Paradox could easily do a major expansion centered around Venice, which includes laws, more councillor actions, trade, republics, and navies. Perfect update for them as all of them go hand in hand with the Venice flavor
If you look back at the floor plan, when discussing trade and merchant republics (Venice), they talk about how it may relate to certain new lifestyles. I am 99% sure that this will involve some sort of new merchant lifestyle that works with landless gameplay. Then, add the fact that the new admin government could very easily be adapted to republic gameplay, and I would be willing to bet $100 that the next chapter will include republics + trade
Something tells me the whole landless system was made as a stepping stone for more complicated governments like Republics and Nomads, since landless can now act as a safety net for what would have otherwise been a difficult government to play as (in terms of dynastic succession).
ck3 will eternally be held back because the game is hard coded at the county level, you can not have barony level interactions outside of directly owning the barony or not directly owning a barony. you cant have a papal vassal in vaticano, you cant have a ecumenical patriarch vassal without giving them a county, etc. you cant have an independent jerusalem in acre
Missed mentioning: Nomad Governments. Right now, Ghengis plays like Ragnar or the king of Somalia.... a nomadic/pastoral government could apply to most of central/sahelian africa too btw. Monasticism. While the societies content wasnt very in depth in ck2, they did try to represent the monastic orders. Would be interesting to have them operate like a peaceful alternative holy orders, taking church or city holdings giving you buffs or growing decaden or acting as another religious actor. Banking. Actual banking would be interesting. Rn the pope and holy orders act as banks. while not entirely false, this wasnt their role and actual banking guilds or the -jews- existed for that.
Nomads governments are the most critical part imho. The Eurasian steppes were history determiners in Eurasia, it was the continent's highway, it's where Genghis Khan finally united east and west And most importantly it was empty. Very empty. They fact that all nomad peoples are settled down, and the entire steppe for that matter is dotted with permanent settlements quite simply disrupts any realistic historical dynamics to be had ACRODS THE MAP One simple example is Byzantium snaking up the pontic steppe.
my biggest grind with this game has always been the lack of any real laws and the fact the council are just nothing more then stats, i also hate how technology is handeled in this game, you can cross the world, and yet you might still be as tribal as it gets despite living in the byzantine empire potentially for a 100 years, just because its tied to your culture.
They need to rework the Orthodox faith system. The Ecumenical Patriach shouldn't be seen as head of faith like the pope is, because other Orthodox empires had their own patriarchs. And the church should have a much much bigger role, I'm guessing when they make this dlc at some point they'll make the theocratic realms playable as well.
@@acekoala457 The "what" is losing the Ecumenism tenet. Whens and whys that are believable and good for gameplay, something like EU4's Reform Desire, still need to be coded.
Yessss! Just adding actual laws and some sort of trade will make this game go from good to great. Sure, navies, republics...etc. are all very nice, but just some basic laws and trade would add so much depth. I mean... it is a grand strategy game after all.
My wishlist mainly involves elements that improve character interactions. I'd love to see council mechanics similar to CK2's Conclave. I also wish they did more with that House feud mechanic they introduced a couple years ago. I'd love to see multi-generational rivalries between houses. Maybe you get a big prestige bonus for undermining members of the rival house, like taking their land or making other nobles have a negative opinion of them. Generally, I'd just like AI characters to play a more active roll in the game, rather than just be brainless nobodies waiting for me to conquer them
Trade is the most important feature they should add in the short term in my opinion, mostly to introduce it somewhat early so they can build on top of it in later DLC
I imagine we see nomads pretty soon due to how easily they could be bolted onto the adventurer system. Then there's of course the inevitable crusade/Christianity overhaul (perhaps paired with a warfare overhaul), and the likely China expansion (credibly rumored to be an actual expansion of the map to east Asia, as far out as Japan, but at least an abstract China like in CK2. Plus, the admin govt was born to represent China). I would like to see trade as well, and we'll doubtlessly get it eventually, but it's more far removed from the groundwork they've already laid than most of the other things I mentioned and so it may come later on. Who knows though.
I'm against the implementation of full trade, because it's the wrong time period for it. There was trade, but you didn't see the god tiers level of wealth that you saw during the time of the Ottomans and Venetians. It was typically small time trade between guilds across the water, often facilitated by vikings or the biggest player, the byzantines, before the Ottomans took it from them. Venice itself only facilitated trade from the Byzantines(acting as a protector for ships against pirates) and didn't develop the spice/coffee trade until well after the year 1200. Basically you couldn't have real trade in this game UNTIL the mongols are formed, because they are the ones who created the route to make it happen. So it's like at the end of the game... EDIT = Just go play EU4 or Vicky 3 if you want trade, they are both far more correct of a time period of it.
The problem is that the AI can just never make the navies work. If we want the AI to properly make use of naval travel and invasions and all the rest, the current system works.
@@whodis3489 I think Paradox could make Naval combat a thing. I also think they wouldnt exactly add much to the game for most playthroughs. A lot of work for little gain. I would rather have Paradox gives us Nomads/Hordes, Trade, Merchant Republics etc. There are easy 10 other things I would rather have than navies.
I dont want naval battles. There's a reason they haven't just copy pasted the system from other games; it wouldnt make historical sense in the time period. What I would like to see is a naval range/power system, so you couldn't just nonchalantly sail to India as a petty king of Ireland in 867, and to determine your capacity for naval trade/protecting your trade routes (once we have trade of course. I think these two features would fit well together on one dlc.)
In the Forums they hinted once that they want to do Republics, Trade and Nomads properly this time. A Religious Overhaul is also something that is overdue. Not only for catholics. One thing that I can imagine working better than in CK2 is actually societies. Chilvarous Orders, Warrior Lodges, Assassins etc. Could work so much more reasonable with Adventurers.
Would be cool if they didn’t have Catholic and Orthodox divide in the earliest start date bc it didn’t exist like that yet. They were still technically all under the same church they just had differences in their worship etc. Latin rite and Greek rite (CK2 had a mod to change it to that any date before the great schism but I don’t think CK3 does)
Good video Andy. While CK3 has taken some steps forward, they still have a ways to go and it’s crazy that we’re still missing trade and republics this far into the game’s life. It’s a sad reality of Paradox games that you have to wait a decade after a game’s release to get the full experience
In terms of catholicism I really miss some kind of investiture. The ability to appoint your own bishops or even antipope would be nice. the actual system that your temple holdings are leased by some dudes is just awful.
The "papal investiture for everyone, in a plurality of faiths too" is bad. I don't like single digit bishops; good luck getting rid of them in a faith without excommunication.
I agree, to some extent, but I still think having the core DOs and DON'Ts tied to culture and religion makes sense. It's not just about what laws are in place - it's also about your character's ability to enforce them, which is why so much of that takes place in throne room events. Maybe they could do something similar for the council? Also, I really like the base-building aspects of camps and estates - I think it would be really cool if they could make that work with legacies, correspondence, dynasty interactions, etc. You family's home estate, basically
I hated it with a purple passion when it came out and then, as I understood how it worked more and more, ended up refusing to ever play WITHOUT it. Great addition to the game!
Agree wit a lot of this but the comment on Navies. Naval battles were rare in this time period and manny didn’t have standing navies like ck2 system did. I suppose the discounts you et for naval paths represent the increase and ease of ship marking which while not as fun as building them isn’t tedious or limiting.
Navies were actually pretty important. Especially considering this is a game which focuses heavily on the Vikings. The Norse attacks were driven away just as often by the implementation of powerful and standing navies. Wessex made a concerted effort to build up a strong and effective navy to combat the Vikings. Likewise, The Ummayyads of Cordova and Byzantines drove off Viking attacks with their navies numerous times. Navies were especially important in the environment of the Mediterranean. Venice and Genoa tore the Mediterranean apart for centuries with their rivalry, which was played out at sea. Even earlier, Byzantium and the Arabs spent a long time fighting each other at sea.
@@TheSamuraijim87 It's funny how he wrote "Naval battles were rare in this time period" while the Roman (Byzantine) navy was a large and crucial thing for its survival and when disgusting Andronikos disbanded it, it let the Turks just blitz straight into Europe after taking Gallipoli
Nice video, I agree on everything except the navies. As someone with 5k hours on EU4 I'm still finding myself playing more and more CK3 recently instead. It just feels good to play a game without too many clunky mechanics that barely bring any extra satisfaction. Island and colonial gameplay is one of the things i dread the most in eu4, from the tediousness of selecting hundreds of ships or having to recover them from all round the world, and the automatic transport system thats just a pain sometimes.
Also in ck2 you had by chance to become a Saint if you lived a holy life. Only if the Catholic church chose you to become one after death. In ck3 is a bit boring with the Saint system, since you only need to do a religious legend and choose the correct family perk for unlocking Saint. When gaining the Saint trait, you don't need to die first unlike ck2. Edit: they should add that feature back, also for the other Christian faith.
@@SunniJihadWarrior That is the purpose of becoming a Saint. According to Wikipedia here is how to become a Saint in CK2: After the death of a pious character, there is a chance for them to be beatified by the Pope (if Catholic), Patriarch (if Autocephalous), or a local bishop (if other Christian denomination). This beatification can then over time become the canonization, upon which the character in question will be given a bloodline and a province in that character's realm will be given the Tomb of the Saint modifier. If Pagan, the ancestor veneration event happens 3 days after their death, granted by the religious leader of their faith.
7:51 there is a mod that uses the new goverment type of the byzantine empire with a few changes to make republics playable. Basically there are merchant families and their estates and then each one votes for the next ruler of the republic. So basically Paradox already has part of the job done, they just needto pick that and work around it. I mean, it wouldnt be the first time they used mods to implement certain mechanics
the reason there are not naval battles in crusader kings is that during this time period, outside of byzantium, venice, and the fatimids/abassids, naval warfare was not engaged in at all. so perhaps it could be a special mechanic for those tags, but for anyone else it would not be historical until the lategame
2:15 - The thing I really liked about laws, and why I want them back, is because of the political intrigue involved. When your council had voting power, passing laws meant having to get everyone's backing for them and having to make that happen was always fun to me. If they bring laws back, I want you to have to gather votes of some kind again at least unless you have full crown authority. Maybe at the lowest level of crown authority you have to get the majority of vassals, then powerful vassals, then your council and then no one.
They may have laid the groundwork for republics and theocracies with landless play because you have a lot more smooth transition to unrelated dynasties like becoming historical characters mid play
I remember in CK2 always trying to get someone from my dynasty into the Collage of Cardinals and elected Pope. It would be great if we had that layer back in CK3
Great ideas. Tbh i would love a roleplay focused aditions as well, like more interactions with family, lovers, rivals, vassals outside of just what is necessary for gameplay.
I think paradox really locked itself into a corner with the contract system for feudal rulers. If each vassal has its own legal system, there's no real reason to have laws that span throughout the entire realm and that can be influenced by the Council.
I have loads of ideas but top of my list is manpower. Currently if your entire army is wiped out it doesn't really matter. In a few months they'll just respawn like Dothraki. I want to see a system similar to Hearts of Iron where manpower is finite. Long periods of war or heavy casualties should significantly affect your available levies and economic power. This should take years or even decades to recover from. In Hearts of Iron you have to be careful deploying troops and giving battle because once they're gone, they're gone. This would add some strategy into this so-called "grand strategy" game. Right now it's too easy to take any single county and become an unstoppable superpower within 1 lifetime specifically because you have no real deterrents to waging war after war expanding constantly. Oh and get rid of Varangian adventurers. They're annoying. There's nothing immersive or challenging about them. They attack every 5 years like clockwork with similar amounts of troops and they're easy to defeat with men at arms alone. It's more of an annoyance than a genuine threat to my realm. I've NEVER lost against them.
they are already tied a lot to the authority level so i dont know how much they should change to implement actual law systems. also as far as we can see they are trying to keep all these tasty mechanics so its not crucial to ignore most of them. something like holdings buildings. "yeah main thing is the castle/city/church. you can lvl it up, and build some variety of buildings depends on your culture and terrain. itd make your game significantly better" -> "yeah main thing is your tribal/feudal/clan land. you can lvl up its authority, and pass new laws depends on your culture and faith. itd make your game significantly better"
I know we are talking about features here and I know my opinion might be unpopular... but I loved the 769 start date. The more time to play the better!
I could be wrong, but I think Paradox has consciously excluded many of these features in CK3 because they have made the decision that CK3 is something in between a strategy and role-playing game, whereas the successor-in-time games are strategy games. And they have also decided to focus on the role-playing aspects of the game and to make the strategy aspects just good enough. This is why I don't think we'll ever see any real improvement in the warfighting aspects of the game. But one thing I would like to see that I think does bridge the gap between role playing and strategy is to ability to meddle in other realms. Medieval rulers often took opportunities to sow dissension among enemy dynasties by supporting rival claimants to the throne. They were rarely successful in getting said rival claimant on the throne, but that wasn't necessarily the end goal.
If the goal is role play then they should actually make some mechanics that support it. As it is now the only rp is whatever you headcanon your own actions as and then gaslight yourself into thinking the npc characters have any real depth.
Correction: CK2 had no naval combat. It had ships, but they acted solely as troop transports, and they were just tedious to interact with while not adding anything unique or interesting.
I think trade would be good but mostly as a modifier for the gold and development you get from port buildings, so it's less a case of just building a port and calling it a day and more about securing trade routes to maximise it's utility. The actual commodities you trade in are more of just a historical tidbit, something that could be accounted for in flavour text that rationalises the value of any given trade route. All of these are good ideas I'd say, even though naval warfare would tip the scales in favour of Venice, the Byzantines aswell as Arab and Berber cultures if it was implemented historically, allowing them all to dominate the mediterranean and mostly compete amongst each other- I quite like reflecting the historical conditions through gameplay and this would be accurate. It would add a dimension to the politics of Crusades if securing the support of a city-state like Venice was crucial to combating the naval advantage of the Muslim realms. The main thing I want to see that isn't on this list is East Asia. As it stands the Mongolian Empire is a pretty major in game event and with the addition of Timujin himself in the 1178 start date they clearly want more people to use the "Become the Greatest of Khans" decision, but you only get to play a pretend version of the Mongolian empire that doesn't include their dominion over China or their struggles and ultimate failure to subjegate Japan, the Viets and South-east Asia. Plus having East Asia on the map would dove tail well with trade mechanics since China would be a significant trade route even with a few degrees of separation, let alone the more direct trade that was facilitated by the Khan and the silk road which medieval traders coveted greatly. Plus the way the map cuts off in the east looks rough anyway, I really hope it isn't going to look like that and stay such an insignificant part of the gameplay despite it's actual historical significance.
Trade does not make sense for this time period until Genghis Khan connects the east to the west. Before this it was just small time trade between guilds. Everything else has some realism.
Completely agree, I miss fighting with your council to get the laws you want. After a couple of years of CK3 I tried going back to CK2 and... felt dumber? Had it been that long? Whatever the reason I struggled at a game I have over 2k hours in. No where near mastered, but enough I should be able to play with muscle memory!
I would love a flavor pack about Italy, it’s my favorite part of the map. I’m not an expert in history so I don’t know what period would be concerned, but it would be cool Also a flavor pack about Africa or Asia would be nice, these regions are very underexploited in DLCs
At this point, I'd settle for them having half the stability they had before the 1.13; CK3 was never all that stable, but the game has crashed more in the last month than the four years before that. Four hotfixes back to back in the last two weeks just confirms it.
The developers really need to do something about crusades. I can't believe so many DLCs and updates have been released without anything to fix or improve the broken crusading mechanics. In my current game the papacy and other crusaders were walking backwards and forwards in Italy, embarking then disembarking. As I'm the most powerful ruler in the world (because this game is easy) I took the initiative and landed in Jerusalem. Nobody followed me. So soon after disembarking my entire army of 12,000 was wiped out by the 50,000 strong Muslim armies. The AI thought this was the right time to finally join the crusade. A few thousand at a time, immediately getting wiped out. Crusade over.
Jack, the reason the crusades succeeded in the first place was due to Muslim☪️ disunity after sultan malikşah’s murder, not poor ck3 ai… changing the ai would not make it more realistic… consider this jack…
@@user-gw2uq4fr8p Having a target area to assemble armies would be useful though, Instead of trying to guess when and where the popes armies will land or floating off the coast of Jeusalem whilst your supplies run out.
When I first played ck3 and realized how naval transport worked I just thought “ok so they decided to make this a toy game”, instead of making navy less clunky they just got rid of it. It made me immediately understand how ck3 was a “dumbed down” version of ck2, like ck3 is duplo to ck2’s lego
CK2's organization of realm laws, trade, and military was sooooo much better. The devs cut a lot of a content in the transition from CK2 to CK3 so they can just repackage the content again as DLC 2.0.
Agreed on all points. Further - Monks & Mystics and Way of Life: In my opinion, these were some of the most fun DLCs the original had. They added in some incredible replay ability, and Monks & Mystics had a soundtrack that still sounds amazing to this day. "Sunset Invasion" & "Old Gods": Old Gods was a favorite for everyone, with raiding, pillaging and beards, and the implementation of paganism into the game. And that absolutely epic soundtrack. Adding in more of the material that we received in Old Gods would open up more unconventional areas outside of the standard starts. Could be combined with "Sunset Invasion" to provide the additional pagan cultures of Aztec and Maya, and to balance out the game for Eastern locations, by challenging the western start positions. The Republic & Naval Combat: Would be easily added in, and would be great, totally agreed.
I don't like the unhistorical prince elektor what ever system for the HRE in CK3. Would be more fun if this would be a decision in late game or so. A HRE DLC would be really great.
The naval game is so silly honestly, I was playing as the kingdom of sardinia and I could do literally nothing to defend my island from naval invasions in full fledged wars
Just attack as soon as they get off the boat with their debuff! Just kidding, I wonder if there could even be a simple building that’s coastal exclusive that makes the enemy take losses as they disembark.
@@BHPOfficial I mean, I wish I could, but when I move my troops around they change trajectory instantly as if they knew while at sea where the troops on the land are, and so I usually do a bit of back and forth but then they land 2 provinces away and in the meantime I arrive their debuff is gone.
we need the revamp of Christianity as a whole imo, the church didn't split until 1054, they gradualy grew apart until the excommunication of each others. Before the split, they focused on the miaphysite and the nestorians too 😂 so there's a need of let's say strugle mechanic for the church, to keep it or break it apart. Every kingdom or emperor also need their own bishops, or metropolitans, there should be 5 tittle of popes/patriarchs too and every king or emperor could influence all 5 elections. Also, during Justinian reign, the Miaphysite (Apostolic and Coptic) almost unite with the Chalcedonian (Orthodox and Catholic). So either HRE or ERE could push for the reunification of the churches, inturn either abolishing their popes or make them new popes.
In the Orthodox world, the Emperor and Patriarch/Pope had are the same, so the emperor could crown themselves whilst in the catholic world, the emperor need to be crowned, so this thing can start to happen after the split.
there's also a need for update for Orthodox churches, there are 4 old patriarchates, and the patriarch can appoint metropolitans, and these metropolitans can grow into a patriarchate. That's what happened to the Russian patriarchate, they started of as a bishopric in Kiev iirc, well that's what happens to all other patriarchates like Bulgaria, Georgia, Serbia, etc. When a realm is big enough, and they rule a different culture and language from the old patriarchates, they can establish their own patriarchates because Orthodox churches aren't like the catholics where everyone should understand latin, everyone should bow to rome, and rome are the one to made laws, Orthodox are basically a council of elders from different communities trying to benefit their people while also keeping the church intact, well you could say that I guess.
the admin gov already opened a path for that, like that Empire faith, so if an orthodox realm establish a new patriarchate they can change the law of their church, like language from greek into lets say slavonic for russian and serbian, and then inheritance, woman can inherit lands in the Nubian lands and in some cases, the king can participate in masses, yea a lay man like the king, can help the priest in masses. This can also make the Orthodox to have crusade too, for some patriarchates, like how the russian patriarch support the expansion of russia into muslim tatar lands
One fantastic DLC would be adding in the "age of discovery" allowing the game to continue past its current end date. The DLC could include naval units, maval combat, republics and new trade features. All this stuff would also be available in earlier time periods. Allowing you to form the Dutch naval trade republic hundreds of years earlier. Each of these features on itself can also add so much to the experience. For example a viking playthrough would benefit greatly from the Naval and trade features.
That's for EU4/5 not CK3. The medieval ages ended in 1453 with the fall of the Roman Empire and Crusader Kings takes place during the medieval ages, so a straight up *no*
Peace negotiations and better occupations. Virtually ever Paradox game has them, except CK3. I'm sick of having all my occupied territory garrisons suddenly switching sides because some random twat inherited the land, or their liege recognized their independence, or some other nonsense like an invalidated CB.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Get any Paradox game on the cheap or any other game you seek right here at Instant Gaming: www.instant-gaming.com/?igr=andysinstantgaming
Paradox could easily do a major expansion centered around Venice, which includes laws, more councillor actions, trade, republics, and navies. Perfect update for them as all of them go hand in hand with the Venice flavor
You just cooked up the most expensive dlc in paradox history.
Let him cook 🗣️🔥🔥🔥
@@fredriknumse8991thats at least 2, maybe 3 modding team trully impossible for paradox
If you look back at the floor plan, when discussing trade and merchant republics (Venice), they talk about how it may relate to certain new lifestyles. I am 99% sure that this will involve some sort of new merchant lifestyle that works with landless gameplay. Then, add the fact that the new admin government could very easily be adapted to republic gameplay, and I would be willing to bet $100 that the next chapter will include republics + trade
@@stoopidapples1596 Would be epic
Something tells me the whole landless system was made as a stepping stone for more complicated governments like Republics and Nomads, since landless can now act as a safety net for what would have otherwise been a difficult government to play as (in terms of dynastic succession).
To top it all off would be doing expansions basing on historic elective theocracies, just so we can play as feudal prince-bishoprics
very true
ck3 will eternally be held back because the game is hard coded at the county level, you can not have barony level interactions outside of directly owning the barony or not directly owning a barony. you cant have a papal vassal in vaticano, you cant have a ecumenical patriarch vassal without giving them a county, etc. you cant have an independent jerusalem in acre
@@Typhoonoverwatch iisnt it the same with ck2?
in ck2 you couldnt even see the barony
@@Zack-fu4lo You could see them pretty easily, I don't know what you're talking about.
Missed mentioning:
Nomad Governments. Right now, Ghengis plays like Ragnar or the king of Somalia.... a nomadic/pastoral government could apply to most of central/sahelian africa too btw.
Monasticism. While the societies content wasnt very in depth in ck2, they did try to represent the monastic orders. Would be interesting to have them operate like a peaceful alternative holy orders, taking church or city holdings giving you buffs or growing decaden or acting as another religious actor.
Banking. Actual banking would be interesting. Rn the pope and holy orders act as banks. while not entirely false, this wasnt their role and actual banking guilds or the -jews- existed for that.
ah true, I forgot about monasticism! the others too of course, but the order thing was fun flavour
Yeah Nomadic people and Hordes are my most wanted feature. They could give Tribal government also some love alongside that as you said.
Nomads governments are the most critical part imho.
The Eurasian steppes were history determiners in Eurasia, it was the continent's highway, it's where Genghis Khan finally united east and west
And most importantly it was empty. Very empty.
They fact that all nomad peoples are settled down, and the entire steppe for that matter is dotted with permanent settlements quite simply disrupts any realistic historical dynamics to be had ACRODS THE MAP
One simple example is Byzantium snaking up the pontic steppe.
banking should probably come as free update together with religious expansion dlc maybe
my biggest grind with this game has always been the lack of any real laws and the fact the council are just nothing more then stats, i also hate how technology is handeled in this game, you can cross the world, and yet you might still be as tribal as it gets despite living in the byzantine empire potentially for a 100 years, just because its tied to your culture.
They need to rework the Orthodox faith system. The Ecumenical Patriach shouldn't be seen as head of faith like the pope is, because other Orthodox empires had their own patriarchs. And the church should have a much much bigger role, I'm guessing when they make this dlc at some point they'll make the theocratic realms playable as well.
Also, orthodoxy in 867, centuries before the schism 💀
They should expand the Schism Mechanics too.
Because in 867 there was an Ecumenical Council underway that could have caused the Schism sooner.
Up ! We need church have bigger role ofc
@@acekoala457 The "what" is losing the Ecumenism tenet. Whens and whys that are believable and good for gameplay, something like EU4's Reform Desire, still need to be coded.
Yessss! Just adding actual laws and some sort of trade will make this game go from good to great. Sure, navies, republics...etc. are all very nice, but just some basic laws and trade would add so much depth. I mean... it is a grand strategy game after all.
An excellent point, Joshua
My wishlist mainly involves elements that improve character interactions. I'd love to see council mechanics similar to CK2's Conclave. I also wish they did more with that House feud mechanic they introduced a couple years ago. I'd love to see multi-generational rivalries between houses. Maybe you get a big prestige bonus for undermining members of the rival house, like taking their land or making other nobles have a negative opinion of them. Generally, I'd just like AI characters to play a more active roll in the game, rather than just be brainless nobodies waiting for me to conquer them
Trade is the most important feature they should add in the short term in my opinion, mostly to introduce it somewhat early so they can build on top of it in later DLC
I imagine we see nomads pretty soon due to how easily they could be bolted onto the adventurer system. Then there's of course the inevitable crusade/Christianity overhaul (perhaps paired with a warfare overhaul), and the likely China expansion (credibly rumored to be an actual expansion of the map to east Asia, as far out as Japan, but at least an abstract China like in CK2. Plus, the admin govt was born to represent China). I would like to see trade as well, and we'll doubtlessly get it eventually, but it's more far removed from the groundwork they've already laid than most of the other things I mentioned and so it may come later on. Who knows though.
I'm against the implementation of full trade, because it's the wrong time period for it. There was trade, but you didn't see the god tiers level of wealth that you saw during the time of the Ottomans and Venetians. It was typically small time trade between guilds across the water, often facilitated by vikings or the biggest player, the byzantines, before the Ottomans took it from them. Venice itself only facilitated trade from the Byzantines(acting as a protector for ships against pirates) and didn't develop the spice/coffee trade until well after the year 1200.
Basically you couldn't have real trade in this game UNTIL the mongols are formed, because they are the ones who created the route to make it happen. So it's like at the end of the game...
EDIT = Just go play EU4 or Vicky 3 if you want trade, they are both far more correct of a time period of it.
Please someone send this to the dev team , all points are bangers and need to be ingame three years ago
The problem is that the AI can just never make the navies work. If we want the AI to properly make use of naval travel and invasions and all the rest, the current system works.
Stop making excuses for paradox
@@whodis3489 I think Paradox could make Naval combat a thing. I also think they wouldnt exactly add much to the game for most playthroughs. A lot of work for little gain. I would rather have Paradox gives us Nomads/Hordes, Trade, Merchant Republics etc. There are easy 10 other things I would rather have than navies.
I dont want naval battles. There's a reason they haven't just copy pasted the system from other games; it wouldnt make historical sense in the time period. What I would like to see is a naval range/power system, so you couldn't just nonchalantly sail to India as a petty king of Ireland in 867, and to determine your capacity for naval trade/protecting your trade routes (once we have trade of course. I think these two features would fit well together on one dlc.)
@@WARGORELORD You cannot have merchant republics without navies, you are contradicting yourself.
@@meanwhilepalmer7993 Now that makes sense to me.
In the Forums they hinted once that they want to do Republics, Trade and Nomads properly this time.
A Religious Overhaul is also something that is overdue. Not only for catholics.
One thing that I can imagine working better than in CK2 is actually societies. Chilvarous Orders, Warrior Lodges, Assassins etc. Could work so much more reasonable with Adventurers.
Would be cool if they didn’t have Catholic and Orthodox divide in the earliest start date bc it didn’t exist like that yet. They were still technically all under the same church they just had differences in their worship etc. Latin rite and Greek rite (CK2 had a mod to change it to that any date before the great schism but I don’t think CK3 does)
Good video Andy. While CK3 has taken some steps forward, they still have a ways to go and it’s crazy that we’re still missing trade and republics this far into the game’s life. It’s a sad reality of Paradox games that you have to wait a decade after a game’s release to get the full experience
In terms of catholicism I really miss some kind of investiture. The ability to appoint your own bishops or even antipope would be nice. the actual system that your temple holdings are leased by some dudes is just awful.
The "papal investiture for everyone, in a plurality of faiths too" is bad. I don't like single digit bishops; good luck getting rid of them in a faith without excommunication.
I agree, to some extent, but I still think having the core DOs and DON'Ts tied to culture and religion makes sense. It's not just about what laws are in place - it's also about your character's ability to enforce them, which is why so much of that takes place in throne room events. Maybe they could do something similar for the council? Also, I really like the base-building aspects of camps and estates - I think it would be really cool if they could make that work with legacies, correspondence, dynasty interactions, etc. You family's home estate, basically
Conclave DLC was regarded as one of the worst features in CK2. I personally loved it.
I hated it with a purple passion when it came out and then, as I understood how it worked more and more, ended up refusing to ever play WITHOUT it. Great addition to the game!
always thought it was one of the best!
Agree wit a lot of this but the comment on Navies. Naval battles were rare in this time period and manny didn’t have standing navies like ck2 system did. I suppose the discounts you et for naval paths represent the increase and ease of ship marking which while not as fun as building them isn’t tedious or limiting.
Navies were actually pretty important. Especially considering this is a game which focuses heavily on the Vikings. The Norse attacks were driven away just as often by the implementation of powerful and standing navies. Wessex made a concerted effort to build up a strong and effective navy to combat the Vikings.
Likewise, The Ummayyads of Cordova and Byzantines drove off Viking attacks with their navies numerous times.
Navies were especially important in the environment of the Mediterranean. Venice and Genoa tore the Mediterranean apart for centuries with their rivalry, which was played out at sea. Even earlier, Byzantium and the Arabs spent a long time fighting each other at sea.
LOL imagine playing a merchant republic with no navy, it would be an absolute joke
@@whodis3489 Byzantium: "My Emperor, the Venetians are Revolting!"
Genoa: "Yes, they are!"
@@TheSamuraijim87 It's funny how he wrote "Naval battles were rare in this time period" while the Roman (Byzantine) navy was a large and crucial thing for its survival and when disgusting Andronikos disbanded it, it let the Turks just blitz straight into Europe after taking Gallipoli
Nice video, I agree on everything except the navies. As someone with 5k hours on EU4 I'm still finding myself playing more and more CK3 recently instead. It just feels good to play a game without too many clunky mechanics that barely bring any extra satisfaction. Island and colonial gameplay is one of the things i dread the most in eu4, from the tediousness of selecting hundreds of ships or having to recover them from all round the world, and the automatic transport system thats just a pain sometimes.
I miss the ck2 monks and mystics content, specially the satanists and the eagle warriors. Playing as a trade republic was really fun too.
Also in ck2 you had by chance to become a Saint if you lived a holy life. Only if the Catholic church chose you to become one after death.
In ck3 is a bit boring with the Saint system, since you only need to do a religious legend and choose the correct family perk for unlocking Saint. When gaining the Saint trait, you don't need to die first unlike ck2.
Edit: they should add that feature back, also for the other Christian faith.
What can a dead man do with a trait
@@SunniJihadWarrior That is the purpose of becoming a Saint. According to Wikipedia here is how to become a Saint in CK2:
After the death of a pious character, there is a chance for them to be beatified by the Pope (if Catholic), Patriarch (if Autocephalous), or a local bishop (if other Christian denomination).
This beatification can then over time become the canonization, upon which the character in question will be given a bloodline and a province in that character's realm will be given the Tomb of the Saint modifier.
If Pagan, the ancestor veneration event happens 3 days after their death, granted by the religious leader of their faith.
@@SunniJihadWarrior You can get the bloodline of a Saint for all his descendants i believe, which is so much better than Legends
I still think it is weird that you can form the empire of Russia 800 years early... with the capital at Kyiv. Historically accurate much?
7:51 there is a mod that uses the new goverment type of the byzantine empire with a few changes to make republics playable. Basically there are merchant families and their estates and then each one votes for the next ruler of the republic. So basically Paradox already has part of the job done, they just needto pick that and work around it.
I mean, it wouldnt be the first time they used mods to implement certain mechanics
the reason there are not naval battles in crusader kings is that during this time period, outside of byzantium, venice, and the fatimids/abassids, naval warfare was not engaged in at all. so perhaps it could be a special mechanic for those tags, but for anyone else it would not be historical until the lategame
Genoa
Pisa
France
Crete pirate s
Cholas
2:15 - The thing I really liked about laws, and why I want them back, is because of the political intrigue involved. When your council had voting power, passing laws meant having to get everyone's backing for them and having to make that happen was always fun to me. If they bring laws back, I want you to have to gather votes of some kind again at least unless you have full crown authority. Maybe at the lowest level of crown authority you have to get the majority of vassals, then powerful vassals, then your council and then no one.
indeed, that was a lot of fun!
They may have laid the groundwork for republics and theocracies with landless play because you have a lot more smooth transition to unrelated dynasties like becoming historical characters mid play
I remember in CK2 always trying to get someone from my dynasty into the Collage of Cardinals and elected Pope. It would be great if we had that layer back in CK3
Great ideas. Tbh i would love a roleplay focused aditions as well, like more interactions with family, lovers, rivals, vassals outside of just what is necessary for gameplay.
I think paradox really locked itself into a corner with the contract system for feudal rulers.
If each vassal has its own legal system, there's no real reason to have laws that span throughout the entire realm and that can be influenced by the Council.
I have loads of ideas but top of my list is manpower. Currently if your entire army is wiped out it doesn't really matter. In a few months they'll just respawn like Dothraki. I want to see a system similar to Hearts of Iron where manpower is finite. Long periods of war or heavy casualties should significantly affect your available levies and economic power. This should take years or even decades to recover from. In Hearts of Iron you have to be careful deploying troops and giving battle because once they're gone, they're gone. This would add some strategy into this so-called "grand strategy" game. Right now it's too easy to take any single county and become an unstoppable superpower within 1 lifetime specifically because you have no real deterrents to waging war after war expanding constantly.
Oh and get rid of Varangian adventurers. They're annoying. There's nothing immersive or challenging about them. They attack every 5 years like clockwork with similar amounts of troops and they're easy to defeat with men at arms alone. It's more of an annoyance than a genuine threat to my realm. I've NEVER lost against them.
why not a caravan adventurer? i feel that's be the most accurate way to do the movement of goods
Good points especially on trade and laws
they are already tied a lot to the authority level so i dont know how much they should change to implement actual law systems.
also as far as we can see they are trying to keep all these tasty mechanics so its not crucial to ignore most of them.
something like holdings buildings. "yeah main thing is the castle/city/church. you can lvl it up, and build some variety of buildings depends on your culture and terrain. itd make your game significantly better" -> "yeah main thing is your tribal/feudal/clan land. you can lvl up its authority, and pass new laws depends on your culture and faith. itd make your game significantly better"
I know we are talking about features here and I know my opinion might be unpopular... but I loved the 769 start date. The more time to play the better!
Quinton, ask yourself this… how often do you reach 1453? Even in the latest start date, it is doubtful you will reach the end of the game….
Lol I’m completely fine with no navies don’t hoi4 ck3
Can you rank all paradox games please
Great video!
I could be wrong, but I think Paradox has consciously excluded many of these features in CK3 because they have made the decision that CK3 is something in between a strategy and role-playing game, whereas the successor-in-time games are strategy games. And they have also decided to focus on the role-playing aspects of the game and to make the strategy aspects just good enough. This is why I don't think we'll ever see any real improvement in the warfighting aspects of the game.
But one thing I would like to see that I think does bridge the gap between role playing and strategy is to ability to meddle in other realms. Medieval rulers often took opportunities to sow dissension among enemy dynasties by supporting rival claimants to the throne. They were rarely successful in getting said rival claimant on the throne, but that wasn't necessarily the end goal.
If the goal is role play then they should actually make some mechanics that support it. As it is now the only rp is whatever you headcanon your own actions as and then gaslight yourself into thinking the npc characters have any real depth.
Correction: CK2 had no naval combat. It had ships, but they acted solely as troop transports, and they were just tedious to interact with while not adding anything unique or interesting.
dont be afraid, until 2030 we should have to most of your wishes fullfilled
I think trade would be good but mostly as a modifier for the gold and development you get from port buildings, so it's less a case of just building a port and calling it a day and more about securing trade routes to maximise it's utility. The actual commodities you trade in are more of just a historical tidbit, something that could be accounted for in flavour text that rationalises the value of any given trade route.
All of these are good ideas I'd say, even though naval warfare would tip the scales in favour of Venice, the Byzantines aswell as Arab and Berber cultures if it was implemented historically, allowing them all to dominate the mediterranean and mostly compete amongst each other- I quite like reflecting the historical conditions through gameplay and this would be accurate. It would add a dimension to the politics of Crusades if securing the support of a city-state like Venice was crucial to combating the naval advantage of the Muslim realms.
The main thing I want to see that isn't on this list is East Asia. As it stands the Mongolian Empire is a pretty major in game event and with the addition of Timujin himself in the 1178 start date they clearly want more people to use the "Become the Greatest of Khans" decision, but you only get to play a pretend version of the Mongolian empire that doesn't include their dominion over China or their struggles and ultimate failure to subjegate Japan, the Viets and South-east Asia. Plus having East Asia on the map would dove tail well with trade mechanics since China would be a significant trade route even with a few degrees of separation, let alone the more direct trade that was facilitated by the Khan and the silk road which medieval traders coveted greatly. Plus the way the map cuts off in the east looks rough anyway, I really hope it isn't going to look like that and stay such an insignificant part of the gameplay despite it's actual historical significance.
Trade does not make sense for this time period until Genghis Khan connects the east to the west. Before this it was just small time trade between guilds. Everything else has some realism.
Completely agree, I miss fighting with your council to get the laws you want. After a couple of years of CK3 I tried going back to CK2 and... felt dumber? Had it been that long? Whatever the reason I struggled at a game I have over 2k hours in. No where near mastered, but enough I should be able to play with muscle memory!
I would love a flavor pack about Italy, it’s my favorite part of the map. I’m not an expert in history so I don’t know what period would be concerned, but it would be cool
Also a flavor pack about Africa or Asia would be nice, these regions are very underexploited in DLCs
The estate system could be the biggest step to republics and theocracies being playable
idk ab that but the camp system is certainly a step towards nomads
God I want naval battles in CK3, it`s going to make AGOT mod just perfect.
At this point, I'd settle for them having half the stability they had before the 1.13; CK3 was never all that stable, but the game has crashed more in the last month than the four years before that. Four hotfixes back to back in the last two weeks just confirms it.
The game also lacks flavor, it annoys me to no end that is the same experience to play as a French noble in 1200 and a Scot in the 800's.
This is a terrible take, Theodoric
The developers really need to do something about crusades. I can't believe so many DLCs and updates have been released without anything to fix or improve the broken crusading mechanics. In my current game the papacy and other crusaders were walking backwards and forwards in Italy, embarking then disembarking. As I'm the most powerful ruler in the world (because this game is easy) I took the initiative and landed in Jerusalem. Nobody followed me. So soon after disembarking my entire army of 12,000 was wiped out by the 50,000 strong Muslim armies. The AI thought this was the right time to finally join the crusade. A few thousand at a time, immediately getting wiped out. Crusade over.
Jack, the reason the crusades succeeded in the first place was due to Muslim☪️ disunity after sultan malikşah’s murder, not poor ck3 ai… changing the ai would not make it more realistic… consider this jack…
@@user-gw2uq4fr8p Having a target area to assemble armies would be useful though, Instead of trying to guess when and where the popes armies will land or floating off the coast of Jeusalem whilst your supplies run out.
When I first played ck3 and realized how naval transport worked I just thought “ok so they decided to make this a toy game”, instead of making navy less clunky they just got rid of it. It made me immediately understand how ck3 was a “dumbed down” version of ck2, like ck3 is duplo to ck2’s lego
CK2's organization of realm laws, trade, and military was sooooo much better. The devs cut a lot of a content in the transition from CK2 to CK3 so they can just repackage the content again as DLC 2.0.
conclave features, nomads, republics asap
A major addition for me is for console to get updated like pc :(
What map mod is this?
Agreed on all points.
Further -
Monks & Mystics and Way of Life: In my opinion, these were some of the most fun DLCs the original had. They added in some incredible replay ability, and Monks & Mystics had a soundtrack that still sounds amazing to this day.
"Sunset Invasion" & "Old Gods": Old Gods was a favorite for everyone, with raiding, pillaging and beards, and the implementation of paganism into the game. And that absolutely epic soundtrack. Adding in more of the material that we received in Old Gods would open up more unconventional areas outside of the standard starts. Could be combined with "Sunset Invasion" to provide the additional pagan cultures of Aztec and Maya, and to balance out the game for Eastern locations, by challenging the western start positions.
The Republic & Naval Combat: Would be easily added in, and would be great, totally agreed.
what people miss constantly is that CK3 is not aiming to be a grand strategy game but a mediaeval noble sims game.
An interesting point of view, Marcin Kalbarcyzk
Baaically a grand strategy rp game😃
Lmao just saw your sponsorship and i missed a good chance at offers☠️
I ended up buying CK3 and all its DLCs @ 117 Dollars damn...
I don't like the unhistorical prince elektor what ever system for the HRE in CK3. Would be more fun if this would be a decision in late game or so. A HRE DLC would be really great.
They could also add resources
Game of thrones mod is the reason most are playing this
The naval game is so silly honestly, I was playing as the kingdom of sardinia and I could do literally nothing to defend my island from naval invasions in full fledged wars
Just attack as soon as they get off the boat with their debuff! Just kidding, I wonder if there could even be a simple building that’s coastal exclusive that makes the enemy take losses as they disembark.
@@BHPOfficial I mean, I wish I could, but when I move my troops around they change trajectory instantly as if they knew while at sea where the troops on the land are, and so I usually do a bit of back and forth but then they land 2 provinces away and in the meantime I arrive their debuff is gone.
@@Augustus_Imperator I do hate how fast they turn around and run lol 3000 troops aren’t turning around that fast ever 😂
I don't care much for CK3 anymore now that EU5 hype is in full swing
Crusader kings didn't have navies either
We definitely need more mechanics to make the game more interesting.
we need the revamp of Christianity as a whole imo, the church didn't split until 1054, they gradualy grew apart until the excommunication of each others. Before the split, they focused on the miaphysite and the nestorians too 😂 so there's a need of let's say strugle mechanic for the church, to keep it or break it apart. Every kingdom or emperor also need their own bishops, or metropolitans, there should be 5 tittle of popes/patriarchs too and every king or emperor could influence all 5 elections.
Also, during Justinian reign, the Miaphysite (Apostolic and Coptic) almost unite with the Chalcedonian (Orthodox and Catholic). So either HRE or ERE could push for the reunification of the churches, inturn either abolishing their popes or make them new popes.
In the Orthodox world, the Emperor and Patriarch/Pope had are the same, so the emperor could crown themselves whilst in the catholic world, the emperor need to be crowned, so this thing can start to happen after the split.
there's also a need for update for Orthodox churches, there are 4 old patriarchates, and the patriarch can appoint metropolitans, and these metropolitans can grow into a patriarchate. That's what happened to the Russian patriarchate, they started of as a bishopric in Kiev iirc, well that's what happens to all other patriarchates like Bulgaria, Georgia, Serbia, etc. When a realm is big enough, and they rule a different culture and language from the old patriarchates, they can establish their own patriarchates because Orthodox churches aren't like the catholics where everyone should understand latin, everyone should bow to rome, and rome are the one to made laws, Orthodox are basically a council of elders from different communities trying to benefit their people while also keeping the church intact, well you could say that I guess.
the admin gov already opened a path for that, like that Empire faith, so if an orthodox realm establish a new patriarchate they can change the law of their church, like language from greek into lets say slavonic for russian and serbian, and then inheritance, woman can inherit lands in the Nubian lands and in some cases, the king can participate in masses, yea a lay man like the king, can help the priest in masses. This can also make the Orthodox to have crusade too, for some patriarchates, like how the russian patriarch support the expansion of russia into muslim tatar lands
4-7 years. Boss, I need to quit this.
I disliked the CK2 navy system.
I also dislike that CK3 just does not have it.
The laws in ck2 were kinda mid
One fantastic DLC would be adding in the "age of discovery" allowing the game to continue past its current end date. The DLC could include naval units, maval combat, republics and new trade features. All this stuff would also be available in earlier time periods. Allowing you to form the Dutch naval trade republic hundreds of years earlier. Each of these features on itself can also add so much to the experience. For example a viking playthrough would benefit greatly from the Naval and trade features.
That's for EU4/5 not CK3. The medieval ages ended in 1453 with the fall of the Roman Empire and Crusader Kings takes place during the medieval ages, so a straight up *no*
We need a serious naval update
I'm hoping for a dlc that allows republican gameplay
Peace negotiations and better occupations. Virtually ever Paradox game has them, except CK3. I'm sick of having all my occupied territory garrisons suddenly switching sides because some random twat inherited the land, or their liege recognized their independence, or some other nonsense like an invalidated CB.
Just make a Italy focussed DLC giving republics and Catholic overhaul + trade. Ok thanks bye
Same will happen to EU5. Will be barebone. I stick to the old ones. So many things to to there
Idk EU5 looks hella ambitious from the DDs. If anything it might be too bloated buggy and janky on release.
Go play Port Royale if you want to trade ffs
It's not 7 it's more like 70 ui is ass and unusable and game gets quite stale after 1 playthrough