Immersion Killers

[Finzi]

Immersion killers are situations that for me, just appear unrealistic or downright strange. While obviously CK2 isn't a perfect historical simulator and doesn't try to be, I think there are a few issues which could be improved upon, for gameplay reasons as well as historicity.

One of these is the accumulation of territories which seems to happen over the course of the game so that by the late game a few powers seem to control counties all over the map. In my current game as Lombardy by the late 1300s Western Europe had pretty much been divided up between Ireland, the HRE, England, and Castille. HRE owned their core territories of Germany, Bohemia and the low countries as well as all of England; Ireland owned Scotland and a large amount of France such as Aquitaine and Toulouse; Castille owned the Iberian Peninsula as well as all of Ireland and England owned a couple of counties in England but their main power base was in Southern Italy. Another strange situation is Georgia owning a huge amount of land in northern Russia and Scandinavia, which is separated from its home territories by the Golden Horde.

It made the entire map disjointed and confusing, with the majority of rulers having their holdings split up all over the map and the weird thing was the relocation of entire nations to new places, e.g. the fact that "Ireland" no longer controlled any of its original island but was now a major power in France. I know that historically rulers did have their possessions split up, such as Spain's possession of the Netherlands in the (1500s?), but that was generally the exception not the rule, and possessions which were removed from their kings by a large amount of land and with foreign powers cutting through the middle of them generally split off and became independent sooner or later, which I haven't seen happening in CK2.

Maybe a solution to this problem could be to increase the relations penalty from distance for vassals, or increase the 'foreigner' relations penalty. I don't know what the answer is, but it's quite a strange situation in game as it stands at the moment.

 

[riknap]

viceroys would have potentially been perfect, but they were cut out from initial development due to resources and all

 

[Fukushu]

The trouble with trying to correct for situations like you describe is that the mechanics that allow for CKII to be such a great game (all the marriage/inheritance possibilities, holy wars, etc.) sort of cater to the hold-territory-all-over-the-place model. Also, distance penalties are quite severe: I have to keep my dukes in Egypt at +35 or they have a revolt chance. I dot agree that perhaps there should be more internal strife in large, AI built empires, just so that the HRE and the ERE cannot get so bloatedly huge with almost no internal revolts of any significance. Also, I do kind of like the element of chance in the game, and am constantly amused by the AI antics.

 

[Finzi]

The trouble with trying to correct for situations like you describe is that the mechanics that allow for CKII to be such a great game (all the marriage/inheritance possibilities, holy wars, etc.) sort of cater to the hold-territory-all-over-the-place model. Also, distance penalties are quite severe: I have to keep my dukes in Egypt at +35 or they have a revolt chance. I dot agree that perhaps there should be more internal strife in large, AI built empires, just so that the HRE and the ERE cannot get so bloatedly huge with almost no internal revolts of any significance. Also, I do kind of like the element of chance in the game, and am constantly amused by the AI antics.

I agree, especially regarding the HRE. Whilst the Byzantines are sometimes checked by the Turks, depending on the starting date you pick, it seems that HRE never has any neighbours that can challenge them, France is probably the strongest European power after HRE and I've never seen them consistently beat them. Even when the whole empire seems to have collapsed into Civil War, in 5 years it will be completely intact and as powerful as ever.

 

[Fukushu]

Very true. I think I have seen France fight the HRE like once, ever, and it was for control of a single country, which France lost. The HRE does always seems to reform even after massive internal rebellions. It would be really cool if the HRE broke up into the kingdoms it contains, like Frisia, Bohemia, Germany, Burgundy, and Italy. That would make for a very interesting Europe.

 

[Emre Yigit]

Basilica Tribuo - which I'm coming to like more and more - has an elegant way of reducing the HRE's strength:

hre_empire_nerf = {
	potential = {
		is_ruler = yes
	}

	trigger = {
        NOT = {
            any_war = {
                defender = {
                    character = ROOT
                }
            }
        }
        has_landed_title = e_hre
	}
	
	city_vassal_max_levy = -10.0
	castle_vassal_max_levy = -10.0
	temple_vassal_max_levy = -10.0
}

Ta-da!

 

[Richard Dolder]

Basilica Tribuo - which I'm coming to like more and more - has an elegant way of reducing the HRE's strength:

Ta-da!

better solution, nerf large realms in general.
Once your the size of the HRE you should be so focused on internal management you shouldn't have time for conquest.

 

[unmerged(464016)]

Immersion killers are situations that for me, just appear unrealistic or downright strange. While obviously CK2 isn't a perfect historical simulator and doesn't try to be, I think there are a few issues which could be improved upon, for gameplay reasons as well as historicity.

One of these is the accumulation of territories which seems to happen over the course of the game so that by the late game a few powers seem to control counties all over the map. In my current game as Lombardy by the late 1300s Western Europe had pretty much been divided up between Ireland, the HRE, England, and Castille. HRE owned their core territories of Germany, Bohemia and the low countries as well as all of England; Ireland owned Scotland and a large amount of France such as Aquitaine and Toulouse; Castille owned the Iberian Peninsula as well as all of Ireland and England owned a couple of counties in England but their main power base was in Southern Italy. Another strange situation is Georgia owning a huge amount of land in northern Russia and Scandinavia, which is separated from its home territories by the Golden Horde.

It made the entire map disjointed and confusing, with the majority of rulers having their holdings split up all over the map and the weird thing was the relocation of entire nations to new places, e.g. the fact that "Ireland" no longer controlled any of its original island but was now a major power in France. I know that historically rulers did have their possessions split up, such as Spain's possession of the Netherlands in the (1500s?), but that was generally the exception not the rule, and possessions which were removed from their kings by a large amount of land and with foreign powers cutting through the middle of them generally split off and became independent sooner or later, which I haven't seen happening in CK2.

Maybe a solution to this problem could be to increase the relations penalty from distance for vassals, or increase the 'foreigner' relations penalty. I don't know what the answer is, but it's quite a strange situation in game as it stands at the moment.

Well de jure shifting should only be able to occur if land is connected IMHO. Nothing more annoying than seeing random duchies belong to an actual de jure sprawled across the map.


What this then does is encorage the AI to accept defeat in some circumstances instead of always being aggressive towards reclaiming stuff within its de jure.









As for penalties and such , i don't feel its the right way to go. Watch HRE with the new distant realm rebellions that came with 1.05. Every game for me HRE eventually takes Africa and parts of Iberia , they rebel due to distance , some win because theres too many for the HRE to get to in time before war score ticks in favor of the rebels. HRE has to accept surrender , than once everything is settled he starts pressing his claims for said lands again. He wins (obviously) and the cycle repeats (literally a new ruler comes along and the same territories rebel over and over).


The whole thing is silly and a TRUE immersion killer.


I rather see the AI allow people to go independent in cases like this. I know as a player i do , i seriously just xfer vassalage to the holy orders or someone if its far away (even if its not connected to my realm ill often xfer it away).

 

[Morwys]

Indeed, everyone here has pointed some serious flaws in the game, but as have been pointed out also, some fixes woud make the game worser.

My solution to all of this, would be to make the AI much less agressive overall - give them something like a "geographical agenda": counties that have same culture and are a de jure holding should be top priority for them; counties of different culture should only be taken after everything else - and only if they're rich or connected by land. And so on.

 

[InnocentIII]

Well, given that in the time period the point is lands being distributed by personal inheritance rather than for geographic/population reasons, it's not an immersion killer for me.

Still I think you're right about excessive consolidation. Watching Paradoxianlp's Habsburg game, nearly all the HRE is owned by three families, and the HRE and ERE have been allied for ages. Which means the vast bulk of central/eastern Europe is locked in like a chess game where no piece have been taken. The ability of the AI to consolidate holdings, or rather the inability of lesser AI powers to avoid being gobbled up or to break free seems wrong.

Of course maybe that's WAD with personal holdings consolidating to modern countries by 1453, even if they're not the countries we know, I'd still rather see more fluidity late in the game.

 

[Lord Samuel]

Indeed, everyone here has pointed some serious flaws in the game, but as have been pointed out also, some fixes woud make the game worser.

My solution to all of this, would be to make the AI much less agressive overall - give them something like a "geographical agenda": counties that have same culture and are a de jure holding should be top priority for them; counties of different culture should only be taken after everything else - and only if they're rich or connected by land. And so on.

+1 for lowering AI aggressiveness, especially among big blobs. Except maybe for the Golden Horde.
+1 for a "geographical agenda" assigned to every duchy, kingdom and empire titles.

I always found AI too aggressive, especially large empires.
Also, I wish vassal Kings would succeed more often in getting independent, with the Emperor losing claim on the kingdom, for example when the rebelling kingdom title has a foreign original culture.

 

[grumphie]

one, imho, sipmle fix: make all independence wars one war. everybody fights uniform, and everyone gets independent afte rthe war. makes doomstackign small counts less useable and should have mroe vassels gaining actual independence.

 

[Zireael]

+1 for lowering AI aggressiveness, especially among big blobs. Except maybe for the Golden Horde.
+1 for a "geographical agenda" assigned to every duchy, kingdom and empire titles.

I agree completely.

EDIT: @ up: maybe not this, but make them look for allies before they start an independence war as a puny 1-county vassal of a 30+ county realm.

 

[unmerged(464016)]

Indeed, everyone here has pointed some serious flaws in the game, but as have been pointed out also, some fixes woud make the game worser.

My solution to all of this, would be to make the AI much less agressive overall - give them something like a "geographical agenda": counties that have same culture and are a de jure holding should be top priority for them; counties of different culture should only be taken after everything else - and only if they're rich or connected by land. And so on.

I don't particularly agree with less aggressive ai. I think the AI is actually probably too passive as it is (specially against empires , Kings and below literally never declare war on empires). IF the AI are passive , it feels like its just the Player running around taking what he wants.


Two things i think could REALLY improve the game here.





1 ; If the balance of power is tilted too far in one rulers favour , he should start to take relations penalties with Neighboring Rulers. It should eventually culminate in an Alliance of sorts between "threatened" Rulers. E.g HRE starts conquering France , Starts taking out Poland and Hungary. Instead of them all doing nothing about it. What if they started banding together? What if Denmark , Sweden and the Independent's in Italy were also part of it? Suddenly , the HRE has a real fight on its hands if it wants to bully them around. As well as this , they might even be able to re claim their occupied de jure lands.

- This is reasonably historic as well. By even the 1300's , Rulers like France and some of the Italian's ect were searching for allies to halt HRE aggression. France even went to far as to send envoys to the OTTOMANS in the 1500's , who were infidels , and it eventually culminated in a long standing alliance. The time period id expect to see this start to happen would indeed be around 1300's. I don't think Europe was as concerned about Power struggles and the balance of it in 1066 (though pretty sure they would have been if HRE conquered 1/2 of France , Hungary , Poland and Denmark) , but rulers did still seek alliances for reasons other than marriage , and definitely for defense.


2 : Medium CA is the true Scourge of all Blobs. I can't express my disappointment with Medium Ca enough. I actually recently played a few games through with Medium Ca basically modded out (vassals can now fight each other till Absolute Ca). I noticed some cool things. Firstly , Germany was huge , rebelled against the HRE , and won. He stayed independent. Secondly , Burgundy did the same and took a chunk almost as big as France with him. Eventually , Bavaria was formed and it looked very threatening and likely to rebel soon (i started a new game before i could witness it). So basically when a big party rebel's , they have a MUCH higher chance of succeeding long term then a bunch of minor or petty counts and dukes. The Emperor will just come back in 10-20 maybe even 30 years time and press his claims on weak people. Germany and Burgundy could stand up to him , so they survived.

-Historically the HRE had nothing remotely close to Medium CA. The hre was , for all comparative purposes , constantly at a state between autonomous vassals and limited ca. The thought of the Empire getting High ca in a few generations and turning to Primogeniture in the 1100's is absurd as far as history goes , yet i see it pretty much every game.

 

[tnick0225]

In my game HRE only got to High CA in the early to mid 1300s only to be lowered by my eventual involvement in a plot. But I'm wondering if France will start looking at challenging the HRE a bit more over the Burgundian lands due to the introduction of the extra empires. As much as the empire changes in 1.06 are debated I'm wondering if it may add a level of AI challenging other large AI countries more. At least this is what I'm hoping for as France and the HRE seem to be logical adversaries but never seem to fight ever which is sad.

 

[unmerged(464016)]

In my game HRE only got to High CA in the early to mid 1300s only to be lowered by my eventual involvement in a plot. But I'm wondering if France will start looking at challenging the HRE a bit more over the Burgundian lands due to the introduction of the extra empires. As much as the empire changes in 1.06 are debated I'm wondering if it may add a level of AI challenging other large AI countries more. At least this is what I'm hoping for as France and the HRE seem to be logical adversaries but never seem to fight ever which is sad.

Haha thats an awesome run. Was he sitting at Med ca for much of that time?





Im not entirely sure if it will workout that way though in the new patch. A lot of people were complaining about how "historical' it is to have the new Empires. The dev's said you probably won't see them formed often so im assuming France will have a hard time making one. But ti would be kinda cool to see Empirical France take on the HRE.

 

[Zireael]

@ Kynaz: I completely agree with the earlier posts. Maybe limiting the AI HRE to Med Crown Authority is the solution? So that a player might have higher Crown Authority... but an AI won't.

 

[GAGA Extrem]

I limited the HRE CA and succession laws in my BGA mod by adding a legalism requirement (or to be exact: a higher requirement than other titles).
Seems to work quite well, as the HRE usually goes through phases of stability where it can expand a bit and times of instability where a lot of vassals fight against the emperor.

 

[grumphie]

imo having vassels fighting amaongst themselves more wouldnt fix the problem. anyone with even half decent vassel managing skill can easly avoid the formation of superdukes, while the AI will suck and break apart. the coalition thing would IMO be a better idea, with some sort of threath meter or so, and the ability to call major vassels to war(i.e. the duke of aquataine if the target is france)

 

[Finzi]

1 ; If the balance of power is tilted too far in one rulers favour , he should start to take relations penalties with Neighboring Rulers.[/B] It should eventually culminate in an Alliance of sorts between "threatened" Rulers. E.g HRE starts conquering France , Starts taking out Poland and Hungary. Instead of them all doing nothing about it. What if they started banding together? What if Denmark , Sweden and the Independent's in Italy were also part of it? Suddenly , the HRE has a real fight on its hands if it wants to bully them around. As well as this , they might even be able to re claim their occupied de jure lands.

- This is reasonably historic as well. By even the 1300's , Rulers like France and some of the Italian's ect were searching for allies to halt HRE aggression. France even went to far as to send envoys to the OTTOMANS in the 1500's , who were infidels , and it eventually culminated in a long standing alliance. The time period id expect to see this start to happen would indeed be around 1300's. I don't think Europe was as concerned about Power struggles and the balance of it in 1066 (though pretty sure they would have been if HRE conquered 1/2 of France , Hungary , Poland and Denmark) , but rulers did still seek alliances for reasons other than marriage , and definitely for defense.

I like the idea of powers banding together when threatened, this could go a long way towards adjusting the balance of power in Europe which always seems to be several large powers (ALWAYS including the HRE) dominating everything.