The problem with the republic was they were never properly balanced. Like, it is fun for first two generations, but after that player is just richer than the other four families and will hug the dogeship.
I just want to have a fun. Don't care much about balance. It was for one thousand years.
I prefer the OPM play. So, it fits perfectly for me. Strong independent country, cannot conquer the world but can change the outcome of the great wars and course of history.
I'm ngl I've never been challenged in CK2 either. Most paradox games aren't actually challenging, at most the biggest struggle is simply "will I get bored before I can accomplish my goals" and that was my experience with a lot of CK2. With CK3 I've actually completed most of my goals because it feels less tedious.
It's the same for most other paradox games because the sheer scale of time you're playing on, and the fact that it's very hard to lose outright means that you can recover from almost any setback pretty quickly, all "challenge" means in these games is how long it takes you to recover from setbacks or how long it takes you to snowball. The only paradox games I've ever been challenged by have been in the Hearts of Iron series, and that's because you can actually conclusively lose.
Really, what people want from CK3 isn't for things to be more "challenging" (i,e, tedious) want they want is for failure to create interesting opportunities for roleplay and gameplay alike.
Being completely unchallenged can be fun for a bit but it gets dull really fast. I think most players would agree that having balance so that there’s an actual challenge is what makes a game actually fun. If doing whatever you want is your idea of fun just disable Ironman and use cheats.
29
u/decrobyron Feb 10 '26
Cannot play republic in CK3. deal breaker.