Tours already confirmed to be meaningless.

  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Ixal

Banned
77 Badges
Apr 5, 2008
2.730
4.616
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • BATTLETECH - Backer
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Tyranny - Bastards Wound
  • Tyranny - Tales from the Tiers
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Surviving Mars
  • BATTLETECH
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Prison Architect
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Prison Architect: Psych Ward
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • King Arthur II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
While the travel feature was received well PDX also already confirmed that it will be completely meaningless as its entirely optional.
So either tours will be farmed for buffs, or like holding court no one will use it once the novelity wears off.

What PDX needs to do is that the DLC together with new mechanics also introduces new challenges the new mechanics can address. For example vassal relation going down if the liege did not interact with them for some time. Either through tours or for example by having the vassal in his council.
A bit like Reapers Due if plagues would have been DLC content.

It would also be more historic as traveling around to remind vassals of his presence was what kings did a lot. (The same way holding court was their job instead something they could ignore without consequences)

But PDX seems to be deeply afraid to add any kind of challenge to the game and instead seem to be determined to make the already too easy game even more easy by having new mechanics just dispense more buffs and letting the player ignore them at will.
What are they afraid of? That players will run away when they have to pay attention at one point instead of casually conquering all of Europe in 50 years?
 
  • 88
  • 20
  • 13Like
  • 2Haha
Reactions:
What are they afraid of?
If I were to put on my "nasty-minded cynic weary of capitalism" hat while pretending to be a telepath, I would say that they believe that DLCs which add new compulsory gameplay are harder to sell than DLCs which add new optional gameplay.
 
  • 26
  • 9Like
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
What are they afraid of? That players will run away when they have to pay attention at one point instead of casually conquering all of Europe in 50 years?

You'd be surprised how many people regularly fail to manage even a small realm. They sit on 1/8 domain after 300 years, haven't built one single building, becase "profits are so small" (why should I pay 300g for 0.5g income?!), rely only on levies... the list goes on.

I kind of understand why the devs are reluctant to make things more complicated or harder.

The devs offer a baseline, at which everyone can manage. If you want things to be harder, use the game rules or mods.
 
  • 28
  • 9Like
  • 8Haha
  • 5
Reactions:
You'd be surprised how many people regularly fail to manage even a small realm. They sit on 1/8 domain after 300 years, haven't built one single building, becase "profits are so small" (why should I pay 300g for 0.5g income?!), rely only on levies... the list goes on.

I kind of understand why the devs are reluctant to make things more complicated or harder.

The devs offer a baseline, at which everyone can manage. If you want things to be harder, use the game rules or mods.

But there aren't really game rules that make the game harder? Higher realm stability also affects the player so the difficulty pretty much remains the same.

And to tell the considerable amount of players who also like a challenge to just use mods is a slap in the face. We paid the same amount of money like everybody else and shouldn't rely on mods to enjoy the game. Many people don't even know how modding works, mods break and have to be updated constantly.

I tried to mod the game to make it harder with stuff like Vassals to Arms and some other mods but even that doesn't really help with making the game harder. I imagine that's because of the poor AI and the limited economic and military options available in the game.

I know only one game that has multiple difficulties which are only easy and normal and that's CK3. Adding more higher difficulties would be exactly this, an optional challenge which players can use or ignore at their pleasure.
 
  • 22
  • 9Like
Reactions:
You'd be surprised how many people regularly fail to manage even a small realm. They sit on 1/8 domain after 300 years, haven't built one single building, becase "profits are so small" (why should I pay 300g for 0.5g income?!), rely only on levies... the list goes on.

I kind of understand why the devs are reluctant to make things more complicated or harder.

The devs offer a baseline, at which everyone can manage. If you want things to be harder, use the game rules or mods.
Do you have numbers for that?
It would surprise me if a significant number of people who still play CK3 being very bad at it. Let alone those players being the ones who buy DLC.

And even if thats the case. Having relations go down and needing to be countered by personal contact would hardly affect them as it would be very easy to do in small realms with only a few vassals and short travel times.

It would only become challeging in very large realms when you need to start managing your time and choose which vassals to pacify by tours and for which you use other means.
 
  • 26
  • 5Like
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
Adding more higher difficulties would be exactly this, an optional challenge which players can use or ignore at their pleasure.
Adding well-tuned higher difficulties (rather than lazy garbage higher difficulties) for people who want a harder game means diverting effort from things that everyone can use towards things most people will never want to use.

(Paradox have the telemetry, and from what I recall, they've said that for the games that have both easy and hard, far more people play on easy than on hard.)
 
  • 15
  • 6Like
  • 5
Reactions:
While the travel feature was received well PDX also already confirmed that it will be completely meaningless as its entirely optional.
I stopped reading right after this sentence.
 
  • 33
  • 30
  • 2Like
Reactions:
You'd be surprised how many people regularly fail to manage even a small realm. They sit on 1/8 domain after 300 years, haven't built one single building, becase "profits are so small" (why should I pay 300g for 0.5g income?!), rely only on levies... the list goes on.

I kind of understand why the devs are reluctant to make things more complicated or harder.

The devs offer a baseline, at which everyone can manage. If you want things to be harder, use the game rules or mods.
Even if this were true which I highly doubt you cant have a game that's supposed to be a "Grand Strategy" cater to those who don't care enough to learn the game, keep up that trend too long and we'll be playing Roblox medieval edition in no time. The game has a pretty in depth encyclopedia that describes pretty much everything you'll run into in the game, as well as a proper tutorial, not to mention we live in the age of the internet and there are plenty of beginner guides on YouTube.



Edit: Besides I'm pretty sure its the opposite, most people think the game is too eZ. Thought that was what fueled the recent changes to the AI, making them better at consolidating their land so they can grow more powerful because before they were basically doing what you're claiming many people are which would be sitting on 1 domain holding and completely failing economically 300 years in. I imagine if a majority of players were "failing to manage even a small realm" they wouldn't have done it
 
Last edited:
  • 22Like
  • 6
  • 3
Reactions:
But there aren't really game rules that make the game harder? Higher realm stability also affects the player so the difficulty pretty much remains the same.

Not the same, as the player usually can manage factions much better than the AI. If realms become more stable, it's the AI who gets the most out of it.

And to tell the considerable amount of players who also like a challenge to just use mods is a slap in the face. We paid the same amount of money like everybody else and shouldn't rely on mods to enjoy the game.

Like Stellaris, I think CK3 would greatly profit from more game rules and sliders. But the AI got improved already to be a bit more challenging and the game is playable as is. If that's not enough for you, then you can either wait for some official update in the future and don't play until then, or you deal with it and play the game as it is now. Mods are a viable 3rd way here.

"Just wait" is a bigger slap in the face than "use mods in the meantime". You don't have to take it, but official content won't just magically drop from the sky because you demand it. It takes time, even if they get the green light and can implement it. The earliest we'd probably see it would be in the next big update after T&T. That's what, at least half a year from now? Those things take time, while mods aren't bound by those processes and get done in a day or two.

As for the official difficulty settings, why not trying your luck in the suggestions subforum? Propose a few game rules and/or sliders, the devs might not comment in most threads, by they read them. Get enough people behind you and we might get what you ask for. You already have my upvote for that.

Also, why don't you try simple mods like "Harder difficulties", "Harder claims" or "obfusCKate - Hidden Information"? They basically do what you wish the game rules did, making the game harder. You can tweak the numbers, if it is still too easy for you.

Do you have numbers for that?
It would surprise me if a significant number of people who still play CK3 being very bad at it. Let alone those players being the ones who buy DLC.

I'm not working for PDX, so I don't have any official numbers. But I read threads here, on Reddit and on the Steam forums. Most players aren't active on any platform, so take it with a grain of salt or two, but among those who are active, you'll find a good number posting screenshots of their realm or asking for help with a bad situation.

The things I've seen in the last few weeks alone... I have learned my lesson assuming the game is too easy for everyone. Just because you're good at the game doesn't mean most people are. People are different, so don't think your standard applies to everyone. Just a couple day ago we had someone who couldn't find the tutorial button.

Even if this were true which I highly doubt you cant have a game that's supposed to be a "Grand Strategy" cater to those who don't care enough to learn the game, keep up that trend to long and we'll be playing Roblox medieval edition in no time.

No need to be condescending towards those players. I mean, what are you trying to say here? "Bad players don't exist. But even if they do exist, this game is for elite players like me. learn2play instead of dumbing down the game" - is that it? People like you are probably part of the reason why those players hesitate to ask for help here in the first place.
 
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7Like
Reactions:
No need to be condescending towards those players. I mean, what are you trying to say here? "Bad players don't exist. But even if they do exist, this game is for elite players like me. learn2play instead of dumbing down the game" - is that it? People like you are probably part of the reason why those players hesitate to ask for help here in the first place.
You just quite literally made up your own version of what I said. I'm not being "condescending" certainly not like you are putting words in my mouth that I never even said. I'm just saying that it's poor practice to make a game easier just because some people aren't good at it... most new players aren't just instantly good, but most new players aren't incapable of learning to be good at the game either, so why then should we degrade in-depth mechanics or sacrifice complex systems? just because we're afraid inexperienced players won't understand them. Instead, just add them anyways and let new players do what every new player does, learn the game.


Edit: I'll also add that you conveniently glossed over and ignored the part where I listed off potential ways to acquire more information about the game.
 
Last edited:
  • 11Like
  • 8
  • 4
Reactions:
I agree that CK3 is too easy - or at least lacks the friction that CK2 had. I’d love to see more difficulty options and/or more Stellaris-style game rules to tweak the challenge of different parts of the game.

That said, despite initially thinking that tours would be a “buff farm” that would make the game easier, having read a bit more and listened to other players, I don’t actually think that’s the case.

Each type of tour appears comes with downsides as well as upsides that will make them useful or not based on the situation the player find themselves in.
 
  • 8Like
  • 3
  • 2Haha
Reactions:
I agree that CK3 is too easy - or at least lacks the friction that CK2 had. I’d love to see more difficulty options and/or more Stellaris-style game rules to tweak the challenge of different parts of the game.

That said, despite initially thinking that tours would be a “buff farm” that would make the game easier, having read a bit more and listened to other players, I don’t actually think that’s the case.

Each type of tour appears comes with downsides as well as upsides that will make them useful or not based on the situation the player find themselves in.
You fail to understand that without new challenges the existence of tours alone is power creep.
If the balance between up and downsides is better than for other mechanics it gets used as a buff farm. If not it will never get used, becomes a new hold court and you do not lise anything.
 
Last edited:
  • 34
  • 4Like
  • 2
Reactions:
You just quite literally made up your own version of what I said. I'm not being "condescending" certainly not like you are putting words in my mouth that I never even said. I'm just saying that its poor practice to make a game easier just because some people aren't good at it... most new players aren't just instantly good, but most new players aren't incapable of learning to be good at the game either, so why then should we degrade in depth mechanics or sacrifice on complex systems? just because were afraid inexperienced players wont understand them. Instead just add them anyways and let new players do what every new player does, learn the game.

You said, and I quote, that CK3 is "supposed to be a "Grand Strategy"" game and shouldn't "cater to those who don't care enough to learn the game", because then the game could become a "Roblox medieval edition". If that's not condescending, what is?

Your first mistake already is thinking that making the game accessible for many, including those who aren't inherently good at it, is "degrading in depth mechanics" or sacrificing complexity.

I don't disagree that the game is too easy for experienced players, but that can and will be addressed by additional difficulty settings. Stellaris did it successfully, CK3 will probably follow at some point. Which is something I look forward to. But I appreciate the effort from the devs trying to get the game to a broader audience and getting it out of its niche. More customers = more money = more content. We all profit from it. There's no need to point fingers and blame new players for anything.
 
  • 19
  • 15
  • 1Like
Reactions:
You said, and I quote, that CK3 is "supposed to be a "Grand Strategy"" game and shouldn't "cater to those who don't care enough to learn the game", because then the game could become a "Roblox medieval edition". If that's not condescending, what is?

Your first mistake already is thinking that making the game accessible for many, including those who aren't inherently good at it, is "degrading in depth mechanics" or sacrificing complexity.

I don't disagree that the game is too easy for experienced players, but that can and will be addressed by additional difficulty settings. Stellaris did it successfully, CK3 will probably follow at some point. Which is something I look forward to. But I appreciate the effort from the devs trying to get the game to a broader audience and getting it out of its niche. More customers = more money = more content. We all profit from it. There's no need to point fingers and blame new players for anything.
I don't find this condescending at all this is just simple logic. I wouldn't hop on call of duty, die 10 times and say my goodness why is it that I'm not winning? and demand that they lower the damage on the enemies weapons so I can have fun too.. a grand strategy, at least in my opinion is meant to be a challenging experience that forces you to.. well.. think strategically lmao.

and there you go again just making stuff up. I'm not blaming new players for anything I'm blaming you for thinking new players cant simply learn the game just like you and me have, and what is this "Making the game accessible" talk? what does that even mean? should we put it on sale?? should we have the AI play the game for you while you just watch? what exactly would you have done to make the game more "Accessible"
 
Last edited:
  • 21Like
  • 7
  • 4
Reactions:
I have played with high realm stability and it honestly didn't make the game harder for me in any meaningful way.

So far the Devs have shown that they don't care about balance at all since most negative events like the ones royal court constantly gives you can just be safely ignored and they didn't even bother to implement a hard difficulty after almost 3 years. Not even talking about warfare/crusade AI, boni stacking and power creep through additional features like artifacts. Every DLC so far has just made the game easier and gives the player boni over boni which the AI cannot make proper use of.

When will this crazy feature called a hard difficulty, which for me is to be expected at game release, finally come? 4 years after release? 5 years? Will it even come? Has it been confirmed by any Dev?

When I bought the game I thought that there would be like in every other video game which gives the player options also an option for people who like the challenge. When I realized that this is not the case, I was sure that it would come very soon.

Now we are here 3 years later. If I had known that there wouldnt be a hard difficulty or that it would take them at least 3+ years to implement it, I probably wouldn't have bought the game, to be frank.

I get their approach from a financial standpoint but I'm not sure if this strategy to ONLY cater to casual players is very intelligent in the long run. I'm not sure if casual players are the most loyal customer base and many challenging games like Rimworld, Valheim or Dark Souls have been huge financial successes. While publishers like Ubisoft which seem to think that their customers cannot be bothered to use their brains a bit from time to time are not looking very good financially right now.
 
  • 13
  • 4Like
  • 1
Reactions:
If I were to put on my "nasty-minded cynic weary of capitalism" hat while pretending to be a telepath, I would say that they believe that DLCs which add new compulsory gameplay are harder to sell than DLCs which add new optional gameplay.
It's not about making it compulsory - that's bad design - but there are other mitigated measures to provide an incentive for a ruler to go on a tour. For instance, vassals might be disappointed if the ruler never went on a tour for the last 10 years - number absolutely arbitrary - or the Prestige of the ruler might take a serious hit.
 
Last edited:
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
More knowledgeable people might correct me, but wasn’t „Reisekönigtum“ (traveling kingdom) an integral part of the government of at least the Holy Roman Empire? It feels like an missed opportunity that you can ignore the tours without penalty, at least in cultures where it would be expected from the king/emperor to travel the realm.
Maybe in the future there will be an integration of this system with a government expansion, but I fully expected it to appear in T&T. Would be a plus for verisimilitude.
 
  • 11
  • 3Like
Reactions:
If I were to put on my "nasty-minded cynic weary of capitalism" hat while pretending to be a telepath, I would say that they believe that DLCs which add new compulsory gameplay are harder to sell than DLCs which add new optional gameplay.
Iberian Struggle? The data balance makes this mechanics feel like shxt. There's a compromise loop in the Iberian slitary island, but I'm still gonna buy it because at least it's fun.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Adding well-tuned higher difficulties (rather than lazy garbage higher difficulties) for people who want a harder game means diverting effort from things that everyone can use towards things most people will never want to use.

(Paradox have the telemetry, and from what I recall, they've said that for the games that have both easy and hard, far more people play on easy than on hard.)
Yeah. It’s not like it’s them guessing what players want by throwing darts at a board. Game dev is kinda their job.

Which, by the way, if I were a dev, I’d be annoyed by all the armchair game development pundits trying to explain my job to me. Far less annoying for folks to just say “I personally don’t like this and why” rather than try to tie it to guessing a studio’s general vibe or bemoaning the rise of the casual (or whatever market trend they think 1) exists and 2) is relevant here).
 
  • 22
  • 7
  • 1Like
Reactions: