The stat scaling problem

[BlueMoon20]

This has been on my mind for many months and sadly, with each update, I see the state of this become worse, so I decided I’m at least going to mention it.


The characters in ck3 are mostly defined by their trait and stats. When picking an heir, you mostly look at those two and try to make sure the next character in line is as competent as possible.

There is nothing wrong with that. In fact, it’s a good feature. Of course you’re gonna want a competent heir to inherit and guide the kingdom further.

The problem is with stat inheritance. At first, there were just the good inheritance traits (genius, beautiful and herculean). I’m not gonna lie, I really liked this system at first. It drew me in. I wanted to have the best heirs possible and my main mission for the first few generations was to get all3 traits onto my heir.

The problem arose after the initial playthrough. The first run is always the hardest, since you’re learning the mechanics, and any helping hand in the form of stats is welcome.

But after that, you start noticing a trend. You’re the most competent every time, there is nobody in vicinity that even comes close to you. The only people on your level are the members of your dynasty. There is no competition, you’re free to do whatever, since you have a boost on armies, income, everybody likes you, you gain perks way faster…

After that, the royal court expansion came. It introduced artifacts. Once again, it drew me in. I wanted to become a collector of legendary artifacts.I wanted to improve my stats with them.

But now, there is a second source for stats. You basically become a god. You automatically have 7 slots on yourself and with the royal court, you gain way more slots to fill. Everything mentioned before (the stats, the perk progression) became even more pronounced.

Even bigger problem: They are all hereditary. Your stats are your children’s stats. They all become the same. Each artifact might have small scaling to prestige or piety. Actually they’re not even small, but let’s leave it at that. The problem is they pile on.

Now they added tournaments, where you can win even more artifacts easily. And as soon as you get a good armor and weapon (Famed and Illustrious give around 10 prowess), you – and everybody in your line – will probably win all the tournaments and gain even more famed and illustrious artifacts. Even if you’re so old that you should have negative prowess, you still have more prowess then most knights in their prime. And that’s just from two slots, there’s many more options to gain them.



The first run with the base game was fun for the traits, and the first run with royal court with artifacts was fun, but after that, the game becomes increasingly empty. With tournaments, even the first run wasn’t fun, since I knew I would win every single tournament I would join.

Instead of being happy for my character – my character is so great at tournaments, I will join every single tournament with him and bring him glory, for he is the best. i will always remember him, even after he dies – he becomes just a dime a dozen in my dynasty. Oh, he’s good at tournaments? Just like the last 3 people in line I played as. Yey. You’re not happy for a good stats roll, you basically expect it.

You’re not incentivized to use your character to their fullest, since they’re replaceable. Nobody is special anymore. Instead of playing a different character with each succession and mastering their own way, all of them master everything and everybody is the same.



I remember the good old days, when having a single stat around 20 felt godlike. And it meant most of your other stats were not that great. Now if most of your stats are not around the ballpark of 15, you’re doing something wrong. And 20 is so easy to surpass it’s laughable.



I actually don’t know how you could fix this. It was actually one of the things that brought me to the game. I like seeing stats go up, I’m not gonna lie. But if you have double the stat of every neighboring ruler, you’re basically playing a different game then them. Now they even added the possibility of 5 star traits, which makes the difference between you and AI even more obvious.

Each update worsens the problem. And each DLC makes the game even easier for you. When they add a new mechanic, you want to engage with it, not for it to just make the rest of the game easier automatically and that's it.

Now if all that is inherited would perhaps contribute 20% of your total stats, that might be a possible solution, but I don’t know. As I said, I don’t know the solution. In my opinion, it would actually be better without any inheritance stats, but at the same time, I know that they are way to ingrained into the game and that many of people would complain about them being removed. I know, since, when the game launched, I would be one of them.


I know I heavily criticize the mechanic, but this post is coming from a place of love. I like the concept of the game, and it has so much potencial, but the game shines when you are invested in every single action you do (which is mostly at the beginning of the game). Soon after that, you partly stop caring, since you already know you're gonna succeed no matter what.

Any thoughts? Or improvements you can think of?

 

[Flockingbird]

This has been on my mind for many months and sadly, with each update, I see the state of this become worse, so I decided I’m at least going to mention it.


The characters in ck3 are mostly defined by their trait and stats. When picking an heir, you mostly look at those two and try to make sure the next character in line is as competent as possible.

There is nothing wrong with that. In fact, it’s a good feature. Of course you’re gonna want a competent heir to inherit and guide the kingdom further.

The problem is with stat inheritance. At first, there were just the good inheritance traits (genius, beautiful and herculean). I’m not gonna lie, I really liked this system at first. It drew me in. I wanted to have the best heirs possible and my main mission for the first few generations was to get all3 traits onto my heir.

The problem arose after the initial playthrough. The first run is always the hardest, since you’re learning the mechanics, and any helping hand in the form of stats is welcome.

But after that, you start noticing a trend. You’re the most competent every time, there is nobody in vicinity that even comes close to you. The only people on your level are the members of your dynasty. There is no competition, you’re free to do whatever, since you have a boost on armies, income, everybody likes you, you gain perks way faster…

After that, the royal court expansion came. It introduced artifacts. Once again, it drew me in. I wanted to become a collector of legendary artifacts.I wanted to improve my stats with them.

But now, there is a second source for stats. You basically become a god. You automatically have 7 slots on yourself and with the royal court, you gain way more slots to fill. Everything mentioned before (the stats, the perk progression) became even more pronounced.

Even bigger problem: They are all hereditary. Your stats are your children’s stats. They all become the same. Each artifact might have small scaling to prestige or piety. Actually they’re not even small, but let’s leave it at that. The problem is they pile on.

Now they added tournaments, where you can win even more artifacts easily. And as soon as you get a good armor and weapon (Famed and Illustrious give around 10 prowess), you – and everybody in your line – will probably win all the tournaments and gain even more famed and illustrious artifacts. Even if you’re so old that you should have negative prowess, you still have more prowess then most knights in their prime. And that’s just from two slots, there’s many more options to gain them.



The first run with the base game was fun for the traits, and the first run with royal court with artifacts was fun, but after that, the game becomes increasingly empty. With tournaments, even the first run wasn’t fun, since I knew I would win every single tournament I would join.

Instead of being happy for my character – my character is so great at tournaments, I will join every single tournament with him and bring him glory, for he is the best. i will always remember him, even after he dies – he becomes just a dime a dozen in my dynasty. Oh, he’s good at tournaments? Just like the last 3 people in line I played as. Yey. You’re not happy for a good stats roll, you basically expect it.

You’re not incentivized to use your character to their fullest, since they’re replaceable. Nobody is special anymore. Instead of playing a different character with each succession and mastering their own way, all of them master everything and everybody is the same.



I remember the good old days, when having a single stat around 20 felt godlike. And it meant most of your other stats were not that great. Now if most of your stats are not around the ballpark of 15, you’re doing something wrong. And 20 is so easy to surpass it’s laughable.



I actually don’t know how you could fix this. It was actually one of the things that brought me to the game. I like seeing stats go up, I’m not gonna lie. But if you have double the stat of every neighboring ruler, you’re basically playing a different game then them. Now they even added the possibility of 5 star traits, which makes the difference between you and AI even more obvious.

Each update worsens the problem. And each DLC makes the game even easier for you. When they add a new mechanic, you want to engage with it, not for it to just make the rest of the game easier automatically and that's it.

Now if all that is inherited would perhaps contribute 20% of your total stats, that might be a possible solution, but I don’t know. As I said, I don’t know the solution. In my opinion, it would actually be better without any inheritance stats, but at the same time, I know that they are way to ingrained into the game and that many of people would complain about them being removed. I know, since, when the game launched, I would be one of them.


I know I heavily criticize the mechanic, but this post is coming from a place of love. I like the concept of the game, and it has so much potencial, but the game shines when you are invested in every single action you do (which is mostly at the beginning of the game). Soon after that, you partly stop caring, since you already know you're gonna succeed no matter what.

Any thoughts? Or improvements you can think of?

My observation is that the players who don’t try to get the best trait, or the best heir, or best artifacts, etc., seem to express the most satisfaction with the game. They generally recommend (role)-playing with the rng hand one is dealt for maximum fun. One generation they’re a vengeful, greedy coward, then a spindly, shy, stubborn zealot, followed by a clubfooted, stubborn, wrathful cynic. Resist the temptation to excel in all things! Embrace mediocrity! (Otherwise, yes, stat bloat may reduce your fun.)

Me, I enjoy playing more than one character at a time, so while I do mostly focus on one character, I switch around when the whim hits me. I can cheese my way with one house, and take bigger risks with my other ones. Works for me, but I am not exactly a conventional player.

 

[Karlington]

My observation is that the players who don’t try to get the best trait, or the best heir, or best artifacts, etc., seem to express the most satisfaction with the game. They generally recommend (role)-playing with the rng hand one is dealt for maximum fun. One generation they’re a vengeful, greedy coward, then a spindly, shy, stubborn zealot, followed by a clubfooted, stubborn, wrathful cynic. Resist the temptation to excel in all things! Embrace mediocrity! (Otherwise, yes, stat bloat may reduce your fun.)

Me, I enjoy playing more than one character at a time, so while I do mostly focus on one character, I switch around when the whim hits me. I can cheese my way with one house, and take bigger risks with my other ones. Works for me, but I am not exactly a conventional player.

I don't know, the most fun game I ever played was one where I deliberately did all I could to create genetic superhumans... but that was also my first game, so that might not really make any valid point.

I think the issue many people see is that even when you play "normally," and not trying min-max everything, the game becomes too easy with stat and artifact bloat. I mean, sure, you can deliberately play and just not ever use artifacts. But that's not really playing the game either, it's just going to the other extreme.

 

[Flockingbird]

But that's not really playing the game

One of the devs over at AOW4 once told a player that they weren’t really playing the game (implied: the way the dev expected the game to be played). I understand their point of view, but at the same time any given game is just a tool for the player to use to have fun; especially in single player, you’re not required to play the game the way the devs envisioned unless that’s what you want to do.

My sibs and I grew up inventing our own games, and sharing them with the neighborhood. We’d discuss any rules before we started playing, and adjust them according to what kids wanted to do that day. We’d do that with standard games, too—rules aren’t rigid; they can be changed by consensus before you start. And when you’re playing alone? It’s Calvinball!

So to me, ‘that’s not playing the game’ is immaterial; what matters is whether or not you’re enjoying yourself. If not, what can you change to make your own game fun for you? Try a new playstyle, different game rules, or new mods!

That said, I will add that I expect the devs will continue gradually tweaking the stats, and will address the stat bloat if the metrics they have indicate it’s necessary. As you know, the majority of players never post at all, so we who do have no idea how the nonposters like to play.

 

[Karlington]

One of the devs over at AOW4 once told a player that they weren’t really playing the game (implied: the way the dev expected the game to be played). I understand their point of view, but at the same time any given game is just a tool for the player to use to have fun; especially in single player, you’re not required to play the game the way the devs envisioned unless that’s what you want to do.

My sibs and I grew up inventing our own games, and sharing them with the neighborhood. We’d discuss any rules before we started playing, and adjust them according to what kids wanted to do that day. We’d do that with standard games, too—rules aren’t rigid; they can be changed by consensus before you start. And when you’re playing alone? It’s Calvinball!

So to me, ‘that’s not playing the game’ is immaterial; what matters is whether or not you’re enjoying yourself. If not, what can you change to make your own game fun for you? Try a new playstyle, different game rules, or new mods!

That said, I will add that I expect the devs will continue gradually tweaking the stats, and will address the stat bloat if the metrics they have indicate it’s necessary. As you know, the majority of players never post at all, so we who do have no idea how the nonposters like to play.

Well, what can I say? You make a fair point.

Let me put it this way then: requiring that players intentionally avoid using a supposedly interesting and enjoyable mechanic of the game, because using it causes massive stat-inflation issues, is not good game design.

Now if players want to avoid using artifacts for whatever reasons of their own, then that's another thing, and more power to them.

 

[Eltener]

• I think if the AI was better and the game more punishing it might help to alleviate genetic stat bloat somewhat since you might actually be forced to marry for alliances instead of genes.
• Artifacts are just too powerful full stop.
• I don't like dynasty legacies in principle let alone implementation.
• The game in general should be a lot more difficult so that it takes time, planning and effort to be powerful enough to become a money printer who can afford to max everything
• Vassals' should be harder to please so that you actually have to appease and nurture them instead of couple hundred years too early absolutism

While roleplay is fun, it should be optional. The game should still be challenging and enjoyable if you try to play it well.

 

[Tschobo]

My take on the game is relatively easy:

For my achievement-hunts I go the best possible way to achieve them and even cheese stuff from time to time.

For my RP-sessions. I avoid all positive genetical traits.

But the Stat Spread is an issue. Espescially with artifacts. Here I would have loved to see an adjustment that the court artifacts can only scale up to their full potential with the Court Grandeur. And your own Prowess-Based artifacts on your skills (like Hastiluder and Blademaster). Also I would wish for some mechanics to get rid of the artifact clutter voluntary and not via duration-end-events. Like donating some artifacts away. Or using them elsewhere. Or handing them out without dealing with the tedious Artifact UI.

But overall I see some issues with the current Gameplay-loop. Espescially in the late game. With the right Men at Arms and the right build up only bad luck can harm you in the mid-to-lategame. And that is the biggest issue. Here I kinda wish, that the AI would cheat to catch up to you if you pull away too fast. Like in some other strategy games.

 

[dawedqafdAD]

I just manually build every kingdom on the map (overtime) and switch characters to then build up another kingdom. Then grant that one off to a son or daughter and start a new until there are enough good leaders and strong kingdoms to keep the map engaging for me, because outpacing the AI happens almost immediately. Its not a fix but its how I've learned to enjoy the game. I must admit though while I love that my rulers are practically gods It is kind of, I don't know silly? I guess. I love it but I don't, but its like you said, how can it even be fixed? its more or less the whole point of the game to build a strong family.


My maps tend to look like this:



Bavaria, Bohemia, Byzantium, And Iberia too but that's to many screenshots lol

 

[Karlington]

I just manually build every kingdom on the map (overtime) and switch characters to then build up another kingdom. Then grant that one off to a son or daughter and start a new until there are enough good leaders and strong kingdoms to keep the map engaging for me, because outpacing the AI happens almost immediately. Its not a fix but its how I've learned to enjoy the game. I must admit though while I love that my rulers are practically gods It is kind of, I don't know silly? I guess. I love it but I don't, but its like you said, how can it even be fixed? its more or less the whole point of the game to build a strong family.


My maps tend to look like this:

View attachment 1021194 View attachment 1021195 View attachment 1021196 View attachment 1021197

This is actually a really cool idea!

 

[BlueMoon20]

My observation is that the players who don’t try to get the best trait, or the best heir, or best artifacts, etc., seem to express the most satisfaction with the game. They generally recommend (role)-playing with the rng hand one is dealt for maximum fun. One generation they’re a vengeful, greedy coward, then a spindly, shy, stubborn zealot, followed by a clubfooted, stubborn, wrathful cynic. Resist the temptation to excel in all things! Embrace mediocrity! (Otherwise, yes, stat bloat may reduce your fun.)

Me, I enjoy playing more than one character at a time, so while I do mostly focus on one character, I switch around when the whim hits me. I can cheese my way with one house, and take bigger risks with my other ones. Works for me, but I am not exactly a conventional player.

Yeah, but roleplaying should be induced on the player by the mechanics. If you have to force yourself to play each generation differently, then it's not really part of the game but a limitation you force onto yourself. It's basically a challenge run, not part of the game.
I mean, they do kind of nudge you in the direction with the stress mechanic, but there are so many ways to negate that that it soon doesn't matter. You have perks + artifacts + events and probably some other options I didn't think of at the moment. And even if you don't fully negate it and suffer negative penality traits, that's not that big of a deal most of the time. Plus they give so many stress relieving options that you can suffer a lot of stress and still get out of it by a click of a button.


If they wanted us to play each character differently, they should make it so.



Not playing optimally "since it's not historic" seems like such a weird argument to me. Which king didn't want to make his kingdom more stable, better then the neighbours and a more glorious life for himself? Which one didn't want to skew the laws in his favor? Why they didn't "play optimally" was because they always had to balance things - do too much of this and there will be a revolution, change things too much and the nobles will revolt. Victoria 3 (I haven't played the previous Victoria games) makes things really good in this direction. Every law has people that support and people who oppose it. You can expand your borders "technically as much as you want" but other nations (that you haven't attack) will hate you and will come to get you. The biggest threat to nobles in ck3 times were any changes to the status quo. Attacking a nation will make it less inclined to trade with you.
The leaders were (mostly) not dumb. They knew this. So they tried to play optimally. But there were a lot of things that were holding them in check.
Meanwhile in ck3, most of these checks don't exist or are way too easy to deal with. So the only way "to have fun and roleplay" is if you force youself to play by a different set of rules that are not enforced anywhere by the game.



Currenly, they give us choices for character, but for most of the time, it's for the wrong things if you ask me. For example, I have seen some examples where you can pick between two chances of death, one big chance and one a bit smaller. And nothing happens if you don't die, so there is no character initiative to pick the higher death rate. How is that a roleplaying question? Of course every character would pick the not dying one. Only as the "player force" can I force him to probably die sooner, so that he can finally play as the "better" character.

This is just one example, I don't want so specifically dunk on the death mechanic (I think it finally presents some unexpected challenges for an unexpected split of land), but there are way more. I can play a character with the most diplomatic and peacful traits and still go to war every other week.

Most of the choices give you around 3 options and then perhaps a 4th option if you fulfill a certain condition. What if it was the opposite? Every event presented you with fewer options (most of the other ones are locked) and only things that your character with his personality would do are open to you?

• I think if the AI was better and the game more punishing it might help to alleviate genetic stat bloat somewhat since you might actually be forced to marry for alliances instead of genes.
• Artifacts are just too powerful full stop.
• I don't like dynasty legacies in principle let alone implementation.
• The game in general should be a lot more difficult so that it takes time, planning and effort to be powerful enough to become a money printer who can afford to max everything
• Vassals' should be harder to please so that you actually have to appease and nurture them instead of couple hundred years too early absolutism

While roleplay is fun, it should be optional. The game should still be challenging and enjoyable if you try to play it well.

Dynasty legacies. That's one more that I really really loved. I always tried to make my dynasty the best with the best traits and legacies. But it becomes a problem, since you begin snowballing. Every legacy you unlock means that everynext character will also have it. And it makes for a duller game. It gives you a terrific goal for a 100 years at game start, but as soon as you unlock the tree that you want, the game stoops being fun and instead you just drown in the bonuses. For the price of gaining a goal at beginning of the game, you make the game worse for yourself for every point after you reach it.

 

[MaMaxLaMenace]

It would be cool if every stats were basically at zero, and the sole sources of stat points were caracter traits and that's it. In that case, artifact should be vital in order to adjust one's skills. A brave, zealot and Idk, diligent, would then be like 7 in military and only 3 everywhere else.

 

[DiplomaticIntrigue]

This has been on my mind for many months and sadly, with each update, I see the state of this become worse, so I decided I’m at least going to mention it.


The characters in ck3 are mostly defined by their trait and stats. When picking an heir, you mostly look at those two and try to make sure the next character in line is as competent as possible.

There is nothing wrong with that. In fact, it’s a good feature. Of course you’re gonna want a competent heir to inherit and guide the kingdom further.

The problem is with stat inheritance. At first, there were just the good inheritance traits (genius, beautiful and herculean). I’m not gonna lie, I really liked this system at first. It drew me in. I wanted to have the best heirs possible and my main mission for the first few generations was to get all3 traits onto my heir.

The problem arose after the initial playthrough. The first run is always the hardest, since you’re learning the mechanics, and any helping hand in the form of stats is welcome.

But after that, you start noticing a trend. You’re the most competent every time, there is nobody in vicinity that even comes close to you. The only people on your level are the members of your dynasty. There is no competition, you’re free to do whatever, since you have a boost on armies, income, everybody likes you, you gain perks way faster…

After that, the royal court expansion came. It introduced artifacts. Once again, it drew me in. I wanted to become a collector of legendary artifacts.I wanted to improve my stats with them.

But now, there is a second source for stats. You basically become a god. You automatically have 7 slots on yourself and with the royal court, you gain way more slots to fill. Everything mentioned before (the stats, the perk progression) became even more pronounced.

Even bigger problem: They are all hereditary. Your stats are your children’s stats. They all become the same. Each artifact might have small scaling to prestige or piety. Actually they’re not even small, but let’s leave it at that. The problem is they pile on.

Now they added tournaments, where you can win even more artifacts easily. And as soon as you get a good armor and weapon (Famed and Illustrious give around 10 prowess), you – and everybody in your line – will probably win all the tournaments and gain even more famed and illustrious artifacts. Even if you’re so old that you should have negative prowess, you still have more prowess then most knights in their prime. And that’s just from two slots, there’s many more options to gain them.



The first run with the base game was fun for the traits, and the first run with royal court with artifacts was fun, but after that, the game becomes increasingly empty. With tournaments, even the first run wasn’t fun, since I knew I would win every single tournament I would join.

Instead of being happy for my character – my character is so great at tournaments, I will join every single tournament with him and bring him glory, for he is the best. i will always remember him, even after he dies – he becomes just a dime a dozen in my dynasty. Oh, he’s good at tournaments? Just like the last 3 people in line I played as. Yey. You’re not happy for a good stats roll, you basically expect it.

You’re not incentivized to use your character to their fullest, since they’re replaceable. Nobody is special anymore. Instead of playing a different character with each succession and mastering their own way, all of them master everything and everybody is the same.



I remember the good old days, when having a single stat around 20 felt godlike. And it meant most of your other stats were not that great. Now if most of your stats are not around the ballpark of 15, you’re doing something wrong. And 20 is so easy to surpass it’s laughable.



I actually don’t know how you could fix this. It was actually one of the things that brought me to the game. I like seeing stats go up, I’m not gonna lie. But if you have double the stat of every neighboring ruler, you’re basically playing a different game then them. Now they even added the possibility of 5 star traits, which makes the difference between you and AI even more obvious.

Each update worsens the problem. And each DLC makes the game even easier for you. When they add a new mechanic, you want to engage with it, not for it to just make the rest of the game easier automatically and that's it.

Now if all that is inherited would perhaps contribute 20% of your total stats, that might be a possible solution, but I don’t know. As I said, I don’t know the solution. In my opinion, it would actually be better without any inheritance stats, but at the same time, I know that they are way to ingrained into the game and that many of people would complain about them being removed. I know, since, when the game launched, I would be one of them.


I know I heavily criticize the mechanic, but this post is coming from a place of love. I like the concept of the game, and it has so much potencial, but the game shines when you are invested in every single action you do (which is mostly at the beginning of the game). Soon after that, you partly stop caring, since you already know you're gonna succeed no matter what.

Any thoughts? Or improvements you can think of?

I think that next year we are going to see several games that are at least adjacent to CK3 come out and many of them go to great pains to make each character distinct and interesting whether that is the current player character or the NPC agents. At that point we'll finally have some concrete examples of the failures of the CK3 social simulation. It seems like so many people can only be reached by giving them a specific extant example of gameplay and can't handle hypotheticals at all.

The fact of the matter is that the core game loop for characters with what are claimed to be totally different strengths, weaknesses, and quirks is functionally identical. And the same applies to cultures and religions and even locations.

A game with a proper social simulation would enable even people who are usually minmaxers to get a varied experience between characters. You could be "minmaxing" a specific type of character rather than making a complete superman. That would enable you to feel like your choices mattered mechanically without just being an overpowered god. The problem right now is that aside from DnD loving types who construct a whole "world in the mind" about the game where they do all the heavy lifting the *game itself* just doesn't seem to do a lot to create a strong narrative experience that draws people into different paths.

It should especially be possible to play two "scholarly" characters who on a low in the moment level have a totally different experience of the game. Same for characters focused on stewardship or intrigue or w/e. Instead you get a bunch of bland and shallow broad spectrum bonuses to basically everything.

 

[Comrade_Boris]

I've posted this a lot on the forums and still stand by it, I think we need diminishing returns on stats,where incrementing stats give less and less benefit to a character (and councillor tasks).

I like that the OP mentioned that stacking stats is fun, because I 100% agree, I like to watch the number go up. I just really don't like how I stop everything when I do this since currently having 30 in a stat is 3x better than 10 in a stat. Stat stacking is still an issue even in the absence of hereditary traits as I weened myself off those long ago.

There's also the MAA/Knight issue that someone else mentioned, but that's a different issue and I think it's clear the devs are trying to fix it, just not taking as dramatic actions as I think are necessary.

 

[Herennius]

My observation is that the players who don’t try to get the best trait, or the best heir, or best artifacts, etc., seem to express the most satisfaction with the game. They generally recommend (role)-playing with the rng hand one is dealt for maximum fun. One generation they’re a vengeful, greedy coward, then a spindly, shy, stubborn zealot, followed by a clubfooted, stubborn, wrathful cynic. Resist the temptation to excel in all things! Embrace mediocrity! (Otherwise, yes, stat bloat may reduce your fun.)

I fully agree on that this approach adds a lot of fun to the game.

However, the OP has still a point - even when I deliberately try to not min-max (which is a challenge itself, as you both constantly have to watch your self and draw the line between what it still ok in terms of knowing the games rules and playing with them vs. exploiting stuff), to an extend you can't avoid the creep of the good. Just two examples:

- Regarding good genetic traits...it doesn't stop with the game mechanics inherently making those traits more likely to pass (because of people carrying them having better chances to marry and get children), which is inevitable for realism. A problem is IMO, that on top the game seems creates such characters out of thin air on many occasions, mainly for events I suppose. Just travel around and you inevitably meet those random beautiful or strong people as potential affairs or knights-in-spe - or you already get them as part of your entourage, if you hire specialists to deal with travel dangers

- Artifacts are another source of problems... They are a cool feature itself and largely the core mechanics around them are nice, but the game ruins it by the sheer number of artifacts it hands out. Even if you don't put a real effort into it, you over time accumulate more and more of them: You inherit them, you get gifts, you conquer them, you hunt them and you fund inspired people. Even the rarer ones become common that way and you soon drown in the arsenal of them you acquire over time. The devs even reacted and gave the option to destroy artifacts...but since the reward for this doesn't scale with "artifact health", it creates anoth considerable gold income.

That - together with an whole array of cases where the player gets a coded advantage vs. the AI (like be limited to be targetted by a single murder scheme at one time or reduced pregnancy complications) - really hurts the challenge the game offers. Sure, map painting and world conquests can be fun for some time, but replayability for my taste comes with facing critical situations. And those are too rare for my taste, even if you apply all possible house rules.

 

[Dayvit78]

I like all the posters here. We all seem to be "try not to min-max types."

To the OP's question, the devs have made small steps in stat balancing. I remember before I went full friend-mode and had like 40 friends (giving diplomacy I think), now the devs have capped the benefit at 5 friends. But these steps are small and the stat bloat from each expansion drawfs it.

At this point, I think it's literally impossible to prevent it. Better the devs spend their time on balancing the consequences of stat bloat rather than the stats themselves.

So far, on this thread, I see people simply trying to enjoy the game with stat bloat- as I am doing. Not really any solution in sight.

 

[Pepper13900]

I agree with OP. What made me concerned lately is also the introduction of 5-stars education traits, or the retinue accolades with Men-at-Arms on steroids.

Power creep is unfortunately an issue that plagues a lot of games that gets additionnal features on a regular basis. In order to appeal to the players, each feature introduces a new bonus, as marginal as it may be.

The problem is that, considered individually, each bonus isn't generally that powerful. But it's the piling up of an ever increasing number of bonuses that creates this (real) sense of stat bloat / power creep.
This means that there can't be one single magical solution : it sounds to me that the only solution is to conduct a global rebalancing, tweaking each source of bonus one by one...

Then, to complicate even further the problem, I suspect that the dev team faces two dilemmas when considering this balancing issue :
- how to find a compromise for the global game balance between the players playing vanilla CK3, and those playing with most of the DLCs ?
- how to tweak bonuses without decreasing the appeal for those ?
So it sounds like a source of headache.


That said, I would ponder the issue through two axis :
- tweak the value of a given bonus itself
- tweak the rarity of the source of a bonus

For instance, given the problem stated by OP, potential solutions could be to :
- increase a bit the rarity of people with good traits (intelligent, comely, hale, et caetera), since you need those kind of people to start and maintain a "breeding program" (should you want one).
- or, increase the chance of AI picking persons with advantageous traits for their own weddings (so that you are left with less choice for yourself, and increasing the overall traits strength of your neighbours a bit).
- decrease a bit the chance for children to inherit good traits.
- tweak the balance of obtaining higher level artifacts
- add a condition for tournaments price artifacts to be of Famed or Illustrious level (like needing an inspired person hanging around)
- decrease the number of bonuses per artifcat (maybe having two~three bonuses for a base level artifact is already too much ?)
and so forth and so on...

What do you think ?

 

[TheRealRemus]

It would be cool if every stats were basically at zero, and the sole sources of stat points were caracter traits and that's it. In that case, artifact should be vital in order to adjust one's skills. A brave, zealot and Idk, diligent, would then be like 7 in military and only 3 everywhere else.

I thought the game was exactly line this? I remember beinh upset when the devs explained that children dont i herit stats from parents line they did in ck2 and that traits and education would determine how children would turn out stay wise. Is this not the case anymore?

 

[MarkFranz]

I remember the good old days, when having a single stat around 20 felt godlike. And it meant most of your other stats were not that great. Now if most of your stats are not around the ballpark of 15, you’re doing something wrong. And 20 is so easy to surpass it’s laughable.

CK2 days you mean? Because i seen CK3 screenshots of characters with 50+ in stat few weeks after release of the game.

 

[grommile]

I thought the game was exactly line this?

Each character has base stats which start at all-zeroes at birth, and develop differently for different characters over the course of their childhood.

Your personality and education traits are then layered on top of that.

 

[MirrorMonkey2]

It still doesn't fix 100% of this, but I found that one thing that alleviates a lot of this is the inherichance mod.
Since I first used it, I never played the game without it. Having the chance of becoming a lowly count again after playing as the king by randomly playing as his youngest son upon death is very engaging. Everything you've built is still there: Your kingdom, custom cultures/religions etc. But now you're just a small cog inside of it. Want to become king again? Now it's you who destabilizes the realm to gain the crown. This way the player kingdom is vunerable, also from attacks from outside. Maybe another dynasty manages to get the crown and now you have to reestablish your dynasties rule again. The good thing is, as a half competent player you can still create your empires and wage your epic holy wars etc, as happened historically when the right person met the right circumstances. But now it's not every single one of your characters, as the modifiers don't stack as much when your elder siblings get all the artifacts etc. It's like the setback from partition, but on steroids. It's very rewarding to climb the feudal ladder back up and surpass your king father or grandfather starting as a count. It feels personal.

Basically, inherichance feels like the way the game was intended to be played, even though it's a mod.
Still, I'm looking forward to devs making the game more challenging in all other possible ways