Why isn't this game doing better?

[Thunder Bagel]

When I saw previews for this game, I thought it would quickly find its place within the grand strategy genre. The map looks gorgeous and the sandbox-y gamestyle is definitely unique. I feel like it just didn't catch on with players and that's a shame because this game has a lot going for it

[FentanylWallaby]

Agree. Just picked this up.
It really is something but it seems overlooked.
Maybe the devs aren't marketing it enough?

[Rex]

There's a lot of confusion about the quality of multiplayer, in my opinion. I just bought the game last night. I think it's fantastic. With some QoL improvements, it could be the best in the genre.

[nobodys home]

This is my first RTS with grand scale army combat, so i have nothing to compare it to. Maybe the more seasoned veterans of the genre see it as too simplistic??? It seems like a great game, maybe a few things to improve, but I thoroughly enjoy it. I could easily see myself spending thousands of hours on it, which is common for games I like.

[Teufels Beitrag]

I play it because it gives me nostalgia and it is a game which i can play on a laptob on vacation. With a decent rig i would rather play games with more depth. The combat is the same as in Part one, as are most of the units and the map was expanded, but still is to tiny for my taste and the cities are mostly in the wrong locations.

[Heraclius Caesar]

It's a good game and a pretty solid successor to the first Knights of Honor. I've been meaning to install it on my Deck and start playing it again on there, will have to see how that goes.

As to why it's not doing better and doesn't have many thousands of players on at any given time, essentially the game is what one might call a "poor mans" or "dollar store version" Crusader Kings with hints of Total War & Age of Empires. It takes concepts from those games and puts them together which is a great idea but in the end was perhaps not executed as well as it could have been.

Hopefully the lukewarm reception of KoH 2 won't discourage or dissuade the developers/publishers from working on a KoH 3, which if done right could take the series to the next level and put it on par with the big names in the historical strategy genre.

[VanCro7]

For me it seems like KoH 1,5 - it has improvements but all too little than what I hoped for, especially considering we waited like 2 years for it. I think it is the delay killed that hype for many players. And then the not too well reviews when it was released kind of made it worse

[The Dess 2023 GOTY Edition]

Game is ok but incomplete imho. There are so many things they can do to EXPAND on the original concepts from the first game but somehow the devs seem happy to hold on to mechanics of the first game without improving it. Personally I refuse to play the game until it changes drastically, especially when the game starts respecting my time.

[VanCro7]

Originally posted by The Dess 2023 GOTY Edition:

Game is ok but incomplete imho. There are so many things they can do to EXPAND on the original concepts from the first game but somehow the devs seem happy to hold on to mechanics of the first game without improving it. Personally I refuse to play the game until it changes drastically, especially when the game starts respecting my time.

Yes it does feel they kept the things that could have been improved but some good things they could have kept (colours of the political map of the first game was way better, and even some borders too) they changed.

[CaliphAragorn]

Originally posted by VanCro7:

Originally posted by The Dess 2023 GOTY Edition:

Game is ok but incomplete imho. There are so many things they can do to EXPAND on the original concepts from the first game but somehow the devs seem happy to hold on to mechanics of the first game without improving it. Personally I refuse to play the game until it changes drastically, especially when the game starts respecting my time.

Yes it does feel they kept the things that could have been improved but some good things they could have kept (colours of the political map of the first game was way better, and even some borders too) they changed.

Maybe the former developers of the first game wanted to play it safe since this is their first project and their company is still young.

[VanCro7]

Originally posted by CaliphAragorn:

Originally posted by VanCro7:

Yes it does feel they kept the things that could have been improved but some good things they could have kept (colours of the political map of the first game was way better, and even some borders too) they changed.

Maybe the former developers of the first game wanted to play it safe since this is their first project and their company is still young.

Yes it could be but I still cant understand some things they did

[Canute VII]

Originally posted by AngeryKangaroo:

It really is something but it seems overlooked.
Maybe the devs aren't marketing it enough?

I can't really agref tbh. The game has already >3000 reviews, that's very far from "overlooked". If you want to see a overlooked strategy gem search for "Hegemony 3" or even "Hegrmony Gold", those are overlooked.

[Kahl der Große]

Biggest two problems are 1) poor AI and 2) buggy multiplayer
AI wastes time sieging castles, doesn't develop cities/goods properly, sends weak marshals to die in battles all the time, etc.
Multiplayer is plagued with disconnects, so the high-level players don't stick around since it's impossible to finish a game.

[retrobarbaari]

Why I didn't buy the game, is how much the court members matter. For example the governor (or what ever it is called) who multiplies the economic production of a province. That is simply so unrealistic, I don't want anything to do with the game.
And the number of armies limited to your few marshals (or what ever they were called). Which is again unrealistic.
Your freedom to play is like artificially blocked with these mechanics.

Also, naturally I would be interested to start my first game in my real homeland, which is Finland. it is cut half in north-south direction because map ends, that sucks. And in addition the western half belonging to Sweden. Europa Universalis is more interesting to me, as I can also edit there other kingdoms/tribes.

[Doe_36]

I'm not playing because inflation is unrealistic and stupidly wrong. In the game, hoarding Money and not spending it causes inflation.

[CaliphAragorn]

Originally posted by Homer Shrimpson:

I'm not playing because inflation is unrealistic and stupidly wrong. In the game, hoarding Money and not spending it causes inflation.

Hoarding money should increase the probability for embezzlement, but the devs figured that having merchants as members of the Royal court is better than having a master of treasury who would do the work of merchants while simultaneously managing wages, buildings expenses, compensation for the families of dead soldiers, feasts and hunting trips expenses, coins production, commerce, and make economy more lively and exciting.