Who has gone back to CK2?

[Flickmann]

CK3 is just hollow. Any one playing CK2 for a bit more depth and enjoyment?

[Heraclius Caesar]

Even though ck3 is very hollow, I personally haven't gone back to ck2. It looks dated now after playing ck3 and ck2 is so bloated with just horrible RNG and events.

[ste]

nope. ck2 is the past

[RodHull]

No, but I can understand people who did/do. Both are great games, one is at its peak, the other is just getting started and will only improve.

[EA Latium]

I haven't, I find it difficult to go back for the same reasons highlighted by Heraclius above. Having said that I'm taking a break until the next patch and DLC. Personal choice, I can see why some would though.

[Heraclius Caesar]

Originally posted by EA Latium:

I haven't, I find it difficult to go back for the same reasons highlighted by Heraclius above. Having said that I'm taking a break until the next patch and DLC. Personal choice, I can see why some would though.

Likewise, been playing black ops cold war on Xbox til patch & dlc come out.

[Razorblade]

I wouldn't call CK3 hollow (in fact, I'd argue CK2 is kind of hollow, or more accurately "surface-level"). CK3's systems have plenty of depth, there is just not a lot of content to go along with those systems. CK2 has a ton of content, but not a lot of system depth. It feels like you're playing 10 different shallow games at the same time, rather than the single coherent game I find CK3 to be. For that reason, I don't think I could go back to CK2.

[Lady Dormouse]

I haven't yet gotten tired of CK3 and where it is currently. If I do, I could see firing up CK2 (it's still installed) and doing some of the things I haven't done in the game. Like a game with everyone being animals instead of humans. Never got around to trying that out.

Otherwise, I think I'd have some problems going back to CK2 for the reasons others have stated above me.

[RodHull]

Originally posted by Razorblade:

I wouldn't call CK3 hollow (in fact, I'd argue CK2 is kind of hollow, or more accurately "surface-level"). CK3's systems have plenty of depth, there is just not a lot of content to go along with those systems. CK2 has a ton of content, but not a lot of system depth. It feels like you're playing 10 different shallow games at the same time, rather than the single coherent game I find CK3 to be. For that reason, I don't think I could go back to CK2.

I can get behind this, its actually quite accurate. CK3 isn't hollow or lacking content, it does however lack a diverse set of events. So you tend to hit repetition much quicker and it makes the game feel more hollow, even though you are correct mechanically it is much deeper.

[Constantine]

I went back to ck2 as its just better currently

[Androzin]

I went back but I will return to ck3, biggest annoyance for me is you cant fight your own battles as a knight, its hard coded for the player not to be a knight even if you're a vassal which is annoying. I hope they expand the knight system in a further expansion or something, its kind of dumb that you cant personally fight in your own battles, just command it.

[Heraclius Caesar]

Originally posted by RodHull:

Originally posted by Razorblade:

I wouldn't call CK3 hollow (in fact, I'd argue CK2 is kind of hollow, or more accurately "surface-level"). CK3's systems have plenty of depth, there is just not a lot of content to go along with those systems. CK2 has a ton of content, but not a lot of system depth. It feels like you're playing 10 different shallow games at the same time, rather than the single coherent game I find CK3 to be. For that reason, I don't think I could go back to CK2.

I can get behind this, its actually quite accurate. CK3 isn't hollow or lacking content, it does however lack a diverse set of events. So you tend to hit repetition much quicker and it makes the game feel more hollow, even though you are correct mechanically it is much deeper.

You're right that its not necessarily lacking content, especially the first 100 or so hours you put into it, although more content would be very welcome and appreciated. Definitely agree that the relatively small pool of events gets repetitive.

Something I'd love to see in the future would be a much larger pool of events, and a vastly expanded decision list with a shorter "cool down" period on decisions.

[VoiD]

I agree, CK3 is extremely hollow, a bunch of base mechanics for a ton of future content, but everything is just surface level.

CK2 however had, by a long shot, the most complex battle system of paradox games, so much that most people didn't understand a single thing about it because they just couldn't learn what was going on.

Besides there were all the secret societies, treasures, event chains, items and equipment crafting, satanist magic, warrior socieities bonuses, actual raising of your children to become gods of their own craft, etc...

Ck3 also feels like I'm playing with cheats on, even though CK2 was very easy after you learn the basics CK3 is just braindead easy, it is, literally impossible to ever lose a game, to ever lose a sucession, to ever be denied anything by the AI, the game just lets you bypass every single mechanic in the game by easily clicking a button and that includes the entire sucession thing which is the main focus of a dynastic grand strategy game.

TBH CK3 needs a major overhaul in many areas, the sucession needs to matter, religions need to be different and not just a modular mishmash of bonuses, the combat needs to come back to it's roots, it went from the most complex system in paradox games to the simplest, single-directional combat where one side just throws damage at the other side, no formations, no tactics, no flanks, no important general bonuses, it's just a single mush of a single damage number vs the other big result number.

Also levies are completely and utterly worthless, I've conquered most of the map (till I got bored) in about a century by not ever raising levies, just raise your OP men at arms with proper bonuses and crush everything in a single battle, then use the massive regiment of siege weapons to near-instantly take down every castle in sight.

The new feudal system is good on paper, horrible in execution, the fact that tribes can be MUCH richer than big feudal empires is a joke, feudals get less than 0.1% of the actual land's income due to how much it gets reduced, and how locked it is in contracts, take the HRE emperor as an example, he's a cockroach, weak as a bug, any of his dukes can beat the crap out of him, any tribe can beat the crap out of him, now compare him tot he CK2 HRE emperor, now that was a boss with a massive army and income.

I honestly don't understand why paradox didn't release 3~4 DLC since it's release, it was VERY well received and I thought they'd make it their leading game, but it's been ages and nothing at all was added to the game (ruler designer isn't content) and no real issues were fixed so far.

That being said I haven't been playing CK2 either, been there, done everything, I just haven't been playing CK games at all, waiting for things to improve even though CK2 is IMO the best, highest quality game Paradox ever made. I'm playing Imperator instead, which they have finally remade into a proper game and honestly, the base game of Imperator is so far better than CK3, in fact it's better than most Paradox games, only reason it wouldn't take the #1 spot is due to the lack of a decade of DLC/development other games had, but it could get there, Imperator is a 10/10 game right now.

[RodHull]

Originally posted by Heraclius Caesar:

You're right that its not necessarily lacking content, especially the first 100 or so hours you put into it, although more content would be very welcome and appreciated. Definitely agree that the relatively small pool of events gets repetitive.

Something I'd love to see in the future would be a much larger pool of events, and a vastly expanded decision list with a shorter "cool down" period on decisions.

Yes as a player of CK2 and someone who adores and enjoys Stellaris that is what sticks out to me playing CK3. Theres plenty of gameplay moments that should be fun but the dressing on top doesn't have enough variety yet.

Take raising your kids (or wards) the events are so limited that you tend to get the same ones over and over again (the bullying one, the one with a man being executed etc) if they just added like 3 more varieties of those events it would be instantly improved and feel less 'gamey'

Originally posted by VoiD:

Besides there were all the secret societies, treasures, event chains, items and equipment crafting, satanist magic, warrior socieities bonuses, actual raising of your children to become gods of their own craft, etc...

All of which was added via DLC and is not in the base game... just saying.

[VoiD]

Originally posted by RodHull:

Originally posted by Heraclius Caesar:

You're right that its not necessarily lacking content, especially the first 100 or so hours you put into it, although more content would be very welcome and appreciated. Definitely agree that the relatively small pool of events gets repetitive.

Something I'd love to see in the future would be a much larger pool of events, and a vastly expanded decision list with a shorter "cool down" period on decisions.

Yes as a player of CK2 and someone who adores and enjoys Stellaris that is what sticks out to me playing CK3. Theres plenty of gameplay moments that should be fun but the dressing on top doesn't have enough variety yet.

Take raising your kids (or wards) the events are so limited that you tend to get the same ones over and over again (the bullying one, the one with a man being executed etc) if they just added like 3 more varieties of those events it would be instantly improved and feel less 'gamey'

Originally posted by VoiD:

Besides there were all the secret societies, treasures, event chains, items and equipment crafting, satanist magic, warrior socieities bonuses, actual raising of your children to become gods of their own craft, etc...

All of which was added via DLC and is not in the base game... just saying.

Doesn't matter at all, the bar is higher today.
They have tried doing a barebones game just like 1.0 CK2 and 1.0 EU4, it was called Imperator, didn't go very well.

Besides it's not really what the OP was asking, DLC or not CK3 has nothing on CK2, the ammount of actual content depth is less than 5% because, just like you said, CK2 has over a decade of DLC and free patches, even though 1.0 CK3 is way better than the 1.0 version of every other paradox game ever made.

Which, again, is very odd how they have not taken the mommentum to crank out new content and rush development after such a well received launch, I'd have expected 3~4 actual content DLC by now over the hype CK3 was carrying.

[RodHull]

Originally posted by VoiD:

Doesn't matter at all, the bar is higher today.
They have tried doing a barebones game just like 1.0 CK2 and 1.0 EU4, it was called Imperator, didn't go very well.

Besides it's not really what the OP was asking, DLC or not CK3 has nothing on CK2, the ammount of actual content depth is less than 5% because, just like you said, CK2 has over a decade of DLC and free patches, even though 1.0 CK3 is way better than the 1.0 version of every other paradox game ever made.

Which, again, is very odd how they have not taken the mommentum to crank out new content and rush development after such a well received launch, I'd have expected 3~4 actual content DLC by now over the hype CK3 was carrying.

It does matter cause if someone is going to invest in a product long term (Im aware CK2 is free but its DLC are not) then its important to point out the base game of CK3 is superior to the base game of CK2 (imo) at the very least in terms of content (all nations playable, religious aspects of HF already in place and so forth)

We know they are planning to add 3 to 4 DLC a year following the stellaris slower DLC model (1 major and 2 flavour packs already planned) so we know within a year (covid allowing) we are likely to see 3 dlc out by Dec, all of which are according to PDX going to be bigger and more 'meaty' (their words) than their CK2 DLC.

So it is relevant to point out the things mentioned are part of DLC for CK2 if you just play the base game it has none of that variety. Though as I admitted it (CK3) does still lack variety in terms of 'events' that fire off.

And there is nothing 'odd' about the DLC situation, it was widely publicised prior to launch the DLC would be released slower and be larger when they appeared (hence the higher price point)