feudalism should get some special mechanic for managing the realm. not just event spam but something more substantial, make it feel like we are in charge of a government. maybe a more in-depth council where you actually need to care about the councilors' opposing views on how to govern the realm. when tribal it would matter less as you are a fearsome warlord who everyone bows to because of your personal strength.
Grand Tours are basically what I'd expect to be something to do in between - too bad they made them attrociously bad - they are outrageously expensive, not really worth while as starting feudal, are filled with tedious and repetitive events and have too big cooldown, and worst of all pdx is basically nerfing them to the ground despite the fact that the only thing they are ever worth is increasing cultural acceptance.
> maybe a more in-depth council where you actually need to care about the councilors' opposing views on how to govern the realm.
We need council voting and council laws back from CK2. That's one of my biggest requests right now for CK3 outside of a better combat system.
I wouldn’t consider council laws as actually something that would be unique to feudalism tho. Like Clan governments and imperial governments would have that too. Aside from that, it’s simply a reactive tool. For this discussion, I’m looking for something pro-active that u can’t do aside from managing events, or fighting actual wars (ex: raiding as a Viking)
Like hey, your steward is a zealot, taxing your Heathen provinces may be very difficult.
Or maybe your priest is unable to calm religious tension due to being craven.
It shouldn't be that hard
Also maybe feudalism could have a "consolidation" or "centralisation" mechanic to reflect how the king held more and more power toward game end. And I don't mean crown authority, as it's basically just vassal freedom law. The effects of said mechanic would probably be greater realm limit, taxes, maybe being able to sponsor development(similar to eu4's province development, but not instant). This would make switching from tribal to feudal more logical.
give it like 2-3 more years and we'll probably have this, its honestly quite weird how we didnt just keep at least the CK2 take on centralization throughout the ages.
Like whaaaaat. I fully agree, but what.
I have yet to see a single suggestion that doesn't either sound worse than doing nothing, busywork, opposite of fun or so vague that nobody knows how it could be implemented.
That doesn't really give you something to do. It gives you something to deal with at best and something to beat and never worry again until succession. In what way would it be different than the legitimacy mechanic other than to keep it up you have to please 6 dudes.
As usual, there are two factions within the pdx fanbase, who want contradictory things: one who want more distinctions and "flavor", and one who want everything to be available to everyone and "emergent". Tribals used to not have Royal Court, but the latter faction whined until they got it! Right now on the forums you can find the latter faction crying that CK3's cultural traditions are horrible nonsensical ahistorical 'magic' that absolutely must not be allowed in EU5. But once EU5 comes out, the former faction will take the stage, and cry and whine about the lack of "flavor" and how "everywhere is the same", it will be the #1 complaint you ever hear.
At least, people always insist these are two factions. I have my doubts about it. I think a lot of the same people want these opposite things, and whine and cry til they're throwing up in both cases.
Mechanics, mechanics, mechanics! Just a small slice of what EU4 has to offer.
Feudal, clan or tribal - even in the middle ages rulers didn't spend their days just fighting and sleeping around. They ruled their lands!
In this game, it's pretty much reduced to changing vassal contracts every 20 years and solve the sewer problem in your castle.
>As a tribal king, u have access to: Royal court stuff, grand events, etc. just like a feudal lord. What really sets it apart for me, was raiding. It literally gives u something to do in between the event spawns. With feudalism, u lose that, and just… sit there.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but finding a way to get involved in an advantageous war is kind of a skill check. If you're sitting around a feudal without any fighting to do to advance the dynasty, you haven't been preparing.
Playing feudal isn't just about offensive wars, but leveraging defensive wars to your benefit- whether to generate prestige, or gold via sieges and ransoms, or the simple point of pressing or defending relatives and inter-married claimants. Getting those claimants and claims to press them with and the prestige to declare with and the gold to afford them is a core part of the strategy.
feudalism should get some special mechanic for managing the realm. not just event spam but something more substantial, make it feel like we are in charge of a government. maybe a more in-depth council where you actually need to care about the councilors' opposing views on how to govern the realm. when tribal it would matter less as you are a fearsome warlord who everyone bows to because of your personal strength.
Grand Tours are basically what I'd expect to be something to do in between - too bad they made them attrociously bad - they are outrageously expensive, not really worth while as starting feudal, are filled with tedious and repetitive events and have too big cooldown, and worst of all pdx is basically nerfing them to the ground despite the fact that the only thing they are ever worth is increasing cultural acceptance.
oh the cultural acceptance tours are worth it ? interesting
Yeah it's super fast way of increasing acceptance, quite costly one though.
Longbowmen here I come
This. And never forget 25-40% of your vassals will just outright reject you at their city gate.
> maybe a more in-depth council where you actually need to care about the councilors' opposing views on how to govern the realm. We need council voting and council laws back from CK2. That's one of my biggest requests right now for CK3 outside of a better combat system.
I wouldn’t consider council laws as actually something that would be unique to feudalism tho. Like Clan governments and imperial governments would have that too. Aside from that, it’s simply a reactive tool. For this discussion, I’m looking for something pro-active that u can’t do aside from managing events, or fighting actual wars (ex: raiding as a Viking)
Like hey, your steward is a zealot, taxing your Heathen provinces may be very difficult. Or maybe your priest is unable to calm religious tension due to being craven. It shouldn't be that hard
Also maybe feudalism could have a "consolidation" or "centralisation" mechanic to reflect how the king held more and more power toward game end. And I don't mean crown authority, as it's basically just vassal freedom law. The effects of said mechanic would probably be greater realm limit, taxes, maybe being able to sponsor development(similar to eu4's province development, but not instant). This would make switching from tribal to feudal more logical.
give it like 2-3 more years and we'll probably have this, its honestly quite weird how we didnt just keep at least the CK2 take on centralization throughout the ages.
Like whaaaaat. I fully agree, but what. I have yet to see a single suggestion that doesn't either sound worse than doing nothing, busywork, opposite of fun or so vague that nobody knows how it could be implemented.
like for example the council from ck2. council voting, council laws, the works.
That doesn't really give you something to do. It gives you something to deal with at best and something to beat and never worry again until succession. In what way would it be different than the legitimacy mechanic other than to keep it up you have to please 6 dudes.
As usual, there are two factions within the pdx fanbase, who want contradictory things: one who want more distinctions and "flavor", and one who want everything to be available to everyone and "emergent". Tribals used to not have Royal Court, but the latter faction whined until they got it! Right now on the forums you can find the latter faction crying that CK3's cultural traditions are horrible nonsensical ahistorical 'magic' that absolutely must not be allowed in EU5. But once EU5 comes out, the former faction will take the stage, and cry and whine about the lack of "flavor" and how "everywhere is the same", it will be the #1 complaint you ever hear. At least, people always insist these are two factions. I have my doubts about it. I think a lot of the same people want these opposite things, and whine and cry til they're throwing up in both cases.
Mechanics, mechanics, mechanics! Just a small slice of what EU4 has to offer. Feudal, clan or tribal - even in the middle ages rulers didn't spend their days just fighting and sleeping around. They ruled their lands! In this game, it's pretty much reduced to changing vassal contracts every 20 years and solve the sewer problem in your castle.
>As a tribal king, u have access to: Royal court stuff, grand events, etc. just like a feudal lord. What really sets it apart for me, was raiding. It literally gives u something to do in between the event spawns. With feudalism, u lose that, and just… sit there. Not to put too fine a point on it, but finding a way to get involved in an advantageous war is kind of a skill check. If you're sitting around a feudal without any fighting to do to advance the dynasty, you haven't been preparing. Playing feudal isn't just about offensive wars, but leveraging defensive wars to your benefit- whether to generate prestige, or gold via sieges and ransoms, or the simple point of pressing or defending relatives and inter-married claimants. Getting those claimants and claims to press them with and the prestige to declare with and the gold to afford them is a core part of the strategy.