Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Now, I agree, we should have some factions that are built to be tough as hell to play, but... Reikland? The recommended starter? THIS hard?
No, this is all wrong, any newbie who tries this is going to give up in frustration and think the whole thing is a prank.
Yep.
So Karl Franz starts the game with his gribbly bits in an iron vise. It's not that bad, but you do have to know the "solutions" to sail through it (Marienburg is a noob trap in game 3, Festus should be eliminated by about turn 15-16, etc).
Is he still a recommended start? I thought they changed that to High Elves and Cathay as the recommended starts. I could've sworn they removed the tag from his campaign.
Damn it.
DAMN it!
Hell with it!
I swore I wouldn't do it... but I'm gonna turn the difficulty down.
This ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ campaign, man...
I try to confederate with him as Franz so I get him as a general.
I might try his campaign.
"Supposed" being the operative word. I'm pretty sure he's on everyone's short list for hardest starts.
There are some other hard starts too, and i've failed campaigns (or at least got into deathspirals I don't want to play out) with some factions, multiple times. But other factions can be face rolls, on the same difficulty, so it's not "IE" that's the hard part, just the faction you are playing as having a rough start.
See, I really had the opposite impression. I thought Reikland was supposed to be the DEFAULT.
His campaign can be fun and rewarding but there is no way that it should be "recommended" to people who are trying to learn the game.
They seem to have one "recommended" lord from each game and I'm not 100% sure who should represent game one. Throek Ironbrow maybe?
I just didn't have the desire to expand except just owning Reikland for a LOONG time. I had electors begging me to confederate, but I asserted their independence, until I couldn't eek out more money to develop my starting region, from sacking their natural enemies North. Once I had good buildings: I went on a war path with the late game units. If you go out of your way to defend Hochland whenever possible: do it. Because you can build a lot of equal diplomatic relations, trade rights, and a lot of money. Ignore war with other nations and pay them with authority whenever possible, if not: then money. Make sure to always send your own forces to help fight their battles, win or not: You earn better points. The rebels and how you deal with them via manual battle will determine how long it takes to get rid of them, sometimes luring them into an "ambush", will delete them altogether.
Trying to confederate too fast, or worrying about another faction that might die doesn't matter, as long as you do your best to defend those nations. That is the way you are gonna win, most of them, if not all.
ofc its not a big issue, but for a new player they might choose him because the game tell you he is recommended for new players.
I could name a lot of other factions better recommended than him.
Like i said, not really a massive problem, but still weird to list him as recommended when you compare him to the 2 other factions also recommended (+ all the other factions that are way easier than his)