The realm rejoices as Paradox Interactive announces the launch of Crusader Kings III, the latest entry in the publisher’s grand strategy role-playing game franchise. Advisors may now jockey for positions of influence and adversaries should save their schemes for another day, because on this day Crusader Kings III can be purchased on Steam, the Paradox Store, and other major online retailers.
Real Strategy Requires Cunning
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose. If you feel it is necessary to make a new reply, you can still do so though.
You should be able to demand non-wargoals, since situations change and any plan or ambitions you may have at the outset may become obsolete. Just give them a steep cost. Or don't, whatevs yo.
Hey guys! Amazing work like always.
But i actually have a question, it seems, that in the second picture we can see only space battles in the war interface. Would that say that we don't have ground troops and transport ships for planet invasion? Can we only won a war in space( space battle and orbital bombardment)?
Hmm, the limitation of a war score of 100 in EU IV/III was always something disappointing... e.g. you have conquered all the provinces of the ottoman empire and you can just take 4 provinces... realistic? or when you play prussia and take denmark as vassal... well, you would like vassalize them, but this would need a warscore of 104 %... For medieval times this limit may have a good reason because of the christian morale or something but in space? Ok, balancing is a reason, one lost war should not destroy the enemy... but it will depends how much every action will cost to have fun with battles...
I assume that theres some kind of negative effects for picking more wargoals than you suceed in taking during the peace talks? otherwise why wouldnt you just cram all you can into the wargoal from the start.
If there are negative effects can you tell us a little about what they are?
I hope war will be more costly and have more nagative consequences, even for the winner, than in EU4. I hope when trying to take everyting (or loads) from a smaller empire you'll really have to fight a long and hard war, and I hope that keeping a war ging just to get that extra warscore to take some more will be a very situational strategy (So as to not see the norway thing where sweden/denmark just steamrolls norway because they can).
All in all I hope the focus of the game is not war like in EU4 (HoI have an ever greater war focus but that game atleast doesn't hide the downsides of war).
You should be able to demand non-wargoals, since situations change and any plan or ambitions you may have at the outset may become obsolete. Just give them a steep cost. Or don't, whatevs yo.
Ah, so combining Victoria 2 (needing CB to declare war) and HoI 4 (peace talks) system?
Question:
a. Is there any chance of repairing relations after a First Contact War?
b. Isn't it better to add war goals not by dragging thing around? Isn't it better if the player can use tickbox or something?
c. Isn't the word "draging" a typo?
1) Why limit the peace negotiations to the stated war goals, why not simply impose severe penalties for terms not outlined in the original casus belli?
2) Will the Negotiation screen have some of the great flexibility of the Trade screen from the previous DD? I really liked how you could trade completely disparate items if both sides deemed it beneficial enough and I imagine the Negotiation could be a similar incarnation but taking war score and other factors (exhaustion? internal calls for peace?) into account as well.
You should be able to demand non-wargoals, since situations change and any plan or ambitions you may have at the outset may become obsolete. Just give them a steep cost. Or don't, whatevs yo.
So you don't have the EU4 problem that its too expensive to take enemy territory in a defensive war, so whether you are the attacker or defender doesn't make a difference in the costs of the peace deal?
I always found it weird that its more costly to demand something from your enemy when they are the original attacker.
I can't tell from the screen shots (Hope I am right), but I hope there is a way to see if your allies arte going to approve, or leave you hanging before you commit to the war, like in that first screen, if the little box at the bottom is red Xs for allies who wont be joining you in the war, and little green checkmarks for those who are joining you.
Also does declaring war as a federation act any different?
Also. Those orange markers on second screen shot must be salvageable debris spots? Cool. Will those be cleaned by Science ships or by Construction one? I imagine what a mess can be after Great Galaxy War. XD
Also. Those orange markers on second screen shot must be salvageable debris spots? Cool. Will those be cleaned by Science ships or by Construction one? I imagine what a mess can be after Great Galaxy War. XD
Getting your allies into war seems better than in EU, but
"Before you have established communications with another civilization, it is possible to simply attack them and even take one of their planets (but once you take a planet, communications are immediately established.)"
Why? What if I'm ultra-xenophobe?
- You captured our...
- Shh!
- But...
- Bad alien! No talking.
We use cookies (sadly not the edible ones) to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners who may combine it with other information that you've provided to them or that they've collected from your use of their services. You consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.