Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Are you speaking of the vanilla CK2 of 6 months after its release, or the one with a ton of DLC several years later?
Can't wait to see how he defends now
+1, but this aside...
I've found quite differently. One game, I played an evil ruler (Greedy, Ambitious) who directed his avarice outward, snapping up lands however he could. Often through war, twice by giving a daughter to an equally wicked husband for the sake of getting a foothold in a coveted land.
One game, I played an evil ruler (Callous, Wrathful) who took out his anger on his subjects, striking those who spoke up to him and harshly punishing any slight with steep sentences of confinement and occasional title revocations.
One game, I played an evil ruler (Callous, Vengeful) who met every transgression, from within or without his court, with a devious response. Kidnapping, blackmail, assassination, invasion... Whatever seemed to fit the trespass.
One game, I played an evil ruler (Ambitious, Sadistic, Wrathful) who went around collecting the wives of his rivals as concubines. Those he captured in battle, he executed as an example. Those courtiers who crossed him, he tortured. When his son grew into a young man who defied his desire in an heir, the son was "removed".
Each ruler in these examples, I played as "evil", but I roleplayed what "evil" meant. Evil isn't an absolute. Because a character is Sadistic, it doesn't mean you have to execute, torture, and jail anyone and everyone you get a chance to. A Sadistic character simply enjoys violence, and the trait combination can inform how that ought to look. For instance:
Sadistic, Brave, Calm: A character who loves war and is willing to wage it simply to get his thrills on the battlefield.
Sadistic, Lustful, Greedy: A character who abuses lovers. He gathers them up and wields them as tools, using their love towards him to his advantage as agents, in blackmail, to see that they accept imprisonment when they do something he doesn't appreciate...
Sadistic, Gregarious, Deceitful: A vibrant, outgoing character who secretly harbors a desire to maim and kill, using his personality to befriend others before turning them into victims who never saw it coming. (This is mechanical; people are more willing to accept things like imprisonment if they like you, because they trust you!)
Sadistic, Just, Arrogant: A violent lawkeeper who punishes those who violate the law with torture and slow death, but only those who violate the law.
Sadistic, Humble, Temperate: A character who tries, really tries, to keep his violent nature in check. One who rarely acts on it. But when he does, he goes all in...
Sadistic, Trusting, Vengeful: A character who lets people in easily and takes them at their word, normally behaving reasonably. But, when you cross him, shut fast the door, because he is coming for you.
Ck3 is like gay orgy play with 5 dudes One as Byzantines, one as England, one as norse, Someone as muslim idk last one is on you enjoy.
Battles seem better, but wars are worse. Laws are clunky and ruling a kingdom is clumsy.
Its not about the DLC, Ck2 was a better base game. This is a misstep. Compare it with Stellaris, another Paradox title. I want to love Stellaris, i bought every DLC, I try different mods, but in the end, it just feels like a simulator, not a game and a story to get lost in. CK2 had some kind of magic, and CK3 is lacking.
Where half of the playable rulers were locked behind a paywall
Where over half of the start date(s) were locked behind a paywall
Where character customization was locked behind a paywall
Where the tutorial is commonly accepted as one of the worst tutorials in strategy games
Sure, it may at this SPECIFIC POINT in time be more complete than CK3. But don't try to say CK2 with no DLC is a better base game than CK3 with no DLC. It has all those features I mentioned (and more) included with the base game, as well as a tutorial that actually makes sense and SLOWLY introduces the player to game mechanics
I have to second this. Objectively speaking, CK2 was threadbare in its base form compared to CK3. There's an argument to be made that CK3 competes with current CK2 for depths. I realize this is by no means everyone's opinion, but there's an argument to be made along those lines. That alone is an indicator as to how superior a product base CK3 is to base CK2.
Side note: Curious how romancing feels less organic now? In CK2, you chose a love letter, gift, or gossip and hoped for a good RNG result. Bedding was quite a similar situation. CK3 has a series of events that grow the romance over time, building it to a decisive head that can, in fact, end in spectacular ways (to either outcome!). I'm not quite sure I see how this is less organic that picking the option with the highest success rate and rolling the dice.
CK2 was not bare bones 8 months after release.
CK2 had new DLC sooner than "6 months" after initial release...
In fact it was only 4 months that the first DLC came out called Sword of Islam.
Then 4 months later Legacy of Rome in Oct,
Sunset Invasion a month later.
Then The Republic 2 months after that.
Then Old Gods 4 months after that.
In 9 months time they had no less than 3 expansions out for CK2.
And opinions need no defense and I have no intention of defending mine, it's as legitimate as anyone else's.
@Lockfågel, the Paradox Knight - Yes you can do all those things choosing the "Intrigue" option, but , IN MY OPINION and OTHERS(God forbid if someone has an opinion...)
The game is lacking in conveying the feel of playing an evil character, or other "ROLE" playing options.
They have in many ways streamlined things too much and it has cored the game like an apple in some ways and leaves just feeling like something could be added to give it more flare and flavor. I don't feel as personal of a connection to the characters. I'm not as "intrigued".. so to speak.. heheh...
Like the whole idea that as an evil character falling into devil worshiping and the steps it takes to become a grand master.. Those felt like they included me in the characters development into the evil he became, it allowed me to feel like I was using the most evilest part of me to role play in the game, that CK3 just doesn't give me.
I am in no way claiming at all, in any shape what so ever that the game is bad, or that it's even not enjoyable.
I've played it for over a 100 hours now(I think it's been) have 12 or 13 achievements. Strategy wise, that part doesn't feel as generic as it did in CK2.. in fact.
I guess in the end, I just wished that they would or could bash some elements of CK2 with Ck3 to make CK3 the game that I loved to play in CK2. The graphics got REALLY old after a while in CK2.
@Lockfågel, the Paradox Knight - I will totally concede that bare bones... CK2 was half the game. ABSOLUTELY agree with that. 100%.
That being said. I will also concede that Sword of Islam was interesting, but, CK2 didn't really get it's mojo until Republics and then after that a lot of those DLC's just kept hitting it out of the park with the religious expansions, Plagues, etc etc..
THat's another one, I just don't get the same sense of forboding from plagues. That feeling of "uht oh.."... It usually forced me to change my strategy in the next games and put more focus on developing hospitals. Which in turn pushed me into studying the human body... which then brought me to Satanism.. etc etc etc...
Now that ♥♥♥♥'s funny.... LOL!
Exactly!!!
Stellaris gets stale after the 3rd solar system for me...... There's no "connection" there. No matter how much DLC I buy for it.
The evilest thing I could find in CK3 Achievements and the only one that actually exists?
CK3
Seductive
As any one character, successfully seduce ten people
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In CK2.... (these are just the achievements I have got as far as evil....) I am pretty sure there are some others that I haven't got yet. I didn't look. This was just the "Short list".
Dark Lord
Become Grandmaster of any devil-worshiper society.
Birthright
As the Anti-Christ/spawn of Satan, become Grandmaster of the Satanists.
Black Pope
Have a priest you corrupted (as a Satanist) become Pope.
And the requirements to become all of these things, makes "seducing 10 people"... feel like a nunnery.
There Can Be Only One
Become immortal.
It was one DLC, called Monks and Mystics.
Good luck to you in your play and hope in the future you are able to afford the DLC you seem to be having an issue with and seem to be personally concerned with, we understand that DLC can get expensive.
I have no problem with it. I understand the hardwork to develop these games and the costs related to hosting them on Steam. These endeavors are not free for gaming companies, despite your insistence that they offer DLC as such.
But it's objectively false to say CK3 has less content than CK2 when CK3 base game has more content than CK2 base game, even if CK2 + DLC is "better" than CK3 in its current state