Exploits are fun, but they really do need to be fixed.

[Sunbro BigBoss]

Depends doesn't it.

I play for the challenge too. Some people play for the ability to experience a famous dynasty or period in history. Some people play for the ability to mod and tweak things (I do a lot of this). Some people play for a goal they set. There are lots of ways and reasons to play this kind of game.

Everyone can play the game as they please, of course. But the core of the game still revolves around making a long-lasting dynasty, which inevitably means competition against other players/characters.

Even if that was true (and it isn't, necessarily) it is ludicrous to say self-control isn't required in a 'competitive' game. These exploits aren't even part of standard gameplay, you have to go OUT OF YOUR WAY to make use of them. It is an active and concerted effort to skirt the game's intended playstyle. In a game that sprawls like CK2 does there will always be exploitable elements, holding the devs responsible for 'fixing' each and every one of those when the only thing a player has to do for it to not affect gameplay at all is TO NOT DO IT is ridiculous.

This one bug is far-fetched, I acknowledge that. But even then, the fact that there will always be exploitable elements does not exempt Paradox from having responsibility to fix any exploit they find.

 

[Lord Finnish]

I am a lover of hard starts and roleplaying. "Fixing" exploits hurts both severely, therefore I am generally against fixing exploits since this is primarily a single-player game and multiplayer games can always have house rules to prevent misconduct.

No way I'm going to post any exploits here and risk them getting fixed.

This. I'm never going to tell my favorite exploit because it would get "fixed".

And fortunately I have yet to see it discussed on the forum so there's hope for me yet!

 

[Ilion]

No way I'm going to post any exploits here and risk them getting fixed.

Don't worry then

*grin* (to both)

 

[Woifee]

Not sure if it's an exploit or working as intendet, but

if I'm Fylkir only germanic characters can inherit. That's actually logical, but only for the maintitle and the Fylkirtitle. Any other title could stil goes to other sons. This way i give all Sons a good christian education except for the son or grandson with the genius trait.

That makes elective gavelkind the best succession law ever.

 

[Dracko81]

I am a lover of hard starts and roleplaying. "Fixing" exploits hurts both severely, therefore I am generally against fixing exploits since this is primarily a single-player game and multiplayer games can always have house rules to prevent misconduct.

This. I'm never going to tell my favorite exploit because it would get "fixed".

And fortunately I have yet to see it discussed on the forum so there's hope for me yet!

Don't worry I'll think of something for you too.

But I am surprised there is little interest in the ability to have a vassal go from this to this to this.

 

[Summercat]

Don't worry I'll think of something for you too.

But I am surprised there is little interest in the ability to have a vassal go from this to this to this.

I'm not seeing anything wrong there. You have a valid claim to the titles, you've got her in prison (either for legit reasons for incurred the tyranny), and thus can revoke titles and she can't do anything about it. You could try the same thing without her imprissoned.

 

[Dracko81]

I'm not seeing anything wrong there. You have a valid claim to the titles, you've got her in prison (either for legit reasons for incurred the tyranny), and thus can revoke titles and she can't do anything about it. You could try the same thing without her imprissoned.

What if I told you I didn't have claims until I followed a set of steps, that will always lead to this outcome.

 

[Summercat]

What if I told you I didn't have claims until I followed a set of steps, that will always lead to this outcome.

If it involved sending a chancellor to forge a claim to the titles I don't see an issue.

If you're referring to something else you'd have to explain it in further detail, not vague allusions to it.

 

[Dracko81]

If it involved sending a chancellor to forge a claim to the titles I don't see an issue.

If you're referring to something else you'd have to explain it in further detail, not vague allusions to it.

The claims in the case before were because of vice royalty stuff, but the actual exploit doesn't necessarily always create claims.

Step 1: Find some who is silly enough to join a plot, don't worry they all do it.

Step 2: Demand they stop backing the plot. If you don't know how to make someone hate you, your not trying hard enough.

Step 3: They refuse.

Step 4: Imprison them.

Step 5: They rebel.

Step 6: Crush them.

Step 7: Revoke, revoke, laugh.

 

[Dracko81]

These exploits aren't even part of standard gameplay, you have to go OUT OF YOUR WAY to make use of them. It is an active and concerted effort to skirt the game's intended playstyle.

So you mean they are exploits? That is what makes an exploit an exploit.

 

[Summercat]

The claims in the case before were because of vice royalty stuff, but the actual exploit doesn't necessarily always create claims.

Step 1: Find some who is silly enough to join a plot, don't worry they all do it.

Step 2: Demand they stop backing the plot. If you don't know how to make someone hate you, your not trying hard enough.

Step 3: They refuse.

Step 4: Imprison them.

Step 5: They rebel.

Step 6: Crush them.

Step 7: Revoke, revoke, laugh.

I'm... where do you get the claims? I'm not following here. Are you inviting someone to YOUR plot, then demanding the end the plot?

 

[clockworkBabbag]

I am a lover of hard starts and roleplaying. "Fixing" exploits hurts both severely, therefore I am generally against fixing exploits since this is primarily a single-player game and multiplayer games can always have house rules to prevent misconduct.

I hate this argument so much. It's pretty much just rationalization of cheating.

Games - even single-player games - have rules for a reason. If you're no longer playing by those rules, or violating the spirit of the rules through loopholes, you're arguably not playing the same game anymore.

The developers want the game to be played a certain way, and they have both the right and the responsibility to make sure it is played that way by fixing exploits. If you want to play a different way, get a mod. Or use the console or some other method of cheating. Just don't pretend that exploits shouldn't be patched out if the developers feel they're violating the spirit of the game they created.

As as side note, "I'm a lover of hard starts and roleplay. 'Fixing' exploits hurts both severely" is... I don't even know what that is. Self-contradictory, to start. Exploits turn "hard" starts into not-hard ones, and gamey tactics and exploits are almost always the exact opposite of roleplay, because they're not something that would happen in real life.

 

[Dracko81]

I'm... where do you get the claims? I'm not following here. Are you inviting someone to YOUR plot, then demanding the end the plot?

No the claims in the previous example was because the vassal was a viceroy. When a viceroy becomes independent, you get claims on their titles.

That is also an exploit, multi-king viceroy, grant independence, declare claim war.

 

[Empress Matilda]

I hate this argument so much. It's pretty much just rationalization of cheating.

Games - even single-player games - have rules for a reason. If you're no longer playing by those rules, or violating the spirit of the rules through loopholes, you're arguably not playing the same game anymore.

The developers want the game to be played a certain way, and they have both the right and the responsibility to make sure it is played that way by fixing exploits. If you want to play a different way, get a mod. Or use the console or some other method of cheating. Just don't pretend that exploits shouldn't be patched out if the developers feel they're violating the spirit of the game they created.

As as side note, "I'm a lover of hard starts and roleplay. 'Fixing' exploits hurts both severely" is... I don't even know what that is. Self-contradictory, to start. Exploits turn "hard" starts into not-hard ones, and gamey tactics and exploits are almost always the exact opposite of roleplay, because they're not something that would happen in real life.

I do and don't agree with you. If a developer wants a game played a certain way and I think they are wrong I'm not going to play it their way if theres an option not to. I don't see the problem with that in a SP game but I'm happy if mods provide the option.

 

[mrwrong]

Maybe that Stewart milking is how I got 80k, in one of my games, I know it must have had something to do with the Holy order ..

 

[clockworkBabbag]

I do and don't agree with you. If a developer wants a game played a certain way and I think they are wrong I'm not going to play it their way if theres an option not to. I don't see the problem with that in a SP game but I'm happy if mods provide the option.

That's exactly my point though: if you don't want to play the game the developers wanted you to play, get mods. Because then you're not playing quite the same game anymore.

Exploits are honestly not much different than more explicit cheating, in the sense that they completely destroy the spirit of the game. If you want to cheat at a single-player game, go ahead and cheat. You're right that nobody should care about how you personally want to have fun. But I hate when people try to pretend that exploits are legitimate and that they shouldn't be fixed.

Also, when you're talking about Ironman games and achievements, you lose your entire single-player argument, because that takes the game out of being solely single-player and adds in some community-based competition/bragging rights. It doesn't matter if you don't personally care about achievements, because other people do (and you don't have a right to tell them that they shouldn't care, for the exact same reasons why people shouldn't be able to tell you not to play the game the way you want to when it doesn't affect them). Getting an incredibly hard achievement through the use of exploits devalues that achievement compared to getting it legitimately.

 

[Kenlin]

Huh. That is, indeed, a bug. I'm not even sure how you'd fix it. A global flag? Character flag, that just solves until you inherit...

The event could have a check whether the province already has the correct holdings. So either no castle, or at least a castle, city and temple (holding_type = castle/city/temple works). This would restrict games which changed removed the defines restriction, but people modding that could just mod the event too.

 

[CocoCincinnati]

I discovered an exploit the other day that if you bring up the console and type in cash, it gives you money. j/k

One thing I do is always try to find spouses for my children/kinsman who have good genetic traits, meaning I have more genius, attractive and strong people in my family tree than you can shake a stick at. I realize the AI doesn't do this and it isn't exactly realistic (rulers back then didn't have a list of all the genius children in the world to choose from) but I'm not sure if its consdered an exploit. I guess they could make it so you can't see attributes or traits of people from other rulers until certain things are done (spying, vassals/rules, allies, etc) but I'm certainly not asking for that to be done.

 

[Halcyan]

It involves an event from WoL involving the Architect trait. Unless there is more than one way around the normal restrictions that I'm not aware of. There is at least one bug report on this issue filed.

A second way to stack castles is through Holy Orders. Wait for the Grandmaster to spam offers to build castles. Eventually vassalize the Grandmaster and revoke/retract those castles. Or if the Holy Order is independent, you can do a De Jure Claim for the castle.

There is so many exploits in the game at the moment whether it is stacking castles in one province or even the invite to court exploit. Alot have been around for a while, if not even since release. I know of many myself and my current favourite is being able to build all castles in my capital duchy. Because troops > everything else.

I think it is questionable how problematic castle stacking is.

I always prefer extra cities over castles. I always pass on the Architect and HATE it when holy orders spam castles in my realm.

While stacked levies might be useful in the early game, my "world conquering" games quickly get to the point where I do all my warring with retinues (even after the retinues were nerfed). Levies aren't worth bothering with most of the time.

 

[Jango40]

So you mean they are exploits? That is what makes an exploit an exploit.

How the hell do you know about so many exploits? I wish I could game the game like this ;\