• 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:
So are you telling me, that after making a entire new game, winning defending wars is still useless?
It doesn't seem that hard to code that after winning a defensive war, you can enforce your existing claims on the defeated side. It's historically accurate and gameplay wise much better on what is seems to be a copy of all weakness of the ck2 system.

At leasr will we be able to claim all of our dejure claims in a a war?
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
So are you telling me, that after making a entire new game, winning defending wars is still useless?
It doesn't seem that hard to code that after winning a defensive war, you can enforce your existing claims on the defeated side. It's historically accurate and gameplay wise much better on what is seems to be a copy of all weakness of the ck2 system.

At leat we will be able to clainm all of our dejure claims in a a war?
Yep, this is much the same as what I've said in a few comments here. I'm really hoping that they'll change it, either before release, or soon afterwards, a bit like how Imperator: Rome was updated massively to strip out the mana systems that were in it at launch.
 
So are you telling me, that after making a entire new game, winning defending wars is still useless?
It doesn't seem that hard to code that after winning a defensive war, you can enforce your existing claims on the defeated side. It's historically accurate and gameplay wise much better on what is seems to be a copy of all weakness of the ck2 system.

At leat we will be able to clainm all of our dejure claims in a a war?
If nothing else, I'd like to see the option to declare a mutually offensive war as a defender within x months of a war starting, using one of your own CBs or declaring a target duchy.
 
So are you telling me, that after making a entire new game, winning defending wars is still useless?
It doesn't seem that hard to code that after winning a defensive war, you can enforce your existing claims on the defeated side. It's historically accurate and gameplay wise much better on what is seems to be a copy of all weakness of the ck2 system.

At leat we will be able to clainm all of our dejure claims in a a war?
Pretty sad indeed. Can't we have a system with an actual peace deal negotiation (like EU4), where you can only demand provinces that you have a claim / dejure claim on. So with 100% warscore (full occupation, enemies armies destroyed or outmatched), you can get a lot of your claims pressed, if you only want 1 province, you need less warscore (like in CK2 - you only need to occupy the capital plus a few extra holdings and win battles). And in defensive wars you can obviously take things as well - if you have claims. Maybe with a slightly increased warscore cost per province.
Shouldn't be too hard and honestly I see no problems with a 'claim restricted' EU4 peace deal system.
 
the 3d graphics for characters are horrible....even worse than ck2

makes me sad
They look okay (but not great) when they're shown full-size such as on character screens or event windows, but I agree that the small head-sized avatar windows look awful.
 
Yeah, and they'll be behind a pay wall, and limited by the design of the feudal system.
If you're so clairvoyant that you can so clearly see the future, then why are you wasting your time with us? You should be making millions gambling on sporting events or something.

I mean, I'm assuming you can see into the future. If not, then this post is a bitter overreaction. You don't know what future DLC will be and you don't know how the coding of the base game will limit anything. You're not one of the developers. You don't have some intimate knowledge of CK3's codebase.

When you say things like this, you make the entire community look bad. Some actual developer could read this post where you tell him/her exactly what can or cannot be done with the guts of a game you know nothing about. When you do this, the message being sent is that we're malcontents who shouldn't be taken seriously. Please be more considerate. Thank you.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Hey everyone,

We understand that sometimes topics can be heated, but we would like to remind everyone to not flame one another.
Please stay respectful and constructive, even when disagreeing. Flaming doesn't help us the team reading your comments neither.
Thanks! :)
 
If you're so clairvoyant that you can so clearly see the future, then why are you wasting your time with us? You should be making millions gambling on sporting events or something.

I mean, I'm assuming you can see into the future. If not, then this post is a bitter overreaction. You don't know what future DLC will be and you don't know how the coding of the base game will limit anything. You're not one of the developers. You don't have some intimate knowledge of CK3's codebase.

When you say things like this, you make the entire community look bad. Some actual developer could read this post where you tell him/her exactly what can or cannot be done with the guts of a game you know nothing about. When you do this, the message being sent is that we're malcontents who shouldn't be taken seriously. Please be more considerate. Thank you.
I have noticed there are quite a few people who just reply to threads with cynical assumptions and try to put down the devs/paradox/the game no matter what the topic is - it doesn't seem very constructive
 
  • 2
Reactions:
From everything I've seen with posts, videos and even the clausewitz engine videos. The devs are doing the best they can with what they have, and what they have is time.

No, obviously they will not make a CK3 that has literally every single feature of CK2 in it unless you want a release date of 2030. And it's a bit odd to expect that in the first place.

People are also, for whatever reason, expecting the absolute worst of Paradox. Yes, their DLC policy is not exactly well liked by some. But it does result in a game getting a ton of support and features over the years. Instead of a sequel that barely has any new features.

Though honestly looking at the AAA Gaming industry it's not that surprising that people expect the worst. But I'd really give paradox the benefit of the doubt instead of searching for negativity in absolutely everything. Especially considering they do release a lot of features as free updates to the game.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Though honestly looking at the AAA Gaming industry it's not that surprising that people expect the worst. But I'd really give paradox the benefit of the doubt instead of searching for negativity in absolutely everything. Especially considering they do release a lot of features as free updates to the game.
Both agreed and disagreed with this point here. For me (and I'd assume others!), my concern stems less out of the AAA Gaming industry and more out of recent Paradox releases (namely Imperator), where I'm seeing similar trends - streamlining mechanics, etc. I have no doubt that Paradox will make CK3 into an amazing game, I'm just cautious and a touch disappointed that it seems there has been little course-correction from Paradox since Imperator's release almost a year ago (or feedback on dev diaries spanning a fair bit further before then). The fact that the devs are responding and seeming receptive is promising, I just hope that some of our feedback can make it into the launch rather than further down the road. First impressions matter and all.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Both agreed and disagreed with this point here. For me (and I'd assume others!), my concern stems less out of the AAA Gaming industry and more out of recent Paradox releases (namely Imperator), where I'm seeing similar trends - streamlining mechanics, etc. I have no doubt that Paradox will make CK3 into an amazing game, I'm just cautious and a touch disappointed that it seems there has been little course-correction from Paradox since Imperator's release almost a year ago (or feedback on dev diaries spanning a fair bit further before then). The fact that the devs are responding and seeming receptive is promising, I just hope that some of our feedback can make it into the launch rather than further down the road. First impressions matter and all.
the idea of no course correction since imperator's release is complete nonsense and I have no idea how you can think that, considering they did a complete 180 on everything in Imperator that people slated. I swear a lot of people on here just want to be cynics
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
the idea of no course correction since imperator's release is complete nonsense and I have no idea how you can think that, considering they did a complete 180 on everything in Imperator that people slated. I swear a lot of people on here just want to be cynics
I think you misunderstand me. I don't mean no course-correction over on Imperator, where, as you quite rightly say, they've made a number of revisions over the year since its initial release. No, I mean no course-correction here, for Crusader Kings 3, learning lessons from Imperator's release. Instead, they seem to be making the same "mistake" Imperator went through a year ago.

Edit: And also, needless to say, I don't consider myself to be one of the harsher critics around, but I figured I'd post to provide some possible insight :)
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
more out of recent Paradox releases (namely Imperator)
Agreed there. Imperator is certainly better and they put a ton of work that is commendable. But imho still isn't fun and the launcher still has issues. But that's not to discuss here.

Just when CK3 comes out and the launcher issue is still there I'd bet. This is a hill I'm ready to die on.

I am hoping that while features are streamlined, and stuff is simplified. Depth is added.
 
Agreed there. Imperator is certainly better and they put a ton of work that is commendable. But imho still isn't fun and the launcher still has issues. But that's not to discuss here.

Just when CK3 comes out and the launcher issue is still there I'd bet. This is a hill I'm ready to die on.

I am hoping that while features are streamlined, and stuff is simplified. Depth is added.

A little logic/sanity in character interactions would be nice too...
 
Ya! I'd like to say a few things too.

giphy.gif
 
Honestly, another dev diary on one of the most disappointing simplifications of the feudal system, combined with another reminder the war system is unchanged, is not what CK3 needs right now.
Unless piety and prestige is actually scarce (which it never was in CK2, but also this was a good thing) the cost of war is pointless.
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.
I agree. One of my biggest gripes with Ck2 is the sheer quantity of arbitrary costs for doing things. It limits the player in a game that's all about a huge sandbox.
 
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.
Peasant communities don't like it when all of the working men are dragged off to war. If you are going to drag them off to war, they want to be assured it's a good war. Piety and Prestige, as currencies, represent political capital. They represent the good will you've built up with the church and with the ruling-class. When you ask them to support your wars, or anything else, you're using up some of that political capital. They represent you throwing your influence around to get the estates to support the propaganda of your war.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Peasant communities don't like it when all of the working men are dragged off to war
They also don't like the hundreds that die in them even if you win the war. Honestly they probably couldn't care less if you win or lose. Most the time it doesn't change much.

Maybe raising peasant levies should also be raising unrest.