Conclave: The Near Future

[Doomdark]

Hi everyone!

I hope you are all busy playing Conclave, and I wish to give a huge thanks to everyone who has bought this latest expansion! Thanks to you all, we are still able to keep supporting and developing Crusader Kings II; which will actually turn 4 years old on Valentine’s Day!

Rest assured that we are listening to all constructive feedback both here on our own forums and elsewhere, and are already hard at work preparing a fairly major update. In particular, I find that a lot of comments concerning the new Coalition mechanics and the intricacies of “Shattered Retreats” merit our immediate attention. You can expect us to address the following issues very soon:

Coalitions:

• 25% Infamy threshold issues (Coalition formation should be a far more gradual process depending on your Infamy level.)
• Immersion/realism issues concerning distance and differences in religion.
• Coalitions should be purely defensive (no exceptions or extra rules.)
• There should be reasonable caps on Infamy gain and lowest possible Infamy decay rates.

(Btw, Coalitions were primarily added to make the game more challenging for huge, aggressively expanding player realms. That intention should serve as the primary measuring stick for the system.)

Shattered Retreats:

• Raiders should not bother you anymore if defeated once.
• You should get much more War Score from winning battles in general, and even more for winning battles against Adventurers.
• Retreating armies should be in trouble in neutral and hostile provinces (perhaps through attrition.)
• Bugs will be fixed with where armies retreat.

(The main intention with the Shattered Retreat mechanic is to keep countries viable and able to bounce back even after losing a major battle or two. Though you should not be able to easily “blitz” a country, neither should wars drag out for much longer than necessary.)

Other issues will be fixed down the line. For example, we are also looking at fleshing out and improving the new Education system.

So, keep the faith and let’s make the game better together!

 

[Raczynski]

Thank you for this post.

 

[Thure]

Sounds good! Can't wait

 

[Tufto]

Oh thank goodness, they're addressing it promptly .

 

[romothecus]

Hi everyone!

I hope you are all busy playing Conclave, and I wish to give a huge thanks to everyone who has bought this latest expansion! Thanks to you all, we are still able to keep supporting and developing Crusader Kings II; which will actually turn 4 years old on Valentine’s Day!

Doomdark: there appears to be a much more serious yet unacknowledged problem introduced with Conclave.

For almost 4 years now, a character could be the heir of more than one person. If a duchess (of her own duchy) married a duke (of his own duchy), their child(ren) would inherit from both.

All of a sudden, the game does not work like that. When the bug was reported, QA seems to think this is normal (http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/2-5-1-inheritance-issues.905933/#post-20599209).

Can you please confirm that this is actually a bug, and that you did not drastically change the way inheritance works without any warning?

 

[KlinkerFyren]

Good stuff.

 

[p0sTpWnEd]

It's great to finally hear from the devs on this (aside from the defensive post by rageair on coalitions).

There was never any hope that these mechanics would be totally reversed, but I think it's clear to everybody that they need work. The points mentioned in this thread are a great step in the right direction, if implemented quickly and effectively.

 

[aono]

• You should get much more War Score from winning battles in general, and even more for winning battles against Adventurers.

Love second part, not a fan of the first.

 

[Doomdark]

Doomdark: there appears to be a much more serious yet unacknowledged problem introduced with Conclave.

For almost 4 years now, a character could be the heir of more than one person. If a duchess (of her own duchy) married a duke (of his own duchy), their child(ren) would inherit from both.

All of a sudden, the game does not work like that. When the bug was reported, QA seems to think this is normal (http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/2-5-1-inheritance-issues.905933/#post-20599209).

Can you please confirm that this is actually a bug, and that you did not drastically change the way inheritance works without any warning?

Hmm, it sounds like an issue with "Protected Inheritance". I'll look into it.

 

[BD13]

Thank you for the update.

 

[DukeDayve]

Excellent stuff. Love the new anti-blobbage mechanics.

Now, no more map expansions please and I'll be happier than Bill Cosby at a narcolspy support group.

 

[durbal]

The core of the problem with coalitions is that they're just a gamey way to stop large empires. The realm-size multiplier is just weird. I can be a warmongering Norseman who conquers Ireland, Wales and sets his sights on England and nobody cares, but if I'm a king who inherits his brother's kingdom then everyone wants to kill me. This is wrong.

Culture also needs to be factored in, as well as general distance and directionality.

And finally, please limit coalitions to all but the most extreme examples. Things like the Khazars subjugating the Abbasids and then instantly declaring war on surrounding duchies and kingdoms. Right now it's just too extreme in how often and how easily they occur. These should be very rare, very local things. Instead they turn a single Holy War into World War 0.

 

[TMSaxon]

Will there be any changes to the way that Council mechanics work? At the moment, especially if you are playing in 1066, it is ridiculously easy to be a totalitarian ruler and have Late Administration. That should not be possible until at least around 1300 at the earliest for most realms - England for example in 1066 should be more centralised and tightly controlled then France, but neither should be able to implement Primogeniture succession immediately.

 

[DMcCool]

Thanks for the update, posts like this are why Paradox has so much good will around it still!

Any word on balance with the HRE and how easily it can change succession law now?

 

[Enriador]

That's the Paradox i first met! Good job.

 

[ogarrr]

Coalitions:

• 25% Infamy threshold issues (Coalition formation should be a far more gradual process depending on your Infamy level.)
• Immersion/realism issues concerning distance and differences in religion.
• Coalitions should be purely defensive (no exceptions or extra rules.)
• There should be reasonable caps on Infamy gain and lowest possible Infamy decay rates.

(Btw, Coalitions were primarily added to make the game more challenging for huge, aggressively expanding player realms. That intention should serve as the primary measuring stick for the system.)

Are you also looking at the possibility of multiple coalitions as well? Imo this would make the most sense with regards to the dynastic and character driven scope of this game.

Cheers for looking at the feedback chaps, and I look forward to the next patch/ wait with baited breath.

 

[romothecus]

Hmm, it sounds like an issue with "Protected Inheritance". I'll look into it.

Thanks so much!

 

[Boss Llama]

Thank you for keeping your ears open and going after these most egregious of issues. It is appreciated.

Please also, as you do that longer-term adjustment and balancing, keep in mind the reasoning behind many of the objections and the fact that the entire coalitions/infamy mechanic is out of place in the game.

Encouraging people to play a certain way should be done by rewarding the play-style you want to see, not by punishing the play-style you don't. By punishing one half your players, you are basically leaving it status quo for the people who share your preference, and infuriating those who don't - a bad situation for us all. If you use a the carrot instead of the stick though, you'll make everybody happy, because the people doing it one way get a bonus, and the folks doing it another way don't feel like they've lost the game they love.

 

[Kollatius]

Late administration should be moved way farther away than legalism 3 though... maybe 6?
Or some other requirements...

 

[Doomdark]

Are you also looking at the possibility of multiple coalitions as well? Imo this would make the most sense with regards to the dynastic and character driven scope of this game.

Cheers for looking at the feedback chaps, and I look forward to the next patch/ wait with baited breath.

Yes, we are probably going down that route.