Crusader kings -v- Victoria

[Blackjak]

i posted this on the victoria forums as well. im going to get one of these 2 games as i have played eu2 a ton and hoi for over a year. i would really like to know the differences between the game. of course on the vicky forums they say vicky is much better, i assume ill get the same thing here for ck. but i would like to know why it is better if you belive it is.
thanks
Blackjak

 

[LordLeto]

I own EU2, HoI, Vic, and CK, and by far CK is better then Vic imho.


My favorite feature is you can turn any ole backward christian count into a king, in Vic there were some country that were just unplayable.

 

[Bismarck]

What parts of EU2/HoI did you like the most... because depending on what you liked the most, the answer will be different...

M

 

[ForVictory]

I like the time period of CK much more then of Victoria but playing as the spirit of a nation like in EU2 and Victoria is more fun to me then the dynasty building of CK. I found EU2 after a while pretty boring cause it wasnt too complex but then Victoria came out and i found Victoria too much of the good...It was way too complex.

so my top 3 would be like this:
1.EU2
2.Ck
3.......

 

[Blackjak]

I guess my favorite part of hoi is building up the leaders. btw is there a way to insert your name/persona into CK? in hoi you can edit the leader file and put your name in there. i enjoyed the conquest and war part of eu2 the most i guess.

 

[unmerged(23721)]

Well I just recently got Victoria and was waaayyy too overwhelmed. It can be fun if you have enough time to read 20 pages of FAQs before you even BEGIN to learn how to play it. But it is certainly more mature than crusaders at this point.

Crusaders is better in the sense that you could just sit back and watch the cash flow in, if you are playing a count or even a duke you can roleplay your character, and you actually start to care about your dinasty and worrying about that clubfooted crazed moron who is about to take things over. When paradox cuts some of the tedious stuff out and perfects the diplomacy aspect I think it would end up being the best of the series, IMHO. It is WAY less complex and technical than victoria and a million times more open-ended than HOI.

 

[LordLeto]

I guess my favorite part of hoi is building up the leaders. btw is there a way to insert your name/persona into CK? in hoi you can edit the leader file and put your name in there. i enjoyed the conquest and war part of eu2 the most i guess.

Im sure you could edit the save file, but you would have to check with the mod forums on that.

CK is pretty much about building your leader up, and his family and making the right choices effecting those aspects.

 

[unmerged(27323)]

Ck is just far more down to buisness. Vicky is a lot of micromanagment , while ck is about dynasties like the Habsburg empire and how it got that way. I also find ck more fun. Anything can happen. A denounced king of Germany can flee to Cyprus an two years later become King of Castile. Belive it, it happened to me...

 

[Bismarck]

Based on what you are looking for in a game, I would also recommend CK over Victoria. Victoria is charming in its own ways, but I think CK would give you more of the things you want.

M

 

[Blackjak]

ok...what are the wars like. is it similiry to hoi, eq2 and how does it differ from vicky. im having a real difficult time in deciding. and i dont want to get both. i already have more games than time.
Blackjak

 

[unmerged(26082)]

The wars work like in EU2, basicly you move your army to a province, fight any enemies that might be there, and then siege it. However actually getting the troops works differently.

 

[Bismarck]

Yes, in Victoria, you specifically build troop by type... in CK, you have a body of fighting men in each province that slowly increases, whose composition is based on your class structure, your laws and the advances you have made to that point in the province. The maximum number of troops you can have built up in a province is mainly determined by the province's income.

M

 

[unmerged(24362)]

I have EU, EU2, HOI, VIC and CK. My favourites are EU2 and CK though, I love the historic stuff of EU2, colonization, building a grand nation and so on. If I want to play a wargame it's HOI. But I love CK, it's so cool to create your own dynasty and create your own duchies or kingdoms when you have inherited or conquered the required lands.

 

[unmerged(16676)]

Well. I prefer Victoria to CK, it is a better simulation of it's period.

I will say, CK is far simpler to play and understand, you really have a LOT of busy work in Viccy, in CK, you can really only do so much, a lot of time is spent waiting for things (more troops, kids to grow up, armies to get bigger, gold to accumulate to name but a few.)

Victoria is really a simulator of 19th century empire building, CK is more of an impressionist painting of the late middle ages.

 

[oddible]

For quick reference:

> Victoria > Victoria - General Discussions > Victoria -v- Crusader kings


Just ordered CK online direct to US. Hope it arrives soon!

 

[HisMajestyBOB]

I have Victoria, but not CK (and I'm waiting for either the Mac Version or a good Windows emulator, so by that time I'll be able to just buy a new computer. Anyway...). Victoria is good fun, but since I quite enjoy the time period and am fairly knowledgable about it, there's just certain aspects of Victoria that are ahistorical enough to irritate me, like Russia's colonization and the mad dash for colonies in 1840, lack of adequete trading/negotiations over colonies (almost certainly too complicated for any computer game, though), and the forever stupid naval AI. Those really are my biggest gripes about the game that come to mind at the moment, I never found it to have tedious micromanagement and haven't had problems with CTDs. The military AI is generally pretty good, as well.

There is a lot of fun in building your own Empire under the sun, and the whole industrialization aspect, political model and POP system is really quite cool.

 

[Murmurandus]

I prefer CK over Victoria. Victoria is more work then play. CK is just plain fun...

 

[Martinus]

I guess my favorite part of hoi is building up the leaders. btw is there a way to insert your name/persona into CK? in hoi you can edit the leader file and put your name in there. i enjoyed the conquest and war part of eu2 the most i guess.

You can add your first name to random names list (which are divided according to culture) - in fact, if your name is not too uncommon and/or you come from an ethnicity which can be described as European, chances are your name is already in the game.

As for the last name, you can always edit the dynasty name of the country you wish to play - although I prefer to play with historical names.

 

[unmerged(10564)]

I have both games and like them both.

But in Victoria there was not a moment where I could relax. There was always something to do, at least looking at the ledger. While in CK there are times where I just sit down and stare at the monitor for 10 minutes.... I even had time once to take a shower and 10 minutes later came back and there was still nothing to do!!!

 

[Thanak]

Victoria is micro management hell, it's the paradox game I like the least.


My list goes like this

EU2 > CK > > HOI >>>>>>>>> Vic