Reaper's Due Death Rate - Upside Down Gameplay

[Xinkc]

Previously a small, well-managed family was a key to victory.

What? Since when? I've always gotten through fairly well with families that put rabbits to shame.

Because paying hundreds, sometimes upwards of a thousand gold for a hospital upgrade (And thus basically neglecting the entire rest of my realm unless I'm raking in a hundred gold a month) just so my fifth consecutive ruler won't die at twenty is so fun. Contrary to popular belief, people actually lived for a decently long time if they survived infancy. I'm fine with diseases and whatnot, I just think the random event diseases should be toned down a lot.

Hospitals aren't going to help much without a good physician. If they're not like 17+ learning (Renowned Physician optional since they can get that), then wait for the next one. Other then that, close your gates when an epidemic comes near.

Seriously, with a good physician, some pets (hunting in focus is OP with the added health events and dog), and closing the gate you don't really need hospitals until the Black Death brings it's nasty self around. I've yet to have a character in my current game ( Count Robert Capet of Bourbon in the Charlemagne start) I've yet to have a ruler not last to their sixties and courtiers not stick around for a while. However, it does seem like unlanded and baron level unmarried characters are set to die quicker... Probably part of the reason the game runs better.

Cancer has always been relatively rare, mostly affecting older people. It's not to say it didn't exist - but they have done studies of old bones and found relatively few examples of cancer in Middle Ages remains. Of course, there's evidence of Cancer going back to neolithic times, but the chance of someone dying by this was extremely low given all the other ways to die, and given the age range it usually afflicts.

Wait, cancer isn't weighted to effect the youth less often? Even by a small amount?

Anyways, I still find the loss of my first daughter/child and her mother to cancer as the most tragic thing I've experienced in CK2. The little one came down with it at the ripe old age of 4, fought to adulthood, got married, and died shortly afterward. The increased death rate from diseases and epidemics has made me finally value life in this game. I'd call that "Mission Accomplished."

*But I too think there needs to be some adjustments needed. AI needs to focus building few hospitals! It should at least make It level1 with 1 or 2 upgrades. I really feel like cheating when AI doesn't do hospitals. Please tweak that AI.

Besides this, it would be nice if we could order the physicians to continue treatment of relatives and councillors. I'm keeping them around so they might as well be useful when I'm not sick.

 

[TehJumpingJawa]

A trade Nexus like Byzantium is going to be a lot harder to survive in than a remote province in Scandinavia or Britannia; that's probably why experiences are so varied.

Perhaps if the game collected metrics on character longevity for each realm, and had a life expectancy/disease tab in the ledger......

 

[mrflibble]

Somewhat related: Does anyone else think "died of a natural death" should be removed? It doesn't appear to have a purpose now with this DLC.

 

[Semigall]

I might have agreed with you but for your snipe at "Casuals"...

They paid the game too, you know...

Thing is, you can't much play CK2 casually. The overall campaign takes 700+ gametime years. That's not a thing you do casually, if you want to finish the campaign before the next patch.

 

[cosmeIII]

I only have one complaint, and it's that in two generations of a norse ruler starting in 769, I've only been able to have one court physician (a priest that came to convert me from Lombardy). I know that I can't really have a 20+ learning renowned physician being from a norse pagan tribe, but "mystics" are really rare, I can only form them out of my family if I'm lucky enough. There should be a decision to hire a shaman for tribal players.

 

[serivahn]

I feel like toning it down about 10% would strike the perfect balance between a feeling of fun and futility.
Its VERY entertaining struggling to keep everything together amidst the chaos, but it also feels futile trying to orchestrate any alliances or relationships with people because 90% of the time they just die or get messed up by a bad medical treatment.

It could also simply being a matter of "teaching" the AI how to counter the new death mechanics (e.g. picking a +health focus, not making decisions that result in +stress, doing the less risky treatment options, etc.) In other words, I don't think the AI values its own characters' health and lives as much as it should.

 

[Kapitalisti]

Honestly, I feel like Cancer ought to be rebranded as "Wasting Disease". The game doesn't call Syphilis or Typhus by their modern names, and it's off putting that cancer isl. It should also drastically affect Martial skill of the afflicted.

A) Cancer as a term has been used since Hippocrates (karkinos). B) Martial isn't just personal combat skill, it's military leadership and organization.

 

[Aries666]

Cancer has always been relatively rare, mostly affecting older people. It's not to say it didn't exist - but they have done studies of old bones and found relatively few examples of cancer in Middle Ages remains. Of course, there's evidence of Cancer going back to neolithic times, but the chance of someone dying by this was extremely low given all the other ways to die, and given the age range it usually afflicts.

Right now you have about 454 people in 100,000 in the US coming down with Cancer per year. Less than 1% of those people are from the ages of 1 and 19. For reference, that's 1% of half a percent of the population. Given the extra environmental issues we have over our forbears, like living under power lines, both the total rate of people, and the number of children who come down with cancer, would be even less in the medieval era.

So, just for scientific accuracy, I stand by my statement.

Cancer rates in the middle ages were low because it simply wasn't a disease that was diagnosed. Additionally, living under power lines has never been definitively shown to cause cancer, there is a very weak correlation to a small subset of childhood cancer.

 

[Narr666]

I already answered to the other threat regarding this topic, but I want to give my 2 Cents here as well. Yes, you are all right pointing on the fact that the child mortality was the main cause of the low life expectancy, but that doesn´t mean that dying wasn´t something that happened quit often. The notice on that statistics was to illuminate the fact that most people didn´t die at 35.

You can check it yourself by looking on your own life. Take all your illnesses and wounds and take the modern treatment away. Would you still be alive? I asked my friends and my family and many of them would be cripples or dead, and that with the relatively save life we are living know.

I would be 80% dead and I would have been maimed, got an accident with a scissor in my 20s. They operated a sponge into my hand with disinfections, after a week it was okay, in the middle ages they had to chop my hand off. My father had a heartattack in his 50s, he would surely be dead, my mother had an illness on her eye in the same age, she would be one-eyed. A friend of mine had an accident breaking his leg several times, it could be healed with screws and plates, but in the medieval ages he would have been a cripple. And the same friend had also typhlitis, many people get that, and all those would be dead.

Gameplaywise I am very content. Getting seriously sick about 2-3 times a life, that´s pretty realistic I think. 1-2 children die of diseases. I so far lived to 50-60. The additional shiftings in power are very interesting. I like that. I got not the impression they are dying left and right.

 

[Rationalsanity]

Overall I like the changes to diseases, maybe they need to be altered a little bit if only so certain starts aren't dependent on save scumming.

I do think that hospitals are far too expensive for what they offer though. They cost thousands of gold for minor benefits, compared to hundreds of gold for other upgrades. This all but ensures that the AI won't be able to get anything more than a basic hospital.

 

[Kumicho]

You're throwing a die, getting a 1 and saying "god, this die is broken, it only gets 1!". It is a futile exercise in frustration.

I have had zero lunatic characters in two centuries. I have seen a Lunatic character every now and then around the realm. Nothing excessive. A plague of Lunatic characters does not exist, least of all half (half!) of them being Lunatics. You've been unlucky. It happens. Random number generators are like that. Sometimes they don't like you.

Curiously enough, I haven't had a single Incapacitated character, either, which is quite weird. That used to be pretty common, normally I would have got a couple at this point. It goes to show that luck is just luck and it goes both ways.

Now, we can sit here and cry over how that 1 that you rolled on the die was a really low number, or we can just keep rolling. Play a couple of games and see if half (half!) of the characters are Lunatics again. I guess they won't be.

You do realize that you're dismissing my anecdotal evidence by quoting your own anecdotal evidence, right? Here were my games so far:

The first one that I mentioned, where out of my 6 rulers, half were lunatics, half were incapable, and 1/3rd had the Great Pox.
The second one Haesteinn of Nantes 867 died within 5 years.
The third one Haesteinn randomly got Infirm 1 year into the game.
The *fourth* one Haesteinn lived to be almost 80 years old and formed the kingdom of Brittany.

So no, it's not all of the time, but as I noted, it's prevalent enough that some people are going to have it happen to them (and in my case, repeatedly). I shouldn't have to restart a game 3 times just to have a pretty important 44 year old character live past the 5 year mark...

 

[CyaN]

You do realize that you're dismissing my anecdotal evidence by quoting your own anecdotal evidence, right? Here were my games so far:

The first one that I mentioned, where out of my 6 rulers, half were lunatics, half were incapable, and 1/3rd had the Great Pox.
The second one Haesteinn of Nantes 867 died within 5 years.
The third one Haesteinn randomly got Infirm 1 year into the game.
The *fourth* one Haesteinn lived to be almost 80 years old and formed the kingdom of Brittany.

So no, it's not all of the time, but as I noted, it's prevalent enough that some people are going to have it happen to them (and in my case, repeatedly). I shouldn't have to restart a game 3 times just to have a pretty important 44 year old character live past the 5 year mark...

Anecdotal evidence doesn't need to be dismissed, because it's just anecdotal evidence and it doesn't prove anything. I could have posted about how "this game is crap because my characters aren't lunatics, and I want lunatic characters, but I never get them; it's clearly broken". It would be as unfounded, as far as criticisms go, as your original complaint. You were unlucky and that was all. Why obsess over it?

Hasteinn dies on you. Constantly. I have played him half a dozen of times since the bookmark was introduced, and half of the times he died while his son was an infant. By the way, it's not game over, because he has a son, so you don't need to restart. If you were playing in order to have an uber-character roflstomp Europe for decades, and that uber-character happens to be 44 at the game start, your own strict house rules ("I will only play with Hasteinn himself, who's a 44 years old man, because his son doesn't deserve to be played, so he need to beat odds and live for some decades or I will restart") make it unlikely that you could succeed without a couple of restarts. That's what happens when you're 44. Your risk of death is starting to become significant. With the new patch, it is expected that Hasteinn would live a little less, on average.

Again, you were unlucky in your first two Hasteinn games. That was all. That you were unlucky doesn't "prove" anything about anything and frankly it escapes me why we're still discussing that you were unlucky. It's a straightforward fact. We could also discuss how you were lucky that other time.

 

[LordNeidhart]

I'm more concerned about the endless string of lunacy that has been plaguing Europa my games. The rates seem to have skyrocketed, and every family member I possess [that doesn't die before the thirsties] WILL become a lunatic.

It has come to the point where I got mighty tired of it, and decided to just wipe the lunacy trait by console whenever it showed up. I must have wiped it about a dozen times or so. In a single character.

Europe is a house of madness and despair from which there is no escape.

 

[CyaN]

I'm more concerned about the endless string of lunacy that has been plaguing Europa my games. The rates seem to have skyrocketed, and every family member I possess [that doesn't die before the thirsties] WILL become a lunatic.

It has come to the point where I got mighty tired of it, and decided to just wipe the lunacy trait by console whenever it showed up. I must have wiped it about a dozen times or so. In a single character.

Europe is a house of madness and despair from which there is no escape.

How does that happen? Are you doing something special to get Lunatics everywhere? Marrying Lunatic ladies or something? Grooming every child to be "Playful" maybe? I'm intrigued at why it goes from "all lunatics" to "no lunatics" depending on who you ask. There might be some key difference in the style of dynasty management or something, I guess.

 

[RoverGrover]

I'm more concerned about the endless string of lunacy that has been plaguing Europa my games. The rates seem to have skyrocketed, and every family member I possess [that doesn't die before the thirsties] WILL become a lunatic.

It has come to the point where I got mighty tired of it, and decided to just wipe the lunacy trait by console whenever it showed up. I must have wiped it about a dozen times or so. In a single character.

Europe is a house of madness and despair from which there is no escape.

Yeah, me too. I'd literally never used the console before. But after three different playthroughs and a dozen rulers.... lunacy shouldn't be nearly this common. I think I've had one ruler in like 15 that died without being insane and I bought the hospital with upgrades. I'd probably be less annoyed by the death rates if I could not have every ruler be nuts by the time he's 30 if he even lives that long.

 

[CyaN]

I think I've had one ruler in like 15 that died without being insane and I bought the hospital with upgrades. I'd probably be less annoyed by the death rates if I could not have every ruler be nuts by the time he's 30 if he even lives that long.

Ok, now I'm legitimately intrigued. How is that possible? How do they do become lunatics? Is it the result of some specific event, or do they just spontaneously go nuts without an explanation? Does it run in the family? Being strongly inheritable could explain why people have either no lunatics or only lunatics. Once you go bonkers you never go back.

 

[JohnKR]

The lunatic thing is fair....too many lunatics....

About the dicease though. It's NOT. I' va played a lot of games and only two kings of mine died from illness. Most died from plots and battles.

Also you understand that most people should die from cancer and heart attacks between 40-60 right? That's even true today.
So it doesn't count for too much death rate when your character died at 55 from cancer. That's how it should be. It would be better if it just said natural death? Whats natural death anyways. How many people you know dying a natural death and how many people you know die from cancer or heart attacks.

Also....does anyone know about the karlings? You know....this dynasty that owned most of europe? And perished? Look out how and tell me if that was possible before in the game.

You must look to grow your dynasty not just cause you want to but as a neccesity to survive. Thats how it is now with this patch. There shouldn't be well managed small families. They weren't. And if they were they perished (looking at you poor Karlings).

 

[RoverGrover]

Ok, now I'm legitimately intrigued. How is that possible? How do they do become lunatics? Is it the result of some specific event, or do they just spontaneously go nuts without an explanation? Does it run in the family? Being strongly inheritable could explain why people have either no lunatics or only lunatics. Once you go bonkers you never go back.

In my last playthrough I cheated to give my first ruler genius and strong and he still went nuts at 40 so... I honestly have no clue. I know that the great pox has been a large cause for me. I literally had a son come of age and develop it within a month while i was trying to find him a wife... he was homosexual and chaste ironically.

Edit: in response to the preceding post, I had a game end because all 9 of my children died before age 30 leaving me without an heir. Bad luck, maybe. But maybe you just had good rng. The truth, as in most things likely lies in the middle

 

[LordNeidhart]

How does that happen? Are you doing something special to get Lunatics everywhere? Marrying Lunatic ladies or something? Grooming every child to be "Playful" maybe? I'm intrigued at why it goes from "all lunatics" to "no lunatics" depending on who you ask. There might be some key difference in the style of dynasty management or something, I guess.

Not particularly, I don't go out of my way to look for lunacy and only rarely a child of mine becomes playful. It just seems to happen.
Although one thing I notice is, there's a massive pike of lunacy whenever I get syphilis, which considering this new DLC is pretty much guaranteed to occur every once in a while.

 

[Narr666]

Not particularly, I don't go out of my way to look for lunacy and only rarely a child of mine becomes playful. It just seems to happen.
Although one thing I notice is, there's a massive pike of lunacy whenever I get syphilis, which considering this new DLC is pretty much guaranteed to occur every once in a while.

You could try to turn Sunset invasion off. Maybe Syphilis goes away than. I appears logical, since Lunatic is a Sympton of late Syphilis.

I have Sunset Invasion alsways off and never seen Syphilis in any game.