The more i play the game the more i find it very shallow

[DaniTheHero]

It's not specifically missing content, or something that i assume can be fixed with added Expansions/DLC, but the core experience feels very.. gamey.

All the ideas are there, but everything is executed to the bare minimum.
The RPG mechanics are there, but barely so.
The strategy is there, but not really.
The RPing is so minimal that there's no real way to play other than speed 5ing.

No matter what i pick, where i start, how i try to handicap myself or try to somehow immerse. It ends up a game of numbers and map expansion.

[The Former]

Originally posted by Das Boot:

I agree, the vanilla game is quite shallow compared to CK2. So far CK3 is the most fun as a vehicle for Total Conversion Mods.

You're quite right in regards to matters of conquest and flavor. Where CK3 really shines is its ability to craft a story. You might ask, "But how is it so different than CK2 in that regard?" Well, CK2's events are rather on-rails in comparison to CK3's. It doesn't matter a great deal who's involved or what their place is in your realm. All that matters is the response you click.

In CK3, however, relationships and character personalities quite often play into the outcome of events. I don't know if you're the type of player who enjoys playing to your ruler's personality, but if you are, you can even take this a step further. For instance, there's a certain event where your son hunts with you and he kills a villager. There are various responses, but you could choose the same one for two different rulers and have vastly different outcomes:

In the one case, say your ruler is trusting and you dictate that he'd believe his son and cover up for him in complete faith that he was in fact telling the truth. You could then go on perhaps even believing yourself that it was the wolf that did it, and your son was merely trying to protect the villager. Your lord certainly does, and this may factor into the way you deal with events regarding your son in the future. When he comes out to father a bastard, for instance, your character might suppose the person who exposed the secret is lying and have them arrested for the slander.

In the other case, you might have a ruler who's deceitful and ambitious. He's sure his son was responsible, but he covers it up to prevent the fallout. How differently might a lord's relationship with his son develop from the above case in this situation?

None of this is mechanical, sure. But this ability to spur the player's creativity and help them forge an emergent epic is far superior to CK2's ability to do the same, in my opinion. I can certainly see why you'd think CK2 is deeper, though. There's certainly a lot more mechanical content there, and it's not exactly an incorrect claim in the literal sense.

[Сааребас]

Originally posted by jp2118:

Originally posted by Soviet sink drip:

He means that you cannot be part of two different realms.
So you cannot be topliege as king of England and be a vassal as duke of Normandy at the same time.

i am having troubles conquering England, i get my ass kicked every time, i am not sure if to hire merceneries or train footmen, i try to get allies to come in but i do well in the first place, take london but then harold defeats me in battle, any suggestions?

I would suggest to start a new topic because of fear of highjacking this one :)
There are multiple ways to go around it.

[Cola]

I think wars are sometimes a bit too predictable (the guy with the biggest stack wins); and it's often too easy to gobble up the smaller fish.
If you are surrounded by smaller realms, you can usually get a casus belli within a few years, and conquer them.
Heck, you can even see how many men they have, so you only do it when they are weaker.

Perhaps it would be better if there was more randomness (the besieging army all got dysintery and shat themselves to death), or "fabricate claim" could be made a bit more difficult, and for sure the number of soldiers everyone has should be hidden by default (and perhaps discoverable with a good spy).

[The Former]

Originally posted by Cola:

I think wars are sometimes a bit too predictable (the guy with the biggest stack wins); and it's often too easy to gobble up the smaller fish.
If you are surrounded by smaller realms, you can usually get a casus belli within a few years, and conquer them.
Heck, you can even see how many men they have, so you only do it when they are weaker.

Perhaps it would be better if there was more randomness (the besieging army all got dysintery and shat themselves to death), or "fabricate claim" could be made a bit more difficult, and for sure the number of soldiers everyone has should be hidden by default (and perhaps discoverable with a good spy).

I definitely agree that Fabricate Claim is too reliable a method of expansion, which is probably one reason many feel the game lacks depth. In theory, one could just fabricate claims over and over again on all their new neighbors and pick the world off the vine one county at a time. I don't generally do this. Personally, I like to use marriages instead. But this being an option does open the door for claims of shallow gameplay and "too easy".

[DaniTheHero]

Originally posted by Lockfågel, the Paradox Knight:

Originally posted by Cola:

I think wars are sometimes a bit too predictable (the guy with the biggest stack wins); and it's often too easy to gobble up the smaller fish.
If you are surrounded by smaller realms, you can usually get a casus belli within a few years, and conquer them.
Heck, you can even see how many men they have, so you only do it when they are weaker.

Perhaps it would be better if there was more randomness (the besieging army all got dysintery and shat themselves to death), or "fabricate claim" could be made a bit more difficult, and for sure the number of soldiers everyone has should be hidden by default (and perhaps discoverable with a good spy).

I definitely agree that Fabricate Claim is too reliable a method of expansion, which is probably one reason many feel the game lacks depth. In theory, one could just fabricate claims over and over again on all their new neighbors and pick the world off the vine one county at a time. I don't generally do this. Personally, I like to use marriages instead. But this being an option does open the door for claims of shallow gameplay and "too easy".

The game is way too exploitable and very very easy to min max.
Unless you intentionally handicap yourself with unreasonable levels of RP or self restraint the game becomes a trivial map painter.

[Keltrain]

Was about 5 years before you got any of that in CK2's lifespan, was really Way of Life, Reapers Due, Monks & Mystics and Holy Fury that added all of the deep, replayable ♥♥♥♥ in CK2

[Сааребас]

Originally posted by Keltrain:

Was about 5 years before you got any of that in CK2's lifespan, was really Way of Life, Reapers Due, Monks & Mystics and Holy Fury that added all of the deep, replayable ♥♥♥♥ in CK2

I have enjoyed CK2 basegame for 100's of hours before I bought my first DLC. This was before all the extra stuff that came with free "dlc's"/patches/improvements.

CK3 has ck2's core but on a lardger scale and I do agree there is little variation in the grand scheme of things.

[Hood Knight Lil Sir]

Isn't that like every other Paradox game? I just bought it, so can't judge yet, but knowing Paradox, we need a few expansions to pimp it up.

[Keltrain]

Originally posted by Soviet sink drip:

Originally posted by Keltrain:

Was about 5 years before you got any of that in CK2's lifespan, was really Way of Life, Reapers Due, Monks & Mystics and Holy Fury that added all of the deep, replayable ♥♥♥♥ in CK2

I have enjoyed CK2 basegame for 100's of hours before I bought my first DLC. This was before all the extra stuff that came with free "dlc's"/patches/improvements.

CK3 has ck2's core but on a lardger scale and I do agree there is little variation in the grand scheme of things.

You enjoyed CK2 basegame because it was all new at the time, go back and try and play Vanilla now. CK3 base is more expansive and better than CK2 mate, jesus christ CK2 Vanilla you couldn't even change dynasty names

[Сааребас]

Originally posted by Keltrain:

Originally posted by Soviet sink drip:

I have enjoyed CK2 basegame for 100's of hours before I bought my first DLC. This was before all the extra stuff that came with free "dlc's"/patches/improvements.

CK3 has ck2's core but on a lardger scale and I do agree there is little variation in the grand scheme of things.

You enjoyed CK2 basegame because it was all new at the time, go back and try and play Vanilla now. CK3 base is more expansive and better than CK2 mate, jesus christ CK2 Vanilla you couldn't even change dynasty names

I dont understand what you expect from ck2 basegame after you have played with all/ a lot of dlc's? Ofcourse it's gonna feel restricted.

Don't understand what you expect from CK3 either because... well... it's the succesor.

Are both games perfect... no... but all that negativity because it is no longer the new fad really grinds my gears....

Dont like the game? cool. People over here, overall, do like the game so... to a breather somewhere else... Thank you.

[DaniTheHero]

Originally posted by Keltrain:

Was about 5 years before you got any of that in CK2's lifespan, was really Way of Life, Reapers Due, Monks & Mystics and Holy Fury that added all of the deep, replayable ♥♥♥♥ in CK2

Hopefully I won’t have to wait till I literally have kids of my own before this game gets better

[Rialm]

A good way to make Fabricate Claim more challenged or interesting, is: the time to fabricate a claim depends not only of the "Court Chaplain" but also your character vs the other character opinion and traits. If I'm not mistaken this is how it works in Sengoku. The more someone hates you the less honor you have to spend.
So in some sort of way you mix this and let say Insult from Stellaris to make it faster.
However, let say that both character are Zealous, it takes more time to fabricate a claim because both character are less likely to hate each other.

So by doing this, It gives the feeling that you are searching for an excuse to invade the other character.
Edit: one thing it would be really nice it's that councilors could work together to get advantage in one task.
Let say that you want to Fabricate a claim, so both the "Court Chaplain" and the Spymaster together are trying to fabricate a claim faster: for example they organize a party so that way you humiliate the other character (so you also gain stress depending your traits), or they instigate violence. So basically, fabricating claims generate events where your character or your councilors play a role.

[DaniTheHero]

Originally posted by Rialm:

A good way to make Fabricate Claim more challenged or interesting, is: the time to fabricate a claim depends not only of the "Court Chaplain" but also your character vs the other character opinion and traits. If I'm not mistaken this is how it works in Sengoku. The more someone hates you the less honor you have to spend.
So in some sort of way you mix this and let say Insult from Stellaris to make it faster.
However, let say that both character are Zealous, it takes more time to fabricate a claim because both character are less likely to hate each other.

So by doing this, It gives the feeling that you are searching for an excuse to invade the other character.
Edit: one thing it would be really nice it's that councilors could work together to get advantage in one task.
Let say that you want to Fabricate a claim, so both the "Court Chaplain" and the Spymaster together are trying to fabricate a claim faster: for example they organize a party so that way you humiliate the other character (so you also gain stress depending your traits), or they instigate violence. So basically, fabricating claims generate events where your character or your councilors play a role.

Many interesting ways to make the game flow better for sure.

[pi73r]

Originally posted by Keltrain:

Originally posted by Soviet sink drip:

I have enjoyed CK2 basegame for 100's of hours before I bought my first DLC. This was before all the extra stuff that came with free "dlc's"/patches/improvements.

CK3 has ck2's core but on a lardger scale and I do agree there is little variation in the grand scheme of things.

You enjoyed CK2 basegame because it was all new at the time, go back and try and play Vanilla now. CK3 base is more expansive and better than CK2 mate, jesus christ CK2 Vanilla you couldn't even change dynasty names

Yes, vanilla ck2 was bland too but:
CK 3 is still a dumbed down ck 2. And while ck2 also suffered from lack of endgame now the game is even easier (too easy) compared to the previous one. Also ck2 at least had ana ctual difficulty settings.

[DaniTheHero]

Originally posted by pi73r:

Originally posted by Keltrain:

You enjoyed CK2 basegame because it was all new at the time, go back and try and play Vanilla now. CK3 base is more expansive and better than CK2 mate, jesus christ CK2 Vanilla you couldn't even change dynasty names

Yes, vanilla ck2 was bland too but:
CK 3 is still a dumbed down ck 2. And while ck2 also suffered from lack of endgame now the game is even easier (too easy) compared to the previous one. Also ck2 at least had ana ctual difficulty settings.

The problem isn’t inherently that the game is too “easy”. But the fact that that ease reveals how empty everything is.