I need some opinions on CK2 (revisited)

What games in the past best resemble this game? (Crusader Kings 2)

I'm used to strategy games like Age of Empires, Age of Wonders, Lords of the Realm, Rise of Nations, Age of Mythology, Heroes of Might and Magic, Warlords, Disciples, Stronghold, Fantasy General, Tzar, Knights and Merchants and others.

So knowing the type of strategy game that I enjoy - Will I like CK2? Or will I most likely find CK2 too slow and boring for my liking and not enough action, etc?

Honest answers/opinions please

Many thanks.

PS. This is discussed partially in another thread I created. But I wanted more focus on this particular question before I dump loads of cash on a game and a sea of DLC.

Whatever you do…. wait for a sale. The game and dlc is often down 75%.

Other than that I recommend you simply watch a let's play. This type of game is relatively unique to Paradox' strategy games.

All of their games have similarities like europa universalis series and hearts of iron series.

I love the games but it takes many hours to learn the game.

The game is hard to learn and much harder to master unlike most other games on your list.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

hmmmm

So knowing the games I listed and like a lot, for someone who has never played CK2 before, think I would like it? I have never played a strategy game before like CK2.

Those games are not really similar to what Paradox do.
Some of the games you listed, like Age of Empire, would look like action games compared to Paradox games.
The other games are not in the right scale, would lack details and depth or not on the same focus.
But, if you think you can like complex game, with a steep learning curve but quite rewarding when you get it, try them.
On top of what Pladio says I would advise you to pay a visit to paradoxplaza website.
In the forum you will find some AAR (After Action Reports) which are player reports of their games. Some of them are quite good but more importantly for you would give you a good feedback of what you can expect.

Yes, you will find CK2 too slow and boring for your liking. Also, you don't need DLCs at all, if you buy the base game for $9 you can play it just fine.
Curiously, I started a game yesterday to quick check something out, and ended up playing for like 5 hours My ruler at the end ended up one-handed, one-legged, severely wounded, eunuch and possessed.

Didn't we just do this?

Crusader Kings is IN NO WAY like a real time strategy game. There's very little action - it's much more of a thinking game.

If you're looking to stretch out a bit, you might try something like Sins of a Solar Empire. That's essentially a combination between real time strategy and 4X games. Or maybe Star Wars: Empire at War if you want something more retro.

Originally Posted by Kelefane
So knowing the type of strategy game that I enjoy - Will I like CK2? Or will I most likely find CK2 too slow and boring for my liking and not enough action, etc?

I only know 1 game names CK2, and that is "Commander Keen 2".

The best thing to do is to find a stream with a small number of viewers. Streamers try to interact with their viewers and a streamer will gladly spend a dozen minutes to explain the game as he plays it and also will answer various questions.

CK2 is about growing a dynasty. Multiple ways to achieve it. It is not possible to state whether it is going to be slow or boring.
One remark is that world domination (that is unifying the whole map under one dynasty) is possible. This sets a dimension to the pace of the game.

CK2 can be very intensive: there are a tremendous number of decisions to make and information to collect. Players are not forced to take all of them though, far from it so this intensiveness varies largely from one player to another.

To summarize it, the content of a playthrough depends on the inputs of a player. You can spend a full playthrough warring non stop (action packed) as you can stay away from war mostly.

On the dlcs stuff: a few years ago, CK2 could be played without adding any DLC. Right now, it is no longer the case. Paradox conceived each dlc as a new layer and each time a dlic was out, they updated the core game to include new features. Somewhat, dlcs unlock content. With all the additional layers, the consequence is immediate: playing the core game with no dlc will like playing something that is missing a lot of things. The things are here but can not be accessed.

On learning: CK2 has kept adding layers. Learning CK2 over the years was not difficult. Learning it is now is another story. To cope with that demand, devs have made it as you do not need to learn a large share of it to play it. The game can be played with learning 20 pc of it. That makes learning the 80 pc remaining harder.

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
The best thing to do is to find a stream with a small number of viewers. Streamers try to interact with their viewers and a streamer will gladly spend a dozen minutes to explain the game as he plays it and also will answer various questions.

CK2 is about growing a dynasty. Multiple ways to achieve it. It is not possible to state whether it is going to be slow or boring.
One remark is that world domination (that is unifying the whole map under one dynasty) is possible. This sets a dimension to the pace of the game.

CK2 can be very intensive: there are a tremendous number of decisions to make and information to collect. Players are not forced to take all of them though, far from it so this intensiveness varies largely from one player to another.

To summarize it, the content of a playthrough depends on the inputs of a player. You can spend a full playthrough warring non stop (action packed) as you can stay away from war mostly.

On the dlcs stuff: a few years ago, CK2 could be played without adding any DLC. Right now, it is no longer the case. Paradox conceived each dlc as a new layer and each time a dlic was out, they updated the core game to include new features. Somewhat, dlcs unlock content. With all the additional layers, the consequence is immediate: playing the core game with no dlc will like playing something that is missing a lot of things. The things are here but can not be accessed.

On learning: CK2 has kept adding layers. Learning CK2 over the years was not difficult. Learning it is now is another story. To cope with that demand, devs have made it as you do not need to learn a large share of it to play it. The game can be played with learning 20 pc of it. That makes learning the 80 pc remaining harder.

How many (or which DLC) do you think one would actually *need* without getting them all? Surely every one of them isn't needed for a "full enough" experience, no?

As said, you really don't need any of the DLC. Buy DLC when on sale if you feel you need them. Paradox will actually update the base game with the core mechanics even if you dont have them so mods can still use parts of it. Also if you like Game of Thrones lore that mod is absolutely the best thing ever and also does not need any DLC.

There are DLC like the The Republic, Old Gods, Horse Lords, Way of Life, Ruler Designer that make a fair difference in GoT and the main game but are no means required. Most of those are for when you are bored of the main game and want to try a different style of ruling. I like Ruler Designer and Way of Life from an RPG perspective. I've been contemplating getting the Grim Reaper and Conclave DLC but can't really justify it.

I just started a CK2 game yesterday, disabled all DLCs, and it played just fine.

Originally Posted by figment
I've been contemplating getting the Grim Reaper and Conclave DLC but can't really justify it.

Whenever you can (and when it's on sale as always), get the Grim Reaper. I was like you, didn't really see much value in it… "diseases? pfft! why would I want that?", but then I got it on a sale and it does add a nice element of realism, diseases become something to fear, just like they were in the Middle Ages.

Originally Posted by wolfing
I just started a CK2 game yesterday, disabled all DLCs, and it played just fine.


Whenever you can (and when it's on sale as always), get the Grim Reaper. I was like you, didn't really see much value in it… "diseases? pfft! why would I want that?", but then I got it on a sale and it does add a nice element of realism, diseases become something to fear, just like they were in the Middle Ages.

Thanks for the confirmation, I'll pick it up then. I think I confused Conclave with Monk and Mystics and M&M has the artifacts. I thought that might be interesting though forums seem to indicate that it was bugged.

Originally Posted by Kelefane
How many (or which DLC) do you think one would actually *need* without getting them all? Surely every one of them isn't needed for a "full enough" experience, no?

Apart from cosmetics DLCs, Sunset invasion is the only DLC you could not figure out it exists by playing the core game only.

It is like exploring a house. At start, the house has 30 rooms. The way Paradox push their dlcs built up the number of rooms to 100.
In the same situation, when companies sell the core game, the core game features 30 rooms. There is no difference with the core game when it was first released and the core game each time a dlc is released. Adding dlcs later add other rooms.
In CK2, the core game is a now 100 room house, you can access 30 rooms only but it can be deduced that the house is actually much larger. There are dead ends, looking throug a window shows other parts in the house, doors are locked, room dimensions indicate other rooms exist etc

By playing enough, a player who gets into CK2 core game only and is not told of the existence of dlcs will figure out their existence.

This remark is worthwhile for players who get into CK2. Playing two or three runs in the core game will not yield much information, just like exploring the house two or three times give no idea it is actually larger.

There is no answer. Players who get hooked by Ck2 will benefit from playing the whole thing from the start. Players who do not, who are going to play thirty, fourty hours obviously do not need the full game.
Added to that, preferences also play a part. Players might not like this or that DLC, so they do not feel their missing ( they bought it, saw they did not like it and chose to play without it)

Paradox DLC policy is peculiar, the core game no longer exists as it used to everytime a dlc is released and it heavily reflects any DLC that is added.

Originally Posted by figment
Thanks for the confirmation, I'll pick it up then. I think I confused Conclave with Monk and Mystics and M&M has the artifacts. I thought that might be interesting though forums seem to indicate that it was bugged.

It is not bugged. M&M is an interesting piece as it shows Paradox is changing. It is not about releasing half finished products, it is about the care and belief given to the production.

M&M showed a degrading involvement. The satanic secret society is well done, then it is like they lost interest in implementing the rest.
The hermeustic society still showed attention even though the artifacts revealed non carried out ideas, they are not bugs, only remains of previous developpment stages

A sort of frontloading.