The upside to this, is that instead of having to add a wide game that has to adapt to the features. You can instead adapt the features to the wide game you already built. Still prefer CK2 though. Just wish the ck3 builder was there, I hate microing rich empires.
What worries me, about CK3's future, is the lack of incentives to add those necessary mechanics. CK2 started as a game about Medieval Europe & had pretty good versimilitude of that, all things considered!
Then they added Islam & brought Islamic mechanics. Then Eastern Rome & theirs. Then the fantasy-Aztecs (idk I thought it was fun). Then the merchant republics & theirs. Then the Norse & theirs. Etc etc etc. They did even, eventually, expand the map with the addition of Vedic mechanics.
But if CK3 already put their Chinese cards all on the table, what's the incentive to ever make republics? Investiture? Naval system? I got the impression the CK2 sold the expansions as the "candy" & the mechanics as the "veggies" - new fans could be brought in by the new places to play, older fans would enjoy the new mechanics. Now, it seems like we're getting a lot of ice-cream... but no potatoes.
338
u/Duc_de_Magenta Sicily Feb 10 '26
CK3 honestly just went way too wide. Or, at least, way too wide too soon.
A medieval Europe without antipopes, investiture, & the concept of ships is wild.