There were plenty. The search function will help you out if you want to read a few.
- 5
- 2
- 2
- 1
I'm NOT on a boat!! Navy/Naval/Transport [MEGA-THREAD]
- Thread starter Nicolas-
- 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.
- Status
I find the new system makes playing coastal, small counties/duchies much more challenging. I could previously start eating at my neighbors with only really a worry that my other neighbors would try to eat me back. So it was a game of regional politics.
I tried playing Ireland for a little bit, in an aggressive manner, and found that counties in france, iceland and scandanavia would declare war on me one at a time after i would declare on a non-allied irish county. I think the lack of need for a navy makes the AI treat small independent counties as thought they are 'literally neighbors'.
Is this a bad thing? I don't know. It changed how I play. But it is very different to norm; when I would just worry about groups in ireland or the english isle.
I tried playing Ireland for a little bit, in an aggressive manner, and found that counties in france, iceland and scandanavia would declare war on me one at a time after i would declare on a non-allied irish county. I think the lack of need for a navy makes the AI treat small independent counties as thought they are 'literally neighbors'.
Is this a bad thing? I don't know. It changed how I play. But it is very different to norm; when I would just worry about groups in ireland or the english isle.
- 1
- 1
- 1
- 1
All say new system...NOT IS NEW! NOT IS NEW! Are the system of ck1! CK1! Repeat: NOT. IS. NEW! Paradox have choosed the easiest choose to resolve the AI issue creating other issue!
- 5
- 4
- 2
Actually it is just a reversion to CK1 mechanics....and because there is no real limit on how far you can send your troops it creates immersion killing border gore and silly enclaves.
Also the aggressiveness of the AI is an issue...because Counts and Higher tiered characters aren't upgrading their castles.....because they spend all their money on wars.
It makes the game almost non playable after the first 150 years...
- 10
- 4
A system like the one for levies would be nice. "all ships rally here", maybe even split it up, so you have the transport and the galleys.
1 transport = holds 100 units - 0 attack 5 defend 0 pursuit 5 screening
1 galley = 10 attack/defend 10 pursuit 0 screening
special unit: Longboats - functions as both transport and galley "can defend themselves" (15 attack 5 defend 15 pursuit 5 screening)
Tribal building: Boatmaker's hut - tier 1 to 4 - 8 transport 8 galleys / 10 transport 10 galleys / 13 transport 12 galleys / 15 transport 15 galleys
Feudal building: Tradeports - adds transport ships into existing building, from 5 transport tier 1 to 30 transport tier 7
Feudal building: Shipyard - builds galleys - tier 1 to 7 - 5/10/15/20/25/30/35
note: as the game is right now, when seigeing coastal, just add a small group of levies to scout, and when they come, just flee to the waters, invincible in you little boats for just a few coins..
- 4
- 3
The people for the boating system use so many straw man arguments. First of all: They argue that the current system is realistic since it was possible to move troops over water. Obvious straw man. I don't think I need to argue why this is a terrible argument at best. Secondly: They present other straw men like vikings being over powered like they are, or that you could move as many troops over water in ck2. None of these arguments are valid. The fact is that the current system promotes frustrating and bad gameplay ... and fixing AI pathfinding would not fix it either, since the current system is highly exploitable by players too. Running from your inland city with 20k troops, jumping into boats, travelling half way around the world, sieging down a city, then running over mountains and jumping into boats on the other side of the mountains, sieging the city again, getting routed southward and managing to flee into new boats for some reason is ludicrous ... It is neither fun nor realistic. It is straight up bad gameplay.
- 17
- 2
- 1
The issue is that almost all replacement systems have at least some of those issues or others. As long as no replacement system has been found that fixes them without causing new issues (any ship levy system would also not be realistic as rulers generally did not have standing navies for troop transport). Fixing AI pathfinding combined with some other changes (slower embarkment time especially in low development areas would fix the most important issues like the annoying AI capital rushing) would in my opinion be better than having as system like the ck2 one (where your example would still be possible as those ships could easily sail around in the time it take you to siege the city and cross the mountains) while a big naval system would also be very unlikely to be more realistic than the current system.
- 5
- 4
I honestly don't mind the new system. I'm sure if/when they do a dedicated naval overhaul with combat there will be a better system. All I'd really like to see is more clarity on what it's going to cost me to move troops over water. For whatever reason I find the tooltips to be inconsistent in giving me a cost or not. Maybe I'm tryingto move them at the wrong zoom level or something. I think maybe it's a little too cheap to use boats right now, but that's a balance issue more than a mechanic. And I've primarily been playing as vikings, so cheaper does make more sense there.
There needs to be an Amphibious landing penalty of some kind . Moral is no longer a factor . But Advange is . Disembarking may cause like a -5 disadvantage for 20 secs or something. but You could put a special stat for Lightfoot to decrease that time . Giving lightfoot troops a special role. Becasue Lightfoot tRoops are not a counter to Heavyfoot, Heavy Cavalry is the counter or should be the counter to Heavy_infantry.
There is a -30 advantage penalty for having recently landed already lasting 30 days.
Last edited:
- 5
- 1
- 1
I didn't know that, TY
Ill increase that in my Mod . See what happens!
Don't mind the mechanic so much, as the way it is implimented. CK2 large fleets would suck your money dry faster than a prostitutes knickers.
Now, its pretty trivial.
Be nice if some aspect of fleet building was in the later game when, in history, ruling the seas meant something. Might encroach on EU4 territory then though.
Now, its pretty trivial.
Be nice if some aspect of fleet building was in the later game when, in history, ruling the seas meant something. Might encroach on EU4 territory then though.
- 2
I mean they could add that you use up supplies while traveling by see and naval attrition for longer journeys.
They could also tweak the AI a bit to be smarter about using navel travel.
But the system is realistic and functional for a Medieval style game.
There simply was no standing navy for the majority of medieval Rulers.
But the CK2 idea of having only a small amount of ships available or no ships at all was deeply flawed. I mean we know that people went by boat over to America over 10k years earlier... It all lead to a huge imbalance and no fun at all.
The system in CK3 is easy to deal with and very fair. (you can beat an army two times your size if it comes by sea)
And if you don't like naval "enclaves" just turn it off in the game rules.
Being raided by sea was the norm in Medieval times, finally we can feel like the English.
They could also tweak the AI a bit to be smarter about using navel travel.
But the system is realistic and functional for a Medieval style game.
There simply was no standing navy for the majority of medieval Rulers.
But the CK2 idea of having only a small amount of ships available or no ships at all was deeply flawed. I mean we know that people went by boat over to America over 10k years earlier... It all lead to a huge imbalance and no fun at all.
The system in CK3 is easy to deal with and very fair. (you can beat an army two times your size if it comes by sea)
And if you don't like naval "enclaves" just turn it off in the game rules.
Being raided by sea was the norm in Medieval times, finally we can feel like the English.
- 5
THIS APPEAR WITH CK2! Not this! In this you have unlimited army and raider and levy are separated before are fused i know for much hot have played ck2 use the boat are hard but the excuse for convince the ck1 system is good are useless! Sorry i not want a dowmgrade i want a upgrade if i play ck3 not a downgrade to ck1 meccanics because dev are too lazy to think a solution!
- 2
My main issue is here not lack of the ships as units, but that the cost for embarkation is laughably small. Plus, the attrition cost is almost non existing. There is a reason why long trips by boat in the Middle Ages were not a thing (if you do not count examples like Crusades, and even then large part of army moved through mainland)
So instead of adding ships, perhaps is better to increase the cost for ship transport, and increase the attrition. At least as a temporary fix, until bigger change will be done (inevitably) in one of incoming DLCs
Maybe that can be tied to the desperately requied change in AI politics, and the urgent need for removal of barebone marriage=alliance system, which results in world wars in which countries from opposite sides of the world create weird Alliances, and we get irritating exclaves (even with strict rules)
For instance, Apulia and Barcelona joined Sweden (!) in its war against England (England was allied by Hungary)...I mean, this is just idiotic
So instead of adding ships, perhaps is better to increase the cost for ship transport, and increase the attrition. At least as a temporary fix, until bigger change will be done (inevitably) in one of incoming DLCs
Maybe that can be tied to the desperately requied change in AI politics, and the urgent need for removal of barebone marriage=alliance system, which results in world wars in which countries from opposite sides of the world create weird Alliances, and we get irritating exclaves (even with strict rules)
For instance, Apulia and Barcelona joined Sweden (!) in its war against England (England was allied by Hungary)...I mean, this is just idiotic
- 7
for alliance not exist the diplomatic range? This not avoid this problem? Add the cog and not naval battle are simple to are: need only copy the formula of ck2,add a pic resolved!
- 6
The limited range could be temporary fix, but I am afraid that the issue is much more complex
- 2
in Ck2 it worked pretty well, like with the Norse I couldn't have contact with Byzantium and Italy (I mean it wasn't raiding)
- 5
- 2
Which brings me to the point...why PDX changed it for CK3.
I mean, why it simplified the Alliance mechanic to the point that is completely random
I mean, why it simplified the Alliance mechanic to the point that is completely random
- 2
- 1
- 1
Another time to say to paradox: IF NOT ARE BROKEN NOT FIX IT!
- 3
- 1
- Status