Crusader Kings II Released!

[acefightr]

Looks like a fun game to try!

 

[obidamnkenobi]

I haven't looked into this one yet. Does it use that same tired game engine they've been kicking around from game to game for ages now?

Edit: Just looked it up. It does . Oh well I'm still going to take a serious look.

May I ask what you have against the Clausewitz engine? This one looks much better than in EU3, and it get's the job done perfectly fine IMO. I think it's looks really good actually. Interface is polished up really nicely over EU3 and it's the "Best map of Europe 11th-14th century graphics" I know of..

 

[Anteaus]

May I ask what you have against the Clausewitz engine? This one looks much better than in EU3, and it get's the job done perfectly fine IMO. I think it's looks really good actually. Interface is polished up really nicely over EU3 and it's the "Best map of Europe 11th-14th century graphics" I know of..

I don't have anything against the engine in and of itself. I think it has served its purpose. My big issue is that while the engine has somewhat been updated for high resolution displays, much of the style from game to game feels recycled from EU3 in regards to interface and overall texture quality/resolution, but much of that is more about design choice and not engine specific. It also doesn't always scale well in regards to zoom.

The gameplay is what is most important, so this isn't any sort of deal breaker. Also, I have seen gameplay videos of CKII and I'm impressed with how far they managed to bring the engine since it's inception, but I'm still of the opinion that it's tired.

 

[Jeffg010]

Just read up on this game sounds interesting.

 

[acheron]

I started playing this last night, and I was totally lost. Read through the manual a bit more today, and I think that will help.

Game sounds like it will be cool once I figure it out though. I always liked the family-tree parts of Total War games, e.g.

 

[Dankk]

I'm extremely tempted to buy this game. Someone else said it's a great beginner's title for those who are new to grand strategy. Does someone wanna convince me to buy it?

Also, it's $5 off on Amazon.

 

[obidamnkenobi]

I would agree that it's a bit easier/less complex than EU3 or HOI (I think. Haven't played HOI). I'm pretty new to these games too but I found it easier to manage than EU3, which has more direct government decisions to worry about etc. My unqualified opinion is that this is a great place to jump into grand strategy

If you start with a smaller holding you can focus on a relatively small scale and not worry about larger parts of the game, for the time being. Don't think you need to understand everything about the game before you can start though. Look at the tutorials, maybe some youtube clips and then start a game and mess around. When something comes up that I don't understand I alt-tab out and look it up.

That said, having started playing EU3 for the first time about 3 months ago (and only having played Civ before) I don't think it's a difficult as many think. Maybe it's because I'm not OCD about mastering everything and like learning this stuff, but I had more fun learning that game and exploring stuff than playing many other games where I understand everything that's going on.

The RPS review explains it much better than I can and might be able to convince you:
www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/02/23/wot-i-think-crusader-kings-ii/

 

[lupi]

While I don't object to their engine or system, I do think with the diversity and depth of subjects they cover, a turn based version of some of these games could be very interesting.

As far as waiting to buy, regardless of what they've said per expansion/dlc, you know at some point a compilation set will be put on sale.

 

[Baptismbyfire]

If you play the in-game tutorial, you can understand the basics, without reading the manual. You can learn more about the system as you play the game, and by hanging out at the Paradox forum few minutes each day.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

While I don't object to their engine or system, I do think with the diversity and depth of subjects they cover, a turn based version of some of these games could be very interesting.

As far as waiting to buy, regardless of what they've said per expansion/dlc, you know at some point a compilation set will be put on sale.

With the pacing of the games and the fine control they give you with pausing, the games basically are turn based.

 

[Sulaco]

While I don't object to their engine or system, I do think with the diversity and depth of subjects they cover, a turn based version of some of these games could be very interesting.

Already been done:

Pride of Nations

I have to say though, as someone who has owned it for awhile, the "real time" style of most Paradox games is simply vastly superior once you get the hang of it. It allows enormous flexibility, allowing you to speed through the monotonous parts, and slow the game down to a crawl for the greatest of strategic minutiae.

Plus, you can always just pause the game, issue orders while paused, then unpause and watch them be carried out. That is essentially a turn-based game there.

 

[Dankk]

Ok, I'm playing this right now. It's very intimidating at first, as I'm not very used to having so many things on-screen, but the tutorials do a great job at explaining everything. The further I get into the tutorials the more badass this game is... especially the combat, plot, and intrigue.

The soundtrack is also excellent. I take my hat off to whoever did the music.

 

[Bulldog13]

THIS. GAME. IS. AMAZING.

I played this game Friday night, all day Saturday, and Saturday night.

Hands down the greatest strategy game I have played since Civ franchise. I cannot more highly recommend it. I have 30 hours of play time on steam and still have no desire to stop playing. All that being said, it can be a little intimidating, but the tutorials help you enough to jump right in, if you start with a small nation with equal size or smaller nations around you (do not start as England, I recommend the 2 territory Ireland).

I have started the game about 5 times and feel like I have a fairly good grasp on the mechanics. Feel free to start bombing this thread with specific questions.

 

[obidamnkenobi]

THIS. GAME. IS. AMAZING.

I played this game Friday night, all day Saturday, and Saturday night.

Hands down the greatest strategy game I have played since Civ franchise. I cannot more highly recommend it. I have 30 hours of play time on steam and still have no desire to stop playing. All that being said, it can be a little intimidating, but the tutorials help you enough to jump right in, if you start with a small nation with equal size or smaller nations around you (do not start as England, I recommend the 2 territory Ireland).

I have started the game about 5 times and feel like I have a fairly good grasp on the mechanics. Feel free to start bombing this thread with specific questions.

arg, jealous! I haven't had time to touch any game since last thursday. Still only have 12 hours in CK2, even though it's the only game I've played since release. I need to retire already..

Anyway, what are some good, smaller nations to start out with? I hear Ireland or Scotland a lot, but what if I'm not interested in the british isles for some reason? (just played a 20+ hr game of EU3 as England..)

Leon/Northern Iberia has been mentioned, and looks interesting. Has the luxury of lots of muslims to the south to beat up on. I might try that next.

My current game is as the king (now queen) of Norway. Taking over pagan lands was pretty easy, and in general it was a good place to learn the game since it's pretty calm up there. Unfortunately, at one point I attacked the wrong Lapp chief and half the pagans to the east joined in an kicked my ass. I chickened out and reloaded The boy-king of Sweden to my south is also a tempting target, but currently has more troops than I do. I need to strengthen my realm before I take these guys on.

Is the general consensus that I should use my own holdings for gold income, and my vassals for raising levies? I have only managed to get minuscule amounts of tax income from my vassals, even though I raised it once. This is the part of the game in need to figure out better.

 

[Bulldog13]

arg, jealous! I haven't had time to touch any game since last thursday. Still only have 12 hours in CK2, even though it's the only game I've played since release. I need to retire already..

Anyway, what are some good, smaller nations to start out with? I hear Ireland or Scotland a lot, but what if I'm not interested in the british isles for some reason? (just played a 20+ hr game of EU3 as England..)

Leon/Northern Iberia has been mentioned, and looks interesting. Has the luxury of lots of muslims to the south to beat up on. I might try that next.

My current game is as the king (now queen) of Norway. Taking over pagan lands was pretty easy, and in general it was a good place to learn the game since it's pretty calm up there. Unfortunately, at one point I attacked the wrong Lapp chief and half the pagans to the east joined in an kicked my ass. I chickened out and reloaded The boy-king of Sweden to my south is also a tempting target, but currently has more troops than I do. I need to strengthen my realm before I take these guys on.

Is the general consensus that I should use my own holdings for gold income, and my vassals for raising levies? I have only managed to get minuscule amounts of tax income from my vassals, even though I raised it once. This is the part of the game in need to figure out better.

Taxes and levies are pretty complicated. The gist of it is you will get 100% taxes / levies from holdings you directly control and a percentage of what your vassals control relative to their opinion of you.

This page explains it pretty well.
http://crusaderkings-two.wikia.com/wiki/Army/Levy_(Guide)

I recommend cruising the CK2 forum @ paradox http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?551-Crusader-Kings-II

Specifically this thread too, http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?586872-Crusader-Kings-II-Quick-Answers

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

I recommend cruising the CK2 forum @ paradox http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?551-Crusader-Kings-II

I almost find half the fun of Paradox games is talking about them on their forums ^.^

 

[Anteaus]

Unfortunately that's a feature in Paradox games. If you purchase one at release, the game compels you to post go directly to the forums and find out if your experience is the same as every one else, and one you find affirmation...you pound your fist and lol at Paradox for once again coaxing you into buying their buggy release version! Fortunately Paradox usually makes good though. That being said, what is everyone's experience? Any bugs to worry about? I'll be picking this one up soon.

 

[Bulldog13]

Unfortunately that's a feature in Paradox games. If you purchase one at release, the game compels you to post go directly to the forums and find out if your experience is the same as every one else, and one you find affirmation...you pound your fist and lol at Paradox for once again coaxing you into buying their buggy release version! Fortunately Paradox usually makes good though. That being said, what is everyone's experience? Any bugs to worry about? I'll be picking this one up soon.

The only bug I encountered was visual glitches on my pc and laptop. After updating the drivers to the latest releases, that fixed the visual glitches. No bugs otherwise to report.

Though I agree with you, I generally never buy a paradox game until at least a month or 2 after release. Sometimes not until the first expansion pack.

CK2 works well though.

 

[Lotheron]

CK2 works great,

speaking of that, are we ready to put a ATPCG multiplayer game together?

 

[acheron]

Been trying this more, and I'm gradually figuring it out.

It's games like this that kind of make me wish I was single with no kid again.

 

[Dankk]

CK2 works great,

speaking of that, are we ready to put a ATPCG multiplayer game together?

I'd be down.

Not that I'm proficient at all with this game, but it'd be interesting to see what happens.

 

[obidamnkenobi]

I'd be down.

Not that I'm proficient at all with this game, but it'd be interesting to see what happens.

Wouldn't MP Ck2 take tens of hours or something? Depends on when you decide to stop I guess.. I can't even imagine how that would go, or work!

I couldn't set aside the time to try it (and I'm in no way good enough at the game anyway) but it would be awesome if some of you tried it and posted some thoughts here of how it went!

 

[Bulldog13]

I tried MP with CK2 with my brother sitting right next to me and it didn't work. Too much variance between who needs what amount of time. We pretty regularly play Civ mplayer games with 5+ people, so its not like we are new to mplayer epic strategy. I could see it working with 2 very proficient players with some sort of iron man timer baked in, but for regular play multiplayer now, I wouldn't bother. Just fire up 2 separate games and chat about what is happening.

I have been playing the Spanish nations lately, they are a lot of fun, have real twisted lines of succession, and have a bunch of Moors South of them when you want to expand your territory.

 

[Wardawg1001]

These games have always intrigued me. I got Europa Universalis: Rome a while back and really could not get in to it at all. There always seemed to be so much going on that I couldn't understand and/or get involved in. Time seemed to flow so fast and I felt like I was accomplishing little to nothing, and with no clear goals given I wasn't really sure what I was even supposed to be doing.

Regardless, what I've read in this forum and of some reviews of it have once again piqued my interest, but I'm leery of paying $40 for the game and just getting the same exact feeling. Now I understand that the vagueness of set goals in these types of games is intentional, but I'm wondering if this one has made it maybe a little more obvious. I'm not very imaginative and starting a game up that I'm going to spend dozens of hours on, with only my own personal made up goals to accomplish, doesn't really appeal to me. Is there any chance I'll like this game?

 

[lupi]

I tried MP with CK2 with my brother sitting right next to me and it didn't work. Too much variance between who needs what amount of time. We pretty regularly play Civ mplayer games with 5+ people, so its not like we are new to mplayer epic strategy. I could see it working with 2 very proficient players with some sort of iron man timer baked in, but for regular play multiplayer now, I wouldn't bother. Just fire up 2 separate games and chat about what is happening.

I have been playing the Spanish nations lately, they are a lot of fun, have real twisted lines of succession, and have a bunch of Moors South of them when you want to expand your territory.

the moops!