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
3 
Report this post
Please remove this. This is a relic of the past and you should not be able to assasinate people with money.
(forgot about that)
2. Where are their stats coming from, base stats or traits?
3. Could you elaborate on who you're playing as (i.e. realm, culture, government)? Different cultures and governments have widely varying cbs and playstyles. In general though, vassals are meant to try to overthrow their liege and seize the throne for themselves, if you want to accrue more power.
4. Could you elaborate on the "huge difference in troops"? I don't think the mod is actually very different from vanilla in this regard.
5. While we do acknowledge that this can improve gameplay, we don't want to make troop movements unrealistically slow. The provinces on the map are quite small and it really shouldn't take more than a day or two for an army to march from one province to the next.
6. Could you specify which events exactly are broken?
7. (Low) Tribal realms that are any bigger than maybe a duchy or so are intended to collapse upon succession, unless your heir is quite strong; this is the tradeoff for the powerful Tribal cbs. Playing as a Tribal is intended to be harsh and volatile; if you're looking for something more stable, play as or reform into High Tribal or a feudal government.
8. We are looking into nerfing feudal incomes, which should resolve the problem of raiding giving too much gold.
9. Isn't there already a game rule to disable it (which is activated by default), or does the game rule not actually work?
If you're interested in helping out more closely with the mod, we'd be more than happy to have you; just send me a message and I'll set you up.
2. both. Base stats are a bit to high. But main problem here results from traits that are insane. Good example is Arthur that gets total of 29 Martial from traits. While I know that this is intended its not that hard to breed superwarriors that totally wreck every ai ingame. Winning 300 Men vs 4000
3. , 4. and 7. Basically every non King. You have numbers of less than 200 Troops as for example a pictish King. This would not be a problem if you could attack and take over other same tier nobles. But you cant since its either a 5k prestige cb or in the same realm as you are.
Reducing the amount of levis is not a good way todo things. In my opinion you have to ask yourself is a game mechanic fun? Loosing your complete realm because you don't have prestige on your heir is a very sad thing because you can't do anything to prevent this really. Its not like you could inherit some prestige of your father. Like it was IRL.
5. No... This is absolutely gamebreaking. You cant even manage to control your units on speed 1. Open up a multiplayer and do a 1v1 fight Durmonia vs Anglia and you will exactly know what I mean. Also the argument that the provinces are small is not really an argument. We are talking about crossing England with a 10k army in less than a week. This is considered that age only possible with magic... So this has no arguments on gameplay or on logic.
6. Alot of the New realm <NAME HERE> was formed. Events seem to pop up multiple times.
8. Feudal income is in fact very high but I think its more the event that pops up when your lord leads a siege. While I know the reason behind this I still believe this events should be removed in total. Basically you loot a second time up tp 70 gold extra. Giving up to 150 gold per holding... There is already a ck2 mechanic that does exactly the same. When you conquer a holding you loot money from its holder. Dont add another gold gaining mechanic ontop.
9. Yes seems to be fixed now for me. I could swear there was no on plot only option.
2. Arthur is an exception that is meant to have very high prestige. I suppose some of those traits could be nerfed though.
3/4/7. Checking out a Pictish king right now, I definitely have more than 200 levies. The average Pictish province has at least twice that much. I agree that there is a definite lack of inter-realm tribal levies at the moment, but we've had trouble trying to balance that against the lack of control over your vassals as a tribal, and the fixed nature of the tier system in CK2 (e.g. there isn't really a way to subjguate other rulers if you're a count under a duke).
You're not meant to be able to maintain a large realm as a tribal - there's lots of cases where a tribal realm just completely fell apart when the ruler died, it's already a concession that your vassals don't have an option to just straight up ignore your heir (which I agree would be even more frustrating). If you don't want to see your realm collapse when your great king dies, keep your realm small and use tributaries or something instead, or land your heir to let him build up some prestige. Personally, I've played a number of tribal games and I do quite like seeing the chaos of a large realm collapse - you just have to hedge this into your expectations.
5. Sorry, I don't play multiplayer (and I can't say that the mod is particularly designed for it in mind either). But I usually play wars on speed 2 and I've never really had problems maneuvaring my armies.
6. I don't think we have any events that are titled "new realm". Are you talking about the events for new de jure titles, e.g. "Eorldom of Lindesege" and "Eorldom of Cilternsaete"?
8. We'll take a look at it.
2. Sure he is but I can easily breed 40 martial warriors from scratch
3/4/7 It is in the beginning but once your -80% of your lacking prestige "buff" strieks you go down by alot...
You say you are not emant to maintain a large realm. This is nonsens becasue you need a large realm to stay in the game and to have a real chanche to cuceed in reforming your nation. Basically what you have done is condemm everey minor to sit around and do nothing.
6. Thats becasue the ai is really really bad. Its just gamebreaking to be able to outmanouvre every enemy unit before they can even react.
6. Exactly.
2. What traits are you getting to 40 martial with? That does sound a bit much.
3/4/7. Well, if you're getting an -80% penalty, then that's supposed to be a sign that your realm is seriously overextended. Not sure what you mean by "staying in the game"; low tribals cbs are specifically designed so that getting game-overed is fairly difficult, with the intention being that if you're weak, you'll just be vassalized by your stronger neighbour until that king dies and the whole realm blows up. If you say that it condemns them to "sit around and do nothing", at least in the long run, then yes, Low Tribals are simply not meant to be able to build a sustainable realm beyond a duchy or so; it's all really just a prelude to when you're able to reform the High Tribal, which is when you'll really be able to build up, or at least reasonably hold onto your gains. They're simply not supposed to be able to compete with other realms in the long run; a powerful ruler will be able to rack up the prestige and pose a major threat to everyone else in the region, but once he dies the entire thing folds like a house of cards just as fast. If you don't like the idea of your realm rising up and falling to pieces, then playing Low Tribals just isn't for you.
5. I don't suppose it would help if I said that historically in this era, armies could basically always avoid battles if they really wanted to? :p
More seriously, how exactly is it gamebreaking?
6. Those events signal changes to the de jure map, and (for the most part) are triggered by the formation of their respective titles. Are you sure that it's the same events happening without any actual de jure change? If so, could you upload a save where this happens?
The general philosophy of the mod is that it's meant to be more railroaded/less freeform and closer to a historical simulator than vanilla. And I'm afraid that the mod will always be made with singleplayer in mind first and foremost; certainly we wouldn't mind make improvements that are primarily for multiplayer, but not at the cost of the single player experience or historicity (although I would also add that I don't think that there would be much conflict realistically).
2. Brilliant trategist gives +9 Formitable fighter does also give quite some. Inculding the more genetic traits. In combination with artefacts... There are several ways.
3/4/7 So you condem half the map to not beeing played for at least 50 years?
5. Ck2 has a farily good tactical system where you can use rivers hills etc to fight your opponent. Espacially in mps this is alot of fun. You can easily cross a river ebfore an opopnent can even react. Also you are faster than units on retreat which makes it so you can be in their "save spot" before they arrive and instantly hit them again...
6. I can try. Its often when these get annexed and get free later again. I guess^^
I also dont think there would be a conflict with realism and historicality.
2. That's the vanilla value for Brilliant Strategist, and artifacts are more or less the same as well. I suppose the Fighter traits could be nerfed a little bit, now that combat rating is a thing.
3/4/7. Sure it's playable, just not in the way that you'd prefer it to be. Not everything has to be all rise and no fall - in fact, I would ask what the fun and challenge with that is?
How would you suggeat the system be changed to make it more "playable" while still being historical?
5. None of that sounds gamebreaking to me. Positioning your armies in a good defensive position is still perfectly possible.
6. If that's the case, that's completely WAD. All events involving de jure changes are always signalled to the player.
I'd like to see a tactics system, simmilar to the dueling mechanic, for battles where the player is able to order their forces around and depending on the order, the army might gain some bonus or another. So for example, one might order their spear/sword infantry in their center to perform a shield wall maneuver, or they might want their heavy cavalry divisions on their left/right flank to perform a charge, or their archers to loose a volley of arrows. Some pre battle preparation could be interesting as well, for exaple laying down traps on the battlefield, sending out skirmishers or preparing ambushes or taking up particular positions that depend on the terrain. All of these things could be inffluenced by your leaders abilties, troop types and numbers and could have adverse effects not only on your enemy but your leaders themselves and your own army.
Well my idea was that it wouldn't happen in every battle (probably should have mentioned that in my OP haha) all the time, perhaps it could be focused specifically on your leader/character, with a small section of soldiers under their command on the battlefield.
https://imgur.com/gallery/VxFrGbC