Chris

Three Moves Ahead 163: Fifty, Alive, and King

Recommended Posts

Three Moves Ahead 163: Fifty, Alive, and King

Rob welcomes freelancer Rowan Kaiser and designer Jon Shafer to talk about Crusader Kings 2. They swap stories, discuss the impact of making a family-based strategy game, and question whether there’s all that much crusading going on here.

Remember to attend the 3MA panel at PAX East this weekend, at 4:30 on Sunday in the Cat Theater. Spread the word!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First time listening to 3MA and even though it took a while to get to the meat of the subject, I'm really liking it:tup:

Crusader King 2 sounds really appealing right now : I'm completely sold to the idea of focusing on a temporary dynasty leader and how it creates a dichotomy between the kingdom's and the character's goal. The thing is, that it sounds like this singular piece of gameplay is buried under a huge amount of hardcore and unrelated E3 feature. And I'm not very good at those.

So should I try it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vimes - I'm glad you are liking Three Moves Ahead. It contains just that little bit of absurdity to grease the way for Idle Thumbs fans. :yep:

Consider Dr. Bruce Geryk's silliness the delightful ooze that will carry you over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really loved Rob's observation about how the dynasty mechanics of this game help illuminate why hereditary monarchs have often been such absolute bastards. Giving the player that kind of perspective into off-putting or completely despicable actions--especially actions that closely resemble actual human history rather than pure invention--seems fairly unique to strategy games or at least most frequently achieved by them.

Games in which the player is expected to fully inhabit one avatar for the entirety of the game tend to be beholden to power fantasy above all else. This game (I gather) puts the player close enough to the events at hand to invest him in a way that his imagination will want to fill in the fictional gaps (the "middle layer"), but preserves enough detachment to allow the kind of bastarding around that authenticity demands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's about right, Chris. There is a loyalty to the line and less to the 'leader'.

However, it's hard to break the habit of identifying with whomever you are playing. Take the issue of Seniority succession - sometimes relatives will fight you to instate a succession law where the eldest family member takes over. (It's great for uniting titles that have been scattered).

Technically, no matter who wins this war, the dynasty still continues and it might make your dynasty stronger and more united. But I find that I still like being in control of my plans - impossible in this game, really - and I resist these civil wars with all my might, when I could easily just surrender.

This is where the role playing side of the game comes most to the for; you have your heir in mind and that might not be an aging uncle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll preface this by saying I haven't listened to the episode yet, I'll fix that shortly.

I have to agree with both of you (Chris and Troy) that CK2 is very much a people simulator rather than a world conquest simulator. Other Paradox games (you'll have to excuse me for not remembering how much TMA has spoken of those before) are very attached to a country. With the exception of that time you must inevitably face in Europa Universalis 3 where you are lead by a Reagent Council, all of the other Paradox grand strategy titles are country simulators. And I think that's kind of a flaw in them.

Often in a game of EU3 I'll find myself thinking outside the, shall we say, box of the game. I'll "meta-game" and happily make use of knowledge and tactics beyond the scope of my character. The problem is that that character is a state, or a country, and I feel no particular connection to the off-white blob to my north. What I do often feel is a lingering animosity towards Austria because whenever I play an HRE country they tend to mess with my plans. So I'll cheat, and scheme and powergame my way to the top, and by the time I take on Austria I already own all of the East Indies, the entire Caribbean and most of Western Europe.

Crusader Kings (both the original and the new) succeeds in making me roleplay something other than Genghis Khan 2.0. I consider the ramifications that appointing Chancellor Jerkface of the Westmarch to Keeper of the Geese will have. In any other game I'd just be prepping my armies to roll over anyone who opposes my actions. A full half my time in Crusader Kings is spent paused, crawling through family trees and relationships looking for weaknesses or flaws in my plan. Crusader Kings more than any game I've ever played can be left running for hours at a time while I go read a book or play another game and contemplate my next five minutes of gameplay.

What I'm saying with unnecessary wind is what you've basically already said. Crusader Kings makes you consider the individual ramifications rather than "Oh well I can take Player 2s gold mines if I wipe out this base." I must admit, I'm worried that I'm not a very nice person because of Crusader Kings. And what more do you really want from a strategy game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vimes - I'm glad you are liking Three Moves Ahead. It contains just that little bit of absurdity to grease the way for Idle Thumbs fans. :yep:

Consider Dr. Bruce Geryk's silliness the delightful ooze that will carry you over.

Err, actually, I think I appreciate 3MA because it's very different from Idle Thumbs : the ratio of silliness is quite low and to be fair, with OneLifeLeft back in the days, the Thumb is pretty much the only silly/insightful podcast that works it for me.

But thanks for the warm welcome.:)

To reiterate my question : I'm pretty much new at Europa Universalis type of strategy games, should I still be able to appreciate Crusader Kings 2? Or is there a better entry point in the genre?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a lot of debate about this, but I think CK2 is most approachable of the big Paradox games because it is so intimate and the goals are quite clear and limited.

EU3 is pretty friendly if you start in certain situations as a newcomer (France in the 1500s for example.) But in general, I would recommend CK2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any podcast that references The Lion in Winter gets me wee bit weak in the knees. However, I do take serious issue with this episode because it isn't about Fall of the Samurai.

Get on it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any podcast that references The Lion in Winter gets me wee bit weak in the knees. However, I do take serious issue with this episode because it isn't about Fall of the Samurai.

Get on it!

Hey bro.

That stache is magnificent. You appear to be having quite a Quincy day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First time listener (ok, who I am kidding? after hearing about the podcast joining the idle thumbs family I subscribed and listened to a bunch of the backlog), first time caller!

I've never been really an hardcore strategy fan, apart from the occasional Civilization or RTS game, but I find really interesting to read about strategy games. And via the podcast I've found a couple games that might interest me already, so I'm thinking of getting my feet wet in the wargaming genre (well, to be honest I tried once with Steel Panthers WaW - that didn't go well).

The interesting thing about CK for gamers like me is the fact it is really a narrative-driven game. You can pretty much decide that the winning condition is telling a good story, and role-play your way through it. In that case, Failing can be as interesting as winning (if you play like that, the closest thing to it I can think of is probably Dwarf Fortress). For someone that usually snoozes through the endgame of things like Civilization, that is a really interesting change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is a lot of debate about this, but I think CK2 is most approachable of the big Paradox games because it is so intimate and the goals are quite clear and limited.

And I'm one of those who disagree with this. ;)

I feel like there are more obscure and punishing rules in CK than in EU where the game is more content to just kind of flow around you. At the very least there's no risk of clicking a single button and accidentally losing half of your empire. ;) Because of the lack of gotchas of this type, I think EU3 is still the best intro to the Paradox lineup.

All that having been said, CK2 is my favorite game that they've put out. :)

- Jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EU3 is the definite forerunner for learning Paradox games. I'd say that it goes

EU3 -> CK -> HoI -> Vicky

That's not to say that Vicky is unplayable, or EU3 is unnecessarily easy, but there are definitely things in the EU series that allow you to ease into it. I wish they'd get around the releasing the retail Magna Mundi game. EU3 is becoming way too easy for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one exception to this rule is a question of personal interest. If you really know Civil War-era US politics, Victoria II is going to be a lot more engaging and intuitive than it is for a lot of people. My pal Erik Hanson, who was on our Pride of Nations episode, really got into that game because he actually knows a lot of what's going on in that time period. It gave him a place from which to start figuring out the game.

In general, I think the debate between CK2 and EU3 is a good one. I'm with Jon that EU3 is probably easier to learn, but I also think it's easier to be bored while you're figuring out EU3 than it is with CK2. CK2 you've just got more stuff to manage: marriage arrangements, vassal loyalty, plotting, province improvements, etc. Even if you haven't figured it all out, you can more easily track the impact your decisions are having on the game. That is a little harder with EU3, I think, even though it may ultimately be a simpler game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can in no way deny that tracking information in EU3 is difficult and arcane. It can take a good while to link all the treaties and alliances together to make sure that declaring war on Sicily isn't going to bring in The Hansa.

But I think that's part of the appeal of EU3, or any Paradox game, at least for me. Alternate reality. What happens if I take control of the Teutonic Order, and they not only survive their ousting from Prussia, but take over the HRE? For reference, France gets really mad at you and allies with the Ottomans to take you down. What.

I'm not sure if you or any of your co-conspirators are aware of this idea Troy, but the idea of mega-games might tickle your fancy. Basically you start in CK (not Rome, the gap in time is too large for decent transfer) and you play to the end of CK. Then you modify a save state of EU3 to have all the appropriate countries and their holdings from your CK game. Then it moves from EU3 to HoI2and then to Ricky (Victoria 1 with Revolutions).

It's an immense amount of effort, relatively speaking, but the one mega-game I've played so far was an interesting exercise in roleplay. If I had just played to the absolute best of my ability I would have owned half the world by the end of CK. So it forces you to stay in character and not make outrageous plays. It's a format often used for Let's Plays of the Paradox catalog, and while most people will never bother, I just thought it's something to point out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not sure if you or any of your co-conspirators are aware of this idea Troy, but the idea of mega-games might tickle your fancy. Basically you start in CK (not Rome, the gap in time is too large for decent transfer) and you play to the end of CK. Then you modify a save state of EU3 to have all the appropriate countries and their holdings from your CK game. Then it moves from EU3 to HoI2and then to Ricky (Victoria 1 with Revolutions).

Yeah, I'm familiar with the MegaGame (but Vicky before HoI right?). Never had the patience to try it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who started listening to TMA a while back and was coming into strategy gaming from RTS games only (mostly Warcraft 2/3) I became very interested in grand strategy games, but was very intimidated and didn't know where to start. I ended up just getting the Paradox complete pack in the steam christmas sale and spent a fair bit of time just trying to figure out what was happening rather than trying to be successful and eventually got to the point where I feel fairly competent in all of the games. As I got the pack in December I don't have CK2 yet, though I've been meaning to. I'd also recommend watching youtube videos of game commentary as it makes things a lot easier to pick up, for me at least. JosefVStalin has a lot of playthroughs of games and does very good commentary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... the idea of mega-games might tickle your fancy. Basically you start in CK (not Rome, the gap in time is too large for decent transfer) and you play to the end of CK. Then you modify a save state of EU3 to have all the appropriate countries and their holdings from your CK game. Then it moves from EU3 to HoI2and then to Ricky (Victoria 1 with Revolutions).

I had never heard of this, but googling shows a side of game-play I've never considered. People with 2 year long mega-games documenting the entire thing. I wish I had that commitment level to anything (just ask my last girlfriend).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I'm familiar with the MegaGame (but Vicky before HoI right?). Never had the patience to try it.

Woops, yeah!

The Paradox forums are a vipers pit of crazy ultra-nationalists, but they do produce the occasional stupendous AAR.

http://lparchive.org/Paradox-Hohenzollern/

This guy over on SA, Wiz, is basically the go-to god of Paradox mega-games. It's worth a read, since he's basically telling a story through the game rather than just playing and documenting it.

Warthuron, I can completely understand what you mean. I've only done one of them, and between conversion and playing it was an exhaustive experience. A fun one no doubt, but draining. How Wiz does it so regularly is beyond me.

Wiz's on-going Azerbaijan mega-game: Here. (Almost done)

And his Crete LP, where he let people on the forums form the senate and make decision about gameplay. That went about as well as you'd expect: Here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally one of the worst things that can in any game is death. From a mechanical viewpoint it's one of the harshest punishments a designer can give to a player, and as a player it's often the one event that can drag you out of immersion in a game. I think this applies just as much in strategy games as in other genre's. One moment I'm the absolute ruler of an empire spanning half a continent, the next I'm a guy sitting in seat looking at a 'game over' screen. Now that all fine and dandy if my loss feels fair, but what if it doesn't?

I think long form game that brings a high amount of randomness to the table can risk frustrating its players. Its not a pleasant feeling to play for 10+ hours and then a random event comes along and totally and utterly screws me over, leaving my plans in ruins.

At this point I’ll normally react in one of three ways:

1.I hit 'reload saved game'.

2.I quit.

3.I feel like banging my head repeatedly against the nearest wall, while screaming in incoherent rage. Before swearing a solemn oath to track down the SoB who put that in the game.

Needless to say, none of these are desirable outcomes.

I think it is telling that Rob says that he wasn't often tempted to reload a CK2 game when something went wrong, and that the only time he did choose to reload was when he had already seen a near ideal scenario play out.

For me the games I enjoy which have random events always have two things in common, they contextualise the events in a believable way, and they give me the opportunity to respond to them.

“everyone understands inherently that family’s are messed up & irrational”

I think Rob’s spot on here, in terms of a explanation for crazy stuff happening I think most people are hard wired to understand the 'crazy family' dynamic, and accept it.

Equally importantly when the shit does hit the fan, even when your character dies in CK its not the end of the world. To nick a phrase from European royalty themselves:

The King is dead, Long live the King.

Once a smart man said a thing about video games, and that thing feels relevant here so I’ll throw it in here:

“The point is that kicking the player out of the execution phase is trivially easy… but making sure he falls back into the composition phase instead of into a load screen is something else.”

I think CK does a excellent job of this allowing all my plots to come crashing down, but ensuring that when it does my instinct is not to hit quit or reload, but to start plotting all over again.

On a side note: has anyone ever played King of Dragon Pass? It's been my iOS crack of the moment and feels like it shares some qualities with CK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Equally importantly when the shit does hit the fan, even when your character dies in CK its not the end of the world

Yep, it's part of what makes the CK series special - setbacks are not only part of the game, they are expected. You can prepare for them and anticipate them, but not entirely avoid them. You may find yourself praying for 20 years of nothing happening just so you can get your lands fertile again. And since you know that nobody is safe because there is no 'snowball effect' to victory (well maybe for Byzantium) then you can wait it out.

I wrote an essay about CK's making you play through the pain a short while ago. (Yes, Bruce, I have to write more.)

On a side note: has anyone ever played King of Dragon Pass? It's been my iOS crack of the moment and feels like it shares some qualities with CK

Such a great game. I have it on my phone but thank God I have the paper manual from the PC version. So much I have forgotten.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Making setbacks fun" is something I really look for in my Grand Strategy Games. The real downfalls of the 4x genre are (1) setbacks are frustrating, not fun, and (2) endgames are long miserable drags. Games like CK2, that are properly described as Grand Strategy Games and manage to avoid these twin flaws, are special.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a side note: has anyone ever played King of Dragon Pass? It's been my iOS crack of the moment and feels like it shares some qualities with CK

Only played the iOS version. It was great, but I stopped when I couldn't remember what I was doing after a longer pause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think KoDP like CK is another of those games that sits teetering on the fence between strategy and rpgs.

In some ways both it CK (& of more so Dwaft Fortress) feel to me to almost be as close to roguelikes as they are to many traditional strategy games.

I mean wikipedia says “The*roguelike*is a sub-genre of role-playing video games, characterized by level randomization, permanent death, and turn-based movement “ and most of those elements seem to be present in one form or another, because as much as you may care about them at this moment there always remains something very 'throwaway' about individuals in CK & KoDP.

“thank God I have the paper manual from the PC version. So much I have forgotten “

Troy I'd be interested to know what info the KoDP printedmanuals provides, because the iOS version is incredibly secretive about the actual mechanics behind the game.

Despite being initially frustrating this feels right for the setting for me. Making sacrifices to the gods wouldn't feel quite the same if I knew 'exactly' how many cattle had to be slaughtered etc.

All that said, boy it occasionally can be seriously unforgiving. What looks like a minor random event can often come bite you hard in the ass a year or so down the line . One day I'm telling a couple a ragged band of Centaurs and Minotaurs led by a Howard the Duck lookalike to get lost, secure in the power of my thanes and strength of my fortifications.

Next year this happens...

apocalypsef.jpg

and as a extra little kick in the teeth I see a little popup

“Game Centre Achievement Unlocked: Beastfolk Apocalypse”

:blink:

I'd love to see some more long form strategy games pop up on iOS, it just feels right to be able to put 10 minutes here & 30 minutes there into a game you know is going to pass that big 10-20 hour mark. That said, it makes the 'just one more turn' problem even worse when you can sit in bed playing something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now