No release/ransom/execute all prisoners option. in some long wars i can have 20+ prisoners which just makes it a complete slog to go through
- 3
Most Hated Thing About CK2
- Thread starter Wonyenners
- 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.
However, there is such a thing as an informed opinion which in the case of computer games is best formed by actually playing the game in question.
- 3
- 1
This one frustrates me, in my current Khazar game I have over 500 people in prison, it's such a chore finding anyone in my court.
- 3
The one thing I HATE from early on, though added features have reduced this, is not being able to have several character windows open for comparisons and cross references when tracing relationships, assessing what they have to offer, tracking down the details of plots, choosing individuals out of the crowd, and just putting a pin in someone for a few minutes while doing something else and not needing to note the exact name or hunt again for the character (having a few windows was old 20 years ago).
This led me to shelve the game for a time. The features are so much better now, but still hate the tyranny of navigating a single path only and a character at a time.
This led me to shelve the game for a time. The features are so much better now, but still hate the tyranny of navigating a single path only and a character at a time.
- 5
Can someone explain this auto-retreat thing? I don't recall ever having encountered such a mechanic (assuming it's something other than shattered retreat, as that only triggers when you lose).
- 3
Gavelkind should be some sort of decision box like splitting armies - you click and drag various titles to the various heirs and don't get to clock "OK" until it's deemed to be balanced.
At the same time, anyone receiving a title equal in rank to the player character should automatically become a tributary (unless their current primary title is equal or higher). Example - a double Duke dies leaving his realm to his two sons, they each get one Duchy but the second son starts off as a tributary of the first, unless he is already a duke in his own right. This represents the fact that the realm is actually deemed to be run by both sons together and the realms is in fact still united.
A bit of a kludge but probably the best possible unless and until we get joint title holdings and multiple lieges.
- 6
- 1
where do you disable the council in the game rules or do you have to disable Conclave? Conclave does some things well, but the Council is horribly implemented. I regularly get popups within the first month of unpausing a new game asking for increased council power with levies five times what I could muster from people who have an 80+ opinion of me. The amount of tedioum the council mechanic adds is just moronic. I would like to keep the education changes and would not mind the council even if it were actually realistic and not a "how can we make the game harder... oh lets make it tedious and call it harder mechanic". So turning off the council or even a mod that fixes it would add, not take away from my experience.
yeah, yeah, I could marry my children into my vassels, but then they have designs on the throne and most guides recommend against it and say toi find content strangers to give territory to. So Conclave forces you to be gamey to avoid twenty council power pushes per second.
yeah, yeah, I could marry my children into my vassels, but then they have designs on the throne and most guides recommend against it and say toi find content strangers to give territory to. So Conclave forces you to be gamey to avoid twenty council power pushes per second.
Last edited:
- 3
- 2
About CK 2, I hate that ALL PAGANS are Prestige based. I understand this being a thing for Norse, because they can do things that give prestige easily. But for others? Other pagans don't have all those features for prestige. I liked that Paradox gave Nomads their own "thing" so that they would not just be Steppe Norse in spirit. They should do that with other tribals aswell.
Examples. These probably don't reflect reality at all. These are just examples of what might be possible.
Slavic - money based. However they don't get their money from their holdings. Their own holdings produce almost a little money as typical tribal norse holdings. Instead, to produce money, they must build trade enclaves in neibghouring contries. These trade enclaves would be the lesser variants of Merchant Republic Trade Posts and also lesser variants of trade posts on the silk road. Slavic rulers would have access to similar CB's that Merchant Republics have. Embargo and seize tribal holding against valid targets. After all, that is exactly how slavs ended up in the area that is Rus/Ilmen. And due to their more money focused gameplay, their realms would convert to land based merchant republics majority of the time. (This would also imply that gameplay for land based merchant republics would be included.) To reform their religion, they would need to build a certain amount of temple holdings to get enough moral authority.
Suomenusko - piety based. Suomenusko on the map extends gigantic swathes of land. And within that area, everyone practiced their faith differently. So, Suomenusko Religion should be completely composed of heretic religions. This would also require there to be a feature where Suomenusko has no non-heretic religions. And each heretic-religion should encompass an area in size between a regular duchy and a regular kingdom. They would all function the same, but would just be heretics to each other. Most things should cost piety instead of prestige and money. Their levies should be even smaller than they are currently. But they should be able to join defensive wars against other religions no matter the CB used. They also should be able to create Holy Orders in a similar way like Nomads can create mercenaries. To reform the religion, their goal is to convert all(or enough) heretics to one heretic religion. (They DID all have a very similar religion, but they all had their own version of it, so you need to make one version the de fact version) And they should most of the time convert from tribe to a theocracy. They are not Christianity, thus they don't really have to have celibate leaders controlling the theocracy. Their theocracy would for example work kinda like a hybrid of a Merchant Republic and Elective Monarcy where the most pious rulers get elected.
Romuva - moral authority based. Due to this religion's small size, this religion should not go through a reformation. It should be reformed from the start because its religious cohesion should be pretty good. However, its Moral Authority should be abysmally low. Perhaps put the Holy Sites more further apart or make Holy Sites give less Moral Authority. But in return, Romuva should have more means to raise its Moral Authority. They should get like 5% Moral Authority from holding another religion's Holy Site. They should get 1% Moral Authority for each Count level character of Romuva religion. +5% Moral Authority for each Duke level character of Romuva Religion. +10% Moral Authority for each King level character of Romuva Religion. +20% Moral Authority for each Emperor level character of Romuva Religion.
I will say it again. These are just examples to show possibilities and may not be entirely accurate. However vanilla CK 2 design has always been about finding a balance between "fun gameplay" and "historical realism".
Examples. These probably don't reflect reality at all. These are just examples of what might be possible.
Slavic - money based. However they don't get their money from their holdings. Their own holdings produce almost a little money as typical tribal norse holdings. Instead, to produce money, they must build trade enclaves in neibghouring contries. These trade enclaves would be the lesser variants of Merchant Republic Trade Posts and also lesser variants of trade posts on the silk road. Slavic rulers would have access to similar CB's that Merchant Republics have. Embargo and seize tribal holding against valid targets. After all, that is exactly how slavs ended up in the area that is Rus/Ilmen. And due to their more money focused gameplay, their realms would convert to land based merchant republics majority of the time. (This would also imply that gameplay for land based merchant republics would be included.) To reform their religion, they would need to build a certain amount of temple holdings to get enough moral authority.
Suomenusko - piety based. Suomenusko on the map extends gigantic swathes of land. And within that area, everyone practiced their faith differently. So, Suomenusko Religion should be completely composed of heretic religions. This would also require there to be a feature where Suomenusko has no non-heretic religions. And each heretic-religion should encompass an area in size between a regular duchy and a regular kingdom. They would all function the same, but would just be heretics to each other. Most things should cost piety instead of prestige and money. Their levies should be even smaller than they are currently. But they should be able to join defensive wars against other religions no matter the CB used. They also should be able to create Holy Orders in a similar way like Nomads can create mercenaries. To reform the religion, their goal is to convert all(or enough) heretics to one heretic religion. (They DID all have a very similar religion, but they all had their own version of it, so you need to make one version the de fact version) And they should most of the time convert from tribe to a theocracy. They are not Christianity, thus they don't really have to have celibate leaders controlling the theocracy. Their theocracy would for example work kinda like a hybrid of a Merchant Republic and Elective Monarcy where the most pious rulers get elected.
Romuva - moral authority based. Due to this religion's small size, this religion should not go through a reformation. It should be reformed from the start because its religious cohesion should be pretty good. However, its Moral Authority should be abysmally low. Perhaps put the Holy Sites more further apart or make Holy Sites give less Moral Authority. But in return, Romuva should have more means to raise its Moral Authority. They should get like 5% Moral Authority from holding another religion's Holy Site. They should get 1% Moral Authority for each Count level character of Romuva religion. +5% Moral Authority for each Duke level character of Romuva Religion. +10% Moral Authority for each King level character of Romuva Religion. +20% Moral Authority for each Emperor level character of Romuva Religion.
I will say it again. These are just examples to show possibilities and may not be entirely accurate. However vanilla CK 2 design has always been about finding a balance between "fun gameplay" and "historical realism".
- 7
- 2
The lack of documentation with all the different DLCs. The wiki does an admirable job of explaining many things but a lot of the game is trial and error. And with changes made in each DLC comes more trial and error. Not so bad for me since i don't care about achievements and can reload whenever I want, but still very annoying at times.
I also dislike the fact that if your heir who already has a legit heir loses his walnuts he can no longer be your heir. If his heir dies big deal-that's why he has brothers who can take over in his stead.
I also dislike the fact that if your heir who already has a legit heir loses his walnuts he can no longer be your heir. If his heir dies big deal-that's why he has brothers who can take over in his stead.
How I can only play for an hour at a time before my brain hurts. Definitely the most complicated Paradox game I've played.
- 1
I dislike most ....
... that i am not able to define, which duchy-titles go with a viceroyality, other than giving out the VR to an (old) ruler that wasn't in the VR before ...
Example:
In my actual game as a germanic saxon i rule most of western europe and britain. Britain and Ireland was conquered by some of my more aggressive Viceroys. That leads to a checkerboard of german/english/scottish/irish duchys.
It should be possible as a ruler to declare which duchys i want to hand out as a viceroyalitie. Especially with empty titular Kingdoms.
The transfer Vassalage only works with duchys in their de jure Kingdom. I hate that.
... that i am not able to define, which duchy-titles go with a viceroyality, other than giving out the VR to an (old) ruler that wasn't in the VR before ...
Example:
In my actual game as a germanic saxon i rule most of western europe and britain. Britain and Ireland was conquered by some of my more aggressive Viceroys. That leads to a checkerboard of german/english/scottish/irish duchys.
It should be possible as a ruler to declare which duchys i want to hand out as a viceroyalitie. Especially with empty titular Kingdoms.
The transfer Vassalage only works with duchys in their de jure Kingdom. I hate that.
India. Never felt right having India in a game primarily focused on Europe/Middle East/Christianity/Islam.
Also seduction and intrigue focuses. So many bad experiences with them when Way of Life first released, I don't actually care if they got fixed, I just don't want them in my games. I was seeing people all over the map with seduction focus having 40 or more children. Worst one was like 47 children. At a time when game performance was already intolerable after the Rajas expansion.
And intrigue... dear me. I had one game as Byzantine Empire where basically every single vassal of mine was either blinded or castrated, including 3 or 4 patriarchs in a row, because counts and dukes all over the empire were kidnapping each other and then immediately blinding/castrating. It was ridiculous.
Also seduction and intrigue focuses. So many bad experiences with them when Way of Life first released, I don't actually care if they got fixed, I just don't want them in my games. I was seeing people all over the map with seduction focus having 40 or more children. Worst one was like 47 children. At a time when game performance was already intolerable after the Rajas expansion.
And intrigue... dear me. I had one game as Byzantine Empire where basically every single vassal of mine was either blinded or castrated, including 3 or 4 patriarchs in a row, because counts and dukes all over the empire were kidnapping each other and then immediately blinding/castrating. It was ridiculous.
- 3
- 1
.png){kind=avatar}
Agree. However it is probably by design but don't understand the logic why I can transfer any counties but not duchy. Always have a problem with vassal limit mostly because of owning duchies but not the kingdom (yet). And with some kingdoms like Saxony (as non-saxon) you can't even form the kingdom.
- 1
Appointing commanders.....
I swear to god, it's like every month. I am so over having to constantly appoint commanders.....
Great DLC though and a wonderful game!! 1100+ hours and going!
I swear to god, it's like every month. I am so over having to constantly appoint commanders.....
Great DLC though and a wonderful game!! 1100+ hours and going!
- 3
Everything about culture. How everyone in France becomes French after one generation, and how the number of cultures on the maps tends to decrease incredibly quickly. How everyone in Germania is "German", save for the Dutch who are in a wholly different group. How Galicia is still fully Germanic in 867 (as if it ever was) yet Copts are nowhere to be seen even in 769...
Also border gore. As in people can rule incredibly disjointed territories without any logistical issue, and it looks awful.
Also border gore. As in people can rule incredibly disjointed territories without any logistical issue, and it looks awful.
- 4