There's scope for an EU4-style "disaster" system in CK3 (imo)

[FreeSoc]

It's a source of frustration to lots of people, me included, that lots of things *can* happen once you unpause CK3 but that all sorts of interesting things *don't*. Have you ever seen a meaningful Shi'a Caliphate in your CK3 game? A proper Bulgarian challenge to Byzantine power in the late 9th and early 10th centuries? The consequences of Capetian weakness in 1066 and its slow reversal? The implosion of Polish royal power in the twelfth century, the rise of Turkic nomads (or indeed any nomadic incursion into Persia or the Balkans except the Mongols) when you start in 867? The rise of the Chola in India? The _*Investiture Contest*_?

I've played with the Historic Invasions mod a bit, and it's good fun, but it still has obvious limitations, not least that it bends the railroading stick too far the other way. However, I think there's potential for a more dynamic system operating on lines a bit like EU4's Disaster system, where if a particular set of triggers are satisfied in a given era then you might see a historical process get going. You could even have positive examples of this as well - much as the Ming disasters in EU4 give, in effect, huge buffs to the Jurchens and Oirat, you could have a "disaster" for the Abbasids which presents a huge opportunity for Shi'a rulers, Iranian dukes etc, or for the Almoravids which give the Almohads a big boost. Likewise you could have disasters active at game start in 1066 for France and the HRE, which provide major rewards and boosts if you can put in the work to undo them.

I'm not pretending this idea is perfect, but I am sure it ought to be possible to do _something_ with dynamic triggers which allows for the development of interesting historical situations which you wouldn't otherwise see happen in-game. Feedback and other suggestions welcome!

 

[funkyfreshrat]

Good post Freesoc, I feel very similarly and would like to share my own thoughts on the matter. The developers of CK3 already seem open to the idea of dedicating whole systems for certain historical processes, such as the struggle system present in Iberia. I have the impression that we might see more specialized systems developed in the future, rather than something dynamic like the disaster system. I think that for events like the investiture conflict and Anarchy at Samarra which you mentioned in your post, that it would be better to fit them within unique scopes that can acknowledge the specific conditions that would cause them to occur in their respective regions rather than trying to produce a "one-size-fits-all" solution for certain tags in-game.

I have thought about the disaster system being applicable to CK3 before though too, I understand where you are coming from. On one hand I worry that the gamey nature of disasters being in conflict with the roleplaying focus of CK3, though on the other hand I think the longer events written recently for Scandinavian tags in EU4 are perfect examples of there being plenty of potential to further elevate that roleplaying focus through the right direction. Fundamentally, I agree with you, the idea of disasters in CK3 is not perfect but I feel it helps in better conceptualizing what systems are currently missing in-game.

 

[Eltener]

I'm sure pdx don't want to alienate the sandbox players and a game rule could fix that. A game rule that railroads certain historical outcomes into definitely happening, one closer to the disaster system described where the outcomes are possible but not guaranteed and just an "off". I can't remember if it was CK2+ or HIP but one of them had a game rule like that.