Anybody playing Crusader Kings 2?

[Crécy]

Originally Posted by Hottentot

The first DLC has also been announced. I'm underwhelmed. The "major DLC" is a vanity feature that many other games have implemented from day one? Name your own dynasty? Build your own character? I can't see myself paying for this, unless it's part of a larger pack. I wish they had focused more on a real expansion-like DLC that could have been more expensive, but added some major ingame content, like playable muslims and pagans. This one, in my opinion, goes right down to the "horse armor" and "pink skin for your favorite gun" category.

Disappointing... I'll buy it though if the price is reasonable. Say... 2€.

[HunterICX]

Originally Posted by Crécy

Disappointing... I'll buy it though if the price is reasonable. Say... 2***8364;.

Blue coins
Since I purchase quite some games from Gamergate I received some Blue coins that I can use for DLC for the paradox games.

HunterICX

[Drewcifer]

While I will be the first to agree this is a feature that SHOULD have been in the released version of the game and not later tacked on.. I'm going to purchase it day one. I've already bought the mongol faces, additional coat of arms, and the music dlc, and I plan on buying all the DLC for this game.

It has all been reasonably cheap so far, and honestly I feel like if I dont' fully support this game I wouldn't be doing my part. There is NO other game like CK out there on the market, and if this game isn't profitable for Paradox we won't see a CK3.... which is something I simply could not allow to happen on my watch.

[Hottentot]

Meh, I'm just anti-DLC in general and had hoped at least Paradox would have stayed out of them. I would gladly pay even the price of the full game again for a well fleshed out expansion pack that involved lots of these small little features or something really major, but this whole "buying drop by drop" is something I haven't ever liked. I can think of a few games with good DLCs, but far more with bad ones. Seems so far that CK 2, unfortunately, is going to the latter category.

On the other hand, I should be and am joyous that they are making this (frankly stupid) vanity feature a paid DLC, while the real changes to the game mechanics and improving them are being released in a free patch.

[Drewcifer]

Again... I'm not left much of a case to argue... other then we don't know the actual price for this 'vanity' dlc and if it lands for 2.99 or something I highly doubt it will cause much of an uproar.

That said I am in favor of 15-20 dollar expansions that fully change the game, or add features. Like "Fall of the Pagans" expansion where you can play a pagan and attempt to unite and destroy the damned heretics of other religions.

However my point still stands if they hit me for 1.99 and 2.99 here and there for bits of gameplay, or small ideas that didn't make it in the game on initial release they still have my full support. CK2 is a unique game of which there is nothing even close.

[Crécy]

Price for the best DLC ever is $5. Must also post this awesome trailer:

Wonder if it'll work with steam version if I buy that from GG.

[HunterICX]

Originally Posted by Crécy

Price for the best DLC ever is $5. Must also post this awesome trailer:

Wonder if it'll work with steam version if I buy that from GG.

iirc isn't the DLC for CKII only to be bought with Gamersgate's Blue coins from the in-game store?

HunterICX

[Crécy]

Originally Posted by HunterICX

iirc isn't the DLC for CKII only to be bought with Gamersgate's Blue coins from the in-game store?

HunterICX

I have a physical copy so my in-game store is steam... Guess I have to buy it from steam then to ensure it works correctly with my version of the game.

[Drewcifer]

5 is fair for that dlc as far as I am concerned.

I buy my dlc thru steam just fine.

[HunterICX]

Interesting so if you buy it from Gamersgate the ingame store is Gamersgate and when you buy it from Steam the ingame store is Steam

as said with DLC like this I have good use for those blue coins I'm left with after purchases on GG

HunterICX

[soopaman2]

Duchy of Provence, and Duchy of Dauphin....check

Fabricated claim on Savoy...Check

Independence from the HRE thanks to me hopping on them when they jumped in the Fracas over England with their pal in Norway, Jumped in too late to save them, but late enought for me to rack up some gold for cheap mercs (imprisoned and killed 7 "important men", made my point to the kaiser)... Check

All my non family Vassals hate me, but I got 3 castles (with squire lists) in my Demense, and money for mercs if need be...check. (I have 2 wonderful sons who would make great counts.)

Even earned "the great" title without using the ambition.

So how long before it melts down?

I am not going for King of Burgundy, I am trying the primogeniture Super Duke strategy. I only miss out on free investiture, but can hold many duchy titles within my dynasty as long as possible without having to worry about penalties or having to deal with the crap that happens with gavelkind when your dynasty head dies.

I will destroy The HRE, as well as that Capet scum.

I hope

(Paradox: Home of the games you love to lose at)

[Hottentot]

Well, it's done: the first full campaign is finally over. Started as a count in England, ended as the king of Manyplaces. I created or usurped all in all 6 kingdoms, but in the end held only 5, because I gave the kingdom of Jerusalem to one of my sons for roleplaying purposes. He managed to lose over half of it in far less time than it took me to create it in the first place. On the other hand, I didn't care, because I had originally created it as a throw away kingdom just for the huge prestige and piety bonus.

The sequel is a clear improvement over CK 1, even in such early stage of its life. I'm really looking forward to seeing what the future patches and expansions will bring. I miss some stuff from CK 1, such as friendships and (yes, still) more conveniently available information. The occasional micro management is still something that hampers the experience, but nothing that couldn't be lived with or, better yet, improved at some point.

My main gripe is, that the game got almost pointless once I had acquired enough land. Until that point it had been a struggle: getting the kingdom of England felt like an achievement, because I had set it as my goal and worked for it for a long time. But after that I had no idea what I would do other than get more land. OK, so Ireland was easy enough. Scotland I didn't even want, so I was content with installing my cousin there as a puppet king. Then I really didn't have anything meaningful to do, so I decided I might as well conquer France piece by piece from the independent heretics (there wasn't, at that point, a single catholic province left in there) and then convert it back to the parent religion. It was easy, because the solution to any war was: "Raise 100,000 soldiers and send them all to one place."

The whole Jerusalem project started that way too. I wanted to use those levies for something, so I sent them over and over again to bash any religion in the world that started with the letter I, including the Iconoclast heretics. At that point there wasn't really any tactics or sense of strategy left in the game. All I had to do was to land anywhere I wanted with (at most) about 200,000 drunken English tourists, have them assault every single clay cottage they found and then send a "do you give up or shall we continue" note to anyone I happened to be at war with.

Sure, I still played the inheritance game too and got three duchies from Scotland eventually because I had claims on them, but...why? If I wanted, I could have smashed the whole country anyway, anytime I wanted. When I started the game, I thought that maybe I'd just take the English crown, then grow my power in the isles, but never expand into the continent. But there just wasn't enough left to do. There wasn't anything I could do with my huge kingdom, other than make it even bigger with more senseless wars. The domestic policies just didn't exist. The only plot I could ever start as a mighty king was to kill my wife.

Keeping the vassals happy wasn't difficult except maybe during a succession, but even then a few gifts and honorary titles were usually all I needed. Actually, I at some points hoped they would rebel just so there would have been a change. The more vassals I got, the more the game turned into "kill this army of rebels that the vassal can't deal with independently" or "click to end his mastermind plot through diplomacy only to have him start it again next month." At some point I didn't even want to expand anymore, because more vassals brought more plot clicking and more peasant rebels. But then again, there really wasn't anything else left to do than expand.

All in all, a great game and hopefully will grow even greater. Still I can't help noticing that the most memorable moments were those I played as a count or a duke. The endgame wasn't nearly as much fun. Hopefully there will be some improvements on it, so that the obvious answer to someone asking "Gee, king, what are we going to do tonight" is no longer: "The same thing we do every night..."

[Drewcifer]

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...pril-13th-2012

I'm eager to get back into Crusader Kings after the patch, better crusades, more events, and FINALLY it will show cause of DEATH on characters so I can now plot revenge on the people who kill off my family members!!

[HunterICX]

Excellent stuff indeed.

Current game I'm holding whole of Ireland and am moving into England and recently conquered Wales...during those time my counts and some dukes think it's wise to rebel against me resulting them to rot away in my dungeon...record was having 8 of them at the time in my Dungeon.

HunterICX

[Crécy]

Marvellous new features indeed! Especially cause of death gives a nice touch to the role-playing element. Should have been in the release but glad they add it now rather than never.