Crusader Kings

[dusematic]

Shit this game is hard.  There's like no documentation, and once your empire becomes somewhat large (say, the size of Englad, Normandy, and Wales) your kingdom is wracked by civil war because out of the dozens of vassals, at any one time there is a scheming prick amongst them.  If you try and rectify this by having fewer vassals with larger swathes of territory, you run the risk of one of them declaring war on a huge power, and fucking you once and for all. 


Here's my question:  There is always a crusade going on, but when I attack the infidels (as England) my piety doesn't stop decreasing.  Do I have to do something special to get it to recognize that I'm slaying muslims?

[dusematic]

OK I just deleted the game from my harddrive so I can neve rplay it again.  It's ridiculous.  There's so much bullshit in this game, steer clear of it.  I've been playing for weeks and it's just lame.  It's a cool idea with the dynasties but holy shit.


fuck.

[stray]

Your post has had the opposite effect on me. I'm intrigued.

[Broughden]

OK I just deleted the game from my harddrive so I can neve rplay it again.  It's ridiculous.  There's so much bullshit in this game, steer clear of it.  I've been playing for weeks and it's just lame.  It's a cool idea with the dynasties but holy shit.


fuck.

Sounds similar to RTS games such as Rise of Nations where if you launched to many nukes the game forced you to loose, basically programers trying to code societal morals into their games.

[schild]

I wouldn't call have a nuke limit where the destruction of the earth was the final result as a loss due to shitty morals. I'd call it a balance decision. What fun is a game with unlimited nukes? Or rather, an RTS with unlimited nukes.

[Righ]

Sounds similar to RTS games such as Rise of Nations where if you launched to many nukes the game forced you to loose, basically programers trying to code societal morals into their games.

You're right. That's just what it is. A bunch of pinko liberal atheist dope smoking crack heads coding games just to piss you off. It's not that the concept behind these games is to try and find an equilibrium with an increasing numbre of variables as play progresses. It's programmers with a chip on their shoulder. Why didn't I spot that before?

[Murgos]

Sounds similar to RTS games such as Rise of Nations where if you launched to many nukes the game forced you to loose, basically programers trying to code societal morals into their games.

You're right. That's just what it is. A bunch of pinko liberal atheist dope smoking crack heads coding games just to piss you off. It's not that the concept behind these games is to try and find an equilibrium with an increasing numbre of variables as play progresses. It's programmers with a chip on their shoulder. Why didn't I spot that before?

I know lots of coders, heck I am one.  The idea of one of them (or even me) putting a mechanic into a game with the express purpose of frustrating an end user does not seem that far fetched.

[Signe]

I know lots of coders, heck I am one.  The idea of one of them (or even me) putting a mechanic into a game with the express purpose of frustrating an end user does not seem that far fetched.

You pinko liberal atheist dope smoking crack head, you!

[Murgos]

Oh, no!  I've been red carded! 

[Broughden]

I wouldn't call have a nuke limit where the destruction of the earth was the final result as a loss due to shitty morals. I'd call it a balance decision. What fun is a game with unlimited nukes? Or rather, an RTS with unlimited nukes.

After working my ass off on hard level to get to the nuke stage before the computer could, being able to obliterate his ass in a nuclear holocaust is ALOT of fun!

[Broughden]

Sounds similar to RTS games such as Rise of Nations where if you launched to many nukes the game forced you to loose, basically programers trying to code societal morals into their games.

You're right. That's just what it is. A bunch of pinko liberal atheist dope smoking crack heads coding games just to piss you off. It's not that the concept behind these games is to try and find an equilibrium with an increasing numbre of variables as play progresses. It's programmers with a chip on their shoulder. Why didn't I spot that before?

Equilibrium? WTF? Have you played Rise of Nations?
So Im allowed to rain death upon the enemy using fighter jets, strategic bombers, tanks, artillery or Gods knows what other type of hellish destruction, but if I use to many nukes the game makes me auto-loose.....sorry but I call BS.

[Mister Garrison]: Nukes are bad mmmkay students?

[schild]

Dear Broughden,

Never discuss game design again. Ever.

Love,
schild

[Broughden]

Dear Broughden,

Never discuss game design again. Ever.

Love,
schild

Dear Schild,

I will discuss what ever the fuck I want to.

Love,
Broughden

[Tebonas]

I call it realism. Using fighter jets, strategic bombers, tanks and artillery don't destroy yourself together with your enemy. Too many nukes do. Its game over because you just killed your own population, and there are not many games where that is a viable winning strategy (Populous for the win).

[Yoru]

Tap out ice blocks, one by one,
They won't melt when you are done.
Take your time, and do some thinking
To keep the polar bear from sinking.
To win the bear must stay on top,
One wrong move and he'll go Ker-Plop.

[Broughden]

I call it realism. Using fighter jets, strategic bombers, tanks and artillery don't destroy yourself together with your enemy. Too many nukes do. Its game over because you just killed your own population, and there are not many games where that is a viable winning strategy (Populous for the win).

I havent played Civ 4 yet. Might buy it this weekend. But according to their forums using nukes, plus paratroopers (to take over the city after nuking it into the stone age) is a viable strategy.

[Tebonas]

But you have radioactive fallout that you have to clean up. Too many of those things and you have serious problems (highest health reduction in the game). And in old Civs you basically could end the game by means of the pollution meter (nukes contributed to pollution quite much). I would be surprised if that balancing factor was completely removed. I don't know though, being a pinko European Communist I always try to keep everything as clean as possible in my games.

[Yoru]

Oh, I've played a few 'nuclear winter' Civ4 games.

After more than one or two nukes go off, the planet goes nuts with global warming. Squares all over the place convert spontaneously into desert. One game had a full thermonuclear exchange - well over 100 warheads went flying; five turns after the bombing ended, the world was still converting about 20 squares per turn to desert.

Cleaning up the fallout is the easy part if you have enough workers. Now that you can't convert deserts, the desertification pretty much destroys your productivity and ability to sustain cities of any reasonable size.

[Broughden]

Oh, I've played a few 'nuclear winter' Civ4 games.

After more than one or two nukes go off, the planet goes nuts with global warming. Squares all over the place convert spontaneously into desert. One game had a full thermonuclear exchange - well over 100 warheads went flying; five turns after the bombing ended, the world was still converting about 20 squares per turn to desert.

Cleaning up the fallout is the easy part if you have enough workers. Now that you can't convert deserts, the desertification pretty much destroys your productivity and ability to sustain cities of any reasonable size.

Well that seems a little more realistic. In Rise of Nations if you launched more than 5 or 6* nukes you simply got, "Sorry you have lost. Game over." from the game.


*(5 or 6 is best guess since it has been about a year since I played)

[stray]

[EDIT]

Bah.

Delete this. I don't know what I'm saying.

[Merusk]

Cleaning up the fallout is the easy part if you have enough workers. Now that you can't convert deserts, the desertification pretty much destroys your productivity and ability to sustain cities of any reasonable size.

As a quick tangent.. the inability to do ANYTHING in a desert, combined with the removal of forest planting irritate the shit out of me.  Of course, I also never knew about the whole "plant 24 forests, the harvest them for near-instant-wonder" exploit that got forests nerfed in the first place.   First I heard of it was folks discussing Civ IV just before it came out. 

[Strazos]

You can plant trees?

[Yoru]

Well that seems a little more realistic. In Rise of Nations if you launched more than 5 or 6* nukes you simply got, "Sorry you have lost. Game over." from the game.

*(5 or 6 is best guess since it has been about a year since I played)

It was always 20 when I played; I think you could adjust it on the custom game settings. I made a point of using the first 19, always, because if you didn't, the AI would. But the AI would never, ever think of launching that last game-ender.

That last nuke is insurance; gonna lose? No, because everyone loses!

As a quick tangent.. the inability to do ANYTHING in a desert, combined with the removal of forest planting irritate the shit out of me.  Of course, I also never knew about the whole "plant 24 forests, the harvest them for near-instant-wonder" exploit that got forests nerfed in the first place.   First I heard of it was folks discussing Civ IV just before it came out. 

I've been trying to find an ecology mod that'll let you replant forests and convert desert at very high tech levels; all the ones I've found so far come with far too much other baggage and I don't feel like rolling my own.

Also, SDI is bullshit.

[dusematic]

http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=7074.0


lol

[HaemishM]

Equilibrium? WTF? Have you played Rise of Nations?
So Im allowed to rain death upon the enemy using fighter jets, strategic bombers, tanks, artillery or Gods knows what other type of hellish destruction, but if I use to many nukes the game makes me auto-loose.....sorry but I call BS.

[Mister Garrison]: Nukes are bad mmmkay students?

Just like real life. DAMN YOU, REAL LIFE!

[Tebonas]

It was always 20 when I played; I think you could adjust it on the custom game settings. I made a point of using the first 19, always, because if you didn't, the AI would. But the AI would never, ever think of launching that last game-ender.

That last nuke is insurance; gonna lose? No, because everyone loses!

Sounds like a good approximation to the RL Mutual Assured Destruction thing that was going on.

[Lum]

As far as nukes and Civ4 - they are very efficient at one thing, and one thing only... a crippling first strike. If you can launch nukes at your opponents BEFORE they build SDI countermeasures (which in human games is not that large of a window) you can effectively blow through their lines and win the game. If you don't win the game with nukes you are hosed, at least if you play with a few AI empires to keep you honest. Use of nukes send your diplo rating into the floor.

WRENCHING back onto the original topic.

Crusader Kings is a good game that has been relentlessly patched into a better game. It sounds like the original poster wasn't playing a fully patched copy. The latest version has saner, more focused crusades.

However the "OMG my vassals are going nuts and getting me in trouble!" stuff is Working As Designed. You can try to run your kingdom with as few vassals as possible but then you run into serious efficiency problems. It's a tradeoff, and pretty realistic insofar as large kingdoms such as France and the Byzantines during this time period tended to melt down into component parts. The technology simply wasn't there to run a continent-spanning Roman-style empire efficiently.

[Signe]

Dear Broughden,

Never discuss game design again. Ever.

Love,
schild

Dear Schild,

I will discuss what ever the fuck I want to.

Love,
Broughden

Those words sound familiar.  Did you used to have a Frank Sinatra avatar?

[dusematic]

I was playing 1.04 A.  I think that's the latest.  It's  a lame game.  It's good in theory.  Like, when you read the back of the box, it sounds sweet.  The final straw was when I made my son Duke of Dheabarth and Count of a few provinces in Wales.  That motherfucker usurped the title King of Wales from me.  This of course meant he was no longer a part of my Kingdom.  I mean...it's bullshit like that I can't stand.  I don't mind the basic premise of what happened, but I want to be forewarned that such an action is a risk.  The documentation is shittier than shit, and scouring the web doesn't provide a whole lot of help.


Edit: also, crusades lasting over 100 years are bad.

[Broughden]

Dear Broughden,

Never discuss game design again. Ever.

Love,
schild

Dear Schild,

I will discuss what ever the fuck I want to.

Love,
Broughden

Those words sound familiar.  Did you used to have a Frank Sinatra avatar?

Are you asking me? If so Ive never had any avatar until I made the one Im currently using.

[Hoax]

This game sounds great, how come I've never heard of it?

[dusematic]

By all means, feel free to buy it.  I've even included this handy dandy link.  Because I care.


http://www.paradoxshop.com/frameset.asp

[Strazos]

Is that Swedish or Danish currency?

[dusematic]

Well, my best guess is that "USD" is an acronym for "United States Dollars."  I'm not making any promises though.  I'm going to look into it further and get back to you.

[Strazos]

The above link quotes prices in kr, not usd.