Honest Opinion from a CKII fan

[ardsss]

I am awaiting DLC for Byzantine Empire and Southeast Asia.

I agree. Byzantine Empire right now is flavorless and overpowered. I understand that the Byzantines had unique sucession laws, but as is, having them have primogeniture while everyone else is locked into partition is very unbalanced.

 

[zaboli]

I agree. Byzantine Empire right now is flavorless and overpowered. I understand that the Byzantines had unique sucession laws, but as is, having them have primogeniture while everyone else is locked into partition is very unbalanced.

ERE really need an expansion. It's not fun to play as them, because they just feel like a feudal empire not the Byzantine empire. Playing as the ERE, should make you feel paranoid because it was a large realm filled with ambitious people who liked to seize power. ERE experienced a lot of civil wars IRL, so it makes sense that the game will try to reflect that. But also because they were under constant threat of the Muslims to the east and the Bulgarians to the Nord.

And an ai controlled ERE is annoying because they always completely dominate the map. I also hope they would reintroduce 4th crusade mechanics.

However it are not only the Byzantines that don't feel like the Byzantines, all nations play largely the same, because with game's current mechanics there is no way to abstractly represent the geopolitics where the nation was in. Ghaznavids for example also don't feel like the Ghaznavids. I'm sure that will change in the future with content packs and expansions.

 

[Battlex]

Ah yes, the old MTTH system for councillor tasks, where you wait for anytime between tomorrow and the end of time itself. Making new players in Ireland wait 20 years for a single claim whilst they twiddle their thumbs as a count sure is dynamic, but I'm not quite sure I'd describe it as 'great'.

Don't get me wrong I understand what you mean in that perhaps councillor tasks at the moment are too quick and static in length, however I don't want to ever see the MTTH system attached to tasks again like in CK2. There's definitely a happy medium that can be achieved.

Ireland hasn't been tutorial island for ages

I completely agree.

I also hope that the difficulty option in CK3 drops the opinion malus, and instead boost AI aggression towards human player, boost their ability to amass larger levies, and boost their anti human alliance, especially if human player is becoming a powerful Empire.
Making your vassals artificially more angry with you isnt that fun in my opinion, though, a little harder overall wouldnt be a problem.

Also, make religion opinion modifier harsher, and stress a lot more stressful. As of now I havent reached stress level 2 more than once when I first started out.

This game needs more external threats, and mechanics to deal with powerful Empires, especially human empires. Right now it seems that the AI(Which in spirit of RPG should care about the world around them) is oblivious to rising powers, and the islamic world keeps loosing to the crusaders.

One more thing, Paradox said they had mechanics for making smaller nations able to defend and maybe win against larger nations, but the battle modifiers are so soft that the biggest number still wins. I never think about terrain, passing a enemy castle might kill 150 men, so what, no battle modifier malus for behind enemy lines? Supply wont reach you that easily behind one or two castles.
Make medieval castles shine, they were a major slow down to warfare and immensily important in medieval times. I would give few exceptions to this rule, giving nomad horse peoples, like mongols and other steppe people able to raid and pass enemy castles without malus modifier, making them bad siegers, but a dangerous raider and open battle army.

Okey this became a rant, and its all written in a hurry, so take what I say with a grain of salt.

Honestly amazing how much defending in mountains doesn't actually matter, I'm not saying I should win everytime in them, but when it's 4k vs 6k with about the same amount of MaAs, I'd at least like it to be a close battle and not the enemy to only lose 2k

 

[Battlex]

ERE really need an expansion. It's not fun to play as them, because they just feel like a feudal empire not the Byzantine empire. Playing as the ERE, should make you feel paranoid because it was a large realm filled with ambitious people who liked to seize power. ERE experienced a lot of civil wars IRL, so it makes sense that the game will try to reflect that. But also because they were under constant threat of the Muslims to the east and the Bulgarians to the Nord.

And an ai controlled ERE is annoying because they always completely dominate the map. I also hope they would reintroduce 4th crusade mechanics.

However it are not only the Byzantines that don't feel like the Byzantines, all nations play largely the same, because with game's current mechanics there is no way to abstractly represent the geopolitics where the nation was in. Ghaznavids for example also don't feel like the Ghaznavids. I'm sure that will change in the future with content packs and expansions.

Can the ghaznavids even raid in ck3 as they lack tribal culture and follow a reformed religion. Ck2 they could only raid adjacents but at least they could raid

 

[GeneralPetrov]

Ireland hasn't been tutorial island for ages

Not only is that irrelevant to the point I was trying to make about MTTH being horrible for councillor tasks, but that's also just wrong? This games tutorial literally takes place in Ireland.

 

[Battlex]

Not only is that irrelevant to the point I was trying to make about MTTH being horrible for councillor tasks, but that's also just wrong? This games tutorial literally takes place in Ireland.

The tutorial may take place there, but the phrase 'tutorial island' to rapidly learn game mechanics is no longer Ireland, the HRE or Iberia is far better

 

[nkibilko]

My biggest complaint about CK3 is definitely the art style of the interface... ck2's interface had a really beautiful and satisfying visual aesthetic... the old paper, stone, and stained glass look of ck2 really looks a lot better than what we currently have in ck3, in my opinion.

 

[FreelancePoliceman]

I also am currently not playing CK3. Not because I think it's bad, but because I am waiting for the next update, like I often do with paradox games once I have played them enough for a time. I suspect that part of the problem is that there isn't really *that much* to do other than expanding by declaring wars. CK2 had Societies, a lot more random events, raiding adventurers, more laws that you could pass, diseases, chinese interactions, artifacts, etc. In short, it had a lot more content to give you something to do while you are not expanding. Maybe this increased variety prevents some people from seeing that all the mechanics that CK3 *does* have are a lot better than what CK2 had. Try playing CK2 without any DLCs sometime and then compare that to CK3, and you might see what I mean.

Exactly. The problem is, since Crusader Kings II is a fleshed-out game and CKIII just...isn't, I see no reason to buy and play CKIII, and wouldn't recommend that anyone else play it in its current state either.

 

[David12596]

The only reason I'm not playing CK3 at the moment is because I feel it really lacks story driven events or rather events that are really interesting/game changing. I'm not saying they have to be supernatural, but most of the events are boring and really do not add to any of the story telling aspect of my character.

 

[GeneralPetrov]

The tutorial may take place there, but the phrase 'tutorial island' to rapidly learn game mechanics is no longer Ireland, the HRE or Iberia is far better

Maybe, but again I think you missed the point of my original post. Ireland was just an example, the MTTH for councillor tasks is just terrible in general.

 

[johnnybgood89]

Backstabbing when you are on the crussade should be punishable by the Pope especially when you are good with him and have lot of piety... At least that you can excomunicate backstabber...

 

[johnnybgood89]

Late primogerniture sux also. Don't know why they did it in CK3 like that...

 

[MatthewP]

I’m another ck2 player who so far can’t get into ck3. I honestly can’t tell if I think the game would be really good with a few key tweaks or if I just don’t like the direction it went.

on the tweaks side, there is difficulty and balance. Men at arms are better in this patch than the last, but they’re still problematically overpowered. I do not understand why teleportation is still a thing, add a cooldown already. Even without that, the fact that you just pass them from character to character makes it hard for the game to challenge you after the first character. Of course ck2 had retinues but they were not such a large part of your strength (at least until much later in the game).

On the other side, partition is supposed to be one of the main drivers of difficulty. I just hate the way it works though. It’s incredibly punishing if you play the game naturally (expand when there’s actually a role play reason to expand, only give kids land when they earn it/are at least adults). On the other hand, it’s quite easy to overcome if you game it. I find it very hard to enjoy deliberately sabotaging myself and undoing hours of work in a game, but I also don’t enjoy the experience of starting yet another random holy war so I can quickly put my infant son in charge of a duchy before I die. I’m not sure what the solution is but the status quo is not fun for me.

then there are the skill trees. In some ways these are great. There’s variety and real differences in how characters play with different trees. But I don’t like how it’s completely invariant and player controlled.

I guess this is similar to my issue with partition. I have a relatively low tolerance for deliberately making bad choices to create challenge. If I’m role playing a character it’s higher, but I’m still not going to enjoy a game where I deliberately flub succession, don’t hire men at arms and then get stomped by the AI. And if you don’t severely hamstring yourself in this game (of course, after you understand the mechanics), there is little to prevent you from getting super characters, all-powerful armies and perfectly stable realms.

what I wish (I think) is that the game would take a little control out of my hands. I don’t think partition would bother me so much if there weren’t so many (out of character, gamey) ways to get around it. If it was genuinely a tough challenge you have to deal with every succession and the game was built around that.

I think I would like skill trees more if there was some randomness, or even better, interactivity with gameplay, that determined how my character progressed through them. Honestly I wish they weren’t trees but just skills you could pick up with player guidance but not full control. Basically, I want the game to throw challenges and different situations at me, not give me a sandbox where I can set up different situations or throw challenges at myself if I want to.

 

[zaboli]

Exactly. The problem is, since Crusader Kings II is a fleshed-out game and CKIII just...isn't, I see no reason to buy and play CKIII, and wouldn't recommend that anyone else play it in its current state either.

That doesn't necessarily need to be case. If the game feels different enough from its predecessor.

I’m another ck2 player who so far can’t get into ck3. I honestly can’t tell if I think the game would be really good with a few key tweaks or if I just don’t like the direction it went.

on the tweaks side, there is difficulty and balance. Men at arms are better in this patch than the last, but they’re still problematically overpowered. I do not understand why teleportation is still a thing, add a cooldown already. Even without that, the fact that you just pass them from character to character makes it hard for the game to challenge you after the first character. Of course ck2 had retinues but they were not such a large part of your strength (at least until much later in the game).

On the other side, partition is supposed to be one of the main drivers of difficulty. I just hate the way it works though. It’s incredibly punishing if you play the game naturally (expand when there’s actually a role play reason to expand, only give kids land when they earn it/are at least adults). On the other hand, it’s quite easy to overcome if you game it. I find it very hard to enjoy deliberately sabotaging myself and undoing hours of work in a game, but I also don’t enjoy the experience of starting yet another random holy war so I can quickly put my infant son in charge of a duchy before I die. I’m not sure what the solution is but the status quo is not fun for me.

then there are the skill trees. In some ways these are great. There’s variety and real differences in how characters play with different trees. But I don’t like how it’s completely invariant and player controlled.

I guess this is similar to my issue with partition. I have a relatively low tolerance for deliberately making bad choices to create challenge. If I’m role playing a character it’s higher, but I’m still not going to enjoy a game where I deliberately flub succession, don’t hire men at arms and then get stomped by the AI. And if you don’t severely hamstring yourself in this game (of course, after you understand the mechanics), there is little to prevent you from getting super characters, all-powerful armies and perfectly stable realms.

what I wish (I think) is that the game would take a little control out of my hands. I don’t think partition would bother me so much if there weren’t so many (out of character, gamey) ways to get around it. If it was genuinely a tough challenge you have to deal with every succession and the game was built around that.

I think I would like skill trees more if there was some randomness, or even better, interactivity with gameplay, that determined how my character progressed through them. Honestly I wish they weren’t trees but just skills you could pick up with player guidance but not full control. Basically, I want the game to throw challenges and different situations at me, not give me a sandbox where I can set up different situations or throw challenges at myself if I want to.

Completely understand your point! The partition-thing may sound interesting on paper making it a lot harder to keep your realm together, but in reality, you are just always forced to expand so you can give land to your children. You always end up with a realm with the same situation, where your realm is eventually only controlled by your family members.

Also agree about the skill trees, they are fine but they went a little bit overboard with how much they integrated it as a core mechanic into the gameplay. Almost everything in CK3 revolves around the skill trees, and the only way to get new skills is to wait. The game also feels less open because of them, because you only have so many playstyles representing the skill trees. The worst part is that they kind of turned the game into a waiting simulator... Want to set up an alliance without having to marry off someone? Wait till you unlock the diplomatic perk. Want to buy a claim? Wait for the stewardship perk, etc. It will be way better if our characters could do some kind of challenge to unlock these perks, but even then I still would still be skeptical about the skill trees, they just feel way too gamey and I don't feel like they belong in a Grand Strategy / Politic simulator game.

 

[NexusSix]

I’m another ck2 player who so far can’t get into ck3. I honestly can’t tell if I think the game would be really good with a few key tweaks or if I just don’t like the direction it went.

on the tweaks side, there is difficulty and balance. Men at arms are better in this patch than the last, but they’re still problematically overpowered. I do not understand why teleportation is still a thing, add a cooldown already. Even without that, the fact that you just pass them from character to character makes it hard for the game to challenge you after the first character. Of course ck2 had retinues but they were not such a large part of your strength (at least until much later in the game).

On the other side, partition is supposed to be one of the main drivers of difficulty. I just hate the way it works though. It’s incredibly punishing if you play the game naturally (expand when there’s actually a role play reason to expand, only give kids land when they earn it/are at least adults). On the other hand, it’s quite easy to overcome if you game it. I find it very hard to enjoy deliberately sabotaging myself and undoing hours of work in a game, but I also don’t enjoy the experience of starting yet another random holy war so I can quickly put my infant son in charge of a duchy before I die. I’m not sure what the solution is but the status quo is not fun for me.

then there are the skill trees. In some ways these are great. There’s variety and real differences in how characters play with different trees. But I don’t like how it’s completely invariant and player controlled.

I guess this is similar to my issue with partition. I have a relatively low tolerance for deliberately making bad choices to create challenge. If I’m role playing a character it’s higher, but I’m still not going to enjoy a game where I deliberately flub succession, don’t hire men at arms and then get stomped by the AI. And if you don’t severely hamstring yourself in this game (of course, after you understand the mechanics), there is little to prevent you from getting super characters, all-powerful armies and perfectly stable realms.

what I wish (I think) is that the game would take a little control out of my hands. I don’t think partition would bother me so much if there weren’t so many (out of character, gamey) ways to get around it. If it was genuinely a tough challenge you have to deal with every succession and the game was built around that.

I think I would like skill trees more if there was some randomness, or even better, interactivity with gameplay, that determined how my character progressed through them. Honestly I wish they weren’t trees but just skills you could pick up with player guidance but not full control. Basically, I want the game to throw challenges and different situations at me, not give me a sandbox where I can set up different situations or throw challenges at myself if I want to.

Top post. Fully agree with everything here.

"I think I would like skill trees more if there was some randomness, or even better, interactivity with gameplay, that determined how my character progressed through them. Honestly I wish they weren’t trees but just skills you could pick up with player guidance but not full control. Basically, I want the game to throw challenges and different situations at me, not give me a sandbox where I can set up different situations or throw challenges at myself if I want to."

That really sums up my feelings about the game as well. CK3 can still be a great game but we will have to see what / if the Devs plan anything.

 

[Reaperdamo]

i have to agree. CK3 is not grand strategy by any stretch of the imagination. Its laughably easy. lacking in peacetime content and choices i.e. you cant even fight on the battlefield anymore, it may have the flavour that meme makers love, but it lacks historical flavour for me. And they didn't even try to include trade, which is just baffling. Throughout history the pursuit of wealth and the control of it has been one of the main drivers of empires.
To be honest i am playing EU4 again after a long hiatus and whilst that game doesnt have the rpg mechanics of CK - at least it has depth. And i am genuinely excited about the new patch that is upcoming for Imperator, but as a long term paradox fan CK3 was designed for the new player and the masses and at that they succeeded but it has quickly bored me. I remain hopeful though that as more gets added it will rise in complexity (fingers crossed).

 

[zaboli]

i have to agree. CK3 is not grand strategy by any stretch of the imagination. Its laughably easy. lacking in peacetime content and choices i.e. you cant even fight on the battlefield anymore, it may have the flavour that meme makers love, but it lacks historical flavour for me. And they didn't even try to include trade, which is just baffling. Throughout history the pursuit of wealth and the control of it has been one of the main drivers of empires.
To be honest i am playing EU4 again after a long hiatus and whilst that game doesnt have the rpg mechanics of CK - at least it has depth. And i am genuinely excited about the new patch that is upcoming for Imperator, but as a long term paradox fan CK3 was designed for the new player and the masses and at that they succeeded but it has quickly bored me. I remain hopeful though that as more gets added it will rise in complexity (fingers crossed).

Harsh words but I understand why you feel that way. Did you like CK2? Considering it also had some of the flaws that you mentioned.

 

[Torredebelem]

I already gave my opinion in the first page regarding the OP post and it was well received.

Other than that, I think the major flaws of CK3 lie in the same gameplay experience no matter where one chooses to play, a lack of more (and more!) events, the teleportation of armies, not enough internal and external challenges to one's own rule, a limited experience during peacetime (more events might overcome this eventually) and too much focus on warfare and map painting with far too easy to get CB.

Some of these points can be addressed in a single patch while time and the host of upcoming DLCs will solve all the other complaints. I am a patient fellow.

CK3 is a great game with more potencial than CK2.

 

[johnnybgood89]

I would like to see rework on the invite to court mechanism. In CK2, yes it was too easy to invite people, but here is just nonsence. Plus, they hid that option instead making a visible button for it.
I think that power of your kingdom, traits, size of the realm, alliances etc. should have impact on the people so you can easier get people with good stats to come to your court.

 

[TheFeudalBavarian]

I would like to see rework on the invite to court mechanism. In CK2, yes it was too easy to invite people, but here is just nonsence. Plus, they hid that option instead making a visible button for it.
I think that power of your kingdom, traits, size of the realm, alliances etc. should have impact on the people so you can easier get people with good stats to come to your court.

I am kinda a fan of hiding a lot of menu options in right click sub menus. It's decluttering the UI and you find all the relevant and available options right where you need them.