Holdings, Navies, Artifacts, Education and many other things

Lorcalus

Private
42 Badges
Jan 7, 2019
22
87
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Knights of Honor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Prison Architect
  • Prison Architect: Psych Ward
  • Island Bound
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • Magicka
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • CK3 is a great game, better than I thought it would be, but it still needs far more additions to make it as defining as its predecessor. This will be quite a hefty list of suggesstions so I divided everything into sections and subsections for better readability. Also, excuse me for any serious grammar mistakes (its a long post).

Contents:
1) BUILDING/HOLDING SYSTEM
2) NAVAL SYSTEM
3) ARTIFACT/INVENTORY SYSTEM
4) COUNCIL CHANGES
5) EDUCATION
6) SOCIETIES
7) CUSTOMISABILITY
8) DYNAMIC ENVIRONMENT
9) PIRACY
10) ECONOMY
11) KNIGHTS AND WARFARE SYSTEM


1) BUILDING/HOLDING SYSTEM


Overall, the whole system is quite good. It is designed with progression in mind and suits different playstyles of the game. To make it more integral, it just needs few tweaks and additions in my humble opinion.

1.1 CONSTRUCTION TIME/COST

  • I believe that it would add more immersion and depth to the game, if instead of current system of paying and waiting to get build, everything would be more gradual. I propose that when building a new building you instead pay 30% (for example) of the whole price and the rest in monthly increments. Also, every construction should have an option of halting the construction. Similarly, when constructing a new holding you pay 50% and the rest monthly. These changes would add great depth since this would allow you (or AI) to start building domain quicker, while also providing more control over expenditures, since you could halt everything to increase gold income.
  • Additionally, it would make your steward more valuable by reducing/increasing overall cost of construction. Steward skill should be slightly tweaked so that for example, if his skill is below 7 , construction is delayed , at 7 and 8 is by default and higher skill reduces time and thus cost. To make it even more interesting, more events should be tied to this system and also use of schemes to influence constructions in enemy holdings. If nothing else, this changes would at least allow easier progression for smaller AI counts or player as it would need far less starting funds.

1.2 UNIQUE HOLDING TYPES

  • To make different regions more unique, game needs more different holding types, that are unique to region/government system etc. This would add more strategical depth, while also providing more options than just default three. These unique holdings should also differentiate from default ones, that they should be more specialized to certain aspects since default holdings seem more balanced in what they provide.
  • For example, feudal governments (Europe) should have access to Manor holding. Manor should have focus primarily on development, supply, control and also provide additional knight slot on build (to represent manor as knight estates). Similarly, clan government should have access to caravanserai that should give bonuses based on all county income, trade and similar things while also upgrading supply limit and also some fortification to lock region.
  • Similarly, other variations should exist to make whole map feel more diverse. Buildings do that currently, just not enough. If nothing else these additions would add additional strategical depth. For example , if county has more slots it might be better to build castles and cities there but a smaller county with less slots might get more from building manor and make its power base better with more initial knights and levy etc..

1.3 GREAT CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS

  • In CK2, great projects were a late and minor feature, but a very interesting feat of accomplishment in mid to late game, that provided a great way to personalize your counties. Something similar should be implemented but a little differently. Great constructions should be limited to one per county and could only be built by county owner in any of the baronies. Type of construction you build in barony should be directly tied to holding type. For example you can built great walls in cities, grand cathedral etc.. in temple and tomb, grand fortress etc.. in castle holding.
  • These construction projects could be a great way to gain a special building that certain holding posses on the game start (Theodosian walls etc.). It would be great if those special projects could also be represented on the map but not with another model next to holding one, but it should (when built) replace holding model to easily represent it on the map
  • Also, it would be great if, when adding flavour content through development in certain regions, baronies would also get special map models (for example castle model for London should be replaced by a one representing tower of London and like other models having also different types of development). That would be an excellent and flavourful addition, when regional flavour DLC starts coming out, that would make a map feel far more unique in each region.

1.4 SPECIAL BARONY UPGRADE SLOT

  • To make holdings more unique and diverse, it would be great to add special upgrade slot to every holding. It should function like a special building slot which would enable you to build special constructions that would further specialize the holding. Special constructions should be different based on the holding type and only one could be built per barony in special building slot.
  • For example, you could built shrines, monastery etc. in temple holdings while building watchtowers, mausoleums, etc. in other types. These special constructions should also have special requirements to be built. For building a shrine you would need a relic etc. Also, these constructions should also provide other things than just stat modifier. For example, having a mausoleum or tomb in castle holding would give you the ability to entomb direct death relative upon their death and giving you prestige and relation with your dynasty if you are head.
  • Also, to build tomb you would need to have castle designated as ancestral seat for example.. Monasteries could give you an option to send children there to be educated until they reach maturity if you own the county (not necessarily barony where monastery is). This education would have high chance to give a virtue trait to the children while deleting bad traits.
  • There should be many different projects available to build per holding type to make everything more interesting and unique. It would provide new strategical layer to holdings in terms of deciding. For example, if you want multiple shrines you would need multiple temples etc as only one special construction could be built per holding. In worst case, this addition would enhance the building aspect and uniqueness of each region and provide new choices of playing while also not handicapping you if you do not want to bother with it.


1.5 ANCESTRAL SEAT

  • CK3 is a game of characters and stories so it would be great if holdings could also be more tied to this. It would be great if holdings could be designated as ancestral seats of certain dynasties. Ancestral seat could be designated, for example, if barony is in the family hands for 100 years(direct holding if immortal or direct succession-parents to children, grandchildren) , has been always a capital of the characters domain and character is head of the dynasty. Fulfilling this requirement would give barony a permanent modifier giving holder +10 relation to said dynasty if owner is of the same dynasty.
  • Also, to make it more interesting, dynasty head should always get special CB to reclaim Ancestral seat if not owning it. If Ancestral seat is not in dynasty hands, head of the dynasty would have -10 relations to all members while if barony is owned by non head, owner gets -20 relations with dynasty head and +5 with other members. This system would create an interesting base for possible events and wars between dynasty members and provide very interesting flavour.
  • To make it even more interesting, baronies should be able to be designated as ancestral seat for multiple dynasties if they reached requirements. It would create an interesting balance of power and possibility of implementing dynasty rivals etc. Game should start with certain baronies already designated as ancestral seats. For more flavour, while holding your ancestral seat you could also swap barony emblem for your own dynasty and colors.

1.6 BUILDING SPRAWL

  • Map is beautiful and holding models feel great but after some time it becomes a little empty to look at. Building sprawl would solve that. Sprawl should be only visual representation of development on the map. Also to make it more varied, it would be great if every holding type should have different sprawl related to it. Cities should be surronded with clusters of houses around barony model while castles should be sorunded by farms and temples with shrines/miniature statues etc.. These variations would greatly enhance immersion in the game while at the same time provide information which baronies are developed by looking at it.


2)NAVAL SYSTEM

2.1 CORE SYSTEM/IDEA


  • Current system needs a rework but certain things are actually quite good. Basically, a naval system should be a mix of parts of the current one and having personal fleet. Ships should be available to build only in counties that you personally own and and are coastal. You do not need to personally hold coastal barony, just the county with that barony. Ships should only be recruited by count or higher tier and should be tied to the county they were built in. In terms of inheritance, ships get inherited with the county they are tied to. Rally system should also be available seperately for the ships.
  • There should not be any limit to the ships you can have, only the upkeep cost. Comparing to the current system, ships should be a lot more cheaper to maintain but they should have, ofc, higher initial investment to be built. Those that dont have the ability to buy ships shouldnt be without an option to sail somewhere. Current system should be modified a little to be able to complement new system. Basically, you( or AI) should still be able to use the current system but only at certain locations. For example, you could board and hire ships in England at Dover etc. (Like it was done historially). This kind of travel will ofc be significantly more expensive than if you own ships yourself. Also it would provide new tactical depth since characters that dont have fleets but are far from these ports will have significant problems and expenses walking there.
  • Also, raiding cant be possible while using hired ships. Vikings need to own their own private ships. AT the start of the game, certain characters should already start with a navy (primarily Vikings etc.).


2.2 PORTS AND EMBARKING

  • Embarking should be done pretty much how is done now but with a few tweaks. You can instantly dock and embark only at locations with major port (where you can also hire ships). Owners of coastal counties should also be able to instantly connect/disembark at their own land even if they have built local port. Vikings with longships should be able to instantly disembark at any barony because of their ships. These changes would greatly increase the depth of the game while providing new ways of interaction with the game.

2.3 SHIP TYPES

  • There shoudl be different ships available to construct, based on technology etc. These ships should have different stats, like men at arms have, but different in terms of parameters. Every ship should have next stats for example: hull size(for raiding etc), speed, transport size and attack value (if ship combat is implemented otherwise just the previous three). In addition to this, certain types of ships should have additional modifiers like able to instantly disembark, or sail through rivers /longships) or speed at certain type of sea etc. Based on the type of the ship, upkepp and cost should also differ. There should also be subclass of ships available. For example instead of just having longships there should be Karvi, Snekkja, Skeid, Drakkar. Similarly should be done for other types of ships.

2.4 FLAGSHIPS

  • Flagships should also be available to have and have a limit of one. They should be far more expensive to construct and should be customizable to some degree (like EU4 does, but with different parameters). Flagships should provide prestige buff while holding it and a high hit when they are lost. To make it more interesting and add a tactical value to the whole concept, Flagships should only be available at rank Duke or higher (to build not held it). More seafaring civilizations like Vikings or republics should also have certain need to own a flagship or they would lose prestige every month and affect their vassal relations (for example Vikings looking down on fellow leader because he has no flagship to represent his power).

2.5POSSIBLE COMBAT SYSTEM

  • It would be great if there would be a naval combat, although with not many possible confrontations there is a question of even trying to implement it. If nothing else, it could be used to siege coast and prevent docking or to defend coast. In these instances, there could be more use of battle system.
  • If it is a possibility, I propose next system of four phases : skirmish - ram - mellee(assaulting ship)-disengage,flee. In first phase, fleets would start shooting each other and dealing damage based on ranged units on the ship and defensive values of ships. In the second part. ships ram to each other and deal damage/sunk ships based on their attack value (cogs for example have smallest value). Third phase should represent embarking of mellee units and fighting. In the last one, losing side flee while victorius fires another phase of arrows. I think this system would be be a logical representation of medieval battles and quite interesting and strategical with mant at arms still playing a major role even at sea. Although to make the system usefull and actually usable, ships would need some other function to incentivize staying with army on ships etc..

3) ARTIFACTS/INVENTORY SYSTEM

3.1 CORE SYSTEM


  • In CK2 artifacts added another layer of gameplay that, although were mostly cosmetic or OP, actually made game more interesting. There were some balance issues but otherwise it was a great system. With that in mind i propose that in CK3 artifacts are part of the bigger inventory system. Artifacts should be divided into subgroups (equipment, relics etc..) as they should have different function or interactions available to them.


3.2 EQUIPMENT

  • Equipment should consist of weapons and armour. Only one weapon and one armour piece can be equip at the same time. To avoid equipment becoming OP, any combination of weapon/armor should grant only maximum 5 prowess for example at ideal conditions. This way character with the right equipment have an edge but not too big one. Prowess bonus can actually be quite realistic since superior armor and weapons gave you a certain advantage in real life. To make it even more interesting, the bonus you are getting through equipment should also be partly based on the traits you have. This way, there wont be any one best build but the type of weapon will be better used if you posses certain trait (for example, shortsword has base value 1 prowess and quick trait gives you +1 then your prowess is +2). Or even negatively impact if you try using great axe with weak character (base +2, weak -1-- result +1 prowess). This system would also open new possibilities of story generation and other things.


3.3 RELICS

  • Every religious based artifact should be designated as relic. Based on the importance of the relics they should be further divided into minor and major relics. All minor relics should give +0.1 piety every month for example and major one +0.3 when in the inventory of a character. Acquiring a relic should also grant one time piety gain of 200 piety for example. Relics should also be available for granting to clergy for a significant relations and pity boost etc.
  • Also, having relic in your inventory also unlocks decision to build shrine(main incentive to acquire relics) . This decision allows you to build a shrine in temple holding(special upgrade slot- look at chapter 2.4) of a county you control by paying for example 200 gold. This way relic is directly transfer to the barony while giving barony and county owner permanent modifier(bonus). Minor relics give far less buffs than major ones. In case of barony being raided, attacker have an option to loot and acquire artifact while destroying shrine. This would create a very interesting foundation for religious gameplay while also providing a new way to specialize your holdings.
  • Minor relics such as bones of saints etc., should be abundant around the game while major ones like ark of covenant are only few per religion. Also, it would be great if by creating shrines from major relics you could, with your religious head approval and high piety, designate that site as holy site of your religion. It would be great if at game start, this shrines(minor ones), already exist in some part to create a regional narrative. Historically , in Europe there were abundance of local saints and shrines built to them. Since minor relics represent more of a local veneration and importance in certain culture, destroying and looting this sites should not undermine whole religion. These events should only effect certain religious heads. For example, if you are english count and relic is taken from the barony under county your control ,you, beside losing county/barony bonus, get a serious relations hit with your top religious vassal and the strongest religious figure of your culture. Additionaly if religious head is of same culture you have problem with that too.
  • This would create a much necessary local narrative and add more cultural flavour. It would be great if local shrines and relics are also added as part of flavour DLC used to enhance local gameplay. On top of that, it would be great if you could make someone saint (like relative etc..) and consequently use his bones to create shrine. If all that is also tied to dynasty mechanics it would provide a base for deeper engagement. In worst case, whole system would at least offer you new goals to achieve during gameplay.

3.4 MISCELLANEOUS,

  • In this category everything that is not relic or equipment should be defined. Everything from books to ingredients and other things. To make system more interesting, it would be great if this type of artifacts would instead of granting you bonuses give you new decisions. For example, having chess set in your inventory would give you an option to invite someone to play with and grant you other opportunities. Having Historia regum Britanniae book in the inventory by being English would allow you to start quest to locate remains of king Arthur and possibly ending with a shrine like location in Glastonbury where monks historically claimed they found graves etc..
  • Acquiring ancient scrolls during crusade could give you a decision to translate them and find location of certain relic, for example, and giving you new CB to siege barony and if done successfully, awarding you relic. Options are limitless and provide a great way for generating new events and stories.

3.5 HEIRLOOMS

  • Artifacts could be tied to the dynastic gameplay pretty well by giving you an option to designate certain equipment as an heirloom. After meeting certain requirements (like owning item for 100 consecutive years, having high prestige and being head of dynasty or cadet branch), gives you the option to turn any item into heirloom of house X. Multiple items could be designated as heirlooms as long as you meet requirements. Having an heirloom should give you certain bonuses inside your dynasty while also giving you access to new options. Dynasty head should always have a CB to reclaim heirloom from any character while other members get CB to reclaim it only if it is outside their dynasty. Also, certain items such as crowns give you a claim over kingdom/empire as long as you hold it while giving rulers of said realm a CB against you if you do not rule them,.
  • Crowns should be a special type of heirlooms in sense that they can be commisioned while having a rank of at least KING and if there is no crown asociated with the realm. Upon creation, crown is instantly designated as heirloom of dynasty who built it and kingdom/empire it represents. This would create an awesome way of new dynastic options and claims. If nothing else it would be a great flavour bonus while creating your custom kingdom and immortalizing it with crown that ties your dynasty directly to it. Holder of the crown should always get CB to become king of the realm that crown represents.

3.6 VAULTS

  • Whole inventory system should be more firmly tied to certain locations instead of magically teleporting with character. Equipment that is currently equiped should always stay with the character wherever he is. If character is imprisoned his equipment is taken by his captor. Everything else is stored at a vault. Every holding type has a vault which is used to store artifacts which are not equiped.
  • Usually, everything is stored in your main holding. You can freely distribute all your inventory between your personal holdings but there is a little catch. If inventory is stored in a holding lost to successions, there is a high chance that an item or more could be lost or stolen during successions, otherwise all items are safe (especially in your main holding)
  • Also, when transferring artifacts around personal holdings, there is a chance of losing them through plots etc.. While capturing holding, an attacker has an option to plunder your vault and take everything with them. This would make whole system more interesting and dynamical. Also, it would be great if whole artifact system could also be tied to scheme system etc. With this in mind, for example, everything stored in your main holding with high fort level would be extremely secure unless you would have internal spy like council member. Also there should be different decisions available, like permanently losing 50 levy by creating vault guard and heavily increasing security etc.
  • All things considered, an inventory system is a must for the game. While it does not make you OP in any way it gives you a new story generation machine which CK3 is all about. Also, new map mode which would track heirlooms and shrines would be greatly appreciated.

4)COUNCIL CHANGES

4.1 BASE IDEA

  • Currently, everything from councils to councillor jobs connects to each other. It should be divided into separate system. For example, council tasks should be seperated from the powerfull vassal system. Council jobs should represent the governing of only your direct domain. This way only your courtiers and barony level vassals in counties you control, should be elligible for the task. When achieving rank Duke, you should get access to the powerful vassal council. This council is where powerful vassals are part of. You could appoint any vassal, even your councillors to this council. All count level vassals want a seat on the duchy council and get negative relation if they are not on in (relation to their power). Giving seat to your minor vassal who is your concillor permanently angers your count vassals while making your councillors extremely loyal.

4.2 VASSAL COUNCIL

  • Each rank should have its own version of council in the realm but characters can be on multiple ones. Also, there should be only one council per rank no matter how many titles of the same rank character have. For example, you are a king in an empire while also holding. two duchy titles. In this case you have one duchy and one kingdom council you rule yourself while also possibly siting in an empire council. Duchy council should have 3 sets, kingdom 4 and empire council 5 seats. This would incentivize the distribution of titles and add another strategical layer to the game as hoarding of titles can severly hampers your control, beacause you do not have enough spots for vassals. In case of previously mentioned example, you would have a problem with your ducal council. Because no matter the amount of the same tier titles, you have only one council and cannot fit all the vassals into those three spots. On the other hand, character with one of each title could have lees personal power in terms of gold or levies but because of title distribution have more stable realm. Whole current system of powerfull vassals should be changed, so that every vassal is now important in its tier. When assigning everyone to the council there should also be visually discerned whether a vassal is ducal, kingdom or empire rank core vassal.

4.3 COUNCIL POSITIONS

  • It would be great, if every vassal council should have different positions that would actually matter when assigned. Every council should have a marshall, treasurer and diplomat while additional council seats have no special positions. It would be great if whole law system would be changed so that each of the previously mentioned councillors could only propose changes based on their job while all members of the council can vote. Also it would add to immersion if, in the case that character is underage or incapable, he is represented on the council by his regent. Also, if marshal could be assigned of leading your armies during the war it would add another layer of deepth to the game since you could basically focus on other things while AI raise your army and leads. Similarly, it would be great if, when assigned as marshal you could actually be allowed to fight your liege war during his war while having total control of realm armies and movement. This changes would add a possibility of different reactions between characters, since losing a liege war as marshal could severely affect relations etc.

5) EDUCATION

  • Education should be more interactive than it currently is. For a game that thrives on story generation, education suprisinglly lacks. I propose a two tier system-initial static and second interactive. First part should include up to year 8 and should also be spent in the main holding. Based on the castle tutor, character should gain varied education based on the tutor skill. In second phase you should be able to chose specialization of the character. You would need to chose one education specialization from the available ones. Each attribute should have at least 2 different types of education. One type is always castle based with focus on that skill. Second type, is dynamical and involves education from outside your holdings. For example, if you choose focus on martial skill you would have an option of castle education which focuses on martial, but also in minor side on other skills which creates somewhat rounded character. The other option should for example be to squire for a knight. This would mean that character is assigned to a knight and travels around tourneying or serving this knight if he is hired somewhere. This, more active, education should be also more event based and far more costly but also potentialy beneficial. Comparing it to castle based martial education, this one focuses completely on martial and have a higher potential for war traits and potentially far higher prowess skill.Similarly, comparable education paths should be available to other skills but the common part is that they are outside your control.

6) SOCIETIES

  • Societies could expand the game and add considerable depth to it, if done correctly. In ck2 they were mostly a source of artifacts and events, but that could be expanded in CK3. Societies should be divided into two major groups- local and global. Global ones should be open for joining and include wider areas. For example, warrior societies, knightly orders etc. This kind of societies should have ranks you can raise to and offer some bonuses based on the type. For example, warrior society rank should add a lot of prestige and relations to fellow vikings etc.. Knightly orders should for example be focused on certain ideals like defending faith and fighting and wining against other religions would give you some bonuses and open certain event possibilities. Also grandmaster of those orders should have the ability to chose goals of societie etc. Certain kind of societies should be present from the start and custom ones should be available to create from scratch and thus becoming a leader of your own society. For example, you could create a custom knightly order with main goal of defending english isles from vikings which would function as a military pact which would allow you to lead a war coalition against vikings etc..
  • Local societies should be entirely based on their presence in certain baronies. Only owner of the county should have an option of interaction with them. Contrary to the global societies, characters cannot join them but can create custom ones. Monastic orders, Guilds, Assassins, Cults and other similar ones should be part of this kind of societies. Basically, this system would work like this. There would be a special UI window that shows all the societies (global and local) that you can either join or invite to your realm. Local sociteies are either present from the start (in barony) or must be invited before you can interact with them. For example, you want to have monastic order in your realm. If you meet the requirements and invite them, they then become part of your realm. You can only invite them into the county you control. Local societies are always based in certain barony and you can only have one per barony. Monastic baronies can also, only be designated to a barony with temple holding while assasisns guild can, for example, be situated only in city holding.
  • When society is situated inside your county, you get access to certain interactions. For monasteries, this means you can send any courtier temporary or permanently to the monastery. All children could also be educated there and your character can also spent some time there as part of stress reduction. Assassins guild on the other hand provides you with option to hire (for money) very skilled agent for your next scheme and also to send your courtiers to be educated there. Options are limitless here. I believe this system could open the game even more and provide deep engagement. This system could also be used for deeper religious gameplay. For example, your character is catholic and Lollard monastic order asks for sanctuary in your temple barony. This could open tensions with the pope or other things. Also on the other hand you could gain a special CB from pope to attack nearby county that harbor heresy etc..

7) CUSTOMISABILITY

With a game with so much focus on story telling it is essential to have a lot more customization present in the game.

7.1 RULER DESIGNER

  • With the update, game got more interesting, but a ruler creator needs few more additions. Aside the emblem creator, it would be great to have the ability to customize spouse and children. Stats for those are not immportant but with the character DNA system, it would greatly enhance the player ability to create dynasties anyone wants.
  • Another one, is to have access to immortal trait in designer. Ofc this shouldnt be achievement compatible, but otherwise would be great for other runs while also removing the hassle with tempering with the files for those not modding savvy.

7.2 SHATTERED AND RANDOM WORLD

  • Those options were a blast in CK2 and something similar would be great to have in CK3. It would add a tromeNdous amount of gameplay options. Especially the random world option with the current religious system would create a very interesting situation and unique setup.
  • It would be great, if shattered world option would also be flexible enough to allow. beside its standard option, an option to only partially shatter realm. For example, if the player want to play as a count of Paris but independent while other world setup stays the same or something similar. Also it would add more options, if only vassals could be rearanged with that option to allow you to remove few vassals and assign them somewhere else etcc.

7.3 EMBLEMS AND REALM COLOR

  • It would add to replayability if everything could be swapped, either before the start or in the middle of playthrough. Having your realm emblem and color in as your realm set would be great. If that kind of customizability is not plausible due to technical limities it would be great if then at least there would be a decsion/option to at least have the house emblem of your character as a realm emblem. Also, if would be great if part of the game rules would allow dynamical coloring and emblems of the dynasty that holds them at least on the ducal and higer level.

8) DYNAMIC ENVIRONMENT

  • It would add a lot to immersion and visual fidelity, if more dynamic weather would be implemented. from more visuall change of seasons to the earthquakes, blizzards ect. Aside from visual effect, it would be great if those developments could also be tied to the development, movement, levy size etc.. Also, sea storms could scatter your fleet while sailing through it, which would, in practice, destroy some ships and scaatter them to different sea tiles. Since optimization is always an important factor in these decisions it would be great if those kind of weather effects would be toggable.
9) PIRACY

  • Piracy mechanic should be implemented to the game to, on one side, provide the raiding to the mediterranean coast and also shatter the stability of southern part of the map. Piracy should work similar to the norse raiding but with some changes. Pirates can only raid coastal baronies that are not castles. Also, piracy should be based on pirate havens instead of classic raiding. Basically, pirate havens should periodically appear in the coastal holdings in the mediterranean, and conduct regular raids of the nearby coasts. Havens should also have a leader that is always leading the raid. Owner of the barony, where a haven is located, should be protected from pirates. Also, owners should have a decision to expel pirates (fight them) or invite them and thus create havens. Having pirate havens in your realm should increase income of that county while also getting some bonuses, based on the plunder pirates brought back. To balance the mechanic, owner of the barony should get -10 relation with the owner of the raided barony (for every barony). All local rulers should also gain special CB to destroy pirate haven. Patron of the pirate haven is always the defender in that battle, along the pirates. Pirate army in the havens vary based on their success. Havens that are successfull for longer periods should increase in size, but should have certain max limit to not make the OP. Also, there should be a limit of one pirate haven per duchy or certain region. I think that overall, these additions would greatly expand the game while also provide player a new ways of interactions.

10) ECONOMY

While the game has quite a good building system, it lacks in terms of deep enough economy. Economy should provide additional engagement and immersion but at the same time not create a micromanagement mess.

10.1 TRADE GOODS

  • It would be great, if every barony should have its own trade good designated to it that would have more passive influence on the holding built there. For example, having castle holding with stone trade good would reduce building cost in that holding and allow some form of great fortress to be build as an late game use. Food types of trade goods would, for example, influence the supply and also provide bonus to local levy because of abundance of food. Similar bonuses should be implemented for other goods. Also, It would be great if also some special buildings could be tied to this mechanic.

10.2 CITY RIGHTS AND MARKET RIGHTS

  • City and market rights should be another type of rights designated to the vassal through vassal contract. It should provide some bonus to the cities in your direct domain while also giving you acces to a decision to host local market etc. This would provide some new interactions while also giving you a new strategic layer about which holding to built etc.

10.3 FOOD SYSTEM

  • While the supply system currently in game is quite good, it cant compare with the true food system. It would make game more immersive, strategical and interesting if food system would be implemented. For example, food should be counted on the county level with different holdings providing different amounts of food. Castles, for example should provide a lot of it while cities should consume some of it. Each holding should have its own granary which stores some amount of food. When it is raided or sieged, the attacker completely loots it and add to his storage. Supply limit should have an affect on the army consumption and should increase further away you go. As long as armies stay next to the holding that either belongs to them or is temporary under their control (sieged) and connected to their domain, armies can be resupplied., If their realm has enough food production.
  • Domain will ressuply army only if it has excess production. Further away you are , more excess production is needed. Also, new type of man at arms should be buildable, supply trains. Building this units should cost minimal gold but reguire food reserve. This unit shouldnt affect your man at arms limit and also cannot fight. In case of battles this units get destroyed only if you lose battle, otherwise they stay far from it. I think this changes would greatly improve the game while providing also other game strategies. Immersive aspect is great and the whole food system could also be more tied to different game systems from holdings to events etc.


11) KNIGHTS AND WARFARE SYSTEM

11.1 KNIGHTS


  • Knights are very interesting system, but it would be great if it was assigned differently. Knights should be divided into permanently assigned and temporary knights. Permanent ones, should be locked because of their position and cannot be changed, while temporary can be changed whenever you want. Whole holding system should be more tied into available knights system. For example, every barony castle vassal in your counties you own should be represented as permanent knight you have. Also, every other vassal you directly hold with rank count or higher are permanent knights too. These permanent knights are always direct holders of the rank. Every character has an option to forbid leaving army in other wars. In this case his marshal represent him as a knight. Other number of knights are tied to your rank and other things and are changeable.

11.2 ZONE OF CONTROL

  • It would add a strategical layer to the warfare system, if at least a limited zone of control would be implemented. For example, only castle should have zone of control which would mean that enemy army cannot walk through the barony with unconquered enemy castle. Armies could go around and through adjacent baronies, but not the castle one. This would add some historical influence to the game, while also providing new options for defenders, especially if fighting superior enemy. Also, this way, terrain could become more important since you could, by strategically placing castles at certain locations, effectivelly walled your entire realm. Also, mountainous realms could easily be protected this way and become true defensive fortresses, like they were historically.

11.3 MILITARY ACCESS

  • Currently armies can walk around freely no matter where they go. There should be at least some soft restrictions to make it more realistic and strategic. Every time an army walks through the neutral realm, they are not part of it, they should become hostile for certain duration of time. During this time local armies can freely engage you, but cannot pursue you outside their borders. Kind of like raiding but without the ability to raid. If armies are marching through the lands that are part of the same kingdom they are, you are not designated as hostile, but get the negative relations hit with local leader. I believe this changes would make the game more interesting and deep. You would no longer just walk through the whole map relatively unscathed. If nothing else, it would provide player at least some options of warfare in case anyone plays peacefull ruler and neutral armies walks through your teritory.

11.4 WAR REPARATIONS

  • Sometimes war can last to long and there is little to do if you want to end it without serious loses. To balance this system, war reparations should be added as a system of alternative end of war. After certain time of war (for example 6 months), any side could propose alternative kind of white peace with reparations. Basically, in this case, neither side realy have requirements for white peace (one side near victory other near defeat) but war has been dragged to long and losing side dont want to lose fiefs and wining side want at least some gain from war. This way war reparations could be implemented to balance warscore and sign white peace.
  • Based on the war score, reparations could differ. Instead of some custom values, war rep should be based entirely on the barony income levels. For example, player is losing war -10 warscore and wants to have white peace. This way, special window concerning payment is opened where player designates which of his baronies (one or more) will pay complete income of the barony for certain time to the opposing side. During that time, player retain control of levies but not the income of designated baronies while also losing prosperity. I believe that this way, at least the smaller realms, have more chance of surviving by dragging war on. Also, this system provides a great and immersive way to end war, that has been going on to long without definitive victor.
 
  • 8Like
  • 1
Reactions:

De_Dominator69

Sergeant
76 Badges
Jun 26, 2015
89
320
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Tyranny: Gold Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Tyranny - Tales from the Tiers
  • Tyranny - Bastards Wound
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
Some really great suggestions here, so would love to give my thoughts on them as well as my own suggestions for them. I feel there really should be more of a discussion in this thread and it should be getting ALOT more attention because these are some well thought out and interesting ideas OP has made.

1.1:

Honestly I think this suggestion is just straight out brilliant, makes perfect sense and would be an all around improvement in my eyes.

1.2:

The idea of Unique holdings seems great, only potential issue I can see is that with them (presumably) being a fourth holding type it could mean you cant use them in counties that only have three holding slots as you need to build one of the original three first (unless that would be changed) which while not necessarily a problem would be a bit of a bummer if for whatever reason you want a three holding province to be your main one or something.

1.4:

Would this be an extra slot that could be used alongside already existing Special Building slots or would it be a generic special slot for baronies without a specific one? I like the idea but I worry about how you would balance it with current special buildings, like if these end up being better or more useful than current special buildings or even Duchy buildings it risks making them both obsolete. I like the idea but I think the current special buildings should be alot better and more useful than anything these would offer, even if that would require going back and re-balancing them, same applies to duchy buildings. I also feel they would have to be limited in how many of each you could have per holdings, or perhaps per realm.

1.5:

Absolutely love this idea, would love some events and decisions surrounding it as well, stuff like being able to hold a feast for only your dynasty members etc. I already more or less assign an ancestral seat myself for Role Play purposes so would love to see it actually added to the game.

1.6:

I think this is something everyone would agree should be added to the game. Only issue I can imagine is potential performance issues.

2:

I basically love the idea of everything mentioned here so dont really have much to add or any thoughts to share.

3.1:

Definitely sounds good, artifacts were a fun addition in CK2 and would love to see that improved upon and added back.

3.2:

This sounds good. Would like to add that it would be cool to add varying qualities for this equipment based both on title and cost, for example normal equipment would be the cheapest and could be made by anyone Count or above, then good quality for a Duke and above, great for a King or above and brilliant for an Emperor. I agree there should be a hard limit for any combination of armor or weapon in regards to bonus prowess varying on quality, for example perhaps 1 prowess for each level of quality so at max you would be getting 8 prowess. If thats considered too op could make it so that rather than an increase in prowess from great to brilliant quality brilliant quality instead adds 0.5 or 1 prestige or something, so maximum benefits you could get from equipment would be 6 prowess and 1 or 2 prestige.

3.3:

These are all great suggestions. One thing I would add is that it would be cool if were your ruler to become a saint (if that ever returns) or reforms their own faith either their bones/body or tomb will become a relic, with its quality depending on what they did, so for example if they were a Catholic saint their body would become a Catholic relic, if they formed their own faith wither with no head of faith or a spiritual head of faith it would become a more powerful relic but limited to just their new faith, whereas if they formed a new faith with them as the Temporal head then it would become the most powerful and most important type of relic that is integral to that new faith.

3.4:

These are awesome suggestions, would add a spectacular amount of flavour to the game so thumbs up.

3.5:

These are both awesome ideas. I could see crowns providing a small opinion bonus and maybe a choice between prestige or piety when commissioning it. One thing I would add for heirlooms is that it would be cool if heirlooms and equipment could be turned into Relics if certain criteria are met, for example say a King using them wins 100 battles without being defeated, such a feat would make them and by extension their weapons legendary, the prowess bonuses would be removed and instead replaced by prestige or other such bonuses. Other such criteria could include forming the HRE, becoming a Crusader King (as in, winning a Crusade and getting the Kingdom, not just receiving the Crusader trait), perhaps if dueling or something similar is implemented then winning X number of duels, reforming a faith and so on and so forth, would make for a good way to depict how weapons and armor were made legendary both in real life and in myth, think of Excalibur and Joyeuse etc.

3.6:

Once again I agree with everything here and dont really have much to add.


4:

This sounds good but I think it sounds a bit unnecessarily complex.

Personally I think it would be better if it was a little more simplistic and you instead just have two councils, a domain council and realm council, the domain council could only seat your courtiers or Barons, Mayors etc. who are a part of your demesne, whereas the realm council would seat your vassals. The domain council seeing to the day to day tasks of your personal demesne (like the council does already in game) and the realm council being a place for your vassals to sit and help govern the realm as a whole. we could also see the return of the council mechanics from CK2, so your Realm council rather than seeing to tasks throughout the realm will instead play a part in its general governance and policy being able to vote on going to war etc. (would also be nice to see the return of realm laws as well, Crown Authority is alright an all but its a bit basic and lacks depth, the return of realm laws and council power would be a nice way to represent this in a more dynamic and in depth way, there would have to be some improvements over CK2 of course as its no perfect but I still think it would be good).

Obviously there could be some new council tasks, but only including the ones in the current game they could be split between domain and realm tasks for each council. For example likes of Convert Faith in County, Integrate Title, Increase Control in County etc. could be realm tasks whereas the likes of Organize Levies and Increase Development would be domain tasks.

5:

This sounds good, basically sounds like an expansion and more interactive version of CK2s education to me. I definitely love the idea of a more theoretical vs more practical education for the latter half.

6:

This sounds good to me, but rather than local and global I think it would be best rather than have the societies be split like this to just have it happen more dynamically. My suggestion would be that each society has a main headquarters (like you suggested) that is centered in a single barony and has its own diplomatic range based on the type of society that people within and who meet the requirements can join, so for example a cult or small religious order may have a very small range limited to just the county or duchy whereas a Knightly Order may have a large one spanning an entire Kingdom. So most societies will start of locally but can slowly grow to be a global one. I think it would also be good if there was a sort of level or tier system for the actual societies themselves representing how they can grown in power, so by a society getting more members and more influence it can slowly grown in size opening up new branches in different parts of the world, unlocking new missions and abilities for members to go on as well as more powers for the society to do. It would be good if this was also dynamic meaning they are capable of losing members and influence and as a result becoming smaller, maybe even going so far as to be destroyed entirely, this could be done through decisions/interactions by rulers whose realms the society is present in as well as by rivaling societies, for instance say a secret cult begins to get too influential within a Kingdom the King can attempt to crush it, this would be difficult and long process and would obviously cause them to make enemies with all the societies members but it would create a whole new internal political system that would make realms far less stable and more interesting as the more powerful a society becomes the more benefits its members get but the more it jeopardizes the realms it exists in, this would make it beneficial to be a part of and strengthen a society as a low ranked character but when you are a King or an Emperor you would find powerful Societies being more of a nuisance.

It would also be a vast improvement if societies where alot harder to rank up in, it should be a slower and more drawn out process less based on gaining points monthly until you can level up and more based on events and the like. It should take someone most of their lifetime to become the grand-master of a society and it should be far more engaging.

7.1:

Main addition I would like to see added to the Ruler designer (besides Coat of Arms customizer) is the ability to make yourself a part of a preexisting dynasty as either a sibling or child of an already existing character, it would provide more role play potential, say for example being a forgotten bastard sister of the Karlings, or a lesser known son of Ragnar Lodbrok etc., could also expand on this by being able to make yourself a member of dead dynasties as there are some very interesting ones that it would be fun to play as a member of (Merovingians for example), taking any of these options should of course disable achievements regardless of how many points you spend but it would be a fun and interesting addition nontheless.

7.2:

These are an absolute must have, it already feels weird to me that they are not in the game considering there is already the option for random ruler placement and random faiths. It just feels like either a weird oversight or odd decision on their part.

8:

This sounds amazing, but its hard to tell how well this could work without inside knowledge of how the engine works etc. so I am hesitant to say its a suggestion I would personally make also in part because of how it might effect performance, and even if you can toggle it off it might make things a bit weird or funny if there are mechanics tied to it. I think it would be simpler to just add events, for instance there could be seasonal modifiers that effect gameplay based on the time of year so for instance Winter could reduce levies, Spring could improve taxes etc. with these being assigned to individual provinces and changing based on location (for example Winter in Scandinavia will provide a much larger malus than Winter in Arabia or India etc.)... Though now I write this, it feels like such a given mechanic that I wonder if this is something already in the game that I just havnt noticed. I do agree with the storms for navies though, but rather than have it be a visual thing I think it would best be assigned to events that can trigger while your navy is either on the move or in dock.

9:

This dosnt sound bad, but to me mostly sounds like non ruler dynamic raiders. It do like the sound of it though, it would be cool if it could be tied to your realms wealth and rather than just Pirates could also include in land Bandits. I think a good distinction between the two (other than location) is Pirates will appear when your realm is particularly rich and prosperous whereas organized Bandits will appear when your realm is particularly poor or devastated, essentially representing how Pirates normally appear due to an excess of wealth and trade whereas Bandits and Criminals normally appear due to a lack of it out of desperation.

10:

I love everything here, but I dont see it ever happening due to complexity and the lack of character focus. But I would love to see it nevertheless, food especially as I could picture that being especially dynamic and rather than effecting just your levies could influence your realm as a whole, for instance having provinces that produce a lot of good (plains and grasslands) occupied will hit your kingdom hard which could decrease your levy reinforcement rate and also begin to lower your popular opinion due to famines etc. slowly resulting in more internal unrest. It would make wars riskier and also place an incentive on protecting food production during any wars as well as adding strategic targets to go after with the enemy, would also make certain locations more powerful than others as places like France with alot of plains and grasslands would be able to hold out longer in a war of attrition whereas places like Scandinavia would have to focus more on quick and decisive wars.

11.1:

For this I think rather than have permanent Knights assigned to all vassals it should be only ones you yourself give a Knighthood too, in real life not every noble was a Knight only select ones the lord choose. You should be able to make anyone you want a Knight but should be limited by how much land you have as a Knight by right deserve land for their knew position, so you would be able to make your landed vassals Knights but to make unlanded characters Knights you would need a title/land you can give them, mainly these would be Baronies that you can already freely revoke and then gift to the new Knight. These Knights would be permanent for as long as they are alive but upon their death new ones would have to be chosen. I think this should be the only types of Knights you have removing temporary ones entirely, it would make Knights harder to come by as its based more around the size of your realm and also make quality knights more difficult to come by as if you dont have many baronies in your personal domain you will be forced to make Vassals your Knights even though they may kinda suck.

11.2:

I 100% consider this a must have. Feels really lame to me how I can currently have a castle placed in the one barony between two impassable mountains yet armies can just walk on by like nothing.

11.3:

I agree with this but with one key addition. You should be able to request military access through an interaction that will give an X amount of time for you to move your armies through their lands, this would be independent so for example a realm could give you permission to move through them but not the person you are at war with and vice versa. If you do both get military access though you can have battles inside that realm but doing so will cause a massive opinion malus (the ruler is giving you access to go fight the battle elsewhere, not giving you access to use it as a battlefield) and will result in them cancelling the military access. Obviously you would have free military access with realms you are allied too. This way you still have the option to walk through any realm with the risk of being attacked by their armies like you proposed, but you can also diplomatically arrange to peacefully move through lands which would give you an advantage.

11.4:

This sounds good. I think a slight expansion to have a more simplified version of EU IVs peace deal system would be good. Nothing quite as in depth but something allows for reparations like you suggested but also allows for a way to benefit from a defensive war, in my opinion this should by reclaiming dejure land belonging to your Primary title. This way you only really benefit from winning a defensive war after you have already lost a couple (the idea being you are regaining lang you lost to this realm in previous wars, though to that end maybe done limit it to just dejure land but all land you previously owned and they took), the reparations would be a good option as well of course.
 

Lorcalus

Private
42 Badges
Jan 7, 2019
22
87
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Knights of Honor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Prison Architect
  • Prison Architect: Psych Ward
  • Island Bound
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • Magicka
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
Some really great suggestions here, so would love to give my thoughts on them as well as my own suggestions for them. I feel there really should be more of a discussion in this thread and it should be getting ALOT more attention because these are some well thought out and interesting ideas OP has made.

1.1:

Honestly I think this suggestion is just straight out brilliant, makes perfect sense and would be an all around improvement in my eyes.

1.2:

The idea of Unique holdings seems great, only potential issue I can see is that with them (presumably) being a fourth holding type it could mean you cant use them in counties that only have three holding slots as you need to build one of the original three first (unless that would be changed) which while not necessarily a problem would be a bit of a bummer if for whatever reason you want a three holding province to be your main one or something.

1.4:

Would this be an extra slot that could be used alongside already existing Special Building slots or would it be a generic special slot for baronies without a specific one? I like the idea but I worry about how you would balance it with current special buildings, like if these end up being better or more useful than current special buildings or even Duchy buildings it risks making them both obsolete. I like the idea but I think the current special buildings should be alot better and more useful than anything these would offer, even if that would require going back and re-balancing them, same applies to duchy buildings. I also feel they would have to be limited in how many of each you could have per holdings, or perhaps per realm.

1.5:

Absolutely love this idea, would love some events and decisions surrounding it as well, stuff like being able to hold a feast for only your dynasty members etc. I already more or less assign an ancestral seat myself for Role Play purposes so would love to see it actually added to the game.

1.6:

I think this is something everyone would agree should be added to the game. Only issue I can imagine is potential performance issues.

2:

I basically love the idea of everything mentioned here so dont really have much to add or any thoughts to share.

3.1:

Definitely sounds good, artifacts were a fun addition in CK2 and would love to see that improved upon and added back.

3.2:

This sounds good. Would like to add that it would be cool to add varying qualities for this equipment based both on title and cost, for example normal equipment would be the cheapest and could be made by anyone Count or above, then good quality for a Duke and above, great for a King or above and brilliant for an Emperor. I agree there should be a hard limit for any combination of armor or weapon in regards to bonus prowess varying on quality, for example perhaps 1 prowess for each level of quality so at max you would be getting 8 prowess. If thats considered too op could make it so that rather than an increase in prowess from great to brilliant quality brilliant quality instead adds 0.5 or 1 prestige or something, so maximum benefits you could get from equipment would be 6 prowess and 1 or 2 prestige.

3.3:

These are all great suggestions. One thing I would add is that it would be cool if were your ruler to become a saint (if that ever returns) or reforms their own faith either their bones/body or tomb will become a relic, with its quality depending on what they did, so for example if they were a Catholic saint their body would become a Catholic relic, if they formed their own faith wither with no head of faith or a spiritual head of faith it would become a more powerful relic but limited to just their new faith, whereas if they formed a new faith with them as the Temporal head then it would become the most powerful and most important type of relic that is integral to that new faith.

3.4:

These are awesome suggestions, would add a spectacular amount of flavour to the game so thumbs up.

3.5:

These are both awesome ideas. I could see crowns providing a small opinion bonus and maybe a choice between prestige or piety when commissioning it. One thing I would add for heirlooms is that it would be cool if heirlooms and equipment could be turned into Relics if certain criteria are met, for example say a King using them wins 100 battles without being defeated, such a feat would make them and by extension their weapons legendary, the prowess bonuses would be removed and instead replaced by prestige or other such bonuses. Other such criteria could include forming the HRE, becoming a Crusader King (as in, winning a Crusade and getting the Kingdom, not just receiving the Crusader trait), perhaps if dueling or something similar is implemented then winning X number of duels, reforming a faith and so on and so forth, would make for a good way to depict how weapons and armor were made legendary both in real life and in myth, think of Excalibur and Joyeuse etc.

3.6:

Once again I agree with everything here and dont really have much to add.


4:

This sounds good but I think it sounds a bit unnecessarily complex.

Personally I think it would be better if it was a little more simplistic and you instead just have two councils, a domain council and realm council, the domain council could only seat your courtiers or Barons, Mayors etc. who are a part of your demesne, whereas the realm council would seat your vassals. The domain council seeing to the day to day tasks of your personal demesne (like the council does already in game) and the realm council being a place for your vassals to sit and help govern the realm as a whole. we could also see the return of the council mechanics from CK2, so your Realm council rather than seeing to tasks throughout the realm will instead play a part in its general governance and policy being able to vote on going to war etc. (would also be nice to see the return of realm laws as well, Crown Authority is alright an all but its a bit basic and lacks depth, the return of realm laws and council power would be a nice way to represent this in a more dynamic and in depth way, there would have to be some improvements over CK2 of course as its no perfect but I still think it would be good).

Obviously there could be some new council tasks, but only including the ones in the current game they could be split between domain and realm tasks for each council. For example likes of Convert Faith in County, Integrate Title, Increase Control in County etc. could be realm tasks whereas the likes of Organize Levies and Increase Development would be domain tasks.

5:

This sounds good, basically sounds like an expansion and more interactive version of CK2s education to me. I definitely love the idea of a more theoretical vs more practical education for the latter half.

6:

This sounds good to me, but rather than local and global I think it would be best rather than have the societies be split like this to just have it happen more dynamically. My suggestion would be that each society has a main headquarters (like you suggested) that is centered in a single barony and has its own diplomatic range based on the type of society that people within and who meet the requirements can join, so for example a cult or small religious order may have a very small range limited to just the county or duchy whereas a Knightly Order may have a large one spanning an entire Kingdom. So most societies will start of locally but can slowly grow to be a global one. I think it would also be good if there was a sort of level or tier system for the actual societies themselves representing how they can grown in power, so by a society getting more members and more influence it can slowly grown in size opening up new branches in different parts of the world, unlocking new missions and abilities for members to go on as well as more powers for the society to do. It would be good if this was also dynamic meaning they are capable of losing members and influence and as a result becoming smaller, maybe even going so far as to be destroyed entirely, this could be done through decisions/interactions by rulers whose realms the society is present in as well as by rivaling societies, for instance say a secret cult begins to get too influential within a Kingdom the King can attempt to crush it, this would be difficult and long process and would obviously cause them to make enemies with all the societies members but it would create a whole new internal political system that would make realms far less stable and more interesting as the more powerful a society becomes the more benefits its members get but the more it jeopardizes the realms it exists in, this would make it beneficial to be a part of and strengthen a society as a low ranked character but when you are a King or an Emperor you would find powerful Societies being more of a nuisance.

It would also be a vast improvement if societies where alot harder to rank up in, it should be a slower and more drawn out process less based on gaining points monthly until you can level up and more based on events and the like. It should take someone most of their lifetime to become the grand-master of a society and it should be far more engaging.

7.1:

Main addition I would like to see added to the Ruler designer (besides Coat of Arms customizer) is the ability to make yourself a part of a preexisting dynasty as either a sibling or child of an already existing character, it would provide more role play potential, say for example being a forgotten bastard sister of the Karlings, or a lesser known son of Ragnar Lodbrok etc., could also expand on this by being able to make yourself a member of dead dynasties as there are some very interesting ones that it would be fun to play as a member of (Merovingians for example), taking any of these options should of course disable achievements regardless of how many points you spend but it would be a fun and interesting addition nontheless.

7.2:

These are an absolute must have, it already feels weird to me that they are not in the game considering there is already the option for random ruler placement and random faiths. It just feels like either a weird oversight or odd decision on their part.

8:

This sounds amazing, but its hard to tell how well this could work without inside knowledge of how the engine works etc. so I am hesitant to say its a suggestion I would personally make also in part because of how it might effect performance, and even if you can toggle it off it might make things a bit weird or funny if there are mechanics tied to it. I think it would be simpler to just add events, for instance there could be seasonal modifiers that effect gameplay based on the time of year so for instance Winter could reduce levies, Spring could improve taxes etc. with these being assigned to individual provinces and changing based on location (for example Winter in Scandinavia will provide a much larger malus than Winter in Arabia or India etc.)... Though now I write this, it feels like such a given mechanic that I wonder if this is something already in the game that I just havnt noticed. I do agree with the storms for navies though, but rather than have it be a visual thing I think it would best be assigned to events that can trigger while your navy is either on the move or in dock.

9:

This dosnt sound bad, but to me mostly sounds like non ruler dynamic raiders. It do like the sound of it though, it would be cool if it could be tied to your realms wealth and rather than just Pirates could also include in land Bandits. I think a good distinction between the two (other than location) is Pirates will appear when your realm is particularly rich and prosperous whereas organized Bandits will appear when your realm is particularly poor or devastated, essentially representing how Pirates normally appear due to an excess of wealth and trade whereas Bandits and Criminals normally appear due to a lack of it out of desperation.

10:

I love everything here, but I dont see it ever happening due to complexity and the lack of character focus. But I would love to see it nevertheless, food especially as I could picture that being especially dynamic and rather than effecting just your levies could influence your realm as a whole, for instance having provinces that produce a lot of good (plains and grasslands) occupied will hit your kingdom hard which could decrease your levy reinforcement rate and also begin to lower your popular opinion due to famines etc. slowly resulting in more internal unrest. It would make wars riskier and also place an incentive on protecting food production during any wars as well as adding strategic targets to go after with the enemy, would also make certain locations more powerful than others as places like France with alot of plains and grasslands would be able to hold out longer in a war of attrition whereas places like Scandinavia would have to focus more on quick and decisive wars.

11.1:

For this I think rather than have permanent Knights assigned to all vassals it should be only ones you yourself give a Knighthood too, in real life not every noble was a Knight only select ones the lord choose. You should be able to make anyone you want a Knight but should be limited by how much land you have as a Knight by right deserve land for their knew position, so you would be able to make your landed vassals Knights but to make unlanded characters Knights you would need a title/land you can give them, mainly these would be Baronies that you can already freely revoke and then gift to the new Knight. These Knights would be permanent for as long as they are alive but upon their death new ones would have to be chosen. I think this should be the only types of Knights you have removing temporary ones entirely, it would make Knights harder to come by as its based more around the size of your realm and also make quality knights more difficult to come by as if you dont have many baronies in your personal domain you will be forced to make Vassals your Knights even though they may kinda suck.

11.2:

I 100% consider this a must have. Feels really lame to me how I can currently have a castle placed in the one barony between two impassable mountains yet armies can just walk on by like nothing.

11.3:

I agree with this but with one key addition. You should be able to request military access through an interaction that will give an X amount of time for you to move your armies through their lands, this would be independent so for example a realm could give you permission to move through them but not the person you are at war with and vice versa. If you do both get military access though you can have battles inside that realm but doing so will cause a massive opinion malus (the ruler is giving you access to go fight the battle elsewhere, not giving you access to use it as a battlefield) and will result in them cancelling the military access. Obviously you would have free military access with realms you are allied too. This way you still have the option to walk through any realm with the risk of being attacked by their armies like you proposed, but you can also diplomatically arrange to peacefully move through lands which would give you an advantage.

11.4:

This sounds good. I think a slight expansion to have a more simplified version of EU IVs peace deal system would be good. Nothing quite as in depth but something allows for reparations like you suggested but also allows for a way to benefit from a defensive war, in my opinion this should by reclaiming dejure land belonging to your Primary title. This way you only really benefit from winning a defensive war after you have already lost a couple (the idea being you are regaining lang you lost to this realm in previous wars, though to that end maybe done limit it to just dejure land but all land you previously owned and they took), the reparations would be a good option as well of course.
Thanks for in depth reply. I appreaciate your thoughts on the subject. I aggree with your personal additions on it. Just to answer some of your questions.

1.2 :
With unique holdings I also meant that you wouldnt need the core ones built before constructing them. I had the idea that those kind of holdings would be of use especially in smallest counties instead of core ones.

1.4:
Special building slot would be totally seperate from other ones. There would be a limit of 1 per barony/holding and only special type of building could be built there.
Also, it wouldnt really interffere with Duchy buildings (or any other) since, they would give your other kinds of bonuses (interactions, events etc.).
For example, shrines from relics would qualify as this kind of building or monastery with giving you options about educations etc..
It is more about giving you interactions and flavor than stat bonuses like levy size. Also it provides new perspection on what holdings you build. Usually you dont want to spam temples in your domain but if you have enough relics you may want to be incentivized with spamming shrines in your realm ( thus needing temples - 1 spec. Building per holding and shrines can only be built in temples)

4.

I aggree with you there. Basically i really only want seperation of my domain council and vassal council (everything else is a plus) . My Dukes are not suppose to manage my personal holdings (i have courtiers and barons for it) and vice versa.

11.1

I aggree with the need for more flavour for knights. With the permanent knights i basically want (idea behind it) that if i am king and when i raise army of my dukes, those dukes also lead that army-- thus permanent knights. Problem in that regard is mostly that ck3 regards knights also as some kind of commanders and more flavour about that would be great.

Everything else, I totally aggree with you suggestions/thoughts. Again, thanks for taking time to read/comment. It is not a short thread.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: