Constructive criticism: For a "character" based game, the gameplay in CK2 is shallow

[nijis]

I would argue that the main activity in the game -- military campaigning -- is far too straightforward. Assemble your troops, smash the enemy army, siege his or her castles. But with military campaigns, nothing ever goes according to plan -- not now, and certainly not in the medieval era.

There is considerable untapped role-playing potential within military campaigns. Do you hang your own men for looting an abbey? Do you force your levees to remain in the field? Do you ignore the young inexperienced knights who taunt you for not dashing headlong into battle?

Generalship in the medieval era was maybe 20 percent tactics, 30 percent logistics, and 50 percent herding cats. That element could be brought further into the game, I think.

 

[Lorehead]

Generalship in the medieval era was maybe 20 percent tactics, 30 percent logistics, and 50 percent herding cats. That element could be brought further into the game, I think.

Oh, yes. Look at the second crusade.

 

[unmerged(617690)]

As a new player, I just thought that I hadn't learned enough of the game yet to see everything. This conversation really puts it into perspective and I've realized that what I've seen is all that I'm going to get. The comment about not even remembering the char name you are playing is exactly my issue. I enjoy how every action affects everything else, but I am never attached to my current char nor their dynasty. It's just stats to me while playing this. A lot of work was put in to the depth of the mechanics, but none at all into the characters.

 

[unmerged(149861)]

I would argue that the main activity in the game -- military campaigning -- is far too straightforward. Assemble your troops, smash the enemy army, siege his or her castles. But with military campaigns, nothing ever goes according to plan -- not now, and certainly not in the medieval era.

There is considerable untapped role-playing potential within military campaigns. Do you hang your own men for looting an abbey? Do you force your levees to remain in the field? Do you ignore the young inexperienced knights who taunt you for not dashing headlong into battle?

Generalship in the medieval era was maybe 20 percent tactics, 30 percent logistics, and 50 percent herding cats. That element could be brought further into the game, I think.

Ten thousand times yes! Going to war was a major social event as well, only at the major affairs of state (corronations ect) would so many nobles be gathered together in the one place.

 

[ThePinkPanzer]

I feel the biggest issue in CK2 are lack of naval combat

Holy hell why are you all so hinged on this like it is the fucking biggest thing on the planet.

It rarely happened, it won't add much to the game.

 

[GreatSlayer]

Something that would topple this game all over in term of character depth and attachment, besides more events, character interaction and action, would be the ability to play a landless person. Not a lowborn, necessarily, but a courtier in general. A person that have nothing but improving himself and his families stats and standing, impress his liege/a rival of his liege enough to earn land and fancy administrative duties.
I'm looking forward to that patch/DLC, for happen it shall! I got my warrior queens, and I will get this one too! You'll see!

Oh, and Merry Christmas!

 

[Keanon]

Holy hell why are you all so hinged on this like it is the fucking biggest thing on the planet.

It rarely happened, it won't add much to the game.

I think you'll find pretty much every piece of historical literature disagreeing with you, but I'm not really interested in teaching you in detail about something as basic knowledge as the fact that the sea never stopped being important, roman times till now. Trade and naval combat was as much a part of this era as the one before and the one after.

Oh, and Merry Christmas!

And to you aswell

 

[Aardvark Bellay]

I think you'll find pretty much every piece of historical literature disagreeing with you, but I'm not really interested in teaching you in detail about something as basic knowledge as the fact that the sea never stopped being important, roman times till now. Trade and naval combat was as much a part of this era as the one before and the one after.

I guess he responded that way as this thread is about character immersion and has nothing to do with naval this or that and the topic has been dicussed a zillion times in several other threads in detail before.
Sure you could add immersive character related events to it but thats not really your point, eh ?

 

[unmerged(149861)]

Something that would topple this game all over in term of character depth and attachment, besides more events, character interaction and action, would be the ability to play a landless person. Not a lowborn, necessarily, but a courtier in general. A person that have nothing but improving himself and his families stats and standing, impress his liege/a rival of his liege enough to earn land and fancy administrative duties.
I'm looking forward to that patch/DLC, for happen it shall! I got my warrior queens, and I will get this one too! You'll see!

Oh, and Merry Christmas!

Tbqh, being landless would be boring. You're a nobody, a political non-entity living of the graces of someone who might need your skills. Frankly, it would be boring and useless.

It did get me thinking though, that there aren't enough council and regent events. These should be big, important roles that ambitous lords squabble for, not the leige spamming the 22 martial count requests when there are 18-21 martial range dukes vying for the role.

 

[ThePinkPanzer]

I think you'll find pretty much every piece of historical literature disagreeing with you, but I'm not really interested in teaching you in detail about something as basic knowledge as the fact that the sea never stopped being important, roman times till now. Trade and naval combat was as much a part of this era as the one before and the one after.

Please, enlighten me on all those frequent and large naval battles the middle ages were just filled with. You know, the ones that happened between anyone besides Venice and Pisa.

 

[TheLionHeart]

Please, enlighten me on all those frequent and large naval battles the middle ages were just filled with. You know, the ones that happened between anyone besides Venice and Pisa.

This game isn't meant to simulate historical events and battles, unless you think Fatimid's conquering the Byzantine Empire in 1106 is historic. It would just add a more valid strategy to naval invasions, for example if Muslims are Jihading Greece overseas, you could destroy their units before they land with a strong navy, winning the war.

 

[Jia Xu]

for example if Muslims are Jihading Greece overseas, you could destroy their units before they land with a strong navy, winning the war.

This might be the case if not for the fact that the Muslims control so many ports meaning they'd have the strongest navies too. CK2 is a game where ships auto-generate in every port. If a Muslim managed to get Levant, Egypt, Africa, and Mauritania together (which isn't hard), they'd basically have an unstoppable naval war fleet. Anatolia is a lost cause for AI Byzantium, so you can throw all of those ports on top of the pile as well.

Adding in naval battles would do nothing other than make crusades impossible for the AI. Crusaders already have their work cut out for them because of the high strength and stability of the Fatimids. Imagine how much harder it would be for them if they lost troops at sea before they even land. These suggestions for naval combat are always made without anyone thinking of the consequences.

 

[Ratlegion]

Everything that has been said about the weakness of the game is true.

I've tried to like it, but it's hard. It seems that Paradox has wanted to trim a lot of EU3 content from the game to make it a "character focused game," but in the end they haven't focused on any of the issues that matter. In the end, it always returns to the EU3 blobbing formula. There simply is nothing else to challenge you.

And after so many years of making similar games, it's pathetically sorry that the few character events that they put into the game leave you with options that only an idiot would pick. I can accept the comet falling, but damn. There are almost no events that have tangible or weighty benifits and it really smacks the overall arch of the game. At least in Rome/Medieval TW/EU3 I personally cared for my ruler.

 

[MasterofMagic]

Before I begin, I just want to say that CK2 is a great game. A really great gem that PI obviously put a lot of work and heart into. I commend them on their achievements and I do not regret being one of the people who pre-ordered their game. May the peace and blessings of Allah be upon them.

With that said, Crusader Kings II is a deeply, deeply flawed game if you acknowledge that it's supposed to be character based. There is absolutely nothing to do in this game other than conquer and prepare to conquer. "What about marriages, and um, plots!?" To what end? What exactly are marriages and plots for other than a means to paint one or more map modes with your colour of choice?

Despite CK2 being a heavily character focused game, I never feel any kind of personal attachment to any of the characters I encounter, whether they're the characters I'm controlling, or someone else. The characters in CK2 lack any personality at all. They all feel the same, and occasionally having an extra button to click on in events because of traits really doesn't fix this. A character based game should be a game that's heavy on story telling. Why even have unique, individualized characters if you can't come up with stories to involve them in? "Well, you're supposed to make them up in your head!" If I wanted to make up stories in my head, I wouldn't need CK2, as I would just use my head. Crusader Kings should have a strong RPGish element if it's going to continue being a "character-based" series. To be fair there are some mild sightings of some story based content in the game. Take for example the "Gates of Hell" line of events. This is a set of events that proceeds based on your choices. The problem is that it's very short, and very impersonal. It doesn't feel like my current character is really involved in these events anymore than he/she is involved in any other events.

Because there are no events or decisions to keep me occupied, what's left for me in this game is constant war mongering so I have some goal to strive for and just something to do in general. Letting the game run and just addressing the same handful of events simply isn't engaging and it's not a style of game play that's demanding my attention. What else can I do then other than conquer the world just because? There's no real character intrigue, no economy, and no substantive game play here that doesn't ultimately lead into a means to conquer everything.

CK2 has no trade. CK2 has no exploration. CK2 does have many mechanics which all seem to just help you blob over the map. I was reading some posts on the EU4 board yesterday from a Mr. Johan Andersson about how hard it is to blob in EU4. I read posts from him and other developers about trading, and relations, and all kinds of other ways in which you can play EU4 (as in actively participate in the game) without conquering the earth. I guess you could say that EU4 inspired me to make this topic. I look at CK2 now and just see so much wasted potential. I think to myself "why can't CK2 be a game where the player is always actively participating in ways that don't ultimately lead to super-blobbing?" I hope some members of the CK2 team read this and perhaps consider expanding the game in ways to improve the overall experience of the game regardless of what religion or type of lord your character is. Thanks.

The game for YOU is "THE GUILD II : just about any one of the expansions in that series as well or combine them. It has all the elements of character building you want, you can even own a business and trade and sword fight and duel with pistols at 10 paces and on an on an on. That's the game for YOU! CK II wasn't meant to be a SIMS in MEDIEVAL TIMES totally it has ELEMENTS of The SIMS in Medieval times but is still a STRATEGY GAME before it's a character building game or did you not notice the AWARD they got for STRATEGY GAME OF THE YEAR 2012? It did not win RPG of the year or SIMULATION of the year but STRATEGY GAME of the YEAR! It's also not about CHARACTER building as much as it is about DYNASTY building and surviving OVER THE YEARS. Things that happen (events) are just side quests of the whole which is a STRATEGY game first and foremost so that is why the modders continue to mod the BLOBBING aspects of the game. So now go get and play YOUR game "The GUILD II" and leave the STRATEGY games to us.

 

[BrunoDerKaiser]

Use bolding instead of caps, it is much more mature and impacting.

 

[Jia Xu]

Use bolding instead of caps, it is much more mature and impacting.

Not really. When you don't have a coherent point that actually addresses anything you're quoting, all of the font tricks in the world won't make your post worth responding to.

 

[Kimberly]

Use bolding instead of caps, it is much more mature and impacting.

I prefer italics, myself. Reading bolded text is so jarring; I reserve it for headers.

 

[willydark0]

I think the idea of becoming an advisor and having some sway or power in that role could make the game a lot of fun! This could give the player something else to strive for and could add a lot of events... what happens after you become one of the five councillors they could all have their own separate events and chains which could help make or break the ruler in which you are working for...think Varys or Littlefinger from Game of Thrones less warfare and more court and political drama!

 

[Tureis]

The game for YOU is "THE GUILD II : just about any one of the expansions in that series as well or combine them. It has all the elements of character building you want, you can even own a business and trade and sword fight and duel with pistols at 10 paces and on an on an on. That's the game for YOU! CK II wasn't meant to be a SIMS in MEDIEVAL TIMES totally it has ELEMENTS of The SIMS in Medieval times but is still a STRATEGY GAME before it's a character building game or did you not notice the AWARD they got for STRATEGY GAME OF THE YEAR 2012? It did not win RPG of the year or SIMULATION of the year but STRATEGY GAME of the YEAR! It's also not about CHARACTER building as much as it is about DYNASTY building and surviving OVER THE YEARS. Things that happen (events) are just side quests of the whole which is a STRATEGY game first and foremost so that is why the modders continue to mod the BLOBBING aspects of the game. So now go get and play YOUR game "The GUILD II" and leave the STRATEGY games to us.

Okay, we get it, you're a big boy, now why don't you make some legitimate criticisms.

 

[yezhanquan]

I probably said this before, but as long as PI remained spooked by the possibilities of bugs that cannot be squashed quickly, we are unlikely to see "bold" new features. Touchups here and there, yes, but if you want a new feature, pray that it is easy to code in and debug.