about new DLC and whats wrong with KC?!

[Sad Pepe]

maybe im wrong but i think its all about grand strategy right???
at least it must be all about dark age of medieval europe...strict and brutal ages.. wars, murenders, genocides...
i really wander, why they add weird DLCs like Sims?!
where are crusader kings?
why crusader wars are so poor?
nonsense events....
im not even talk about late game, when u have empire with biggest army and u have nothing to do, just boring... where are challenges??
idk but i think something wrong in this game and where its going...

sorry for my bad english but i wanted to say something cuz im lost....

[Rex, the Mid-Level Bureaucrat]

Idealistically, hopefully the management and development teams hear the feedback (both negative and positive), and actually consider it.

Else, what else is there? Ranting hot air into a void?

I really hope this next expansion will fix the crusades. As well, add something for mid-to-late game.

PDX has already said that they're focusing on Role Play for the next expansion. The rhetoric that this is "the sims" is overblown, in my opinion. Mostly spun by the "I want Republics/Nomads" crowd. Data shows, however, that nobody plays Republics and Nomads :b. PDX most likely will cater to the majority desire before the minority desire.

Tours and Tournaments (I still hate that name) will hopefully buffer peace-time playtime and mid-to-late game content.

I, personally, can only play about four generations of rulers before I get bored xD. Then I start fresh again!

[Kimlin]

Originally posted by Rex is Returning in March 2023:

Idealistically, hopefully the management and development teams hear the feedback (both negative and positive), and actually consider it.

Else, what else is there? Ranting hot air into a void?

I really hope this next expansion will fix the crusades. As well, add something for mid-to-late game.

PDX has already said that they're focusing on Role Play for the next expansion. The rhetoric that this is "the sims" is overblown, in my opinion. Mostly spun by the "I want Republics/Nomads" crowd. Data shows, however, that nobody plays Republics and Nomads :b. PDX most likely will cater to the majority desire before the minority desire.

Tours and Tournaments (I still hate that name) will hopefully buffer peace-time playtime and mid-to-late game content.

I, personally, can only play about four generations of rulers before I get bored xD. Then I start fresh again!

I would say there is more to the Republics and Nomads arguments. The argument is that all of the governments play exactly the same. There’s no real difference between ERE and a Scandinavian Empire or Mongolian Empire. Sure if you are tribal or clan it’s easier to expand but that’s really it. Every tier every realm plays the same. Adding variety such as Republics and overhauling Empires and adding regional flavor would freshen up the game far more than a tour.

Now I think the tour is a cool idea but adding flavor to religion, government or economics would have done more to freshen the game.

[Ēarendel]

Its not all about grand strategy, and its not all about crusades, it would be boring if it were and a knockoff of other games. Devs promised roleplay depth first and map painting mechanics later, which will be the focus after the upcoming expansion.

[Kimlin]

Originally posted by Ēarendel:

Its not all about grand strategy, and its not all about crusades, it would be boring if it were and a knockoff of other games. Devs promised roleplay depth first and map painting mechanics later, which will be the focus after the upcoming expansion.

A Grand Strategy game named Crusader Kings should have a focus on Grand Strategy and on Crusades. Right?

[Rex, the Mid-Level Bureaucrat]

Originally posted by Kimlin:

Originally posted by Rex is Returning in March 2023:

Idealistically, hopefully the management and development teams hear the feedback (both negative and positive), and actually consider it.

Else, what else is there? Ranting hot air into a void?

I really hope this next expansion will fix the crusades. As well, add something for mid-to-late game.

PDX has already said that they're focusing on Role Play for the next expansion. The rhetoric that this is "the sims" is overblown, in my opinion. Mostly spun by the "I want Republics/Nomads" crowd. Data shows, however, that nobody plays Republics and Nomads :b. PDX most likely will cater to the majority desire before the minority desire.

Tours and Tournaments (I still hate that name) will hopefully buffer peace-time playtime and mid-to-late game content.

I, personally, can only play about four generations of rulers before I get bored xD. Then I start fresh again!

I would say there is more to the Republics and Nomads arguments. The argument is that all of the governments play exactly the same. There’s no real difference between ERE and a Scandinavian Empire or Mongolian Empire. Sure if you are tribal or clan it’s easier to expand but that’s really it. Every tier every realm plays the same. Adding variety such as Republics and overhauling Empires and adding regional flavor would freshen up the game far more than a tour.

Now I think the tour is a cool idea but adding flavor to religion, government or economics would have done more to freshen the game.

Well said
I would have preferred a cultural pack before the next major expansion. I'm curious if they'll do a Community Poll again to see where we'll head for our next cultural pack.

[Ēarendel]

Originally posted by Kimlin:

Originally posted by Ēarendel:

Its not all about grand strategy, and its not all about crusades, it would be boring if it were and a knockoff of other games. Devs promised roleplay depth first and map painting mechanics later, which will be the focus after the upcoming expansion.

A Grand Strategy game named Crusader Kings should have a focus on Grand Strategy and on Crusades. Right?

That's an utterly simplistic take, crusades aren't even 5% of what you do in the game, nor should grand strategy be 100% of it.

[Kimlin]

Originally posted by Ēarendel:

Originally posted by Kimlin:

A Grand Strategy game named Crusader Kings should have a focus on Grand Strategy and on Crusades. Right?

That's an utterly simplistic take, crusades aren't even 5% of what you do in the game, nor should grand strategy be 100% of it.

I was of course being fictitious but Crusades do need some love. It will probably make sense to come with a religion update.

[Ēarendel]

Originally posted by Kimlin:

Originally posted by Ēarendel:

That's an utterly simplistic take, crusades aren't even 5% of what you do in the game, nor should grand strategy be 100% of it.

I was of course being fictitious but Crusades do need some love. It will probably make sense to come with a religion update.

Yes of course, I don't think they implemented the base needed for it. For example this expansion, could very well set the base for nomads and hordes with the overhauled travel and event mechanics.

[Myll]

Originally posted by Ēarendel:

Its not all about grand strategy, and its not all about crusades, it would be boring if it were and a knockoff of other games. Devs promised roleplay depth first and map painting mechanics later, which will be the focus after the upcoming expansion.

You played all of 2.5 hours of CK2 yet offer a perspective of the game from a series perspective (as in - what it is, what it should be). You should actually play CK2 before you form an opinion on what CK3 and the Crusader Kings series is supposed to be, because CK2 is the "flagship" of the series right now, and sadly - may always be, because the new customers of CK3 such as yourself, don't even know what it's supposed to be in the first place.

You should think about this - how can you define what CK3 is and what it "should" be, when it isn't a completed game? Answer: Refer to the Series, and CK2 is that reference point.

[Ēarendel]

Originally posted by Myll:

Originally posted by Ēarendel:

Its not all about grand strategy, and its not all about crusades, it would be boring if it were and a knockoff of other games. Devs promised roleplay depth first and map painting mechanics later, which will be the focus after the upcoming expansion.

You played all of 2.5 hours of CK2 yet offer a perspective of the game from a series perspective (as in - what it is, what it should be). You should actually play CK2 before you form an opinion on what CK3 and the Crusader Kings series is supposed to be, because CK2 is the "flagship" of the series right now, and sadly - may always be, because the new customers of CK3 such as yourself, don't even know what it's supposed to be in the first place.

You should think about this - how can you define what CK3 is and what it "should" be, when it isn't a completed game? Answer: Refer to the Series, and CK2 is that reference point.

I will tell you why I have 2 hours on that game. Because its a terrible game. I tried it twice, didn't like it. Its all over the place and over the top, the UI is a bloated mess. And this "flagship" of yours had 2,000 concurrent players over the past 30 days. On the contrast CK3 has 11,000 players so I would say its so far doing much better when it diverged from its original design...

[Myll]

Originally posted by Ēarendel:

Originally posted by Myll:

You played all of 2.5 hours of CK2 yet offer a perspective of the game from a series perspective (as in - what it is, what it should be). You should actually play CK2 before you form an opinion on what CK3 and the Crusader Kings series is supposed to be, because CK2 is the "flagship" of the series right now, and sadly - may always be, because the new customers of CK3 such as yourself, don't even know what it's supposed to be in the first place.

You should think about this - how can you define what CK3 is and what it "should" be, when it isn't a completed game? Answer: Refer to the Series, and CK2 is that reference point.

I will tell you why I have 2 hours on that game. Because its a terrible game. I tried it twice, didn't like it. Its all over the place and over the top, the UI is a bloated mess. And this "flagship" of yours had 2,000 concurrent players over the past 30 days. On the contrast CK3 has 11,000 players so I would say its so far doing much better when it diverged from its original design...

You must not realize how bad of a stat that actually is. It's a 1-to-5 ratio (proven today/current data with 3.5K-to-17.5K in game on a weekend also). This means that 1 out of 5 would-be CK3 players (and customers) are choosing instead to remain with CK2, the prior game. In the gaming industry, this isn't a good stat, because it means there is not as much "complete acceptance" of the successor game, and additionally we're now 2.5+ years since CK3 launch (this is the kind of stat you may expect in the first 90 days of CK3 launch but this stat is persisting 2.5+ years beyond that point).

Separately, I can understand that you're biased, but in 2.5 hours of CK2 gameplay, you certainly didn't see all the game has to offer for varying play-throughs, rare events, and for that matter - you certainly didn't try the hundreds of variations of combinations of game starting points (especially the totally different dynamics of let's say - a typical European Catholic start vs E. Euro Pagan start vs Middle-Eastern Muslim start as but 3 especially different game variations).

Don't take my word for it - just look at CK2 reviews, and when I say CK2, I'm meaning - the complete/all-DLC game. If your negative perception is because you only played the free CK2 Base Game, well - you're not an authoritative source on what CK2 is as a complete game.

[PDX-Trinexx]

Dial the hostility back a bit, folks. You're allowed to disagree with each other and prefer different games, but try to be respectful about it.

[Khorne Flakes]

Agreed. There are so many more important features that needed to be added before this... before Royal Court even(and what a gimmick that turned out to be).
I hope after this the director adjusts his priorities or the game gets a new one.

[Zoop]

This game seems to be mostly focused on graphics and cosmetics. after all of this time it does not seem like they added much content to the game. I an actually very dissipointed. It really does feel like the sims or dress up.

[Shazbot]

I didn't play much of CK2 but CK3 has way better UI at least.