Crusader Kings You want death? It's yours my friend?

You want death? It's yours my friend?
Why aren't they getting married?
Navies.
Baby Arm Wrestling...
Wikibox Saga Part III: The Abyssinian Crusade
I have to look at this for the rest of the game now...
Bruh
My character gained the Irritable trait, which enables him to duel people to relieve stress. Who can be challenged to a duel? Apparently anyone...
Egyptian France and a bit more
Mr. Worldwide ��
The Eternal Crusade
First try restoring ancient Carthage (Ironman mode enabled)
Yeah so This Will Be My Last Crusade......
Thanks, I guess?
They start young
This is without doubt the worst peasant leader I've ever heard of
Do you guys think it's possible to create a overhaul mod for She-Ra and the Princess of Power? ��
It gets worse the longer you look at it
Any tips for playing the King of Lotharingia?
Map I made for my old Fylkirate run in CK2, truly the based timeline

You want death? It's yours my friend?

Posted: 26 Sep 2021 10:51 PM PDT

submitted by /u/RiversNaught
[link] [comments]

Why aren't they getting married?

Posted: 26 Sep 2021 08:57 PM PDT

submitted by /u/MixieDad
[link] [comments]

Navies.

Posted: 27 Sep 2021 05:59 AM PDT

I'm thick, I still haven't fully understood why navies and ships were not included in Crusader Kings 3.

Comparing to Civ 5: I thought it was an idiotic and inexplicable move to remove transport ships from Civ 4 to 5. The only conceivable motivation I could distill out of it all was "it's a hassle".

That's it.

Well, isn't the sea supposed to be a hassle? You can't just waltz across it, you need the proper traditions and infrastructure to ferry shit (and armies especially) across.

My understanding is that the removal of navies from CK3 was done in inspiration of Civ 5, but it makes my head hurt even more. Okay, I have 2 main discussions on this topic:

Historicity.

Having ships available at the right times have literally made and unmade empires. When the Byzantines no longer could muster the obscene funds needed to keep a domestic navy ready, they were forced to "outsource" their naval power to Venice. The aftermath of this decision led to the sack of Constantinople in 1204 and the rest is - as they say - history.

The Vikings weren't just some blokes who happened to have some boats lying around. The political and economic structures surrounding shipbuilding were complex and well-organized and legalized. In Scandinavia, the land was organized in a system highly reminiscent of the feudalism in the rest of Europe. The smallest geographical organizational unit of the land (a härad or a hundrade) was literally tied to one ship. A group of villages (led by some kind of chieftain/captain) had to have a seaworthy ship with trained sailors and soldiers ready at all times. This organization so fundamentally shaped local society that until the 1800's, the smallest administrative units of my province in southern Sweden still followed the structures set down by kings before recorded history in order to always have a seaworthy warfleet.

We can go even deeper and turn this into a discussion about how and why Western Europe came to dominate the world from around 1500 AD and onwards, but I'll leave it to you.
Gameplay (or: "The sea is supposed to be a hassle you muppet!")

The only other explanation given to me on this sub was that... Fleets in CK2 were a hassle? I still have problems fully grasping this. Levies in general were a hassle, weren't they? Every war, especially during wars where you were evenly matched, you had to plan how many soldiers to send to what front, how many vassal levies to raise, not to mention which route to take, subdividing armies and march different routes to minimize attrition, etc. But that was also what made the game FUN in my opinion. I love feeling like Belisarius and plotting out my armies' routes. Ships were, at least to me, just another aspect of this? You need to send your army/part of your army across the sea, collect the ships necessary, don't upset the wrong vassals, don't fucking catch scurvy, etc.

And no, I don't understand why fleets are "just" an unnecessary hassle if they "just" are there to transport armies. That's no "just" - that's fucking fundamental wartime logistics isn't it? Read any historical account of any ancient or medieval war that included sea transport and you'll see that the whole problem of getting from A to B if A and B is seperated by the sea C will take up a great deal of the book and almost always leads to much drama.

There were flaws, I admit (and no, the lack of sea battles weren't one of them), one of my main beefs was that Norse rulers could not construct river ports. If they could sail rivers, why couldn't they build ships on those rivers? The historicity of the vikings having ships that navigated the Russian rivers as well as the Atlantic is - in my opinion - dubious as fuck but I'll let that slide.