GENTLEMEN! BE CALM! WILLIAM WALLACE COMMANDS YOU TO HOLD!!

[The Former]

First and foremost, you do not have to buy the DLC!

Let's remind everyone of that straight away. If everything else I say in this post fails you, take heart in this fact. Buying DLC is a choice, not an obligation! You needn't fear for your wallets.

Now let's get to the rest of my points.

They told us this was coming.

Way back in May of 2020,[forum.paradoxplaza.com] we were told their plans for DLC. Here's what we were told:

Question 7: What kind of content can we expect post-launch?
Our DLCs will be split between Flavor Packs and Major Expansions.

Flavor Packs - SRP $6.99: in-game content focused on a theme or a region.
Major Expansions - SRP $29.99: larger, meatier expansions with content and mechanics to expand and enrich your experience.
Free Updates: As usual, each Major Expansion will be accompanied by a free update that will provide new features, fixes and changes to improve our players’ experience.

If you are familiar with Paradox Development Studio games, you surely have realized that we will start with a Major Expansion for CK3 at a slightly higher price point than those of our previous titles. This is due to the fact that we want to spend more time on our CK3 expansions and deliver bigger DLCs with better, more exciting content and well-enhanced mechanics.

We knew this was coming, and they told us why. Which leads us to point number two:

There is more to this than one announcement post.

How do I know? Because the announcement post was titled "CK3: The Royal Court - The Vision". Northern Lords didn't get one of these. This is substantial because in length, it's just a bit longer than this dev diary[www.crusaderkings.com] with a similar title posted at the start of CK3's hype period.

Do compare the amount of content in this dev diary to the amount of content we got with base CK3. Go ahead. I'll wait.

I'm not saying the exact same amount of comparative depth can be extrapolated for this upcoming expansion. What I am saying, with no small amount of confidence, is that if we got a post called "The Vision", we can expect a great deal more dev diaries detailing a much deeper experience than that single post captures.

Edit: This fellow at Game Watcher got a closer look. https://www.gamewatcher.com/news/crusader-kings-3-royal-court-hands-off-preview

That said, if it's shallow, I doubt I'll be buying the next big expansion.

But at least give them a chance to release the DLC before you rip them for "price for content" points.

[ℕatas Ҝhan}HvC{2.0]

being i bought the royal edition, not really expecting much from the DLC's and expansions as i got into CK2 much much later on (pretty much as it was finishing development actually) so i didnt really know what to expect from expansion to standard DLC. now that being said. i am personally kind of disappointed that my first "expansion" that im going to be getting for "free" feels more like a gimmic DLC add on.

now i have not had a hands on with the expansions stuff. so i cannot say for sure how much its going to add. but from what i've read on it in the presale page, i dunno i feel kinda jipped outta a real Expansion.....

like personally i feel the northern lords could have just had the Royal Court stuff added into it and they could have just merged all that into the Northern lords. then give us something else for the expansion...

[The Former]

Originally posted by ℕatas Ҝhan}HvC{2.0:

like personally i feel the northern lords could have just had the Royal Court stuff added into it and they could have just merged all that into the Northern lords. then give us something else for the expansion...

I disagree on the grounds that Northern Lords is a regional flavor pack, and was always meant to be. It would've felt disjointed to include it with a large-scale expansion that affects the entire map.

Otherwise, I do see your point. Obviously the angle they went with won't be for everyone. Personally I like it, as I play Crusader Kings for the roleplaying. I figure if I went a deep strategic conquest experience, I'll play Europa Universalis or HOI4, both of which handle that scale better than Crusader Kings.

It remains to be seen whether I'll like the execution, of course, but I'm optimistic.

[JC]

sure.. a year of dev time should of just been crunched into 6 months..

Originally posted by ℕatas Ҝhan}HvC{2.0:

like personally i feel the northern lords could have just had the Royal Court stuff added into it and they could have just merged all that into the Northern lords. then give us something else for the expansion...

[ℕatas Ҝhan}HvC{2.0]

Originally posted by Lockfågel, the Paradox Knight:

Originally posted by ℕatas Ҝhan}HvC{2.0:

like personally i feel the northern lords could have just had the Royal Court stuff added into it and they could have just merged all that into the Northern lords. then give us something else for the expansion...

I disagree on the grounds that Northern Lords is a regional flavor pack, and was always meant to be. It would've felt disjointed to include it with a large-scale expansion that affects the entire map.

Otherwise, I do see your point. Obviously the angle they went with won't be for everyone. Personally I like it, as I play Crusader Kings for the roleplaying. I figure if I went a deep strategic conquest experience, I'll play Europa Universalis or HOI4, both of which handle war that scale better than Crusader Kings.

It remains to be seen whether I'll like the execution, of course, but I'm optimistic.

fair enough. i can't really say what i play CK for...i know for damn certain its not the wars lol the wars are too Blobby, esp if u compare it to HOI4.....Roleplaying to some extent i guess. idk...either way i feel that for the first Expansion DLC, they're kinda idk lacking?. dont get me wrong, im not gunna STOP playing or buying the DLC (atleast the ones i want anyways). i just feel that if they're gunna keep going this way with the expansions CK3 won't do as well as 2 did IMO


Edit: i also should say that maybe not MERGE dlc1 n the expansion but maybe swap them....i feel like they could have made the this expansion as the first "flavor" pack and then use the expansion to expand the Northern lords MORE, and perhaps even add an earlier start time around the beginning of the Viking Age, maybe Flesh out Tribal buildings a little more give them some extra levels to build for the people that just want to stay tribal all game like me >:P

[RodHull]

Shush with your facts and logic, there is no place for that here. We only have room for hyperbole, pearl clutching and angry over reaction to any post or announcement. We don't care that they literally told us how much this would cost before the game was even out, we shall complain about it anyway as though we all woke up from comas mere weeks ago and know none of that information.

/sarcasm

Personally I think the court things sounds excellent. One of the most lacking elements of CK3 is the inter vassal interactions, internal politics and events and so forth. And this seems focused on improving every facet of those elements.

Its already a very good map painter, unlike CK2 it doesn't need new factions or nations added, it doesn't need the religion part expanded, or disease added (as they are in the base game) so going really deep on the court politics aspect seems a really good move imo

[ℕatas Ҝhan}HvC{2.0]

Originally posted by JC:

sure.. a year of dev time should of just been crunched into 6 months..

Originally posted by ℕatas Ҝhan}HvC{2.0:

like personally i feel the northern lords could have just had the Royal Court stuff added into it and they could have just merged all that into the Northern lords. then give us something else for the expansion...

honestly the tiny ass Dev team working on the Princes of Darkness mod have done more in 6 months then the ♥♥♥♥ they(the actual CK3 devs) have done. so as far as im concerned yes. they could/can

[The Former]

Originally posted by RodHull:

Personally I think the court things sounds excellent. One of the most lacking elements of CK3 is the inter vassal interactions, internal politics and events and so forth. And this seems focused on improving every facet of those elements.

Its already a very good map painter, unlike CK2 it doesn't need new factions or nations added, it doesn't need the religion part expanded, or disease added (as they are in the base game) so going really deep on the court politics aspect seems a really good move imo

Yeah, I agree. When people used to ask what we wanted to see for DLC, I really didn't know. Now that I've seen it? This would probably be my answer. It's something I never really thought about wanting, but now that I see it I think, "... Why didn't I think of that? This is exactly what the game was missing." It not only adds roleplaying opportunities, but it gives us things to do during peacetime.

[brownacs]

Originally posted by RodHull:

it doesn't need the religion part expanded

Compared to CK2, certainly, but I definitely think there's room for a fair bit of expansion to the current religious systems. Catholicism feels very, very lacking.

[The Former]

Originally posted by ℕatas Ҝhan}HvC{2.0:

Originally posted by JC:

sure.. a year of dev time should of just been crunched into 6 months..

honestly the tiny ass Dev team working on the Princes of Darkness mod have done more in 6 months then the ♥♥♥♥ they(the actual CK3 devs) have done. so as far as im concerned yes. they could/can

I think that's a bit unfair, as someone who's played the mod. It's a beefy mod, no doubt, but the actual amount of content isn't comparable. I've seen the code for both the mod and Northern Lords. I think PoD just comes across as bigger because it's such a substantial, across-the-board change to the game compared to many other mods.

[RodHull]

Originally posted by brownacs:

Originally posted by RodHull:

it doesn't need the religion part expanded

Compared to CK2, certainly, but I definitely think there's room for a fair bit of expansion to the current religious systems. Catholicism feels very, very lacking.

In what way?? All it needs really is the current system tweaked or rebalanced. No new mechanics or major reworks of the system are required. Its perfectly good as it is.

The only thing really lacking from Ck2 imo is nomadic gameplay, proper Byzantine empire and republics. We know they are doing Byzantines at some point (my guess is as a flavour pack) and we know Republics are likely to not return in anything like the form they existed in CK2. Which leaves nomadic/horde gameplay as the only unknown, but I don't expect to see that for a year or so.

[brownacs]

Originally posted by RodHull:

Originally posted by brownacs:

Compared to CK2, certainly, but I definitely think there's room for a fair bit of expansion to the current religious systems. Catholicism feels very, very lacking.

In what way?? All it needs really is the current system tweaked or rebalanced. No new mechanics or major reworks of the system are required. Its perfectly good as it is.

The only thing really lacking from Ck2 imo is nomadic gameplay, proper Byzantine empire and republics. We know they are doing Byzantines at some point (my guess is as a flavour pack) and we know Republics are likely to not return in anything like the form they existed in CK2. Which leaves nomadic/horde gameplay as the only unknown, but I don't expect to see that for a year or so.

Well there's no college of cardinals, no investiture, no schisms, no anti-popes, no papal elections... etc. The power struggles within the Catholic church are really what lead to the crusades so, personally, I think that's something which should be fairly well represented in a game called Crusader Kings.

[The Former]

Originally posted by brownacs:

Originally posted by RodHull:

In what way?? All it needs really is the current system tweaked or rebalanced. No new mechanics or major reworks of the system are required. Its perfectly good as it is.

The only thing really lacking from Ck2 imo is nomadic gameplay, proper Byzantine empire and republics. We know they are doing Byzantines at some point (my guess is as a flavour pack) and we know Republics are likely to not return in anything like the form they existed in CK2. Which leaves nomadic/horde gameplay as the only unknown, but I don't expect to see that for a year or so.

Well there's no college of cardinals, no investiture, no schisms, no anti-popes, no papal elections... etc. The power struggles within the Catholic church are really what lead to the crusades so, personally, I think that's something which should be fairly well represented in a game called Crusader Kings.

I can agree with all that, but I'd argue this could be something better suited to DLC this time around purely on the grounds that their goal for CK3 seems to have been to put all faiths on "equal footing" with regards to mechanical depth. They'd either have to abandon that, or set a precedent of going that deep for every major faith group, and that might not be something they wanna tackle for CK3.

[brownacs]

Originally posted by Lockfågel, the Paradox Knight:

Originally posted by brownacs:

Well there's no college of cardinals, no investiture, no schisms, no anti-popes, no papal elections... etc. The power struggles within the Catholic church are really what lead to the crusades so, personally, I think that's something which should be fairly well represented in a game called Crusader Kings.

I can agree with all that, but I'd argue this could be something better suited to DLC this time around purely on the grounds that their goal for CK3 seems to have been to put all faiths on "equal footing" with regards to mechanical depth. They'd either have to abandon that, or set a precedent of going that deep for every major faith group, and that might not be something they wanna tackle for CK3.

Oh for sure I was just saying I do think religion needs some work.
EDIT: also whilst I agree that they seem to be trying to give religions equal footing, I just don't know how realistic that is. We know an almost infinite amount more about Catholicism than we do about Asatru (probably wasn't even called that) or Tengrism so it seems like you either have to keep all the religions bare-boned, abandon that project or fictionalise.

[RodHull]

Originally posted by brownacs:

Well there's no college of cardinals, no investiture, no schisms, no anti-popes, no papal elections... etc. The power struggles within the Catholic church are really what lead to the crusades so, personally, I think that's something which should be fairly well represented in a game called Crusader Kings.

Well as both of you say above, this for sure would be nice but then we'd need that level of depth for all the major religions (at least) and I think thats a bit of an ask personally for the base game. I am not even sure its something we'll see any time soon as DLC.

You can always go deeper with all the systems, the army/war system could be made deeper, the dynasty system could be made deeper. Does it 'need' it ?? No but sure any system could be made deeper I guess.

Originally posted by brownacs:

EDIT: also whilst I agree that they seem to be trying to give religions equal footing, I just don't know how realistic that is. We know an almost infinite amount more about Catholicism than we do about Asatru (probably wasn't even called that) or Tengrism so it seems like you either have to keep all the religions bare-boned, abandon that project or fictionalise.

I don't think anyone would say all the minor or less well known religions. But for sure all the Abrahamic and Eastern religions would require the same level of depth. Which is a lot of work.

[The Former]

Originally posted by brownacs:

EDIT: also whilst I agree that they seem to be trying to give religions equal footing, I just don't know how realistic that is. We know an almost infinite amount more about Catholicism than we do about Asatru (probably wasn't even called that) or Tengrism so it seems like you either have to keep all the religions bare-boned, abandon that project or fictionalise.

I'd say say that's accurate, to be honest. I get why they went this route, mechanically, but on a realism standpoint I definitely agree.