger Norse duchies at start, I suspect it would be trivially easy to go on an absurdly lucrative duke/count kidnapping spree right from the start.

We were discussing this before release, actually. The big issue lies with the fact that it's next to impossible to distinguish between an army that's present just to loot and one that's actually there for war... the last patch added an is_looting trigger, but that trigger doesn't always return true (an army is only considered actually "looting" in a province a certain number of days in a row, and then it's not for a while). That reveals an issue with the core raiding mechanic, to be honest, but that's a separate issue.

I could drop the percentage chance of capturing someone even lower, I suppose. My fear is that, if we go so far to adjust the mechanic just to accomodate raiders, we may end up swinging the pendulum in the other direction for those who are legitimately at war. The other alternative is to set up a separate mechanic specifically for pagans--though that would apply in all instances, not just when they're raiding.

 

[daniloy]

My main concern relates to gameplay. What is the benefit of giving him the "foreigner" opinion malus with all his vassals (many of whom will be Norman and not Occitan)? The Melting Pot event covers Occitan, so that's not an issue, but I'm uncertain what that would actually improve.

The Angevin Dynasty considered france a important part of their country the nobility was mainly anglo-french, they might consider defending their french territories instead of expanding in the british isles.

 

[DoktorZaius]

We were discussing this before release, actually. The big issue lies with the fact that it's next to impossible to distinguish between an army that's present just to loot and one that's actually there for war... the last patch added an is_looting trigger, but that trigger doesn't always return true (an army is only considered actually "looting" in a province a certain number of days in a row, and then it's not for a while). That reveals an issue with the core raiding mechanic, to be honest, but that's a separate issue.

I could drop the percentage chance of capturing someone even lower, I suppose. My fear is that, if we go so far to adjust the mechanic just to accomodate raiders, we may end up swinging the pendulum in the other direction for those who are legitimately at war. The other alternative is to set up a separate mechanic specifically for pagans--though that would apply in all instances, not just when they're raiding.

If the mechanic could be altered for unreformed pagans, I think that makes a lot of sense. Perhaps even just nerfing the rates for unreformed pagans by a decent amount would do the trick.

 

[Rylock]

If the mechanic could be altered for unreformed pagans, I think that makes a lot of sense. Perhaps even just nerfing the rates for unreformed pagans by a decent amount would do the trick.

Would have to be all pagans, reformed or not, since they can all raid. Wish it didn't have to be like that, but it might.

 

[thekonkoe]

Doesn't seem to warrant a thread, the Gallawa names in the last release included some that are essentially equivalent (Iomhar and Imar comes to mind). Doubles should probably be eliminated or perhaps connected as alternates of the same name (though I don't think that is possible inside a culture).

In a similar vein, I think more names across cultures should be tied together (for Europeans anything with a common saint would make sense)

I can help with both of these once the newest version is out.

 

[loup99]

This was mentioned earlier but both the duchy of Artois and the one of Flanders should be dejure France from atleast 1000 (maybe even earlier).

 

[schwarherz]

This was mentioned earlier but both the duchy of Artois and the one of Flanders should be dejure France from atleast 1000 (maybe even earlier).

Flanders already is from the treaty of Verdun in 843.

EDIT: and I just made Artois de jure france in 843 as well.

 

[loup99]

EDIT: and I just made Artois de jure france in 843 as well.

Great!

 

[Tarridus]

Just a suggestion that the excommunication mechanic needs to be updated/reworked somehow. In a lot of my recent test games with 3.0, I've had nearly 50% of the rulers in europe excommunicated at the same time, including young rulers who are still children with regents. I think it should be harder to excommunicate someone or just cost more in general to use it.

Also, I know that long ago, Wiz changed the mechanic so you can't automatically try to depose an excommunicate in order to prevent abuses to it but this brings up an issue when Anti-Popes pop up as there is no present decision available to depose the Anti-Pope in CK2+. I also know that the religious authority malus was taken out to counter act the steep anti-pope negative modifier but I think the entire mechanic needs to be reworked to at least allow for the deposing of an anti-pope decision and a greater cost to excommunication or just a higher requirement in order to ask the pope to do so.