Crusader Kings Expansion

[Incendiary Lemon]

I loved the concept behind CK but its always been a problematic title even with the patches. Hopefully the expansion will sort some of the issues out, its set for a September release.

* Various added inter-character relations, representing loyalty inside courts, relations between countries, as well as friends and rivals for all characters. No longer will realms just fall apart, a beleaguered King will always have friends who will support him. Also beware as your smoothly running realm could run into trouble when your nice loyal vassal becomes your rival.

* Introduction of new gameplay aspects like the stability affecting realms, numerous traits for characters and options for diplomacy, such as the possibility to send fosterlings to other courts. Plus an all-new system for children. No longer will a 3 year old be able to run a realm effectively. Children are all now born with 0 stats and then develop over childhood. You'll never know how good your heir will be until he matures.

* A revised interface to streamline gameplay, with several completely redesigned windows. Immediate alert icons highlight immediate problems with your realm and a full ledger with more than a dozen detailed pages.

* A variety of new events as well as a substantial amount of changes and improvements to the tools used by modders.

Also mentioned is a "graphical overhaul."

Paradox Plaza (http://www.paradoxplaza.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=215&Itemid=129)

[Samurai]

You know I never liked CK, and couldn't ever figure out why. It just didn't feel as if there was enough of a game there. Maybe the expansion will renew interest for me. Doubtful though...

[Igor Muravyev]

I wish all these turn based war games would allocate one person and just make some cool fighting animations, like GalCiv2. You don't actually need to control the turn-based battle, but its much cooler when you can see the actual fighting.

Because quite frankly, after Total War, all of these games pale in comparison.

[Kalle]

Igor, as much as I'm willing to admit I didn't really get into Crusader Kings, your comparison with Total War is just mindbogglingly stupid. Completely different games for completely different audiences.

[Troy S Goodfellow]

Igor, as much as I'm willing to admit I didn't really get into Crusader Kings, your comparison with Total War is just mindbogglingly stupid. Completely different games for completely different audiences.

And Crusader King's not even turn based.

I like CK a lot, but as a role playing dynasty management sim more than as a conquer-thy-neighbor game. So I like the new personality stuff they are adding. The idea of loyalty/rivalry is a good one.

Troy

[Brian Rucker]

Yup. This game's always been my cup of tea. It's not perfect but the mental imagery in the gameplay is wonderful. Dynasties, interpersonal rivalries between vassals and leiges, rallying troops for war without going broke, detailed events (especially with the user mods) creating ongoing narrative consequences for both personal and strategic decisionmaking (not unlike King of Dragon Pass's nested event trees) and so on.

Love it. And these changes look to add more of what I like. Will they break the current patch mods? Or does it incorporate them?

[metta]

I read this news at TSG's blog this morning and almost spilled my cuppa. I'm in!

[moss_icon]

I still need a tutorial.

[Rod Humble]

Awesome news. It sounds like the extra features will fit my playstyle very well (playing a tiny Duchy somewhere).

[gamadict]

Cool stuff, but I'm really interested in hearing about Paradox's next proper game. EU3 was pretty disappointing, and I can only cover the world in the nazi/soviet/british flag so many times in HoI2

[flyinj]

I never actually played King of Dragon Pass. Would it still hold up today? I've always been interested in it, and I don't think anything like it has been done since.

Would it run on modern PCs?

[Kalle]

King of Dragon Pass runs on modern PC's, no problem. I just wish I could get it to run in a window.

[Incendiary Lemon]

It sounds like the extra features will fit my playstyle very well (playing a tiny Duchy somewhere).

I think thats where CK is best. Building up your small domain with clever marriages and a bit of luck. For me its more of a role playing game with a dynastic element than a strategy title.

[Rod Humble]

I think thats where CK is best. Building up your small domain with clever marriages and a bit of luck. For me its more of a role playing game with a dynastic element than a strategy title.

Agree. I love coveting the little province next to mine and trying to weasel control of it over the generations. Not to say the unusual moments when you suddenly end up in control of some small area in Poland by accident of marriage. Great stuff.

[Igor Muravyev]

Igor, as much as I'm willing to admit I didn't really get into Crusader Kings, your comparison with Total War is just mindbogglingly stupid. Completely different games for completely different audiences.
Actually I compared it with GalCiv2 and then said I was spoiled by Total War. But feel free to insert "I was spoiled by Knights of Honor" if Crusader Kings is not turn based (don't know, since the graphics turned me off and I never played it).

Maybe this game is great after all, but I can't tell that just by looking at the screenshots is all I was trying to express, unless I guess you already have experience with similar kind of games (which I obviously don't).

[Incendiary Lemon]

Its a realtime game where you manage your dynasty. Armies exist only as icons on the map and due to their expense you won't be raising them too often. The substance is with the random events and battling through the bad periods (who knew Schizophrenia ran in her family?). You can assassinate characters including your own family members. The second is often the only way to save yourself from the unfit.

[flyinj]

Wow, that does sound pretty interesting. Is this running on the EU engine like every other paradox product?

[Troy S Goodfellow]

Its a realtime game where you manage your dynasty. Armies exist only as icons on the map and due to their expense you won't be raising them too often. The substance is with the random events and battling through the bad periods (who knew Schizophrenia ran in her family?). You can assassinate characters including your own family members. The second is often the only way to save yourself from the unfit.

And there are lots of bad periods that can't be helped by assassination. You kill to get a good heir, but then he goes mad and declares himself to be the Messiah. Then he gets excommunicated and his most powerful vassal lays claim to the kingdom.

Then the Mongols show up.

I think I'll reinstall this later this week...

Troy

[metta]

This game once made me assassinate a 6 yr old monarch so that his lands would fall to me.

First, I politely asked him for them, and when he told me to sod off I sent Black Jaques Ornskoldvisk to throw him from the tower.

This is one of my favourite games ever.

[Incendiary Lemon]

Wow, that does sound pretty interesting.

The concept is fantastic but it doesn't always live up it. Once you've manipulated yourself to the top things can get dull. I find the combat mechanisms simple and consequently dull. CK could always do with more random events and the court system could be expanded.

The expansion does resolve the bride finding issue. Previously you had to go Kingdom to Kingdom on the map searching for a talented young lady to pair to your eligible bachelor. They now have a page that presents your options. The Loyalty rate also sounds like a reasonable wrinkle in empire management. I'd like to see the foster system used a peace guarantee where your offspring might be held hostage. We'll see how far it goes.

To your second question, yes.

[Ben Sones]

I still wish the Paradox games were turn based. I've never understood what the realtime element brings to the party in these designs. They really play like they want to be turn-based to me, especially given the level of detail.

[Incendiary Lemon]

I've never understood what the realtime element brings to the party in these designs.

I think realtime is great for Hearts of Iron where momentum and unit speed come into play. CK though could easily play as a turnbased game, perhaps consolidating events into turns would make endgame play more exciting with less downtime.

[zx81-Amd64]

I never actually played King of Dragon Pass. Would it still hold up today? I've always been interested in it, and I don't think anything like it has been done since.

Would it run on modern PCs?

Ah KODP, a true underated gem. And quite difficult to fathom to boot. I'm an ex-RuneQuest pnp player, my mate was the DM, and neither of us had much success with this crpg-like version of the game. Still it is definately worth checking out(they do a free demo on their site). On the other hand my partner took it on one day while I and mate were fixing the shed, and a few hours later I went to find her still at it. She had completed 4 Hero Quests!(for the record neither my mate or I have ever done one!) and was loving it. I still dont quite get how that happened?

Still if your after something different, which has great artwork and a unique vibe then KODP is for you.

Good to hear about this expansion for CK. I always quite liked it, more so than EU even, but always played it as a dynasty maker rather than a run of the mill conquer+expand type game. It does sound like they are going to focus more on the personality aspects of the game, something I quite liked that CK did different/better than other games. so thumbs up from me on this news - I'll go dust of that cd.

[lesslucid]

I think realtime is great for Hearts of Iron where momentum and unit speed come into play. CK though could easily play as a turnbased game, perhaps consolidating events into turns would make endgame play more exciting with less downtime.

I agree, CK probably would work better as a turn-based game... I assume it's in continuous time because it's based on the EU engine, so... you get an EU-like game in some ways.

This expansion does sound pretty damn neat, though. :) I'm with the others here who say it works best as a dynasty simulator rather than a conquest-y game... there's a special feeling in slowly building up to getting a second province in your little domain, through marriages and diplomacy and whatnot, rather than just taking an army from place to place and "painting the map blue".

[JeffL]

I've got CK but never installed. Do you play as a single king, or do you die and your heir takes over and you go on for hundreds of years, etc.? More interested in the RPG aspects than the strat game aspects.

[lesslucid]

I've got CK but never installed. Do you play as a single king, or do you die and your heir takes over and you go on for hundreds of years, etc.? More interested in the RPG aspects than the strat game aspects.

When you die your heir takes over, *if* you have successfully produced a suitable heir. This makes for tense times when you are getting old or your wife is getting old and you only have daughters... it's great! :)

[Orinoco]

Ah KODP, a true underated gem. And quite difficult to fathom to boot.

Still if your after something different, which has great artwork and a unique vibe then KODP is for you.



Yeah, I loved it but gave up eventually as I kept failing at all the HQ's.

Now I'm tempted to dig out both KODP and CK (which I never installed). But do I have to "finish" Beyond the Sword first? That's next on my to-do list after all...

Sometimes playing games is harder then work. It's a never-ending chore!! (Which reminds me - I need to install Neverend at some point).

[metta]

When you die your heir takes over, *if* you have successfully produced a suitable heir. This makes for tense times when you are getting old or your wife is getting old and you only have daughters... it's great! :)

Yeah, it's much more like Sims 3: The Feudal Ages than EUII. You have a court of characters, all with stats making them strong or weak in various areas, and you give them positions, which in turn, add to the strength of your realm. You make choices about how your kids are schooled - military or monastic, for example - and try to balance your future needs. The combat is pretty abstracted, but there are a fair number of units. This is my favourite of the EU Engine games, but this is also my favourite time period.

[Incendiary Lemon]

Thought it was worth mentioning that GoGamer has the original release on sale (http://www.gogamer.com/viewproduct.htm?productId=5590267&categoryId=65152) for 1.90.

[wisefool]

Thanks for the head up.

Is the expansion going to be standalone? If not I better pick up one of the originals!

Answered my question: http://www.bdgamers.net/tag/expansion says it's standalone.

[Incendiary Lemon]

will be like revolutions..

ie, it will need the original game.

from the Paradox forums.

[strategy]

Yeah, I loved it but gave up eventually as I kept failing at all the HQ's.


Hero Quests are tough in King of Dragon Pass, but about half of them can be pretty easily handled if done correctly (e.g., Forming the Storm Tribe), a few are tough no matter what you do (e.g., Elmal defends the Stead).

- WWOD? (What Would Orlanth Do) Follow the Myths.
- Learn all the secrets of the quest before questing.
- Don't Quest too often.
- Pick appropriate leaders for the Quest.
- Assign lots of support (magic and worshippers).

[zx81-Amd64]

Hero Quests are tough in King of Dragon Pass, but about half of them can be pretty easily handled if done correctly (e.g., Forming the Storm Tribe), a few are tough no matter what you do (e.g., Elmal defends the Stead).

- WWOD? (What Would Orlanth Do) Follow the Myths.
- Learn all the secrets of the quest before questing.
- Don't Quest too often.
- Pick appropriate leaders for the Quest.
- Assign lots of support (magic and worshippers).

Maybe true. Still when a(very versed) RuneQuest DM can't work it out then maybe there are a few issues? I would say being too opaque is the single biggest flaw in KODP(in many areas, not just the Hero Quests). But that doesn't stop me from being very fond of it as a piece of must have computer gaming. I recommend it whenever it's appropriate, as it seems to have been mostly overlooked outside of the indie scene.

Here's the direct link for those interested:
http://www.a-sharp.com/kodp/

[Brian Rucker]

I think in some ways the opacity is what makes it such a unique experience. Pocket-protectors and sliderules aren't necessarily going to help you out as much as getting a grasp of the setting, the mythology and the intentions of the various characters (the tribal council, neighboring clans, etc.) which vary each game. Combined with the branching, conditional, random event system which adds a narrative flavor to the experience you've got a game like nothing else out there.

[BobJustBob]

Just noticed that the original game is on sale at gogamer this week for $2.

[Igor Muravyev]

$2.59 for shipping though? How I hate to pay more for shipping than for the item itself..

[Ben Sones]

I'm sure that if you wanted to pay them extra for the game, they would be happy to accommodate you.

;)

[Incendiary Lemon]

I recently started playing again and thought I'd do a brief writeup on one of my games.

From the King of Castille to the King of Aragon, Castille, Leon, Jerusalem, Portugal and back again.

http://img293.imageshack.us/img293/9343/therealmdc6.jpg

the map in July 1156. Almost a hundred years have elapsed since the game began.

The game began with the small Kingdom of Castille. Leon was to the west, Navarre and Aragon to the east and the lands to the south fully Muslim. The first war occured in 1066 where the King of Leon died leading his army against Castille. Without an heir Castille was next in line to the throne and so the war ended without a months passage. Leons vassals fell behind the new King.

Over the next twenty years Castille expanded westward consuming small counts and dukedoms. When Aragon moved south into Muslim lands Castille took advantage and attacked as well taking much of what would become the Kingdom of Portugal. Once completed Castille struck a treaty with the Emir of Seville ending the war and so the Muslims turned their focus to destroying Aragon. Overstretched the Emir was able to destroy the Christian kingdom but it exhausted his treasury and spent his army. Navarre picked a fight soon after and in this conflict Castille broke out again smashing the core of the Emirate while its Army was deployed in the North. Navarre fell the Muslim forces but was liberated and claimed for Castille. The Emirate of Grenada fell five years later in a war they foolishly opened.

A king passed and things were looking quite good. The massive treasury inflow was spent building up the Royal territories but much was also given back the counts and dukes in the form of gifts. Roads had been researched and they needed extensive funds for such investments. Wooden Palisades became Small Castles, and Small Castles became Medium Castles.

You could really blame the pope for the disaster. In another of his friendly comunicades he demanded a crusade to free Constantinople (or was it Jerusalem?) It was a patently ridiculous demand as I'd just spent my entire savings on improving the lot of the common man and hadn't a penny for the thing.

So I declined and received a nice note explaining my excommunication.

That spurred a few changes. An expedition was formed and sent to take Jaffa a strong target of opportunity. Its ruler controlled a single territory and had no allies. Taking it with ease the Crusader army pushed further in destroying small Sheiks and in a year and a half forming the new Kingdom of Jerusalem. It was here the excommunicated King of Castille died. Not of wound but rather age, he was 48.


http://img261.imageshack.us/img261/2606/themiddleeastua3.jpg

the Kingdom in East

At home a new ruler was crowned, his 22 year old son. I'd hoped for a respite as in the past few months some of the Counts had become restive even declaring independence. Armies had been raised to defeat these rebellions but as one came the next rose. First there were only one mole to a mallet but then there were two and then there were three. One of the great mistakes made early in the game became apparent. I'd taken the most productive provinces for my own and they were spread across the Kingdom. There was the advantage of having an army for each region but as the rebellions became a general civil war they fell to forces that surrounded them, spread far too far apart for mutual protection.

The standing army in Palestine was recalled. Already on the edge of losing it to the restive lords I gave the crown of Jerusalem to a rather promising nine year old and pulled back to Spain.

Thats where the game is now. I'm trying to rearrange my home provinces into a small Kingdom that I could defend successfully. Hopefully the upstarts will go after each other at some point.

[tmastern]

It looks like the expansion was released yesterday.....anybody taken a look at it yet?

[Troy S Goodfellow]

I played it some yesterday. The new rivalry/friendship stuff is sweet, adding a lot to the role playing part of the game. Small changes to the way war and peace are welcome, too.

The most significant improvement is the way children's stats are handled. You no longer know from the cradle who your best heir will be; the kids need to get schooling and mature before you know precisely how they will turn out. Their stats increase a little each year. This prevents all the child murders that were pretty prevalent pre Deus Vult.

Not so welcome are the fatal exception errors that pop-up from time to time. I can't get through fifty years without the thing dropping.

Troy

[Kalle]

Curses. Now I'll have to dig up the game from somewhere in my game disc pile.

[RightWrong]

Lemon, that write-up is great. I tried the same thing with Aragon only the Muslims proved much more aggressive and it took an epic decade-long war with Seville to finally win ( we started as allies, but they were a little too successful ). Setting up my son as a fledgling King of Jeruselam felt like the grandest reward I could have imagined.

In the expansion, do the Seljuk's still tend to rampage over everything? The game's pretty ahistorical and unfun in that they rarely break their empire up into feuding dynasties.

[CSL]

In the expansion, do the Seljuk's still tend to rampage over everything? The game's pretty ahistorical and unfun in that they rarely break their empire up into feuding dynasties.

And do the Byzantines still collectively destroy themselves.

[Troy S Goodfellow]

The new "friend" system is intended to make it easier for larger realms to stay together. Vassals who friends with their lieges get big bonuses to loyalty, so it's less likely that everything just collapses all of a sudden. The king/emperor will always have a reservoir of support somewhere.

However, rivals work in the opposite direction. Rivals in court or in subservient duchies/counties steadily lose loyalty and can cause trouble for a weak ruler.

I still a lot more play time before I can say whether this helps Byzantium, Germany or France.

Troy

[Incendiary Lemon]

Lemon, that write-up is great.

Thanks, I really love starting a game with one of the Spanish Kingdoms. Their surrounded by rivals and you've got your goal set out for you with the reconquista.

[Lum]

Not so welcome are the fatal exception errors that pop-up from time to time. I can't get through fifty years without the thing dropping.

I haven't been able to make it through FIVE years. It's unplayable in its current state, which is a shame.

[Troy S Goodfellow]

I haven't been able to make it through FIVE years. It's unplayable in its current state, which is a shame.

I went back to an earlier autosave in my Lithuanian game and have made it through with no more errors. So far. I don't have much confidence that it will stay this way. Which is fine, because my Lithuanian kings all seem to be sterile.

Oh, and back to an issue raised in this thread, the "friends" thing does nothing to keep AI kingdoms together. Hungary is OK, but that's about it. Byzantium is a bunch of city states, Germany is a snakepit and France is being swallowed by Flanders and Navarre. England is in even worse shape.

Troy

[Kalle]

Sigh. Guess it's a good thing I haven't bought it yet. Fucking Paradox.

[RightWrong]

If one were to take the Paradox games as remotely accurate for the isles, the Britons must be currently undergoing their eighth consecutive century of violent civil war and insurrection.

[strategy]

I haven't been able to make it through FIVE years. It's unplayable in its current state, which is a shame.

Sigh. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[metta]

If one were to take the Paradox games as remotely accurate for the isles, the Britons must be currently undergoing their eighth consecutive century of violent civil war and insurrection.

Fuck the poll tax!

[tiohn]

How the fuck do you play this game? I picked up the original and the expansion on a (drunken) whim and have no idea what the hell is going on.

[wisefool]

Read some of the AAR's in the Paradox forum. Example: "Real Men Do It Alphabetically" (http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=266596&page=1&pp=20)

Marry a Princess. Kill off all male siblings and other descendants. Wait to assume throne.

If you highlight the law in your council (i think it's called Salic Consaguity) all the countries with that law are highlighted green.

[Brian Rucker]

So this this expansion only available as a download? Or is there a boxed copy with a manual I can get? And, perhaps more importantly, has it been patched properly yet?

[Kalle]

The answers you're looking for are Yes, No, and one beta patch (http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=331766)

[JamesP]

I recently picked up Crusader Kings and Deus Vult thanks to all the humorous and varied shenanigans that people in this (and other) Crusader Kings threads have described as taking place in the game.

After watching the video tutorials (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7vXXKXQSSU&feature=PlayList&p=F7B220E75A31E452&index=0&playnext=1) and reading the wiki beginner's guide (http://www.crusader-kings.com/wiki/index.php?title=Beginner%27s_Guide) I started up a game as the King of Castille. And I'm just floundering around. Can any of you guys get me pointed in the right direction to get a grip on this? Helpful advice? Recommended game setup for beginners? Links? I'd greatly appreciate it.

[Troy S Goodfellow]

I recently picked up Crusader Kings and Deus Vult thanks to all the humorous and varied shenanigans that people in this (and other) Crusader Kings threads have described as taking place in the game.

After watching the video tutorials (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7vXXKXQSSU&feature=PlayList&p=F7B220E75A31E452&index=0&playnext=1) and reading the wiki beginner's guide (http://www.crusader-kings.com/wiki/index.php?title=Beginner%27s_Guide) I started up a game as the King of Castille. And I'm just floundering around. Can any of you guys get me pointed in the right direction to get a grip on this? Helpful advice? Recommended game setup for beginners? Links? I'd greatly appreciate it.

Castile is a bitch to start with. Your Muslim neighbors are stronger than you and every Iberian prince wants to kill every other Iberian prince.

Best to start with a small, stable kingdom like Scotland or Hungary, or a reliable duchy like Norfolk or Wales. A large kingdom like England isn't a bad idea if you want to learn vassal management since it has few land neighbors to bother with.

Early things to remember:

Research things that increase wealth or knowledge distribution, and be sure to mix it up in the military research box. It's all well and good to have the finest swords in the land, but you don't want to be running around in leather for 200 years.

Keep an eye on the succession list and the courtier list. You don't want to be followed by an idiot on the throne, but if he has a talented son it might be worth sticking around. You can only change your laws every so often, so plan a couple of heirs ahead. And be on the lookout for new talent.

Only raise as many troops as you need to fight a war. Call on all your vassals for major wars, of course, since there's no piecemeal way to do it. But they start to resent you after a while, and they are very expensive. If you call on their aid one at time if the war starts to bog down, then you can draw only on the strongest or most loyal.

If you are a vassal, your lord will kill-steal some nice sieges you have going on, so be careful where and when you move. However, a war is a good time to think about revolting if your king is having a bad time of it.

In Deus Vult, you need to be careful who you side with. Make powerful friends and avoid powerful rivals, unless the rival is also a rival to someone you want to suck up to.

Troy

[JamesP]

Thanks! I'll give your advice a spin in a few minutes and report back with my wondrous successes or harrowing failures later.

The simple fact that all the help people give for this game consists of general advice rather than build orders, for example, is encouraging. It's good to know the learning curve might be worth it :)

[Lum]

A fun way for a new player to learn the game, I've found, is to play as an Irish duchy. Being in Ireland, you'll be dirt poor, so you're not going to be flinging around thousands of troops at people, but you also live in a political microcosm (all you have to worry about, really, are the other Irish states, unless one of them manages to get a powerful ally offshore which rarely happens) and can play around with the full dynasty game without having to worry about Crusades or marauding opponents.

Your goal is to unite Ireland - once you do that, well, then you can play the rest of the game!

[gamadict]

I just learned how to play this recently. In my two games over the holidays I've been able to go from one county starts to unify Ireland (http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/9083/kingsv0.jpg) and Finland (http://img339.imageshack.us/my.php?image=ckca7.jpg). I'd agree that you're much better off starting off with a dutchy or county rather then a kingdom. It gives you less to manage and gives you a natural goal, which is to put together a kingdom. Once you have a kingdom, there's not really much reason to get another one other then to paint the map in your color. That's cool and all, but it leaves you pretty directionless the first time you play the game.

random tips...

Research: Not really that important if you start as a kingdom, since it only researches things in your capital province. Really important if you're a county. Don't try to push one field far ahead of others unless you really want something(example: L2 mining) because the amount of time to research each additional level ramps up. If you're a county, you should definitely get siege equipment as your first military tech

Educating children: Don't raise any children yourself, it's not worth the fertility hit. I tend to let the monks raise pretty much everyone

Prestige: By far the quickest way to gain prestige is to offer peace demands lower then your 'warscore' in wars, and the best way to do that is to crush your foes utterly. Never accept one of their offers, even if it's what you want, if you you can siege all their provinces and grab a bunch of prestige. It's pretty tough to get what you want against an evenly matched foe without total conquet anyway. In my last game I had to take over most of byzantium before they'd give up one province(Novrgorod)

Demesne size: It says on the wiki that it's linked to your stewardship, but I'm pretty sure it's actually intrigue, multiplied by a factor depending on your title(.25 for county, .5 for duke, 1 for king), It doesn't really tell you this in the game for some reason

I'm still learning the family management game, which seems to be the more complicated side of things

[Kalle]

When you do get some conquests, being greedy is the best way to ruin your game. Every province you take in a peace treaty will decrease your reputation, every claim you grab does the same. Only vassalisation, usurping claims, and making the other guy renounce their claims on you is free. As your reputation decreases, so does your vassals loyalty. You can see this as a negative percentage modifier to their loyalty every month. This is further modified by reputation, traits you have in common, friendships, rivalries, etc, so one conquest isn't gonna hurt you, but ten in short succession will. One rebellious vassal isn't a big deal most of the time, but if you have several you're headed for possible civil war which has a ton of nasty penalties.

Whats worse, if you have a rebellious vassal you cant replace him without hurting your reputation even more. If he breaks free you can declare war on him and get him to be your vassal again without a reputation hit, but if he hates you he's just gonna rebel in a year or so again.

The two things you can do that directly affect monthly loyalty of vassals to manage this is to lower your scutage and institute feudal contract law. Lowering your scutage to zero will mean that vassals gain 1% more loyalty per month, and less as you increase it, at the cost of your monthly income. Feudal contract law will net you a flat 1% boost.

I have managed kingdoms where my reputation has been "very bad" with only minor inconveniences, but this was done on the strength of a very prestigious ruler and having well matched traits with my main vassals. And all it takes for everything to unravel is for the ruler to die and leave a child to inherit. You definitely don't want anything worse than "slightly tarnished" reputation starting out if you can avoid it.

Note that this also means no wholesale annexation of pagans, muslims, or religious enemies in general. Same rules apply there. If you want to crusade, take one or two counties in a peace and vassalize the rest. Makes the pope happy, keeps your fellow rulers from thinking you're greedy and overly powerful, and in a generation or two your vassals will share your religion anyway.

[JamesP]

Well, I'm absolutely hooked on this game. Many thanks to all the contributions of ideas and recommendations. I've since become the King of Ireland and have designs on those Welsh buggers.

What was key to me finally grokking the game was letting go of the TBS mentality of micromanagement. A huge part of why the game felt so unresponsive and joyless was that I was letting time pass REALLY slowly and I was pausing all the time and poking around the screens and sliders looking for things to do because I expected to have to be fussing with them all continually. When I discovered that I DIDN'T need to be micromanaging like that, I still couldn't let go of the tight reins I was holding on time. Then I realized I'd been sitting there for upward of two hours and I'd only let game-time progress a few months! Ridiculous.

Well, letting time flow more freely and setting things in motion was the snowball that turned into an avalanche of fun. I was up obsessively into the wee hours of the morning in a way I haven't felt since, well, probably Civ4 but even then, we're talking that rare passion that got this site its name. Pure joy.

Then I returned the next morning after having united Ireland into a Kingdom the night before, and that passion was nowhere to be found. I sorta poked at the game trying to prompt to entertain me damn you!

Well, after getting my feet back on the ground, coming up with some new goals to work toward, refreshing my memory of all the kids my King had sired who I'd hoped to see develop into strong leaders, seeing that my once-Count of Dublin who'd become my rival and had rebelled against me at the stupid, young age of 5 was, in fact, still alive and was serving a Scottish Count as a courtier, etc., I was totally amped up again, motivated, and excited. Man. So great.

In short, this isn't a game that's going to do anything to actively convince you of its greatness. It's no Assassin's Creed with immediate WOW appeal (well, duh). It's a game that gives back what you put into it. If you're not feeling imaginative, if you're not feeling proactive and self-motivated, the world will just carry on without you. It would feel like a game that doesn't give you enough choice, not enough consequences, not enough reason for playing. But, frankly, you'd be completely wrong!

Again, pure joy.

Now the question of whether or not it's worth getting Europa Universalis 2 with which to continue playing once the CK game-time runs out. I can tell I'm going to want to play more Paradox games and they're selling EU2 for 9.99 on GamersGate, but EU3 and its expansion are out too and I guess I'm just wondering if the price of EU2 coupled with the coolness of importing your CK game outweighs the new stuff and the improvements that make EU3 worth playing. Which is a better investment? 2 or 3?

[Kalle]

EU2 is a great game, in my opinion one of the very best strategy games ever released. You should definitely get it and play it. Since you've already played CK the learning curve for EU2 won't be as steep either.

Continuing from a CK game would be a mixed blessing. On one hand, you can keep playing. On the other hand I'm not sure ahistorical nations (the Kingdom of Bohemia, Germany, France, Aragon and Italy comes to mind) can take full advantage of the scripted nation events.

EU3 is a game that I personally found extremely underwhelming as an EU2 fan, make of that what you will. First, they severed all ties to actual history in EU3. Every game will randomise kings and generals, and all events are generic. Second, because of this the actual game mechanics are overly generic. Playing England feels no different from playing France which is no different from playing Saxony which is no different from playing Russia, etc. The 3d graphics are ugly and angular, EU2 looks plain better despite having 7 years on it's sequel, and performance is a bear.

EU3 is not a bad game, despite all this, but neither do I think it's very good. It's a historical sandbox that has managed to remove almost all of the interesting parts of history in the effort to be free-form.

[Incendiary Lemon]

Castile is a bitch to start with. Your Muslim neighbors are stronger than you and every Iberian prince wants to kill every other Iberian prince.


But that gives you something to do!

CK can go from addicting to dull in a game year. Your goals are entirely self made and once accomplished leave you with little to do. I like the Spanish Kingdoms for that reason as they are wealthy enough to wage war from the start and have plenty of enemies to pick on none of which are pushovers.

[Troy S Goodfellow]

But that gives you something to do!

CK can go from addicting to dull in a game year. Your goals are entirely self made and once accomplished leave you with little to do. I like the Spanish Kingdoms for that reason as they are wealthy enough to wage war from the start and have plenty of enemies to pick on none of which are pushovers.

Oh, I agree that they are great fun. But lousy to learn with since you will be overwhelmed. A newbie needs a game that has a little bit of downtime and Iberia gives you none of that until you've Reconquista-ed.

Troy

[Pishtaco]

The 3d graphics are ugly and angular, EU2 looks plain better despite having 7 years on it's sequel, and performance is a bear.

But the 3d makes the graphics more moddable. There's a mod (http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=332901) to give the map a more 16th-century look (sorry for the self-pimpage):

http://i10.tinypic.com/6wwik8x.jpg

There's an earlier, different-looking, version of the mod which seems to improve performance a bit.

[Kalle]

But the 3d makes the graphics more moddable. There's a mod (http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=332901) to give the map a more 16th-century look (sorry for the self-pimpage):

There's an earlier, different-looking, version of the mod which seems to improve performance a bit.

I agree that there's been quite a lot of work done at making EU3's map look not-horrible but when the provinces all look like jigsawpuzzle pieces there's only so much that can be done.

[Pishtaco]

I agree that there's been quite a lot of work done at making EU3's map look not-horrible but when the provinces all look like jigsawpuzzle pieces there's only so much that can be done.

I know what you mean. I think I'm used enough to looking at the EU3 map now that I don't see it. Also, the graphics mod adds some terrain and some other texturing to the political maps, so there's more to look at than just the straight lines.

JamesP was talking about importing CK saves into EU2; there's also a fan made program that imports into EU3: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?p=7480125

[JamesP]

Honestly, Kalle's opinion of EU3 vs EU2 is coherent and makes EU3 seem the lesser game, graphics aside.

Unless anybody cares to offer a different opinion, EU2 seems the better time expense (lets just forget the relative fiscal costs of the games for the sake of argument).

With all that said, CK is such a genuine pleasure it will be some time before I consider either EU game for checkout.

[Unicorn McGriddle]

National Ideas are great, though. And it's not like anybody plays these games for the graphics in the first place.

[Lum]

Wholeheartedly second the EU2 over EU3 recommendation. Try EU3 after you play EU2. If you only play one, play EU2.

Also, install this event pack: http://www.agceep.com/downloads.htm

[JamesP]

Well then, that settles it Lum :)

Does anyone know where the heck that fabled Deus Vult 2.1 Beta patch can be found? I've been stalking the Paradox website and forums and am either blind or there's a horrible conspiracy going on around me (JamesP just gained the trait "Paranoid" :P ).

[Lum]

Well, let me ask you this before you just go off on our recommendation.

Would you prefer:

* a game that has lots of events that "nudge" history in the right direction, where you can effect the flow of history to a degree but sometimes you'll be forced to follow "historicity" in many areas - as the Ottomans you won't get many colonists for the New World, for example.

* a game that's a sandbox, that lets you do what you want a la Civilization without paying too much attention to history. You can take any country and play it as you want.

People who like the latter like EU3 better. People who like the former like EU2 better.

CK:DV beta patch is here: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=331766

[malkav11]

What game would we play if we want history to happen as much as it can while we busily fuck it up?

[Raife]

What game would we play if we want history to happen as much as it can while we busily fuck it up?

That would probably be EU2 with event mods.

[JamesP]

* a game that has lots of events that "nudge" history in the right direction, where you can effect the flow of history to a degree but sometimes you'll be forced to follow "historicity" in many areas - as the Ottomans you won't get many colonists for the New World, for example.

* a game that's a sandbox, that lets you do what you want a la Civilization without paying too much attention to history. You can take any country and play it as you want.

People who like the latter like EU3 better. People who like the former like EU2 better.


Aw man, both of those have their place in my heart. From surety to ambivalence in one fell swoop. :\

I only just discovered CK and the glory of being pushed around by the tide of the world around you. Before now I'd be heartily in favor of EU3. Now, however, I think the pressures of the world around you is what makes CK so unique and I just may need that side of things better represented in my overall game library.

I'll mull this over. Thanks :)

[gamadict]

EU3 is a lot closer to Crusader Kings then EU2, for what it's worth

[Lum]

Only in the world aspect. CK has the dynasty management which is completely missing from EU3, and is CK's big strength.

[Kalle]

Agreed with Lum. The dynasty management is what connects the player to the world of CK, you can get involved with these little simulated people and their woes and live out the game through them. The dynasty makes the crazy alternate history personal.

EU3 has no such hooks. It's crazy alternate history where the only thing you can recognise and connect to is country names and regions. You won't have the benefit of real history for flavour, nor will your kings and generals ever become more than names in a ledger.

[JeffL]

Just started this back up again, this time as a Duke in Ireland. Expanding pretty well, never have the prestige I need, married everyone off well into the King of England and King of Scotland's courts, and felt pretty good.

Then somehow the King of England decides to declare war on me. Of course, my one ally in Ireland is content to sit back and watch (I can't find a way to explicitly ask for help) and of course, I cannot fend off the overwhelming power of the King of England. Damn. I had about 2/3 of Ireland in my control, and was working well toward that King of Ireland title. What to do?

So I suck it up and decide, as much as it pains me, if I declare allegiance to the King of Scotland, perhaps he will come to my aid. He accepts my desire to become a part of his kingdom, and his troops are on the way to my defense.

Will he get there in time? Once there, does he have the power to push the English off of Irish soil? And how long, after I'm safe, before I can tell him to go take a hike and declare my independence?

(Also - I suspect my wife is having affairs, and we keep fighting, so I believe getting rid of her is in the future - if I have a future. Perhaps then a nice, fertile 18 year old babe from Sweden or France...)

[JeffL]

Question - is there any mod that is a simple install and makes the character portraits look less, well, bad? Every woman seems to be butt ugly, and most guys look like cartoon characters.

[Enidigm]

Is there any way, or any mod, that lets women inherit the throne?

I groomed two daughters with my Queen of Georgia but none of them are eligible to inherit, unless perhaps they marry one of the courtiers? I like how her husband was a pretty nice guy; he led all the armies, hand-raised his three kids, and gracefully gave up all his spear-won territory when asked :).

I wanted to create a vast Orthodox, Georgian empire ruled by nothing but women, but alas, this seems tough to do.

I've been dealing with Muslim provinces by letting them rebel themselves into Orthodoxy. Kind of neat seeing the Byzantines re-take Anatolia. Not looking foward to the Mongols though. Also, i captured Trebizond in war, and an adjacent province, but immediately afterword that jerk switched sides and pledged himself to the Byzantines. What do you do in those situations?

Is there any reason to not claim lands as demense? I've got a couple vassals and i hate dealing with vassals.

Also, any reason to get the expansion?

[Raife]

I'm pretty sure the only way for them to rule is not to let them get married, which also means no heirs. I don't think they can ever inherit directly, but it's been awhile.

[Kalle]

You get an economy penalty if you have more provinces in your demesne than your rulers intrigue/2, plus one extra for every new century starting with the 12th. Also, having a large demesne should slow down technology expansion as technology you're researching only appears in your capital province and then has to spread to your other provinces from their neighbours. Appointing vassals should have them researching tech on their own.

The expansion is definitely a priority. For one thing, you can get the game to play in a window. For another, it has a lot of useful additions like a ledger (with brides listing and stats) and expanded relationships and crap. It's a very good expansion.

[ravenight]

You also get a prestige bonus for each vassal (at least, as a duke you do - I think you don't get it for counts if you're a king).

You can appoint women as vassals, can't you? If that's true, then you could switch to elective inheritance, and just make sure the woman you want inheriting is the most powerful of your vassals at all times.

[Kalle]

You can appoint women as vassals, can't you? If that's true, then you could switch to elective inheritance, and just make sure the woman you want inheriting is the most powerful of your vassals at all times.

You can, but female vassals will never marry. If they did their husband would take their title. And since they won't marry, they won't have any heirs, meaning that you can only do this trick once before your dynasty dies out.