CK is dynasty/character based and EU is nation based, sort of, it's hard to explain. CK2 is a lot newer and better looking than EU3, but you can probably buy both for a fraction of the prize of a new game if you want to. Someone else will have to do the comparison because I hardly understand either one of them.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Paradox Grand Strategy - Thread of Fighting WW2 as Bithynia
- Thread starter Walshicus
- Start date
CK is dynasty/character based and EU is nation based, sort of, it's hard to explain. CK2 is a lot newer and better looking than EU3, but you can probably buy both for a fraction of the prize of a new game if you want to. Someone else will have to do the comparison because I hardly understand either one of them.
Not really advantages or disadvantages, more like jsut differences
Crusader Kings II:
You play as a character (count at the lowest, emperor at the highest)
You 'goal' is to increase the prestige of your dynasty.
Tech advancement (AFAIK) doesn't depend on your size or how much money you put into it (since you don't put any money into it).
Economics are much simpler, you don't deal with trade. Your money comes from your demense + your vassals (depending on your laws and their opinion of you.)
There is no inflation
There are no standing armies, everything is levy based.
The map is smaller than EUIII (Europe, North Africa, Middle East)
No naval combat.
Royal marriages actually require you to have available children (and dynasty members in your court).
No explicitly Stability, it's more like replaced by individual vassal loyalty.
EUIII:
Much more focused on the State:
Your 'goal' is to increase the prestige of the state
You have five categories in which you pour money into to research.
Your money comes from tax of the State + tax on vassal states (if you have any) + trade. Money is based on tax efficiency, production efficiency, and trade efficiency.
If you mint, you'll get inflation, which slows your tech progress down.
There are standing armies and you pay maintenance on them. The maintenance level affects morale.
Royal marriages increase legitimacy/prestige (I think?) and they're limitless (besides diplomats.)
Certain actions require certain people availability (diplo requires diplomats, trade stuff requires merchants, building stuff requires.... i forget what they're called)?
This is what I think of off the top of my head.
In EUIII, the main challenge comes from managing the State. In CK2, the main challenge is managing your vassal relationships (and relationships to foreign leaders, also your marriages with regards to claims.)
EDIT: One more thing about tech advancement in CK2, it's much more out of your country, besides the use of spies to steal tech and being able to use your court to speed up research by 100%. It's much more fluid in the way it spreads. Unforunately, I don't really understand tech that much in CK2.
Europa Universalis can be boiled down to a complex game of Risk (with some elements of games like Axis & Allies).
While Crusader Kings shares some elements with a game like Risk or EU it's a character focused game about different dynasties(families) so it's more about intrigue, building relationships, building the prestige of your family than it is about straight up conquering.
If you have played a Paradox strategy game before Zoku's post will give you a bit more detail about specific differences.
While Crusader Kings shares some elements with a game like Risk or EU it's a character focused game about different dynasties(families) so it's more about intrigue, building relationships, building the prestige of your family than it is about straight up conquering.
If you have played a Paradox strategy game before Zoku's post will give you a bit more detail about specific differences.
"Demesne" not "demense" - pronounced "De Main" (close to domain).
For years I'd get that the wrong way around - only got it right when I heard it spoken instead of written down!
...
:O
Thanks for that, lol.
I wonder if the word "domain" comes from that... looking at the pronunciation.
Hari Seldon
Member
Supposed to be a CK2 patch any day now right?
Tomorrow, I believe.
Johan Andersson ‏ @producerjohan Close
We're releasing a large big update with lots of free content for @CrusaderKings tomorrow, but I am busy designing for the next now
From 8 hours ago.
I really gotta get that game, but I held off on the sale because I am really short on cash at the moment and am still deep in EU3 and some other games I have owned for a while but never really played.
I think domain and demesne come from the same French word or something.
Nope and yes, S thing is entirely English in origin and was dropped with some kind of double re-import from French again. It's related to Latin dominus whose S is unrelated.
In CK2, how the hell do I ever beat the Seljuks playing as the Byzantine Empire? Within a year of play time they arrive through our sole bordering province with 12 000 soldiers and I have nowhere close to that. If I called every single soldier in my entire kingdom there and hired two teams of mercenaries I could see 12 000, but that's no guarantee. I tried assassinating the Sultan and his son, but they're apparently really stable politically, and I can't make their neighbours attack them because I'm Orthodox and they're all Sunni.
Hari Seldon
Member
Dunno man. In my two complete games as other smaller nations so far, the Byzantine Empire has done pretty well though. I think when you play as them you have to accept that you might lose a few provinces here and there over time between the steppe tribes and the Muslims.
Another question for you guys, is there anyway to annex a vassal with a different religion?
I got a core on Rhodes through an event and The Knights is my vassal but it says they are a different religious group.
If I can't then is there anyway to make them switch to my religion without breaking my vassalization of them and going to war? At that point I might as well annex them.
I got a core on Rhodes through an event and The Knights is my vassal but it says they are a different religious group.
If I can't then is there anyway to make them switch to my religion without breaking my vassalization of them and going to war? At that point I might as well annex them.
Hari Seldon
Member
That patch looks epic! Is the DLC character editor out on steam as well?
FrontalMonk
Banned
isthisreallife.jpg is also relevant here.
I guess I didn't need to hold off on my CK2 in anticipation of patch...still some really awesome notes there.
Well, I usually end up hating most of my children, especially when I'm powerful.
I remember that the son I instilled as the King of Croatia murdered his older brother (who already had a son), right when I was about to win a war to instill the older brother as the Holy Roman Emperor.
...
I really want to go home and install this patch...
Hari Seldon
Member
Yeah I can't wait to get home and start up this patch. The best thing about a new patch is a new game, so 20 minutes of deciding who I want to play lol. I will have to ditch the mod I was playing, but that will make the game feel fresh again, even after like 150 hours or so I have in it already haha.
Huh, so I integrated the Mamluks 50 years after forming a personal union with them in my Saruhan game.
Little did I know that you get a ton infamy for that... I am now double my infamy limit! And every provence keeps spawning peasant/noble rebels. Thankfully if peasant and noble rebels spawn in the same province they will fight each other. Add in the huge amount of provinces I took from the Mamluks which will now spawn nationalists and it should be a fun 30 years or so. Hopefully no one declares war on me because I can barely contain all of these revolts with the 150k troops that I have.
I released some of the Mamluk land as Funj (my vassal) and am now selling them all the poor territories south of Nubia because they are really bad.
Don't really have any questions of anything, I just thought this was interesting.
Little did I know that you get a ton infamy for that... I am now double my infamy limit! And every provence keeps spawning peasant/noble rebels. Thankfully if peasant and noble rebels spawn in the same province they will fight each other. Add in the huge amount of provinces I took from the Mamluks which will now spawn nationalists and it should be a fun 30 years or so. Hopefully no one declares war on me because I can barely contain all of these revolts with the 150k troops that I have.
I released some of the Mamluk land as Funj (my vassal) and am now selling them all the poor territories south of Nubia because they are really bad.
Don't really have any questions of anything, I just thought this was interesting.
Basileus777
Member
So apparently CKII 1.05 has some problematic bugs and the character editor is kind of a mess. Come on Paradox...
Lactose_Intolerant
Member
One of the new bugs is that your kids only learn Intrigue. Lol, your kids are going to be killing each other.
Basileus777
Member
It is you for? The save I tried had a bunch of oddities.
Everyone getting an intrigue education is pretty bad. Autopause is broken and the mouse wheel doesn't scroll correctly. I'm not sure I'll play this until they send out a hotfix.
They clearly rushed this patch out.
Hari Seldon
Member
I didn't really notice the bugs starting a new game last night. Just the mouse wheel thing but it was not in all of the windows. I was checking out the paradox forums and they said hotfix later today, so no big deal really.
Did anyone buy Crusader Kings II Collection?
http://store.steampowered.com/sub/14254/
If so, can you please PM me, I've got couple of questions. Thanks.
http://store.steampowered.com/sub/14254/
If so, can you please PM me, I've got couple of questions. Thanks.
Basileus777
Member
It's a quick turnaround, but they introduced this game breaking zero stat bug, so no, it's not fantastic. I thought Paradox was doing well with this stuff for CK2, but then they break the game with a hotfix meant to fix a botched patch. This is just awful QA, did they even test these patches?
Well, now we wait for 1.05c.
superdeluxe
Member
Holding off patching until 1.5 is more stable.
In game issue, my heir rebelled and he died and then 2 turns later his son died, my other 2 sons were in mattineal marriages meaning game over
In game issue, my heir rebelled and he died and then 2 turns later his son died, my other 2 sons were in mattineal marriages meaning game over
Basileus777
Member
That's the best option. I wish I could force Steam to go back to 1.04c, because 1.05b is unplayable due to 0-stat bug.
Hari Seldon
Member
Started a CK2 game as Bavaria with the new patch. Being in the HRE seems like easy mode. I can war with all the other duke's to grab up land, and I'm protected from foreign countries since they have to declare war on the entire empire. So far I have grabbed up all of the Austrian de-jure provinces, and married the Duchess next to me, and established the Kingdom of Bavaria. Going to roll down through Italy and grab everything up so I can be King of Italy and Bavaria before I declare my independence. I guess I have to hurry before higher crown authority is established.
Mgoblue201
Won't stop picking the right nation
First time playing the hard difficulty in EUIII (as Castille), and I was unprepared for how difficult sieging actually is. Granada was able to capture my provinces faster with 1,000 men than I was able to capture its provinces with 10,000 men. Meanwhile, Morocco basically has carte blanche in the north, while I'm sitting there for years just trying to take one of Granada's provinces. It seems very unbalanced to me. Anyway, I eventually succeed in annexing Granada and then taking several of Aragon's territories. I'm close to forming the modern Spanish nation, but I'm kind of at an impasse, since Aragon is allied with England and France is far too powerful to deal with (fortunately, they're preoccupied with England at the moment). I'll probably try to push south into north Africa while I can.
I always wanted to do this in EU3 but Hungary was always in the way.
Mgoblue201
Won't stop picking the right nation
After a century of good relations, I've finally gained an alliance with France. Having chased the Portugese completely off the Iberian peninsula, my main territory is completely unassailable except perhaps to England, but I don't think they're going to declare war anytime soon. I can now focus on deploying most of my troops to other areas such as Italy and north Africa.
This game is so addicting, got it last night from steam. Started with playing the Portuguese Duke, declared my independence from The Kingdom of Galicia and then proceeded to declare a holy war against the muslim kingdoms... that is, until i was maimed in a hunting accident and died a bit later, leading to a massive civil war and a game over when Galicia decided to reclaim their territories.
Is Europa Universalis 3 as fun to play? I saw that it didn´t have as nice a map as CK2, but the scope seems larger. What about their modern period games?
Is Europa Universalis 3 as fun to play? I saw that it didn´t have as nice a map as CK2, but the scope seems larger. What about their modern period games?
This game is so addicting, got it last night from steam. Started with playing the Portuguese Duke, declared my independence from The Kingdom of Galicia and then proceeded to declare a holy war against the muslim kingdoms... that is, until i was maimed in a hunting accident and died a bit later, leading to a massive civil war and a game over when Galicia decided to reclaim their territories.
Is Europa Universalis 3 as fun to play? I saw that it didn´t have as nice a map as CK2, but the scope seems larger. What about their modern period games?
I haven't really got a chance to play CK2 but I have put at least 200 hours into EU3. EU3 is very fun to play, but it is (at least from what I have seen of CK2) a bit simpler. It mainly focuses on territorial expansion and you play as the "guiding spirit of a nation" instead of a dynasty. Everything is from the state level (no dukes, counts etc.) with a focus on maintaining a strong military and prospering economy with low inflation.
I haven't really played the more modern offerings yet but EU3 is probably the easiest to get into out of all of Paradox's strategy games.
Mgoblue201
Won't stop picking the right nation
The result of my Castile game on hard difficulty:
I think my greatest weakness is the early part of the game. Most of my expansion comes after I've already built up my country, but I am incapable of destroying any of my rivals early before they have the chance to grow. I'm not yet good enough at combat to beat other large countries when I'm at a disadvantage in army size, so I spent the first hundred years paying off England and France so that they didn't invade. I noticed that PrawnStar, in his latest AAR as England, managed to invade Castile with only half the number of troops. I'd really love to know how something like that is done.
Anyway, North America came out really strange in this game, with the Papal State dominating most of the territory and Khmer taking Mexico. First time I've seen an Asian Pacific country gain a foothold in NA.
I think my greatest weakness is the early part of the game. Most of my expansion comes after I've already built up my country, but I am incapable of destroying any of my rivals early before they have the chance to grow. I'm not yet good enough at combat to beat other large countries when I'm at a disadvantage in army size, so I spent the first hundred years paying off England and France so that they didn't invade. I noticed that PrawnStar, in his latest AAR as England, managed to invade Castile with only half the number of troops. I'd really love to know how something like that is done.
Anyway, North America came out really strange in this game, with the Papal State dominating most of the territory and Khmer taking Mexico. First time I've seen an Asian Pacific country gain a foothold in NA.
I haven't watched this yet, but someone posted a Let's Play of Magna Mundi.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=s_quF_ZdWdM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=s_quF_ZdWdM
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
Defensively, you can let the enemy spread their troops out into your land, then counterattack to destroy one stack at a time. If they concentrate all of their forces into an unstoppable doom-stack, do not engage it, instead scorch the land at provinces they are about to siege in, making them take 10-15% attrition monthly. After a few months their doom-stack will have been horrifically maimed, at which point you can move in for the kill. Don't be afraid to let them siege provinces from you that you can retake easily once their armies have been destroyed.
The importance of good generals and fighting on favorable terrain cannot be overstated. A 4-6 shock general can turn an early army from pretty decent to an unstoppable killing machine capable of taking on armies twice it's size. Maintaining high army tradition is of the utmost importance, so taking Battlefield Commissions as a national idea can be extremely good. In easy wars, you can farm army tradition by deliberately letting enemy troops escape to recuperate and battle you again. Likewise, if you have defensively-focused troops, battling in mountains can see you taking on forces far larger than your own. If you have good generals, defensive troops AND they attack you in rough terrain, the battle will be a complete slaughter in your favor.
Fighting in a distant land can make things trickier because you resupply slower, they resupply faster, and new troops will be raised regularly. Many of the same principles apply, but I think you need to occupy a province before you can scorch the crops in it, so that part can be a little harder.