Henrik just said that these will not be in. Nomads will just be generic tribals or something.
No nomad gameplay, no merchant republics
- Thread starter Denkt
- 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.
Im a bit sad about Nomads, CKII wasnt obviously made with Nomads in mind but they kinda managed to make it work.
Republics sucked major marbles so I dont mind them not being in the base game, maybe they can make a Republics DLC work this time.
Republics sucked major marbles so I dont mind them not being in the base game, maybe they can make a Republics DLC work this time.
I'm fine without nomads, but since it seems the idea of this game is to make things work that they couldn't before, I don't see why they couldn't make merchant republics work from the start. I'm a little disappointed that they won't be in from the start, and probably a DLC at some point.
Such an attitude would turn CK into the Sims; selling the same DLCs over and over again for each generation ...
If they are released as dlc again, they most likely will not be the same thing.
That is a shame, nomads certainly have their problems in CK2 but they also have a lot of potential, guess we'll have to wait for the inevitable DLC
Damn, I love paying republics... oh well, better enjoy the feudal bandwagon for a time
I also really liked playing as a republic in CK2, but I acknowledge that they were always a little bit weird mechanically. I am fine with not getting to play republics if that means more resources to flesh out the core feudal experience. I didn't play much as a nomad, so I don't have a strong opinion on that.
Looks like the most logical cuts really, I expect them to do these kind of governments in DLC and much better besides.
If I had to choose between "merchant republics and nomads" and "theocracies", I would always choose theocracies 
But don't worry we will probably get all of them in future dlcs (maybe a bit changed to provide us more fun ^^)
But don't worry we will probably get all of them in future dlcs (maybe a bit changed to provide us more fun ^^)
Nomads and Republics were the most problematic elements in CK2 (Republics were a mess of hardcoded stuff that worked janky and were very hard to work with in mods, while Nomads have always been broken balance wise and not really interesting since you quickly get to the point where you either stop being a nomad or genocide the settled population of the world), I'm not surprised that they've been done away entirely for now but I absolutely expect them to return playable with revamped mechanics at some point in the future.
I rather have a few well made government with assumption that others will be as well made in the future, like CK2 you could only play christians at the start and they added in other religions over time that was well made instead of poorly made like Imperator: Rome which went for quantity over quality.If I had to choose between "merchant republics and nomads" and "theocracies", I would always choose theocracies
But don't worry we will probably get all of them in future dlcs (maybe a bit changed to provide us more fun ^^)
Literally no love for Genghis Khan anywhere... Was very disappointed with horse lords so maybe its a good thing they drop that
Im fine with it if they really manage to pull it this time later on, also with other unique non feudal government types like Imperial for Byzantium, or Theocracies.
Also, I do hope they allow playstyle this time as a City Major, controlling a city. Rich burghers with power in rich powerful cities could be immensly influential in this time. It would suck if some small poor knight were to be represented, but major key players like wealthy merchats controlling cities that filled the Kings treasures werent. Because the sucess of a war dependend much of the time on Kings successfully getting stipends and being granted money by the cities,which was often done through parliaents in western europe (another thing that I really hope its represented in CK3, and not some middle ground feature such as Conclave).
Also, I do hope they allow playstyle this time as a City Major, controlling a city. Rich burghers with power in rich powerful cities could be immensly influential in this time. It would suck if some small poor knight were to be represented, but major key players like wealthy merchats controlling cities that filled the Kings treasures werent. Because the sucess of a war dependend much of the time on Kings successfully getting stipends and being granted money by the cities,which was often done through parliaents in western europe (another thing that I really hope its represented in CK3, and not some middle ground feature such as Conclave).
nomad and merchant republic mechanic in ck2 are just awful
and paradox didn't really fixed them in the years after they are added to ck2
and paradox didn't really fixed them in the years after they are added to ck2
Why would I wait for that when I can just play them in CK2? This is not how you do a sequel. You don't remove features and concepts then add them back again later. I might do a wait and see on this one. Especially after I bought Imperator on day one.