|
What happens if the Seljuk Turks conquer Byzantium in CK? I've never seen it happen before. Do they become the Ottomans?
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2011 04:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 20:56 |
|
|
Am I right in thinking the Seljuks represent the nascent Ottoman Empire? I remember figuring it out a long time ago, but I'm not sure where I got that idea.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2011 06:18
|
|
|
Shouldn't Samogitia be a bear?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2011 04:32
|
|
|
Where did the Timurids come from?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2011 05:27
|
|
|
Did real countries worry about this sort of stupid poo poo?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2011 07:26
|
|
|
I vote for B. Heathens would work harder in the gold mines if we allowed them rights.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2011 22:30
|
|
|
Y'all ever read Birds Without Wings? That's a good book. Y'all should vote B so we can be more like that book. It's all about how well Christians and Muslims get along together in an integrated village under the Ottomans. Another good argument is that these LPs always turn their countries into fascist, conservative states. Let's not go that path. Let's be the heirs to the tolerance of the Osmalis, and we will be stronger for it!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2011 06:06
|
|
|
It doesn't seem like Azerbaijan is going bankrupt, the main limitation in the war against Armenia seemed to be manpower rather than funds.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2011 01:28
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:Ha ha. Lesbians. Get it? Like girls who like girls. Whoa! That makes me laugh AND makes me feel tense in a way that vaguely embarrasses me!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2011 19:11
|
|
|
Raserys posted:Wiz, out of curiosity, if this and the Hohenzollern LP were you playing with limitations on yourself, what happens when you go out with the active intent to conquer the world? It isn't particularly hard to break the game and conquer the world. Once you get past a certain point, EU3 is incredibly easy, and the worst part is simply micromanaging all the armies and navies and poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2011 23:53
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:I wish Crusader Kings was on Steam, I kinda want to play it myself. I really love its focus on playing a family that rules a nation/vassals as opposed to you being the nation itself. Then again I worry I wouldn't have the patience for it or it wouldn't be nearly as exciting as Wiz's excellent descriptions and narrative. It is a strange game. Playing it as a game is almost invariably not fun at all - you can quickly get to the point where you are impossible to beat, and making sure an idiot doesn't inherit isn't THAT hard. Vassals are annoying to control sometimes, but you can grow enough kids in a couple generations to get the bloodline bonus for almost everyone. Playing low on the totem pole can also be ridiculously boring if you again treat the game as just a game. But if you start to really pay attention to your family tree, noting rivalries and making sub-optimal choices based on characters' personalities, then the game really starts to shine and you start to get a really interesting and at times hilarious or heartbreaking narrative. For example, one of my favorite things is to play as a count in the service of a duke of some greater nation, like France or Poland. This allows you to keep a smaller court and concentrate on family dynamics. I remember one particularly cruel and zealous count who was vicious to his court but weak-willed and doting when it came to his only son and heir. In an ironic twist of fate, he caught his son in bed with another boy. In a rage, he disinherited him and cast him out of the court. A few years later, he had another boy, and the EXACT SAME THING HAPPENED. One of the rarest events had happened to the same count. He went insane from the stress almost immediately after and killed himself, after which a cousin inherited. I got a pretty big kick out of that. Sometimes you have to stretch, but you can almost always squeeze a coherent narrative out of the game, and it often does the storytelling itself. It's probably the PC game I've put the most hours into total, aside from maybe Civ 4 or EU3. I am very anxious to see how they do with CK2. If they forget this strong core, it could be awful, but if they don't mess with this basic narrative creation element and just improve on all the janky mechanics and make it a fun game as well as story, then it could be the last computer game I ever need.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2011 05:19
|
|
|
That's how I play games too. Form over function. You'd probably love Crusader Kings. Another game that I got into with the same fervor was King of Dragon Pass, but that has less replayability since the story is always the same. It is still very fun.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2011 05:39
|
|
|
Pakled posted:I always make decisions in CK the same way my ruler would based on his personality traits. If he's cold and cruel, he'd beat the poo poo out of his kids when they did something wrong (or perhaps have a servant do so). A wise and just king would try to instill those virtues in his children. A lazy, arbitrary king basically ignores his realm, and he only rides out to battle when his kingdom is in a state of total upheaval with vassals breaking away and poo poo (basically when he has no other choice). The best thing about being a vassal is being able to send your king to war for free. Battlefield events are fun and dangerous!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2011 07:40
|
|
|
National Bank would not have helped at all, you people don't know poo poo about this game.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2011 21:34
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:Can't we make this king a general in charge of a 1000 man army unit to speed up his demise? That seems fairly out of character for Arim.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2011 22:30
|
|
|
 for B
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2011 01:15
|
|
|
Apparently y'all vastly underestimate the power of leader shock. Like I said earlier - you people don't know poo poo about this game. Ah well.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2011 01:33
|
|
|
MadPierrot posted:I actually think B is the best choice but there's no way in hell it will win. It will if we believe! C'mon everyone! Clap your hands if you believe in leadership!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2011 01:35
|
|
|
I wonder how many people voting for a larger army were the ones crying about our financial situation earlier? You realize that a larger army means vastly larger upkeep, right?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2011 01:38
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:Wiz said that he made seiging more difficult, didn't he? Maybe engineers would be the most useful. You can't assault, making seiging less useful in general. Everyone voting for C should switch their vote to B.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2011 07:19
|
|
|
rudatron posted:On the contrary, seiging is the only way to militarily take provinces, and C speeds that up. You can't take provinces if you don't defeat the armies.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2011 07:53
|
|
|
I thought we were supposed to be doing a non-standard LP here, anyway? Grand Army is bog-loving standard.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2011 08:22
|
|
|
Kavak posted:All we have available right now are military ideas. Besides, ideals need to take a backseat to practicality once in a while. Battlefield Commissions (B) is still a military choice, and is extremely practical, but is more interesting by far than Grand Army. It improves our generals' Shock value, which is very powerful. If B and C combine on B, we can beat that boring-rear end A vote. Which has been chosen in undoubtedly every Paradox LP since the beginning of time.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2011 08:32
|
|
|
LordBaxter posted:It's probably been chosen in every LP because the idea of having a grand army is rad as hell. It is much radder to have badass generals with awesome lightning powers. This is indisputable.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2011 08:34
|
|
|
uPen posted:It probably hasn't since vanilla battlefield commissions is pretty useless. So far it looks like Wiz has done a great job shoring up the weaker ideas and nerfing some of the 'must have' ones. That's what I said? It's a very powerful idea now.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2011 08:39
|
|
|
Pakled posted:10% Land Tech isn't that great, since we already get 25% land tech from western arms trade and another 25% to ALL tech cost from that other modifier. We have decent manpower and army size. Army leadership will prove the bottleneck, when our huge armies have no decent generals we WILL lose wars. +1 Shock to every general is a massive bonus, one that doesn't require any upkeep, and good military tradition means we'll also get great military advisers. Rarity posted:I too care deeply about a game on the internet. I must make sure everyone knows. But how...? Make a huge post like the guy above you? I dunno man, I don't really understand that mindset.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2011 09:10
|
|
|
Rarity posted:Nah, I think I'm gonna settle for whining like a manbaby when things don't go my way. Knock yourself out bro-ny
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2011 09:12
|
|
|
It makes sense that a culture would tolerate heathens but not heretics. Heathens are different people, and could reasonably be seen as ignorant rather than actively evil. The same could not be said for heretics, even when they are different peoples, they have seen and rejected the true faith for a slightly different, evil variant.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2011 21:25
|
|
|
Government: A (Administrative Monarchy) Idea: A (Ecumenism) Nothing much to say about it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2011 04:07
|
|
|
The best thing about Finland in the Hohenverse was the choice to create a Finno-Russian Empire.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2011 18:42
|
|
|
That's US! WE are the regency council!!!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2011 04:04
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2011 11:41
|
|
|
What is Russia's current mission?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2011 12:21
|
|
|
God dammit.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2011 12:38
|
|
|
Yeah, in gameplay terms, A is probably the least helpful. But whatever you know, this is what comes of lots of people who have no idea how to play this game voting.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2011 13:45
|
|
|
Pakled posted:
That is an odd thing to dislike. How else would you prefer people justify their vote? None of the choices are based on current events - a military choice would be available if so, because Russia gaining an Attack Azerbaijan mission is a huge red flag. But if it is gamey to vote based on a theme that has emerged for this particular LP - multiculturalism, liberalism, whatever - then it is doubly so to vote based on the mission that Russia has drawn. You should vote for what you feel is best. Voting based on spite makes this feel like a real-life American election.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2011 14:00
|
|
|
Nepalese Robot posted:Do you have autism or something Do you?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2011 14:31
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:You can choose your vote based on RP or in-character reasons other than tolerance, you know. The votes aren't just for national ideas, they're for how Wiz continues to play the game. The vote for the cabinet is a vote for Azeri 'soft power' and an attempt to obtain hegemony in the region through diplomacy, as well as maintaining a large coalition of allies so that we don't get killed all the time. The people who are choosing A seem to largely justify it in response to Russian aggression.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2011 15:13
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:
Good lord, will you please shut up? You're the most annoying poster in these threads by far, and you seem to revel in it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2011 19:53
|
|
Whining about me whining is even more pointless and tiresome than the original whining
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 20:56 |
|
|
Am I that annoying? I apologize, if so. If it is just my avatar, there is nothing I can do about it, but if it is otherwise...well, I will try to tone my posts down a bit. I've looked over my posts in the thread and can't find anything particularly objectionable, at least any more so than what that idiot has posted, but I'll stop if I'm overruled.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2011 20:12
|
|