Crusader Kings 3

Been watching a few videos and just like with CK2, it does not seem a good idea to play the game at release. There's so many stupid little things not included in this and obvious features which will be sold as dlc again. Why is else wouldn't republics be playable now. How did we go backwards from being able to see at a glance who is willing to join your court to the current solution and why can't you just filter for it right away?
UI changes like that are just mind-boggling.

For anyone who's playing this who enjoys it but feels frustrated I recommend acquiring ck2 instead. It's basically the same game but it's put together in a way that makes more sense; has more depth and gives the player more agency. After playing a few hours of this I can't recommend it over the older version, so many things are just wrong about it. Instant raiding, no navy, garbage map modes, regen whole armies in a few months, the retardation of supply (easier to just ignore it or resummon the whole army where ever to gain it back), everyone's in the battlefield until you manually intervene, lack of agency in schemes, incredibly dumbed down building options, no duels, inability to see who would join your court at a glance, time locked succession laws etc etc.

It's a shell of a game that's still fun because it's Crusader Kings but there's no reason to play it over ck2 unless you have a hardon for the eugenics enhancements which are left more to chance in the older game.

Gask said:

For anyone who's playing this who enjoys it but feels frustrated I recommend acquiring ck2 instead. It's basically the same game but it's put together in a way that makes more sense; has more depth and gives the player more agency. After playing a few hours of this I can't recommend it over the older version, so many things are just wrong about it. Instant raiding, no navy, garbage map modes, regen whole armies in a few months, the retardation of supply (easier to just ignore it or resummon the whole army where ever to gain it back), everyone's in the battlefield until you manually intervene, lack of agency in schemes, incredibly dumbed down building options, no duels, inability to see who would join your court at a glance, time locked succession laws etc etc.

It's a shell of a game that's still fun because it's Crusader Kings but there's no reason to play it over ck2 unless you have a hardon for the eugenics enhancements which are left more to chance in the older game.

Click to expand...

I've been reading this thread going back and forth on whether or not to buy CK3. I checked out CK2 after reading your post and lol wtf is this?

Zaide said:

I've been reading this thread going back and forth on whether or not to buy CK3. I checked out CK2 after reading your post and lol wtf is this?

View attachment 302055

Click to expand...

Yeah welcome to Paradox. Most of the Imperial Collection is just cosmetic bullshit or music. The Royal Collection is the gameplay collection.

So this is my Sweden game. Best I've been able to do so far. Started in 867 AD. I reformed the viking religion, making my king the head of the faith so I can do holy wars. I also managed to switch to feudalism, so I can get decent buildings. For some reason, when I was tribal, my vassals gets running around conquering everything so now I have territory in France, Germany and GB.



The king you can see in the other screenshot is now dead. This is/was his son. King of Sweden and Norway. Dude is an absolute unit.

I formed an empire that encompassed all of Scandinavia and Scotland, and then my heir switched his culture to some Spanish bullshit and all of my vassals launched an independence war.

I lost everything. Twenty plus hours down the drain.

Thats why I am kind of holding off on starting another game. I feel like I just wasted my time the last 2 tries.

I had a nice little kingdom with my jogger king, having took over about 4 or 5 other territories, I think I had about 22 provinces or something. Put like 15 hours in........all destroyed by a homosexual uprising.

So if your lord commands an army during a crusade, and they set foot in the holy land, they get a Crusader buff.

But then if they are defeated and the army is destroyed, they lose the buff. I got a message that I, "Left the Field of Battle."

Bitch I was fighting the battle.

Wish I had known this when I had my Swedish Empire, but anyway I am going to be trying it out later.

Araysar said:

I got 1000 hours in EU4 and 1000 hours in Rome Imperator played

i liked fighting wars, painting maps, building armies, building buildings, jiggering around with econ and tech research options and completing the quests

i did not like trying to remember the name of every roman character because after a while they all sound the same, or micromanaging their feelings, ambitions, loyalty, marriages, etc.
i liked doing that for the ruler, but not for all the ancillary 100 characters, especially since they die after a few hours of game time.

i tried to get into the CK series a few times (I own CK2) but that was a long time ago, before i really got into EU4 and RI and figured out their mechanics

should I give the CK series a try? am I likely to enjoy this? or is it just mostly a game about court politics? a lot of people seem to love this game, but i cant seem to nail down that magic "IT" that makes people love this series

Click to expand...

It is an RPG except your character is the leader of a kingdom.

It is all about court politics and going on text adventures, with a light coating of economy and war to make you feel like its something deeper.

I am still playing and just had a game as the Byzantine Empire.

For four generations I fought against the Muslims until I took the Holy Land.

Then I invaded Italy. I healed the schism in the church and reunited the Roman Empire along the way.

Looking forward to royal court so you feel a bit more attached to your characters.

Well Royal Court came out and I spent most of the evening yesterday playing it. Pretty good!

Had one game as Haesteinn. Loaded up my Viking warriors on their ships and sailed to North Africa. Took over Morocco and made a kingdom. Muslims declared a Jihad on me so I converted to Muslim, then they couldn’t touch me. Now I’m in the processing of create a hybrid culture; Norse and Berbir (or whatever medieval Moroccans were).

Had another game playing as the Duke of Sudreyar, up in Scotland. He is a Norse character and I cannot remember his name but I conquered half of Scotland and merged my culture with the Gaels. Now I have bonuses to raiding and to pump up glory (from the Norse heritage) and bonuses to living and fighting in hills (from the Gaelic heritage).

so overall the culture mechanics definitely pull you deeper into the game.

on top of that there is the royal court and an inventory system. The royal court is neat because you get to see your character interacting with others, kind of giving you a sense of immersion beyond the “text adventure.”

The inventory system is very cool to me. Really makes it feel like an RPG. As King of Norse Morocco I built a court and had a wandering smith show up. He spent a year making a rare axe that my king now carries into battle.

Would recommend.