Whats a roleplayer, and whats a min maxer?

[Nanami]

I keep hearing these terms, people say ck3 is more for roleplayers, rather than min maxers
but im confused, one time theres someone that wants ck3 to be less exploitable, and he was accused to be a "min maxer", strange, once I joined a CK3 RP group, there are soooo many rules, including enforcing people to not exploit, to stop people to min max, it deters me to join because Im afraid to break one of the rules

But yeah Im still confused on what those two terms really means, and why are these 2 people are at odds at each other

[PDX-Trinexx]

Try to stay on topic, folks.

[avil]

I guess I'll share my vision, under context of CK3.
Role playing is what your character would do if they were a real person. Other say that it means you should pick everything according to your traits, but that's not quite true, unless you rolepaly as an actual idiot. Nervous breakdowns are real in real life too, and people often pick choices not because they like them, but because they're more beneficial. So you don't actually have to pick everything that glows blue. In that context, CK3 is an easy game to role play, as long as you can come up with a logical excuse to why you do what you're not supposed to do.
And to minmaxing... minmaxer is somebody who would castrate ALL their knights if that gave extra prowess, and prior to that they would find a way to promote some obscure culture that has that effect and convert their whole nation to it. It's a person that reaches extremes to gain benefits, disregarding "real life logic".

[taomastercu]

Originally posted by avil:

I guess I'll share my vision, under context of CK3.
Role playing is what your character would do if they were a real person. Other say that it means you should pick everything according to your traits, but that's not quite true, unless you rolepaly as an actual idiot. Nervous breakdowns are real in real life too, and people often pick choices not because they like them, but because they're more beneficial. So you don't actually have to pick everything that glows blue. In that context, CK3 is an easy to role play, as long as you can come up with a logical excuse to why you do what you're not supposed to do.
And to minmaxing... minmaxer is somebody who would castrate ALL their knights if that gave extra prowess, and prior to that they would find a way to promote some obscure culture that has that effect and convert their whole nation to it. It's a person that reaches extremes to gain benefits, disregarding "real life logic".

This sounds more or less pretty reasonable. In EU4 a minmaxer would be someone who forms a new nation like 4 times to get valuable permanent modifiers from a nation specific decision tree, as an example. Lots of people reform to Sardinia-Piedmont before going to Italy for this reason, to stack unintended bonuses to get super powers. Similarly nearly every serious world conquest involves becoming Emperor of the HRE to abuse free vassals followed by hitting the insta-inherit privlege as soon as your vassals cover the whole globe.

In CK3 you'd do stuff like run only a single MaA type and stack buildings in every holding till they fought like DBZ characters against mere mortals and forming silly quadri-cultures and custom religions.

[VoiD]

Originally posted by taomastercu:

Originally posted by avil:

I guess I'll share my vision, under context of CK3.
Role playing is what your character would do if they were a real person. Other say that it means you should pick everything according to your traits, but that's not quite true, unless you rolepaly as an actual idiot. Nervous breakdowns are real in real life too, and people often pick choices not because they like them, but because they're more beneficial. So you don't actually have to pick everything that glows blue. In that context, CK3 is an easy to role play, as long as you can come up with a logical excuse to why you do what you're not supposed to do.
And to minmaxing... minmaxer is somebody who would castrate ALL their knights if that gave extra prowess, and prior to that they would find a way to promote some obscure culture that has that effect and convert their whole nation to it. It's a person that reaches extremes to gain benefits, disregarding "real life logic".

This sounds more or less pretty reasonable. In EU4 a minmaxer would be someone who forms a new nation like 4 times to get valuable permanent modifiers from a nation specific decision tree, as an example. Lots of people reform to Sardinia-Piedmont before going to Italy for this reason, to stack unintended bonuses to get super powers. Similarly nearly every serious world conquest involves becoming Emperor of the HRE to abuse free vassals followed by hitting the insta-inherit privlege as soon as your vassals cover the whole globe.

In CK3 you'd do stuff like run only a single MaA type and stack buildings in every holding till they fought like DBZ characters against mere mortals and forming silly quadri-cultures and custom religions.

I did WC using the HRE before, couldn't convert it all quickly enough to get one faith too unfortunately.

But the experience actually made me give up on EU4, haven't played in a couple of years so I don't know how much it improved, but ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ it was tedious trying to conquer all of those provinces one after another, end a war, start another war, break truces, play on x1 speed looking at 4 different wars at the same time in 4 different regions of the globe, and that's with all of those vassals helping you out sieging a lot of stuff for you.

I couldn't imagine doing it without them and sieging every single province yourself, EU4 was a great game, possibly paradox' hardest grand strategy, even though it's fairly simple, but that experience soured me to this day, it really made me miss the HoI4 frontline system where you could just click "go" and they'd march accross the globe for you taking everything on their path.

[Evil Savant]

so for example a min maxer will take whatever choice is best mathematically and the roleplayer would make the decision that their character would make if the things happened to them IRL. In CK theres lots of choices that are mathematically best to advance your dynastys success, but do not make sense for your character

[Admod, the Equivocal]

Originally posted by Fellington:

You have to roleplay otherwise the game is too easy and boring. The problem is, the game doesn't encourage any sort of roleplay nor has any mechanics to incentivise 'roleplay'. The game wants you to actively sort by stat to find the best characters and best everything. You have 100 percent information of everything. All this does not help roleplay.

So to make the game better, there could be a mechanic where the more positive or even negative relation you have with someone the more you learn about them stat wise. Or maybe a spy mission? Plenty of ways to make learning about other people in the game more interesting or at least make it worth more. Maybe the romance option or seduce option is what reveals a potential spouses stats while sway and befriend reveals other people's stats. While spies would reveal stats of foreign people.

I kind of think traits should simply be revealed though.

[JC]

Originally posted by Mya-Nee:

But yeah Im still confused on what those two terms really means, and why are these 2 people are at odds at each other

Min/maxers, Power game, they don't care what an event is they just pick the best most powerful outcome, and try to put the most powerful people with the most powerful stats in every place. They use the Traits to farm them and get even more bonuses so they have characters that are gods with 30's in every stat...

a role player just plays, picks things how they think the character would react, not the least bad option. They try to get in the head of a person and act accordingly. If that leads to bad things happening so be it. If putting your best friend that has total crap skills in a position of power even if they are bad at their job, so be it. A min/maxer would not stand for such things.


on a side note, It's a flat out crap, that RPers don't know how to play. In fact they have to know how to play well to do things because they aren't just power gaming the systems and steam rolling which is super easy to do as a min/maxer because by doing so you can easily trick or over power the AI.


Ohh some folks are mad because the next huge expansion is all about RP so bashing RPers is just par for the course right now.

[Aelfric]

Min maxers maximise small advantages. Roleplayers handicap themselves, like I tried a run where I didn't allow myself to do kingdom level or higher level wars. Min-maxing is by far the most fun but ck3 doesn't want to add balance, so it's very sad. Neither min-max or roleplay are viable playstyles without balance. Perhaps I'm thinking of the merged playstyle of min-max-roleplaying. which is why the game fails in the same way