Advice on temp workaround for Fatimid craziness?

[Mixxer5]

What do you guys want? an always successful crusades? Impregnable catholics? Precise history?

The first crusade was successful ONLY because muslims were in a political crysis (civil war).
The muslim conquest of Spain was successful ONLY because Jimena was in a similar crysis.
The Sejluks subjigated the romans only because a constant crysis in the empire.

Once those states consolidated - Kingdom of Jerusalem fell and Reconquista happened.

Later crusades were not as successful. Just because they were called at a wrong moment.

In this game it is modelled correctly. It is not geography, that defines the conquests, but it is political situation.
Instead of Iberia muslims can get Italy or Greece. Instead of falling apart - empire can become the Rome Reborn. It is up to you, as a player, to help your close and far away AI to achieve their goals.

If you want Fatimids to be less successful in general - try supporting their victims(in every way possible), instead of building 20th century centralized Ireland before 1100.

I want realism and satisfactory game. In reality it wouldn't be enough to make superpower from Byzantium after 1066. Here it's enough if my new ruler is better- no crisis, no consequences of previous ruler weaknesses (apart from lost territories obviously). In reality this political crisis happened. Here it cannot, because good ruler= strong realm while weak ruler= weak realm. Romanos Diogenes was good (or even very good) energetic and diligent Basileos but losing at Manzikert combined with internal crisis (long internal crisis!) resulted in loss of most of Anatolia.

 

[telegraph]

well, the game is not quite perfect yet, but there are a lot of DLC to come.
For a longer crysis we will need a blood rivalry (dynasty-dynasty relationship). This way a fresh new ruler will not instantly pacify the realm.
But for that we will also need to have cadet branches, to implement a dynasty split.

Within the current rules, however, a death of empire can happen too. An empire consists of Kingdoms. If an Independence faction is to succeed - it will be really hard for an empire to regain the lost kingdoms.

Also you have one other factor to modify the crysis frequency. Religious authority.
You can win Holy Wars to weaken enemy religions. Or you can create an antipope to weaken catholics. When heresy runs amok - europe becomes as colorful as a stained glass in the cathedral.

 

[Mixxer5]

DLC is a word to which I'm allergic- it means that I bought incomplete game. And I don't like it. I've created this topic with my own suggestions to what could be done to make game more balanced and realistic. One of suggestions was creation of system similar to muslim decadence but applying to whole realm instead of one character. Why country can't be weak in CK2? What about long-term disasters, internal crisis or economical one?

And about DLC- only one I ever bought was Legacy of Rome- most of things could be easily modded in and playing as Byzantium is still not unique (flavor events are nice- but nothing more). I won't buy next DLC that adds minor changes and improvements.

 

[Lord Finnish]

1. Go to Crusader Kings II/common/cb_types
2. Backup 00_cb_types.txt
3. Open the file and search for "muslim_invasion"
4. Go to the line: "check_de_jure_tier = KING" just a few lines below.
5. Change it to : "check_de_jure_tier = DUKE"
6. Now Muslim Invasion targets Ducal titles.

And wham, Fatimids just as strong as before, but now they lack their primary form of blobbing. They still use the Invasion CB of course, but not as often and with much less destructive effects.

 

[telegraph]

That made me smile .

You did indeed bought an incomplete game. That is a paradox business model - if you want to play now - you purchase a vanilla game (it is called an alpha access). Then you can purchase additional DLC to improve your expirience (those are betas).

If you do not want to pay premium for alphas and betas - you have that option: wait until CK2 lifecycle is finished and purchase a perfecly stable collection (that is called a full game) at a 75% discount (+ whatever the collection saving is, usually -50%) during some steam sale 2 years from now.

So with Paradox - it is either an early alpha access @ big bucks OR a late full game @ ~10% of it's nominal price.

For example I can purchase a complete EU3 game now @ $14.99. During a sale it would be even cheaper. How much did it all cost for early access?

 

[Mixxer5]

That made me smile .

You did indeed bought an incomplete game. That is a paradox business model - if you want to play now - you purchase a vanilla game (it is called an alpha access). Then you can purchase additional DLC to improve your expirience (those are betas).

If you do not want to pay premium for alphas and betas - you have that option: wait until CK2 lifecycle is finished and purchase a perfecly stable collection (that is called a full game) at a 75% discount (+ whatever the collection saving is, usually -50%) during some steam sale 2 years from now.

So with Paradox - it is either an early alpha access @ big bucks OR a late full game @ ~10% of it's nominal price.

For example I can purchase a complete EU3 game now @ $14.99. During a sale it would be even cheaper. How much did it all cost for early access?

I'm not saying I'd not buy such DLC- but first they have to make Byzantines unique- all things that couldn't be modded in were added in patch. Game looks like core- it's good, it's working, it's even entertaining. But it's not satisfactory- and no matter how long I'm going to wait, it won't be changed unless community will ask for it. EU3 is lifecycle is at the end- but game is still incredibly easy. I can restore Byzantium from OPM (fine- 2PM) to size of Roman Empire during Trajanus reign. I can go for world conquest if I want, snowballing through world. There are no mechanisms preventing me from doing this- game is still fun but after some time of playing I don't have feeling that I could actually change anything if I'd really be ruler (while I've such feeling playing Medieval Total War- it's not perfect but definitively more satisfactory).

And I wouldn't be disappointed so much if I could see that this game is going in good direction and developers do something to make it more realistic. That's why I'm writing about it- because none of Paradox games (being very entertaining) aren't really satisfactory.

 

[telegraph]

How many community members have asked for Aztecs? I think we can clearly see the message in this.

 

[Comm Cody]

Isn't obvious? The Aztecs were made to destroy the Fatimids.

 

[Mixxer5]

Isn't obvious? The Aztecs were made to destroy the Fatimids.

Clash of the titans! At last real rival to Fatimid blobby monster!

 

[Lord Finnish]

Please, keep the Aztects out of threads that don't discuss them.

 

[Mixxer5]

Please, keep the Aztects out of threads that don't discuss them.

Please, keep Aztecs out of Medieval-centered game :sad: They're ridiculous...

 

[telegraph]

Why is that? And I am not discussing pros and cons of Aztecs. I am analysing paradox business model and place of community feedback in it.

 

[Mixxer5]

How many community members have asked for Aztecs? I think we can clearly see the message in this.

I clearly see how many community members didn't want it. Seriously it's similar to Bioware forum after ME3 release (smaller scale but still). Game is broken now and what we get? Instead of fixing one invasion- another comes from the west. Perfect.