-
Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.
"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.
CKII is released.
- Thread starter Trash
- Start date
Zero Credibility
Arcane
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2007
- Messages
- 2,951
Combat in CK2 is... well, shit unfortunately. Overcomplicated shit that you have very limited influence on. If army numbers are comparable the winner is often decided not by skill of the leaders or terrain (though that can help), but by chosen tactics of yours and enemy army. The problem is that the tactics chosen are decided mostly based on flank composition, with different troop types possibly triggering different tactics. Many of the tactics actually work against other unit types, so triggering a tactic that makes most of your flank useless is perfectly possible, regardless of the skill of your flank leader. And since you can't split your troop groups by unit type you have very limited control over what actually happens in battle.
A big part of why retinues were so popular and powerful (and why they were nerfed) is that they are the only way to actually make some use of this overcomplicated system. They allow you to have clean flanks, with one or two unit types that maximises chances or really good tactics with huge bonuses to most of your flank, while minimising or removing chances of bad choices. They also allow you to use special culture troop type (some of which were good, some weren't) and use commanders of specific culture to trigger special (sometimes hilariously overpowered) tactics. In comparison, levies just suck - you get a mixed bag of all units with very little control over their types and tactics chosen could easily be something mediocre or bad, that makes most of your flank doing shit while you get crushed. So that combat tactics page is mostly something you can't actually use.
Anyway, I haven't played with the latest patch yet (and don't know if I will), but it does look like the best retinue choice by far is still a good choice. So spamming archers (or longbows if you have them) with just enough light infantry to not trigger charge on your flank is now the only possible choice. The idea is that while they are not very good in melee that doesn’t matter since the opposing flank is going to be turned into pincushion before that. And since they are not going to be fighting in melee they will only take small damage (very important now because retinues eat huge amount of money while reinforcing, and are much easier to be completely lost because of small size). And you can have by far the most of them for your retinue cap. And when assaulting only the skirmish attack matters, so they are also crazy good with that. At least previously some other choices were possible even if they were maybe inferior to longbow spam, but now... I swear someone at Paradox has a raging boner for bows.
A big part of why retinues were so popular and powerful (and why they were nerfed) is that they are the only way to actually make some use of this overcomplicated system. They allow you to have clean flanks, with one or two unit types that maximises chances or really good tactics with huge bonuses to most of your flank, while minimising or removing chances of bad choices. They also allow you to use special culture troop type (some of which were good, some weren't) and use commanders of specific culture to trigger special (sometimes hilariously overpowered) tactics. In comparison, levies just suck - you get a mixed bag of all units with very little control over their types and tactics chosen could easily be something mediocre or bad, that makes most of your flank doing shit while you get crushed. So that combat tactics page is mostly something you can't actually use.
Anyway, I haven't played with the latest patch yet (and don't know if I will), but it does look like the best retinue choice by far is still a good choice. So spamming archers (or longbows if you have them) with just enough light infantry to not trigger charge on your flank is now the only possible choice. The idea is that while they are not very good in melee that doesn’t matter since the opposing flank is going to be turned into pincushion before that. And since they are not going to be fighting in melee they will only take small damage (very important now because retinues eat huge amount of money while reinforcing, and are much easier to be completely lost because of small size). And you can have by far the most of them for your retinue cap. And when assaulting only the skirmish attack matters, so they are also crazy good with that. At least previously some other choices were possible even if they were maybe inferior to longbow spam, but now... I swear someone at Paradox has a raging boner for bows.
I've read they're actually nerfing archers in last beta patch but to what extent I do not know.
I played either 2 skirmish / 1 defensive (so archers archers lots of archers and a bit of infantry) or maxed cataphracts. I played Druzhina too for larping, gave even mongols a beating but I had great commanders with defensive perks and good positioning so we shield-walled everyone to death.
Archers aren't invulnerable though, I remember holy orders and merchant republics fucking me up with their 1000 heavy cavalry stacks when I played as muslisms conquering Byzantine.
I like cavalry more simply cause it moves faster. It's good at being police force in large empire when you are so big you get revolts every few months. But having more infantry, I believe it numbers count to your power so factions do not bother you.
I played either 2 skirmish / 1 defensive (so archers archers lots of archers and a bit of infantry) or maxed cataphracts. I played Druzhina too for larping, gave even mongols a beating but I had great commanders with defensive perks and good positioning so we shield-walled everyone to death.
Archers aren't invulnerable though, I remember holy orders and merchant republics fucking me up with their 1000 heavy cavalry stacks when I played as muslisms conquering Byzantine.
I like cavalry more simply cause it moves faster. It's good at being police force in large empire when you are so big you get revolts every few months. But having more infantry, I believe it numbers count to your power so factions do not bother you.
Last edited:
Vaarna_Aarne
Notorious Internet Vandal
The best way to actually influence the system as present would be to have at least four times as many cultural unit buildings (or incorporate cultural buildings into all standard unit buildings), instead of the "cultural speciality" actually meaning a tiny fraction of your levies.
But honestly, the big issue is that assaulting holdings only counts Skirmish, it's fairly dumb and a HUGE reason to have at least 40% archers in any retinue.
But honestly, the big issue is that assaulting holdings only counts Skirmish, it's fairly dumb and a HUGE reason to have at least 40% archers in any retinue.
Turrul
Augur
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2014
- Messages
- 211
This is maybe the biggest problem in CK2 and I don't know why they designed it like that.
Seems like I have to hang around 2.1.6 for a while.
Turrul
Augur
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2014
- Messages
- 211
That place was known as Turkestan for a long time, but you can use Sogdiana too, considering you play as a Sogdian character. At least that's what Wikipedia says.
Or you can use Turan, an Iranian name.
To raid well and get 10 to 80 coins at least or more, you gotta raid capitals for prisoners. Ignore random villages, you want prisoners or feudal provinces. Raid just conquered castles, raid places where war happens.
You have to raid. Without raiding you won't turn feudal yourself, you will need I say 5+ fully upgraded forts unless you want to go feudal with 1 castle and die instantly. And also a tech spread to all your provinces you want to upgrade, since you need 1 point in castles tech.
Check enemy fortresses too, if they're level 4 and close you your border conquer them, they'll become your castles later.
I am playing second game, a weird mixed Kiev now, about 12 provinces. It's 9th century. Obviously I tyrant everything to myself since otherwise I don't get enough troops. I play only martial and take martial wives. I turned orthodox by taking concubine from Byzantine (finally, took me 8 tries at least) and switched to regular gavelkind. I am bombarding everything around with missionaries and holywar everything small, and I keep some of places around me small and independent just to raid them. For example, I raid a bunch of my own grandsons. Managed to get a few allies and finally turned king of Rus back, they say feudals stomp barbarians, well, a bunch of 2.5k's and random, 3 volleys in combat and goodbye my german mercenary friends. Already had to fight him 5 times and they get very good kings who actually can hold big tribal kingdom with many green perks.
My position is weird cause I am orthodox tribe that can still raid and take concubines, as I turned orthodox I also got tournaments and events, and jews teleported in, but nobody gives concubines to me since pagans hate me, christians can't so I take them in raids too. Dat prestige bonus is a must for my own summoned 2.5k's. I replaced my slav court with whole lot of hired greeks with 20's in skills. I think I'll go feudal in 10th century if things go well.
Last edited:
Zero Credibility
Arcane
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2007
- Messages
- 2,951
Unfortunately cataphracts don't seem to be a good option any more. Smaller size (so they can get wiped out more easily), very expensive in retinue points (they are what, 4 times as expensive as skirmish?), huge drain when reinforcing very slowly (and they will get damaged a lot), as all retinues they lost their tech bonus that made them strictly superior to levies. There are a lot of things about retinues that piss me off - why are almost all cultural retinues useless or next to useless, now more then ever? Why the smaller size of units instead of making them more expensive or cutting down on retinue points available, just to make it more annoying when you need to create a new one because the old one got completely destroyed? Are retinues now supposed to be technologically inferior to levies after you upgrade your holdings a bit? Why small upkeep and large reinforcement cost - why not just a modest upkeep cost to make retinues kind of like custom designed vassal mercs?
Right now from what I've seen retinues are inferior to mercs - mercs get cheaper as they fight and take casualties; retinues get much, much more expensive instead. For cataphracts that's over 4 gold per month for every single 250 men unit that got damaged, and you are likely to be paying that for several years. So you have a standing army that you can't actually afford to use in a fight (or would be better off just using that gold on mercs) and whose only purpose is to just stand in your capitol to inflate you numbers against AI factions and neighbours? And that's another thing, why isn't retinue points cost a factor in calculating your strength instead of number of men in the retinue? You'd think this would be a bloody obvious thing - a heavy cavalry shouldn't count the same as a pitchfork wielding peasant.
There has to be a better way to balance retinues against levies. An upkeep is a good first step, fine. But drop the reinforcement cost then and balance the retinues by their upkeep cost, make me want to use them in a fight. Maybe make it so that you have a choice to specialise your realm for retinues or levies through laws that are unlocked through techs? So you can have large retinues as a real standing army at the cost of your levies (and your vassals aren't going to be happy about that) and monthly gold cost (and money better be there on time). Or you can keep retinues as a small household guard and instead go for a large levy army (but ffs make it possible to split them by troop type or at least specialise them somehow if you insist on the current combat system). Maybe make retinues a factor in internal politics as well by having generals leading them take some of them with them if they decide to revolt for example. Of course, you can lead them personally, but that would at least give us some reason to actually risk the ruler in battles.
Right now from what I've seen retinues are inferior to mercs - mercs get cheaper as they fight and take casualties; retinues get much, much more expensive instead. For cataphracts that's over 4 gold per month for every single 250 men unit that got damaged, and you are likely to be paying that for several years. So you have a standing army that you can't actually afford to use in a fight (or would be better off just using that gold on mercs) and whose only purpose is to just stand in your capitol to inflate you numbers against AI factions and neighbours? And that's another thing, why isn't retinue points cost a factor in calculating your strength instead of number of men in the retinue? You'd think this would be a bloody obvious thing - a heavy cavalry shouldn't count the same as a pitchfork wielding peasant.
There has to be a better way to balance retinues against levies. An upkeep is a good first step, fine. But drop the reinforcement cost then and balance the retinues by their upkeep cost, make me want to use them in a fight. Maybe make it so that you have a choice to specialise your realm for retinues or levies through laws that are unlocked through techs? So you can have large retinues as a real standing army at the cost of your levies (and your vassals aren't going to be happy about that) and monthly gold cost (and money better be there on time). Or you can keep retinues as a small household guard and instead go for a large levy army (but ffs make it possible to split them by troop type or at least specialise them somehow if you insist on the current combat system). Maybe make retinues a factor in internal politics as well by having generals leading them take some of them with them if they decide to revolt for example. Of course, you can lead them personally, but that would at least give us some reason to actually risk the ruler in battles.
Turrul
Augur
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2014
- Messages
- 211
This. Transition from early medieval to late medieval should be noticable, late game sucks big right now.
Alternatively, don't tie it to tech, make it a crown law so the game can simulate the difference between household guards and good old levies from vassals systems ala Anglo-Saxons vs Normans.
Modders would fix it...
If they weren't so busy making hentai mods...
If they weren't so busy making hentai mods...
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2013
- Messages
- 4,460
My game is unplayable now, for some reason whenever I make a hellenic pagan greek ruler the heirs just appear as empty circles. I can't click on them; it doesn't generate a protrait for them and you can't interact with them, and I can't seem to rid this bug. I don't experience this bug when I make an germanic pagan anglo-saxon ruler.
Vaarna_Aarne
Notorious Internet Vandal
Could be specific to the Hellenic Pagan religion itself, since it's never intended to be actually used. It's just there for family trees.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2013
- Messages
- 4,460
Perhaps you're right, but why would it be there for family trees? Did they put in really extensive family trees for some of the characters that stretch back to the pre-christian Mediterranean world?
Anyway, if that's the case I'll stop using it. Still, they did go so far as to put in a religion tab for the Hellenic faith, you can see the centres are at Alexandria, Rome, etc. I was really hoping to revive ancient greece, though.
Anyway, if that's the case I'll stop using it. Still, they did go so far as to put in a religion tab for the Hellenic faith, you can see the centres are at Alexandria, Rome, etc. I was really hoping to revive ancient greece, though.
It used to work, my guess is there is no hellenic pagan hairstyles or something, as most of the newer pagan types have different looks depending on their religion.
omega21
Arcane
Oh boy, where'd you find that?
Modders would fix it...
If they weren't so busy making hentai mods...
Vaarna_Aarne
Notorious Internet Vandal
Hellenic Pagan is in the same basket as Roman culture, it's only intended to show up in the family trees of some characters in Byzantine Empire and elsewhere.
Turrul
Augur
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2014
- Messages
- 211
Yeah, that's why they did it. Some title histories and dynasties goes all the way back to the 0AD
Catholic feudal Kiev - best Kiev
Still not many troops to talk about and lots of bashing my own vassals with a mace to the head, but after this screenshot was taken I got Moldau into my demesne instead of my lands meaning about 10 extra feudal holdings, and pumped Kiev with another castle. Not fun to get beaten up by 15000 adventurer groups as an ex-shit-tribe.
Also, greek girl and german girl got it out of their systems when catfighting for who is best italian, and atm Empress of HRE is married to catholic emperor of Byzantine Empire.
They still couldn't turn back another cheat-muslim jihad though.
Would have taken a picture of Abbasides but I'd need to stack 2 pictures together for that. Half of India is already theirs for example.
Still not many troops to talk about and lots of bashing my own vassals with a mace to the head, but after this screenshot was taken I got Moldau into my demesne instead of my lands meaning about 10 extra feudal holdings, and pumped Kiev with another castle. Not fun to get beaten up by 15000 adventurer groups as an ex-shit-tribe.
Also, greek girl and german girl got it out of their systems when catfighting for who is best italian, and atm Empress of HRE is married to catholic emperor of Byzantine Empire.
They still couldn't turn back another cheat-muslim jihad though.
Would have taken a picture of Abbasides but I'd need to stack 2 pictures together for that. Half of India is already theirs for example.
Last edited:
Brinko
Arcane
- Joined
- May 7, 2012
- Messages
- 884
Turrul
Augur
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2014
- Messages
- 211
They'd better make this more than a 20$ event pack.
sser
Arcane
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2011
- Messages
- 1,866,684
Play a pagan/Norse and don't get rid of Gavelkind. Play a Muslim and see how much shit you can conquer with one guy without really balancing out the decadence. Basically, welcome the fracturing of your empire upon a ruler's death, I guess, and mucking about in the remains. I mean, it's one thing to 'paint the map' over many years, but I personally have fun seeing how far a guy can get in just his one lifespan without putting anything into place for the future.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2009
- Messages
- 1,462
Modders would fix it...
If they weren't so busy making hentai mods...
What the hell is this abomination?
Self-imposed ironman? (cause technical can be buggy and crashes and frustrations)
I wouldn't play muslim, they really are the master map painters imo because it's so easy to warmonger with them.
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.