sheesh. it's the liege's job to defend the realm. that's a fundamental part of the game world that doesn't need to be repeated on a weekly basis.
- 18
- 2
- 2
I'd Call The Game Farcical but I'm Not Sure that Quite Captures the Essence of the Problem
- Thread starter InsidiousMage
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Nice. So why as a vassal tooltip says that you can improve popular opinion to help your liege with populist faction, but it does nothing? Why as a ruler you're allowed to give land to local culture noble to "pacify locals", but it doesn't do anything either? Should vassals have ways to deal with this problem or not? Question was never whom populist faction targets, question was what vassals can / should do abouit it, It was never answered, except with a misleading tooltip.
That's actually another big complain. Vassals don't care to protect their land, They gladly will lose their kingdom title with 20k army because their emperor has only 1k and can't do anything.
- 13
- 7
raymond. hes this guy
anyway listen id suggest you try modding the game before just uninstalling and giving up on it. the issues with the base game still stand and it would be nice to see them addressed eventually, but theres actually a lot of mods out there holding the entire game up as a playable experience. just give the steam workshop a good look over and you genuinely might find something to iron out the kinks and help you derive more enjoyment and less frustration out of the whole thing
(to be clear, this isnt intended as a counterargument, this is advice from someone who is also frustrated at the state of the game. im actually not interested in getting involved in the bickering going on in this thread)
- 8
- 2
well, you want the province to be the same culture and faith as the top liege. don't tell me there's nothing you can do about that.
- 10
- 2
Yeah, change shoes to local culture and join populist faction, or declare independence. Never care to play a vassal game. Got it.
- 17
- 2
This is the era when the Duke of Bohemia successfully pressed his argument for being elevated as a King within the Empire by (among other factors) pointing out that he and his people were not Germans and thus the King of the Germans was not their King even if he was their Emperor.
If the county, duchy, and kingdom titles are held by co-culturalists, the foreign emperor should not have to concern himself with populist independence revolts, but he should absolutely have to worry about the king launching an independence faction.
- 15
- 3
That's not the issue here.
If your liege decides to revoke as much as a single county from you, then you have the right to refuse and go to war to defend your land.
If he decides to give away your entire domain minus your capital (and even the capital before a recent patch) to a populist faction, you have no way of refusing or resisting. That doesn't make sense to me. You should have the option to refuse, and face the consequences.
- 27
- 5
if that happens you now have a pile of claims that you and your children can press.
..or your liege, for that matter...
- 23
- 2
Except I can't press them because I've lost all but one county, and my liege can't because he's getting his face pushed in.
Please stop defending the current design; it's indefensible.
- 27
- 7
- 4
people are saying they want to be a vassal while simultaneously complaining that things happen that are out of their control.
i honestly don't get that.
- 27
- 3
- 1
I have a large private army.
I should be allowed to use it to fight the populist revolt even if my emperor is a spineless craven who wants to capitulate.
And even if I'm not allowed to, I should have, like, -200 opinion of him for failing to honour his obligations to me (and my fellow vassals should also have their opinion of him similarly cratered; if he won't honour his obligations to me, he can't be trusted to honour his obligations to them.)
- 32
- 6
i agree with the second point wholeheartedly and i was dead serious when i said, 'time for a new liege.' capitulating should have severe consequences for that ar...person.
- 2
- 1
Compare ck3 dev cycles to eu4 and vic3. CK3 is continuously late with work, we just suddenly got a patch, with no forewarning
- 10
- 1
- 1
Nobody has said that "they want to be a vassal while simultaneously complaining that things happen that are out of their control." Please stop misrepresenting people's opinions. It doesn't help the discussion forward, and instead stalls it by forcing people to engage in denials (like the one I just wrote).
The issue remains: the liege should make his decision, and we should make our decision on whether to accept it or not. Just like with revoking. Or are you saying that you consider revoking counties to be poorly designed as is, and that vassals should not be able to refuse a revocation? Personally I don't really see the relevant difference between the two.
- 22
- 5
that's a good point and i guess my answer boils down to another CK pillar i.e. that wars are between two individuals, so the populist leader and the liege. the vassal is collateral damage.Nobody has said that "they want to be a vassal while simultaneously complaining that things happen that are out of their control." Please stop misrepresenting people's opinions. It doesn't help the discussion forward, and instead stalls it by forcing people to engage in denials (like the one I just wrote).
The issue remains: the liege should make his decision, and we should make our decision on whether to accept it or not. Just like with revoking. Or are you saying that you consider revoking counties to be poorly designed as is, and that vassals should not be able to refuse a revocation? Personally I don't really see the relevant difference between the two.
- 19
- 1
I dislike losing land to factions too, but the rest of the complaints in the OP seem oddly specific and blown out of proportion in comparison. Three questions about starpos for a kingdom alone.
Not very conducive to conversation. The game isnt farcical cause of one major complaint and a few minor grievances.
Where are the good parts of your experience in your assessment? You only listed the bad.
And as someone who follows multitude of games. Paradox is very communicative in comparison to most in the industry. Try the discord if you wish. If you expect to be babysat cause you paid for the game, you're overreaching.
Not very conducive to conversation. The game isnt farcical cause of one major complaint and a few minor grievances.
Where are the good parts of your experience in your assessment? You only listed the bad.
And as someone who follows multitude of games. Paradox is very communicative in comparison to most in the industry. Try the discord if you wish. If you expect to be babysat cause you paid for the game, you're overreaching.
Last edited:
- 10
- 7
Yeah the game fails to work as a coherent mix between grand strategy and role playing game. In fact it fails in each department taken individually. The role playing part is near nonexistent while the grand strategy part is very weak. At this point I think it is clear to anybody capable of objective critical reviewing.
Tbh no need to drop a wall of text every few weeks to repeat the same observation with a slightly renewed vocabulary.
Edit : unfortunately I do not see what the devs could realistic do to correct course. It would require to start over the game from scratch as far as gameplay mechanics and game design is concerned but honestly that is just not possible. So lets hope CK4 will be good. Some people will say, "It is possible, look at I:R" but precisely the devs put a lot of work to re-do what what had gone wrong during I:R development and could naturally not fully "fix" the game nor even push their gameplay revisions to their full extend. It does not help either that in theses scenarios, directors are changed and so, the ideal coherent visions tends to be diluted with each new director's personal vision. Stellaris being arguably an example of this phenomenon pushed to the extreme.
Tbh no need to drop a wall of text every few weeks to repeat the same observation with a slightly renewed vocabulary.
Edit : unfortunately I do not see what the devs could realistic do to correct course. It would require to start over the game from scratch as far as gameplay mechanics and game design is concerned but honestly that is just not possible. So lets hope CK4 will be good. Some people will say, "It is possible, look at I:R" but precisely the devs put a lot of work to re-do what what had gone wrong during I:R development and could naturally not fully "fix" the game nor even push their gameplay revisions to their full extend. It does not help either that in theses scenarios, directors are changed and so, the ideal coherent visions tends to be diluted with each new director's personal vision. Stellaris being arguably an example of this phenomenon pushed to the extreme.
Last edited:
- 17
- 4
- 2
Out of interest, did you feel like CK2 was similarly incoherent?
- 3
- 2
As far as I remember, no. In CK2 I do not recall finding that my chaste brother cheated on his wife with my pious sister. Or others typical nonsense that happens so often in CK3. On the contrary I remember that both RPG & strategy mechanics could often works in tandem. Typically it was good to have a vassal with the content traits. It fell like each game sub-genre were complimenting each other and managed to offer bigger stories overall. I do remember my characters changing progressively as they grow older, in part due to what they experiment through my strategic decisions, in part though eh natural flow of RPG mechanics (events, way of life, etc).
Imho the devs made a big mistake when they reduced the number of base traits to only three and introducing many skill trees instead. Especially as they did not make sure the three traits have real and far reaching effect to AI behaviors. It cut the relationship between RPG and strategy for the AI and simultaneously it removed the largest and the most interesting link between RPG and strategy for the player. Aka the ability to tell detailed story as your characters naturally develops through the strategy experience you face in his life as well as the more anecdotal life events.
I am not sure why the devs made many skills trees. Since a few years a lot of devs do it while claiming this turn their game into RPG. While it most of the time its the opposite. Skill trees may be the most famous RPG concept but it is also the crudest one. And it usually takes others mechanics to work in tandem with them (story, tabletop narrator, etc).
CK2 was not perfect but it was better imo. And of course it had the quality of novelty. Unfortunately CK3 feels like a step backward rather than the two steps forward everybody hoped for.
- 32
- 4
- 1