CKII is released.

[Undead Phoenix]

When you can march your entire army (7k levies) through hostile territory, recieving zero loses, then besiege their capital, recieving zero loses, something is very wrong with the attrition system.

 

[Notorious]

When you can march your entire army (7k levies) through hostile territory, recieving zero loses, then besiege their capital, recieving zero loses, something is very wrong with the attrition system.

Agreed. A lesson Paradox never learned.

Warfare is complex, but not impossible to simulate. In reality there is attrition in marching armies (Deserters, natural deaths, wounded etc) and while sieging. The main problem in this game lies with raising armies. While in reality it took months to years to form an efficient ground force in medieval times, all you do in CK 2 is to disband your depleted army, wait a view months and raise it again to transport it via fleets to it's designed destination in a matter of weeks.
It can not be that hard to make an realistic experience in that system. It's really dissatisfying playing this game, because armies are so replaceable completely contrary to real armies in that time period. (Or any time for that matter)

I wonder if they will ever manage to make the game more realistic. And ironically enough the Total War games managed to give a more real experience in that regard. Because you cannot as easily replace elite armies, hardened by combat, as in this game. (Ironically because Paradox often criticizes these games)

I hope they will implement a HoI like unit system into the ancient eras, it would improve their games a lot.

 

[The Brazilian Slaughter]

Its just me or Ortodoxy is boring compared to Catholicism?
Catholics get Crusades, Holy Orders, Popes and Antipopes.
The only thing Ortodoxes have going for them is that there's no need for a anti-pope because Bishoprics pay tax to their liege, not to the Patriarch.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Warfare is complex, but not impossible to simulate. In reality there is attrition in marching armies (Deserters, natural deaths, wounded etc) and while sieging. The main problem in this game lies with raising armies. While in reality it took months to years to form an efficient ground force in medieval times, all you do in CK 2 is to disband your depleted army, wait a view months and raise it again to transport it via fleets to it's designed destination in a matter of weeks.
It can not be that hard to make an realistic experience in that system. It's really dissatisfying playing this game, because armies are so replaceable completely contrary to real armies in that time period. (Or any time for that matter)

Actually, this is not something you want to do if you're not winning, because a few months of free reign for the enemy can be a bad thing for you.

 

[Raghar]

When you can march your entire army (7k levies) through hostile territory, recieving zero loses, then besiege their capital, recieving zero loses, something is very wrong with the attrition system.

Russians in S. Ossetia had half casaulties from traffic problems. So some more detailed simulation would be much better.

 

[Cassidy]

What actually would improve CKII warfare was if there was a single POP stat for each province, simpler than Vicky 2 without unneeded divisions between burghers, peasants, nobles, clergy etc but still relevant when determining the maximum size of levies that could be raised. On the other hand the improvements would only increase the % of this POP you can raise as levy and of the type of soldier it raises instead of giving absolute bonuses as in "building x gives 100 more archers" etc.

 

[Tigranes]

My Castille game is up to ~1200 and the only times I've seen attrition anywhere were when +10k stacks were marching across unfavourable conditions. I think it's too little a factor, and combined with slow technological process, it has been pretty rare to see armies with smaller numbers win. Another factor; the 'automatic' assignment of generals means when you raise some levies and combine them, you'll usually end up with at least 10 marshal on each flank, so you don't get EU situations of 7-star generals versus idiot commanders anywhere as often. In general, the complexities of different types of troops, etc. have insufficient impact for me to actually consider; wars are pretty much get as many troops as you can, punch the enemy in the face, then decide whether to assault or siege. At least enemies now get into big stacks instead of requiring endless chases.

I'm not sure if it's just one game or a general thing (always hard to tell with Pdox), but I'm living in a world of blobs at the moment. The French are also kings of Africa, the Byzantine Empire has half of the Middle East, HRE has gobbled up Poland, and none of them show any real signs of disintegration. My own Iberian empire is pretty difficult to keep together, with Dukes constantly scheming and every succession requiring bags of gold and several assassinations to prevent rebellion (and to maintain Medium Crown Authority to prevent superdukes). Currently had an Emperor die when the heir was a daughter married off to the Duke of Moravia, proceeded to assassinate him and remarry matrilineally to a random courtier with good stats. Now just have to birth a child, and somehow take the three sons from the first marriage out of the running. May have to save up to create some new bishoprics.

 

[scratchmonkey]

Only the HRE is holding together in my game, they're doing it really well though, they have all of their original territory, most of Italy, all of Sweden, some of Norway, a big chunk of France and a strip of the Baltics. France and the Bizzes are breaking apart, Spain is patchwork Islam, and there's never really been an England in my game, Wales actually holds the most territory with constant revolts by Northumberland, Leceister, etc. I'm the King of Ireland, although probably for not that long, a series of unlucky colds and presumed assassinations has created a situation where my teenage queen is without an heir and is facing a direct claim on the crown from Scotland and the Earl of Kildare has just broken away with most of the southwest.

 

[treave]

Huh, got the game, and the galleys are pissing me off. Why can't I construct new galleys? It doesn't make sense that I can afford to hire mercenaries but can't build or hire boats to ferry them in. Also, the Mongols seem bugged. They arrive and stand there doing nothing. Just standing around in Balkh with their doomstacks.

 

[Tigranes]

Because people didn't go around offering galleys to rent for cash? I mean, you could argue for seizure of merchant ships, etc., but that was not common and rather unreliable.

But you are very rarely in situations where your provinces can't raise enough galleys to transport all the troops you can levy, unless you have like one coastal province or something like that (in which case, the difficulty is reasonable).

 

[treave]

How about building them if there's a need, if I have a dock? I wouldn't mind the upkeep, so long as they did have the option for it if needed. Or did William the Bastard just hang around for a decade or two so that he could get enough ships to ferry his troops? No, he managed to assemble more than 500 ships in less than a year, and he didn't rule all of France either.

Having an option to upgrade the ports/docks, as I do every other aspect, and having that improve trade income and number of galleys, would be acceptable.

 

[The Brazilian Slaughter]

Having an option to upgrade the ports/docks, as I do every other aspect, and having that improve trade income and number of galleys, would be acceptable.

Galley number is actually affected by buildings in Coastal Cities, you can build the necessary buildings there, although the AI also does it by itself.

 

[treave]

Wait, you don't need to own that particular demesne to assume direct control of building construction? Goddamn. That's a few hundred years wasted there. Thanks for the tip.

 

[ironyuri]

Look, gentlemen! The creature is trying to think!

 

[treave]

Ook.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Hoo.

 

[Malakal]

There is a one mercenary band that has some galleys, Victual Brothers I think?

But yes, realms with small coasts like Poland have issues with sea transportation.

 

[Peter]

Noob question time, since this is my first Paradox game. I started playing as the Count of Desmond in Ireland and took 3 other territories before my first guy died. When he did, I lost 2 of my territories to one of his sons. Any way to avoid this? What did I do wrong? How can I check who will inherit which counties and stuff?

 

[Malakal]

Noob question time, since this is my first Paradox game. I started playing as the Count of Desmond in Ireland and took 3 other territories before my first guy died. When he did, I lost 2 of my territories to one of his sons. Any way to avoid this? What did I do wrong? How can I check who will inherit which counties and stuff?

In the "laws" page you have succession laws which decide which of your successors gets what. You obviously had gavelkind which spreads your titles among your successors, if those titles are of equal value (counts, dukes, kings) you play as your main successor and the rest become independent. To avoid that either get a "main" title that is higher than your other titles (king or duke) so after your death your other brothers become your vassals or simply change succession laws. You can always change to elective and that doesnt spread your titles but carries a risk that someone not from your dynasty could succeed you.

In laws page you also have other laws, deciding taxes and levies. Read popups there, those are important.

 

[Peter]

Thanks. I guess I didn't really pay as much attention to the laws tab as I did to other stuff.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Also, if you intend to enjoy the happy stability of primogeniture in your kingdom, you MUST do it before you become a King. If you're a King, you need a certain amount of Crown Authority, which will take a while to accumulate. Dukes and Counts don't, so it's a good idea to screw over your horde of sons while you still can.

 

[Renegen]

Dukes and Counts can only become a primogeniture if the empire or kingdom they live under has high crown authority, so your advice is kind of situational.

 

[Monocause]

ProTip: If you get to be a king get to medium crown authority ASAP. You don't want your vassals fighting among each other and they sure will. First of all they expend resources on themselves leaving you more vulnerable to foreign aggresion, second - it can thin the landholding lines of your dynasty (since I assume you were clever enough to keep the whole demesne - all the counties and duchies under control of your dynasty), third: sooner or later one of your vassals will consolidate enough power to become a threat to your position. You know what to do.

 

[Malakal]

On the other hand as long as your vassals are killing each other they wont be a threat to you. Just make sure they are more or less equally strong and imprison/assassinate stronger ones from time to time thinning their possessions.

Low crown authority also means way bigger relations with your vassals - they dont get penalties for wanting counties in their duchies, they can simply take them. This in turn gives bigger taxes and levies.

From my experience low crown authority means stability. I had decades of peace under different rulers unlike constant rebellions almost assured when new king succeeds in a more centralized kingdoms. Makes vassals busy.

 

[Hoaxmetal]

ProTip: Set alarm clock or something if you have stuff cooking while playing CK2. 10 eggs that kind of exploded in the kitchen taught me that.