Suggestions Thread ~ Leave your God Characters at the door.

[Orinsul]

if you observe after uniting the empire and achieving peace
go to bed, and wake up in the morning
the empire intact, but the direct vassals map mode is madness

I feel that while conquering goes well
the AI ignores de jure wars completely?
maybe something to encourage them to do de jure wars more would keep things looking tidier without stopping the chaos and free conquests?
can cbs be weighted? dropping a few onto de jures might be good as a suggestion.

 

[SholanShaman]

I find no issue with the Empire uniting, just with the conquest cb usurping the county. As in, it's happened several times for me that Skingrad starts running rampant in Elsweyr, and before long there are no Kajiit rulers anymore and the provinces start converting to Colovian. So I get to enjoy a Tamriel where Kajiit don't exist anymore. That feels a little lame. I like seeing the races, their unique religions, their unique settlement portraits, and how they interact. Thus my suggestion of a subjugation cb: realms will consolidate, but there will still be local rulers, and subjugated races have an opportunity to bounce back. CK 2 is not designed so that diverse empires prosper, but I think that would make it more common, which is lore appropriate.

 

[Dragonsploof]

Could you make it so that when you select custom start in the era selector it goes strait to the Interregnum bookmark instead of the year 1066.

 

[Korbah]

Could you make it so that when you select custom start in the era selector it goes strait to the Interregnum bookmark instead of the year 1066.

If I knew how.

 

[Dragonsploof]

If I knew how.

The base game 1066 start date has this in the bookmarks file

 custom_start = yes               ## Choosing "Custom Start" will open this bookmark

 

[Korbah]

The base game 1066 start date has this in the bookmarks file

 custom_start = yes               ## Choosing "Custom Start" will open this bookmark

That's what I get for only skimming the first couple of BMs in the file.

 

[TheMeGaMaN]

Something that has bothered me for some time is the hostility adjustments in tributary wars.
Lets say you attack ruler A to make him your tributary and defeat his armies. You still need to siege some holdings and suddenly ruler B attacks A and he is not hostile towards you, even though he is warring for a certain county while you want to make ruler A tributary.
This leads to annoying situations when the ruler B is laying siege to ruler A and you need to take that same county to end the war quickly but you cant.

Please make everyone who is hostile towards your tributary war target be hostile towards you.

 

[_Arzakon_]

I've just noticed that in the last SVN revision you can hold pretty much any holding, independently of its type and your government. I assume it's just because you're working on something, but the thing is I had some fun holding Academies as a telvanni lord. Is there any chance that we could have some government and/or conditions that might give wizards the ability to hold Academies? It adds some flavour, makes perfect sense within the limits of EK and, why not, having hordes of battlemages and archmages seems to be really fun, xD.

 

[Korbah]

I've just noticed that in the last SVN revision you can hold pretty much any holding, independently of its type and your government. I assume it's just because you're working on something, but the thing is I had some fun holding Academies as a telvanni lord. Is there any chance that we could have some government and/or conditions that might give wizards the ability to hold Academies? It adds some flavour, makes perfect sense within the limits of EK and, why not, having hordes of battlemages and archmages seems to be really fun, xD.

I don't actually plan on removing that; I've always disliked the "wrong holding type" if I'm honest, especially in a fantasy setting.
If you notice any issues with it though let me know; like AI weirdness, inheritance problems.

 

[EmperorG]

I don't actually plan on removing that; I've always disliked the "wrong holding type" if I'm honest, especially in a fantasy setting.
If you notice any issues with it though let me know; like AI weirdness, inheritance problems.

While I agree with your reason, the main issue with the AI using any holding as opposed to just castles is that city and temple holdings are weak as hell and can easily be assaulted quickly. If the entirety of a country has as its top holding a city/temple, then its possible to quickly siege it into submission without even having to fight the enemy army at all.

At least that's my finding from when vanilla gets city-focused republic states, no idea how that affects balance in Elder Kings.

 

[Korbah]

While I agree with your reason, the main issue with the AI using any holding as opposed to just castles is that city and temple holdings are weak as hell and can easily be assaulted quickly. If the entirety of a country has as its top holding a city/temple, then its possible to quickly siege it into submission without even having to fight the enemy army at all.

Preferred holdings is what is meant to affect the AI's choice on what to build rather than the allowed holdings (which determines what holdings -don't- give the holding penalty). If you're noticing the AI is spamming holding types other than their preferred types, let me know, I'll log it as a bug with PDS.

 

[LeSingeAffame]

Oooooh, so we'll be able to have the Jarls hold their primary city (like the Jarl of Whiterun not only controlling Dragonreach but also Whiterun proper) ? Neat

 

[Ivir Baggins]

Double the capacity of ships. That's what they do in HIP and it'd help with the massive shortage of ships in game.

Also add some mercenary fleets.

 

[Jako473]

Double the capacity of ships. That's what they do in HIP and it'd help with the massive shortage of ships in game.

Also add some mercenary fleets.

I was thinking on this, and if you ever want to invade something that is by sea, or you ARE an island, it is quite annoying to assemble a fleet. So I agree with this!

 

[Orinsul]

I would suggest giving the Kamal invasion more troops
they start off so outnumbered

 

[Rubidium]

On the topic of mercenaries, Akavir could really use some more. As it currently stands, rulers have access to 2-4 bands (generally of the more expensive tiers), in contrast to Tamrielic rulers who have zillions of options.

 

[TheMeGaMaN]

On the topic of mercenaries, Akavir could really use some more. As it currently stands, rulers have access to 2-4 bands (generally of the more expensive tiers), in contrast to Tamrielic rulers who have zillions of options.

Akavir is no where near ready. There are still baronies without localisation and most counties dont have unique CoA. Doesn't seem to be a huge priority when compared to bug fixing and basic features. Then there's a whole new DLC coming which will require its own compatibility patch.

 

[Arakhor]

Not even mainland Tamriel has all its CoAs in place yet.

 

[Orinsul]

for the duchies that dont have CoA
could they not just have copies of their capitol counties CoA if it has one?

 

[Rubidium]

Akavir is no where near ready. There are still baronies without localisation and most counties dont have unique CoA. Doesn't seem to be a huge priority when compared to bug fixing and basic features. Then there's a whole new DLC coming which will require its own compatibility patch.

Sure, there's all sorts of stuff that needs to be done. I mainly singled out mercenary companies as a significant QoL issue that (I assume?) requires less effort/time than things like new CoAs (which are clearly a bottleneck all over) or new features.