>>2110642
No.

The game would be perfect if they added Imperator Rome population, building and trade mechanics. We could have gotten a DLC for that but no, we got China instead.

Imperator is still better.

>>2110642
I'm a CK2 oldhead but I honestly prefer CK3 just for the QOL aspects and better graphics.

Im having fun

Anyone here play the Prince of Darkness mod? It’s pretty fun

>>2110867
It's pretty much the only reason I play the game at all. I think it really plays to the strengths of CK3 but even still, it does eventually fall prey to the same issues of repetitive and dull events but there's a great amount of variety in the mod. I recently did a Horus playthrough which was pretty cool. I hear they're reworking the mummies soon. Yet to really touch the fae or werewolf stuff.

I've had fun with it but the problem is that internal development is just EU4 slop shit where you place buildings. If it had Vicky 2 pops/eco it'd be the GOAT, because the character interactions and feudal system are fantastic and actually make running a large empire feel engaging.

Of all the Paradox games CK3 is the only one where I've had fun running a huge-ass empire because instead of the world turning into a non-interactive blob that I control, it remains a realm that has moving parts (characters, subsidiary kingdoms and duchies etc) that I can interact with, that can scheme or war against me, that can do stuff on their own, etc.

But the eco and development system is shit. That's the problem with Paradox. Every game they'll do one or two systems well and then the others will be shit, they never tie together the best of everything.

>>2110642
One of their next DLC is another feature from ck2 that was missing on launch, so no.

I can enjoy it in doses, but it just feels like there's something missing. I can't quite put my finger on it either. It wants so badly to be a medieval sim, with warfare aspects. But the sim part for me comes up flat because it's just waiting around for random events to kick off and you're not really in control of any of it.

The most control you can have in this game is playing as an adventurer, and you get so much money and so many good troops that there's basically no reason to be a landed lord. Being an adventurer feels like what the actual game should have been because you have vastly more freedom. Being a landed lord feels like being a wagecuck where you're just checked into a job.

I guess I could summarize it as saying, at no point in CK3 does being an aristocrat feel aristocratic. A problem which CK2 did not have.

>>2110660
How do populations work in Imperator?

>>2110965
You actually get population growth and that population does things, like improve your economy or give you more troops. I agree, stuff like that should be in CK3. So should naval warfare.

Also, I really, REALLY fucking hate the technology system in CK3. It isn't dependent on your country/nation, it's dependent on an arbitrary "figurehead" of the culture. And if that figurehead has a 4 in learning, you're just fucked with tech and there's nothing you can do.

File: file.png (1.04 MB, 720x857)

1.04 MB PNG

>>2110642
Lately I've been getting my entire enjoyment from trying to fix the game rather than actually playing it. But all that does is scrub away the grease to reveal the even bigger layer of dogshit beneath, so it's just a hopeless process of trying to make CK3 into something it isn't.

Picrel is my attempt at making a mod that places female rulers under their husband's regency, as was historically the case in most circumstances. The biggest issues I'm facing rn are
i. other rulers can't be your regent if they're not your vassal, this is hard-coded; and
ii. regents in general don't actually do anything, they don't have any real power.

File: file.png (203 KB, 508x346)

203 KB PNG

>>2111131
I forgot to add, but ii. is actually part of the broader issue plaguing this game's design. Every single new mechanic is just hoots and whistles with nothing underneath. Can't have anything actually complicated or that would hamper your ability to brainlessly conquer le world. The entire system is designed around the player being the regent and just getting easy claims and titles. You're barely hampered in your ability to rule if you're the one who is in a regency. The regent doesn't actually rule in your stead, you just have to pay prestige to do 'mundane' stuff (this doesn't include going to war, which is completely unhindered).

The design philosophy that led to CK3's bullshit regencies is also the one that is used for every other mechanic in the game that already is, or will be added. The game is designed by retards who only care about getting their paycheck at the end of the month. There's literally 0 chance for the game to get better under the current team and I hope it will eventually tank dramatically in sales numbers so that Paradox will have to clean house -- which I know will never happen because the Reddit crowd is easily appeased by le funny meme reference written by Wattpad-tier "content designers" who majored in English but have never read anything written before the 1940s.

My least favorite thing about ck3 is how harsh breaking truces is. I should be able to break a truce when it no longer benefits me, and should worry about other leaders doing the same. The promise given was a necessity of the past, the word broken is a necessity of the present.

Also, innovations. Whats up with that?

>>2110642
it is somewhat better, but overall it's still shit

>>2111131
>Picrel is my attempt at making a mod that places female rulers under their husband's regency, as was historically the case in most circumstances.
Nice, jure uxoris/coverture, I made a similar mod in CK2 back in the day.
Think you should also have a crown law that determines this, for example, Mary of Hungary refused let her husband be crowned as king of Hungary, because it would have taken her out of power.
>>2111149
>The entire system is designed around the player being the regent and just getting easy claims and titles.
Never realized that, but I was very rarely under regency in the first place, because all rulers live up to 60, by which point you have 5 sons who are all 40.
This is an interesting contrast to CK2, where minors often ended up inheriting, but in CK,3 all the health boosts make it rare.
>Every single new mechanic is just hoots and whistles with nothing underneath.
I mean, what are they supposed to do with their DLC model?

>>2111463
>Think you should also have a crown law that determines this, for example, Mary of Hungary refused let her husband be crowned as king of Hungary, because it would have taken her out of power.
That's a very good idea, but maybe for later. It's already extremely finicky and I'm surprised it even works. I'm not at all used to modding mechanics in CK3.

>>2111170
I'd want a rework of the entire truce system/peace system.
What game describes as a truce is not a truce, but a "timed non-aggression agreement".
A truce is not the end of war, but a timed pause in the war. If no formal peace has been made before the truce expires, the war resumes.
So, there have always been truce treaties and peace treaties. The difference is that the peace aims to end the war permanently, which typically requires concessions from both sides; therefore, no "timed non-aggression agreement" is necessary.
For example, let's say an empire wants to acquire a certain province from the kingdom. Therefore, they invade the province. But this leaves an issue: how do they get the kingdom to accept it? They have three options:
>a) continue invading until the kingdom relents
This option is expensive and risky. Prolonged invasion is going to require more resources, and deeper penetration gives the kingdom a chance to turn the tide of the war.
>b) hold the province
A cheaper option that relies on the empire being able to defend the province. The only issue with is that it still requires heavy military investment, and the kingdom has no reason to make peace; they can just keep assaulting the province. And after years of endless attacks, the province might start to feel like it's more trouble than it's worth.
>c) compensate the kingdom
Instead of prolonged conflict, the empire might end the war by giving the kingdom, which will make the loss of the province hurt less. Such as a marriage offer or cash settlement.

>finally get into a save after starting and quitting about 10 in a row because I didn’t care about the characters
>game crashes
Thank you paradox very cool

>>2110642
It's the same shit but with more buttons, more notifications, and performance that's about 5 times worse than what it was on release

>>2111478
it autosaves a lot, so thats nice sometimes

>>2111506
>performance that's about 5 times worse than what it was on release
did they really fuck it up? i remember it being the fastest gsg there was, at least twice as fast as ck2

>>2111787
Well it used to be when it released (in my experience). Now its pretty bad. Maybe its added DLCs? Admin gov?

>>2111789
Are they still pondering upon castrating EVERYONE all the time?

>>2110642
>is it any better
yes
doesn't mean it's any good though

>>2110660
it would run like ass if it did

It can't be fixed without major reworks that won't ever happen

Conquerors are cool but how do I stop being one? Its a bit much.

>>2111925
then take out all the other unnecessary garbage to balance it out. Also I'm not a poorfag and my computer is good so I could still probably run it

>>2111477
Would add nothing.

>>2111477
would add everything

>>2112619
It's a stupid idea that would alienate the majority. Even non-casuals. Forcing people into automatic wars with no war goal. Paradox would have to redesign the entire peace system and they will never do that. Ck3 doesn't need to model every type of scenario.

>>2112214
Lose some wars or just don't go to war for a long time, I think.

>>2112617
>>2112619
Either way my point was that wars end either in conditional or unconditional terms.
In unconditional terms, one of the parties has been beaten up so badly, they accept everything that is demanded of them. Therefore, the winner has no reason to start a new war against them, because they already got everything they wanted.
In conditional terms, both parties are so exhausted that they agree on a compromise. Therefore, war ends because both parties are exhausted.
In both cases, there is no reason for "truce", because the war itself resolves the outcome.
PDX's war peace system is literally the worst.

>>2112622
it's too big brain for you, I got it.

>>2112627
Do you really think Paradox would add this level of realism?

>>2112628
I mean EU5 is literally being developed by extreme autistic MEIOU&Taxes devs.

>>2112629
Yes but we're talking about ck3. Every dlc so far has been pay to win.

>>2110867
CK3 is pretty much just a mod for Princess of Darkness and After The End for me

I kinda stopped playing after admin govs. Huge benefits for no downside and lack of independence factions means the BYZ always blob through the map

>>2112785
Figures, right?
The game is determined to depict feudalism as the worst form of government, because they don't realize it's benefits.
Visigoths and Merovingians had Byzantine-like centralization, but feudalism existed for a reason; by allowing regional magnates autonomy, they were able to defend against raiders.
>BYZ always blob through the map
Have you tried the game rule where Abbasids also start with admin government? Seems like it would balance things out,

>>2111170
As soon as you accept you can just break your word as soon as it benefits you, the entire feudal system (which is based on verbal or written contracts between individuals) collapses. Breaking truces doesn't just prove you're an unreliable actor in inter-polity relations, it's also laying out the red carpet for your vassals to rebel in fear or your liege to slap the shit out of you.

>>2113389
Weird, Ive had vassals rebel despite never breaking truces

>>2112375
I'd have a population instead of actual pops. You'd still raise levies out of them so there'd be impact in losing battles. Then add food management that is also the basis for army supplies and some trade goods. Buildings would need a total rework in my opinion, the current model is pretty stale.

The biggest problem is that there is absolutely nothing to actually do at peace time for your realm unless you're administrative or nomadic. Even then the realm issues feel somewhat intangible to the health of your realm as ignoring them incurs no penalties and they mostly arise at random.

>>2113384
The thing that fucking infuriates me is the succession system. Like okay, Charlemagne or whoever divided their kingdom. Neat. That doesn't mean EVERY SINGLE RULER DID THAT. Declared heirs was far more common, but in this game you have to grind tech to get primogeniture. So fuck you I guess? Watch everything you obtain be divided upon death and then you have to take it all back again, over and over and over.

What "gameplay".

And again, the primary purpose of this game is to make you feel like an aristocrat.
It fails at this.
CK2 did a much better job of making you feel like an actual lord. There's basically nothing to do in this game if you're playing a christian lord other than blob neighbors, lose all your shit on death, then blob them again. There's no content. If you want content, you pretty much have to play Norse or an adventurer. BYZ can be fun too until you become emperor.

>>2113721
>Like okay, Charlemagne or whoever divided their kingdom. Neat. That doesn't mean EVERY SINGLE RULER DID THAT.
I made this old video explaining how that transpired https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmmEA94THrc
But the point is that this division of land has been around since Clovis divided his kingdom among his four sons in the 6th century. The same practice continued until Charles the Fat was overthrown and replaced with an elective monarchy in the 9th century. Partitions existed among the Celts, Franks, and Slavs.

>>2113721
>And again, the primary purpose of this game is to make you feel like an aristocrat.
This.
Being an aristocrat was somewhat analogous to being a shareholder.
Manors were the smallest unit of land. According to Domesday Book, there were at least 13,000 manors in England. One manor was a knight's fee, so in theory, for every manor you owned, you could raise one knight.
The more manors you had, the richer you were. So, these manors were sold and traded between vassals a part of dowries and whatnot. The king would reward manors to loyal servants.
So, the noblemen would spend generations acquiring manors.

>>2110642
Ck3 will never have any cultural flavor events outside of the Norse. Every other flavor pack just adds regional and government tied events. And not even mods are adding that in any significant way. It fucking sucks.

>>2110642
The reason I play this game is for princes of darkness, if you want to play an actual feudal game modded CK2 is still far superior. Saying that, I haven't actually gone back to play CK2 in a long time now, it's been 2 or 3 years I think. After playing POD for hundreds of hours I've been really spoilt by the travel mechanic and having actual character graphics that now make it really hard to go back.

>>2110642
Yeah but the performance fucking sucks so play ck2 instead also it's repetitive as shit

>>2111102
The culture leader's learning is a percentage increase. The raw increase is based on the average development of your culture. This unironically means you want the smallest culture possible concentrated in a few highly developed counties.

>>2110660
Imperator's trade was ass, manually setting it up across 5000 different provinces

>>2111102
Imperator's pop system is fantastic.
If your people get fed, their number will increase.
As their population increases, they will eventually exceed the city's population cap, which makes them unhappy, because the city is overpopulated.
Unhappy pops will contribute to the disloyalty of the province, and if the loyalty falls below 33% the province becomes "disloyal", which means everyone stops paying taxes. And if multiple provinces become disloyal, only then will they rebel and seek independence.
So, in order to avoid disloyal provinces, you have two options build buildings to increase pop cap, or start deporting pops. Both options are expensive.

In other words, if you just blob and spend all your money on your army, it doesn't matter how amazing your army is; neglected overpopulated cities will make most of your provinces disloyal, which means you are unable to pay your army.

no, it's shit.

File: harry-potter-goblins.jpg (78 KB, 1200x675)

78 KB JPG

>>2124724
Mechanics reflecting history

CK2 is still better than CK3 in literally every way except the portraits

>>2126117
including the portraits, even the 2d women are hotter

>>2110642
the only people playing install Tiny Black Clitty domination mods if that's what you're wondering

Any coomer mod?

>>2126187
see
>>2117306

>>2125164
In the base game it's incredibly easy to keep them happy though. You can also keep building the pop limit of cities using aqueducts so you end up with mega cities. The Invictus mod prevents you from achieving that by messing around with the food and building stats.

>>2126243
>In the base game it's incredibly easy to keep them happy though. You can also keep building the pop limit of cities using aqueducts so you end up with mega cities
Sure, it's easy, but my point was the game forces you to spend a significant amount of money on civil infrastructure.
In contrast to CK3, where you will be fine if you don't build a single building.

>>2110642
It's better, but still fundamentally ass. The events writing alone makes it basically unplayable compared to CK2.

File: file.png (1.03 MB, 1080x607)

1.03 MB PNG

>>2110660
Other anons forgot to mention that pops each have their own culture group, specific culture, religion, and class.

A culture group is much larger. For example "Hellenistic" or "Italic", whereas a specific culture is a subset of that.
So you have the Hellenistic culture group, and inside it there's Spartans, Athenians, and so on.
Spartans will hate Athenians because they're of a different culture, but they won't hate them as much as they'll hate Romans, because Romans are of a different culture *group* entirely.

Then you have religion, pretty self-explanatory.

And finally classes: Nobles, Citizens, Freemen, Tribesmen, and Slaves.

In your culture tab you get to decide the max status of each culture in your nation, among other things. For example your primary culture will have max status (they can go up to being Nobles), whereas someone you just conquered you might limit up to Freemen (or even enslave their entire culture by making it so they can't go above Slave)

It's really deep, it's very dynamic, it's pure kino.

>>2134840
Oh and you might even integrate different cultures. Let's say I'm Rome and I conquer the entirety of Greece.
I might decide that Greeks are cool people, and deserve to be a part of my empire. Therefore I'll set their culture's max to be Citizens (or even Nobles if I like them a lot). I might even give them the right to inter-marry with Romans, my primary culture.

This will start a process called *integration*. Your primary culture will NOT like it, but it might become necessary if you conquer so much that the vast majority of your empire's population is people of another culture.
If they're not integrated, they won't be able to attain higher positions (and won't help in warfare either). You need those positions, and you need the manpower, so you gotta integrate at some point.
Or don't, and slowly *assimilate* them instead, meaning they die out and Greece becomes full of Romans instead.

Going for integration or assimilation is a crucial part of pop management in Imperator.

>>2134844
To add to this, integration is good in the short term, since you’ll get the full benefit of foreign pops, however each integrated culture gives a permanent penalty to the happiness of your primary culture. Assimilation is better in the long run, but can take many decades.

Better than when it first came out, still worse than CK2 in almost every way

File: 859580_20250902143705_1.png (2.74 MB, 1920x1080)

2.74 MB PNG

>>2110965
Each territory is constantly assimilating pops to your culture, converting them to your state religion. Growing one random pop in the territory, receiving an immigrant from another territory, and sending an emigrant to somewhere else. Promoting a pop from slave to freeman, freeman to citizen, citizen to noble, or demoting a pop in the opposite. There's also tribesman but they don't want to live in the cities.

Only pops of your main culture, or integrated cultures, will provide levies. You can also interact with other cultures, granting privileges to make them happier, or enslaving them or trying to breed them out.

>>2134840
Lol, CK3 actually more advanced culture system.
>So you have the Hellenistic culture group, and inside it there's Spartans, Athenians, and so on.
That's same thing as in every PDX game, except in CK3, in addition to culture groups, cultures have cultural acceptance based on cultural ethos and actions.
For example, if two cultures have the same cultural pillars, they might still like each other if they have same cultural ethos.
They are also impacted by actions, for example, every time the Swedish king declares war on the Danes, cultural acceptance between Danes and Swedes decreases. In contrast, every time a Norwegian ruler marries an English woman, it increases cultural acceptance between Norwegians and the English
There are also languages, each culture has a language, and some cultures share a language, which makes them more acceptable.
On paper, it's a good and natural progression, but CK3 doesn't really do anything with it; it mostly impacts popular opinion.
They only added the system so it can be used as a threshold for cultural hybridization.

>>2135858
See that's the thing with CK3: it tracks all sorts of interesting things, and then does fuck-all with them.

>>2110642
It's actually worse than it was in 2020. Back then it was a simpler and dumbed down version of CK2 with prettier graphics. Now it is a bloated juggernaut full of disjointed and unnecessary features that can't decide what it wants to be, a grand strategy or some sort of storytelling quasi-RPG game.

>>2111170
Can't you just build dread and do whatever you want?
Or is dread useless in relations outside of your realm?