So where are the battlefield events?

[Androzin]

Its hard coded for the player to never become a knight or participate in battlefield duels, you cannot get hurt in battle at all unless you use mods. War is pretty boring since the main appeal at least for me was the events. You cannot even get traits like blademaster unless you cheat or get it on your heir.

[ShepherdOfCats]

Has been mentioned many times before and I agree. One of the developers responded and said they were considering how to implement battlefield duels. (but I don't know how seriously they were considering it)

I understand that not everyone is a fan of it, so I think it could be done with an option to toggle duels in battle, so people who don't want the interruption (or the risks) could just turn it off.

FYI you can get blademaster from a pilgrimage event but it is extremely rare, considering it has to fire the event based on RNG and you can only go on a pilgrimage once every 10 years.

[dannyvader007]

Originally posted by Androzin:

Its hard coded for the player to never become a knight or participate in battlefield duels, you cannot get hurt in battle at all unless you use mods. War is pretty boring since the main appeal at least for me was the events. You cannot even get traits like blademaster unless you cheat or get it on your heir.

Are you serious? Do you know how boring that would be? That would just keep adding more spam events. And the war and battles will take a lot longer. It wouldn't add anything interesting.

However, what they could add is more war detail such as reworking on levies and men at arms with their clothing and armour's and weapons. I believe they could add more details to sieges. Also, navies need more detail.

[VoiD]

Yeah, bit of a miss.

Duel events shouldn't be optional, if your character is leading troops it should be fairly common for you to have to handle yourself, somehow, in battle, ofc you shouldn't be playing duels for other characters too, instead just get the resolution, like "your son was maimed in combat by duke dikassaurus and los his right eye" or something.

Also, commanding troops should always be risky, I mean, you're in the middle of a battle, with angry men with spears and arrows flying everywhere, even if you're a protected noble in good armor that's not exactly the safest place to be. Having no real chance of death or injury in combat is just one of the things that make this game too easy and too predictable.

As a sidenote I've been playing Old World lately, and the game has a curious system with Orders, you need to use Orders to tell any unit, of any kind, to move on your turn, which means if your king sucks and inherits a huge empire, you won't really be able to handle it efficiently or even move half your pieces each turn. On the other hand, all units have several pips of vigor, which allows you to spend 3+ orders on the same unit to move it several times in a single turn.

Tribals and barbarians don't use orders, and they can't move the same unit twice or more, I've been fighting barbarians for a while, and it was just as easy and impossible to lose as a Civilization game, where you can calculate the AI's movement range and never really expose your units to any real danger, but when I got in a war against Egypt, ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥, a swarm of units started appearing from outside of my screen, any unit I used to kill something from them would imediatelly get butchered by their own units the next turn as they moved their pieces 2x to get in whatever range they needed to focus fire and kill any one of my units, war elephants, charriots, everything was getting destroyed, it was a pleasant surprise, and the first time in many years I actually lost a war and got humiliated by an AI in these kinds of strategy games, because it's impossible to calculate, prepare and accept which losses I'm willing to take to win @ the end.

CK3 suffers from the same problem, back in CK2 you could be a great player, do everything right, but sometimes the game would just throw a random curve ball at you and foce you to, after you panic madly, try to fix the situation, sometimes your perfect genius heir (which was also a lot harder to breed and get into the sucession line than in CK3) would simply die at an early age from a random disease, sometimes your perfect general, bred for 20 years would get an axe to the face in his very first military campaign, and you'd constantly have to struggle and adapt to such situations, in CK3 everyone seems to live very long lives, you get warnings before people are about to die, you have a health meters, you don't really have random death events, everything is controlable, which is a big reason why CK3 is far too easy, you have to pretend to be retarded and intentionally ignore all the warning signs for anything truly bad to happen to you as a player, and, as the OP suggests, the lack of duels and battle events is one of such things.

Then again, it's pointless to add these to the game if you're also going to make them safe and predictable.

[Kimlin]

Originally posted by dannyvader007:

Originally posted by Androzin:

Its hard coded for the player to never become a knight or participate in battlefield duels, you cannot get hurt in battle at all unless you use mods. War is pretty boring since the main appeal at least for me was the events. You cannot even get traits like blademaster unless you cheat or get it on your heir.

Are you serious? Do you know how boring that would be? That would just keep adding more spam events. And the war and battles will take a lot longer. It wouldn't add anything interesting.

However, what they could add is more war detail such as reworking on levies and men at arms with their clothing and armour's and weapons. I believe they could add more details to sieges. Also, navies need more detail.

Wait, so in your opinion adding events and impactful situations to war would be boring event spam but if they add more clothing options with different weapons, that would be fun and deep content?

[Androzin]

I honestly think these events are needed. Its a little thing in the grand scheme of things but ck2 is composed of little things that add up and make the game great. War is just boring right now because you can just stack one man at arms and wipe everything if you built for them. At least adding a little bit of war events with battles or duels during battles would make it somewhat interesting. Stacking MAA is even more trivial if you get Varangian Veterans you can kill everything even with the many nerfs they gave them.

It would be cool if they had the levy system from ck2 where your levies spawn at every county and you have to gather them up, I think the MAA would only spawn at your capital to balance it? I honestly don't know but it sounds cool imo.

[ShepherdOfCats]

Originally posted by VoiD:

Yeah, bit of a miss.

Duel events shouldn't be optional

i mean like in the game settings. Battlefield duels on/off. Not like having it on, and then deciding whether or not you want to duel if the opportunity confronts you.

Some people raged in Ck2 because RNG killed their well-groomed death machine characters. I don't see the harm in letting those folks turn off dueling in options. I also don't feel like everyone else who wants them in the game should miss out because some folks don't want to serve as knights under a liege or engage in life-or-death duels.

[VoiD]

Originally posted by ShepherdOfCats:

Originally posted by VoiD:

Yeah, bit of a miss.

Duel events shouldn't be optional

i mean like in the game settings. Battlefield duels on/off. Not like having it on, and then deciding whether or not you want to duel if the opportunity confronts you.

Some people raged in Ck2 because RNG killed their well-groomed death machine characters. I don't see the harm in letting those folks turn off dueling in options. I also don't feel like everyone else who wants them in the game should miss out because some folks don't want to serve as knights under a liege or engage in life-or-death duels.

Well, you're not wrong, but from a game design POV it still doesn't make sense to me that someone could enter a battlefield and turn off the possibility of dying there, I don't see it any different from turning off death from diseases, old age, injuries, or any other kind of event.

The way to not risk dying in combat should be by not participating in combat, the castle walls are safe...ish.

[dannyvader007]

Originally posted by Kimlin:

Originally posted by dannyvader007:

Are you serious? Do you know how boring that would be? That would just keep adding more spam events. And the war and battles will take a lot longer. It wouldn't add anything interesting.

However, what they could add is more war detail such as reworking on levies and men at arms with their clothing and armour's and weapons. I believe they could add more details to sieges. Also, navies need more detail.

Wait, so in your opinion adding events and impactful situations to war would be boring event spam but if they add more clothing options with different weapons, that would be fun and deep content?

Yes. Adding more events is only going to clutter up the game more and more to the point that you won't be able to fight a war. What we need is better war mechanics and detail for your armies and your commanders. Armies and wars must have more detail and mechanics.

[Androzin]

Originally posted by dannyvader007:

Originally posted by Kimlin:

Wait, so in your opinion adding events and impactful situations to war would be boring event spam but if they add more clothing options with different weapons, that would be fun and deep content?

Yes. Adding more events is only going to clutter up the game more and more to the point that you won't be able to fight a war. What we need is better war mechanics and detail for your armies and your commanders. Armies and wars must have more detail and mechanics.

You're entitled to your opinion but I personally don't feel like that would be a problem, look at how many events ck2 had. I would argue that events are most of the game in CK3 since it looks like they're doubling down on the role play aspect with dlc like royal court.

[PacificCloud]

definitely check out the better battles mod.

It makes war feel so much more immersive.

[Androzin]

Originally posted by PacificCloud:

definitely check out the better battles mod.

It makes war feel so much more immersive.

I started using that mod but the thing is we shouldn't have to use mods for something that should be in the base game already. Good mod though.

[dannyvader007]

Originally posted by Androzin:

Originally posted by PacificCloud:

definitely check out the better battles mod.

It makes war feel so much more immersive.

I started using that mod but the thing is we shouldn't have to use mods for something that should be in the base game already. Good mod though.

I agree with you! Mods are too overrated and they get outdated. It's always better to have mechanics through the main game without having to rely on mods. Mods should be extra.

[Kimlin]

Having mods to fill out your gameplay is never a bad thing.

A lot of people hate events, so the more events that are added base game will just annoy these players but having event mods such as VIET allows those users such as myself to add many more events at their own discretion.

Some people hate city building, so more buildings options and building slots would just annoy them if it were base game. Mods can also fill in this role.

While everyone agrees we want more base game features not everyone agrees what those features or mechanics should be. That’s where mods come in and can expand and customize your gameplay to be what you prefer.

A blanket statement that mods are bad or that everything should be base game is short sighted and not looking at the overall picture. Which is, just because you want a specific mechanic doesn’t mean anyone else does. So maybe adding it base game isn’t always the best idea.

[dannyvader007]

Originally posted by Kimlin:

Having mods to fill out your gameplay is never a bad thing.

A lot of people hate events, so the more events that are added base game will just annoy these players but having event mods such as VIET allows those users such as myself to add many more events at their own discretion.

Some people hate city building, so more buildings options and building slots would just annoy them if it were base game. Mods can also fill in this role.

While everyone agrees we want more base game features not everyone agrees what those features or mechanics should be. That’s where mods come in and can expand and customize your gameplay to be what you prefer.

A blanket statement that mods are bad or that everything should be base game is short sighted and not looking at the overall picture. Which is, just because you want a specific mechanic doesn’t mean anyone else does. So maybe adding it base game isn’t always the best idea.

Buy they get outdated.

[Kimlin]

Originally posted by dannyvader007:

Originally posted by Kimlin:

Having mods to fill out your gameplay is never a bad thing.

A lot of people hate events, so the more events that are added base game will just annoy these players but having event mods such as VIET allows those users such as myself to add many more events at their own discretion.

Some people hate city building, so more buildings options and building slots would just annoy them if it were base game. Mods can also fill in this role.

While everyone agrees we want more base game features not everyone agrees what those features or mechanics should be. That’s where mods come in and can expand and customize your gameplay to be what you prefer.

A blanket statement that mods are bad or that everything should be base game is short sighted and not looking at the overall picture. Which is, just because you want a specific mechanic doesn’t mean anyone else does. So maybe adding it base game isn’t always the best idea.

Buy they get outdated.

I use 100s of mods and there are very few that cause any issues.