Introducing CK3 - Battles 

how is this comment 4 days old when the video came out 5 minutes ago?

Vulcanist You can make a video available at any time on RU-vid. Some videos are available to certain people earlier than others. The creator channel can post comments at any time.

Vulcanist ya wut

Squirrell!

Good evening. I didn't find how to contact you, so I'll write here. I would like to try to voice your videos about the mechanics of CK3. But, since these are your videos, before that I want to ask your permission to translate. Please give your answer, whatever it may be. Respectfully, Merchron.

in ck2 the more heavy inf and cav you have the better your army was.

@@gabrielcollstefoni7765 Camels, camels are the thing

Few knew about actual "Combat Tactics" and how to fire them properly with its according unit composition

Because no one knew anything about combat in ck2, not even the devs

@@noahsyndergaard1560 not true

Only thing that matters in Ck2 is heavy infantry and heavy cav. Everything else might as well be numerical.

Yeah, on CK2 if you dont have heavy cav and the other side has it you can outnumber them 3 to 1 and they will detroy you. 1K heavy cav makes all the difference.

Same, also seen in a video that some building effect individual unit types. Ie hide tent gives archers +2 damage, per building, the youtuber used this with archer en-mass to destroy the ai.

and plus-minus terrain bonus

I used to create armies based around pikes and archers, I could beat armies 3x+ my size with minimal casualties, troop composition is big in ck2

Easiest way to simulate unexpected battlefield situations. Apollo did say that some traits could change the range of dice roll, so I think great general would never roll 1. Personally, I like randomised battles and this is the way to do it.

@@AlbonitumG I believe the Cautious trait makes your dice roll something like a 3-8 rather than 1-10 for example. So a commander with that will never take the big rewarding risks represented by a 9 or 10 but likewise means they don't suffer the failures of those risks represented by a 1 or 2.

Yeah, thats from a Bokoen video.

@@darklordaranyx2467 yeah do you know which one?

@@airstrike9002 it was an eu4 video I believe but forgot which one

That's my dream _Total War: Medieval III_ right there. Because of that, it's unlikely to be made anytime soon... at least by CA and not by the modders.

@Based Chad The dream would be paradox over-world with total war style battles, imagine if they made a game together.

@Based Chad I don't know man. One you send vampires against laser shooting lizards so you can kill the Dragon riding elves that were weakened after their battle with steampunk rats all the while deciding if the human with the golden mask is worth trading with, you can't really go back to stuff like this. IF that's what you consider dumbed down then I'm all for it. Though paradox knows how to write a good story arhc despite it all being mostly text and if I wanted to read an adventure I'd play a visual novel

@Based Chad Three Kingdoms is alot more indepth and battles is Paradox biggest weakness, i feel Stellaris struck the perfect compromise. Such a shame about CK3

@@Latinkon 1212 is getting close

Yeah, what bothers me the most is that publishers don't look at calendars when releasing their games. September 1st is in the middle of the freaking week... release it in a Friday so that we can play as soon as we get our hand on it :S

@@MrQwertyman111 Tuesday is the usual release date for games, always has been (same with music albums). Unsure why.

@@MrQwertyman111 Tuesday release is standard though

@@TheRadishBros It's so they're immediately ready for feedback, and can patch any major day1 issues without extreme overtime.

@@MrQwertyman111 Rule #1 of software development is to never deploy nor release anything on a Friday, except if you want to do weekend overtimes ;)

Yup I was confused at first look. Another point to add, commander's advantage does not include terrain advantage/disadvantage. It would be good if that number was also added and a total advantage (except dice rolls) is given as a number in parenthesis.

im pretty sure he just read from the script, i would blame the editors, really.

All commanders are knights but not all knights are commanders.

I know, it's outrageous!! Shame! SHAME!!

NERDDDDDDDdaahhh

This comment is speaking from my heart =/

Yesir

pdx logic about anything that people complain about: "we need more of it"

the problem with paradox is the naming sense sometimes , if they hide the "dice rolls" with a different name and call it something like " decisions" and make it a scale of 6 decisions from 1- bad to 6 exelent while adding various level thx to traits ; they could hide the "dice rolls" with something that do the exatly same thing ... when battle are not decided by numbers , they are decided by events \ on site decisions , this is easyer to make with a " random generator" that is a dice roll . there is no better way to do it , the only thing they can do is hide it behind something .

If you cant fight battles like in total war there is really no other way to decides these battles than through chance or constant repetitive events.

Welcome to HoI4, where every hour we roll 350 dice ranging from 2-200 for every side of every battle.

I don't why dice rolls get so much hate these days.

Those three things are what happens when the siege progress is complete, the garrison become so demoralized they surrender and open the gates . Of course, you can assault the holding directly (there's a nice big button for it), but as you said, even some hundred garrisons could hold out against thousands in that case.

@@feryth My problem is that there isn't really a way for sieged castles to "win" it's just hold out, but the army that is sieging don't have all the logistical battles it would have had back in the day, food plays an important factor here, as well as disease etc. Instead you KNOW you will win the siege if you have more men. Would've been cool if they made that system a bit more intricate, sure you might not want to go into it, but could give those who rather build tall than wide to really focus on something. Edit: Hell, they could even put in ways you could sabotage the attackers, maybe make it a bit more intricate, giving something for people who're going to play this a lot, to really delve down into.

@@liva9994 I hope they add proper supply mechanics into the game, that pretty much fixes most of the proplems that CK has with battles/sieges/bordergore

There is a button to assault the fort. But it seems they went the way of EU4 and just made it irrelevant. Which is kind of annoying. They pushed toward making assault worse over time in CK2, to the point that by default it's impossible if they have 6 fort level. But assaulting is I think what you mean. If they try to assault it the soldiers in the garrison could win against a superior force. But the default is instead to starve them out.

@@liva9994 I agree. Having some sort of mechanic to try to win a siege as a defender would be great, instead of it being only a waiting game to see how long the castle will take to fall unless you win a battle against that army. The way it is defending has no real advantage other than time, which is exactly the opposite of what it should be.

Paradox: *Whistles Nervously*

Nice one. *Wink*

Wasn't naval combat mostly non-existent beyond burning ships at port during the time period Crusader Kings takes place in?

@@jerkchicken_expertlyseasoned No. Mankind still knew how to fight on boats.

@@jerkchicken_expertlyseasoned Venice used galleys in the middle ages to fight pirates all the time.

You are not in the minority. I will not be making the switch while to combat is like this. I really dislike the EU4 mechanics where you just rely on Dice rolls. This is worse than that. The combat was not too complex people think it is because the GUI and Tutorials are soo bad.

It was very obscure to most players, and it was very unbalanced for some cultures. Yes, the mongols should be OP but some cultures had no chance against their neighbors and the AI couldn't take advantage of it.

I also fear things getting too dumbed down. CK2 was just right, and these videos make it seem that CK3 went too far with simplifying things. Knights completely defined by a single number? Yikes! :( I was already worried about this because they did the same going from HOI3 to HOI4, and these videos aren't reassuring me. I'll postpone getting CK3 and watch some let's plays, and if I see the game doesn't have more complexity than what we see in these videos, I'll just stick to CK2 and skip completely on CK3 Not like there aren't any other games coming out this period. Baldur's Gate 3 looks to be amazing and their promo videos do get the blood pumping!

Sub-commanders sound good.. until you remember you can only have 9 commanders per empire (6 per kingdom, &c.) so there's no point using them unless the fate of an entire kingdom hinges on a single battle.

@@MeidoInHebun laughs in welsh

At least, we have our Original Soundtrack Album on Spotify and other streaming platforms at 00:00 CEST, between the 27th and 28th of August! 🎵

i expect the 1st to obliterate the levies at equal advantage

I would hope that 5000 troops win against 1000 troops in 99% of cases

@@armoredchimp what you expect 5000 ordinary people to be able to defeat 1000 highly trained and disciplined soldiers

@@armoredchimp 5000 peasants vs 1000 fully armoured and armed professional soldiers?

@@armoredchimp levies are litteraly peasants with zero training armed with farming tools and bows at best against cavalry, knights and other troops that are a lot more efficient, they would deffinitively win by morale damage at least

because it looks like CK3 is being dumbed down :(

Looking at the ui, there seems to be room for two different icons within the main phase and it shows a bow icon on the left side of it, which to me would suggest that there is a skirmish/melee split within the main phase. It's strange that they didn't mention it in the video though.

Also they had no men at arms in this video. Otherwise that give diffrent modifers aswell since some men at arms counters others.

@@superhans85 not dumbed down, they've just changed what's important

@@superhans85 Can't dumb down what was already really dumb. Sure, CK2 had a complex battle system working behind the scenes, but there was very little you could do to play around with said system, and the small amount of changes you could do, barely made any difference from not doing it at all. Compare that to EU4, which has a much simpler battle system on first glance, but has tons of stuff that can be manipulated by you to effect the outcome. In the end, the CK2 system is the dumbed down one, while the EU4 system in reality is the one with hidden complexity. CK3 is leaning more towards the EU4 design, which is a good thing.

there was one video where they went over man at arms, knights, even cavalry and other non levy units

They talked about that in the previous vid dude. The one about war.

ikr, the just keep dumbing down the mechanics, expect there to be a paid "war" dlc in the future where they (hopefully) add a navy and actual battle mechanics.

yeah, no more tactics also.. i am dissappointed

Lmao as if coordinating centre or flanks actually mattered. You just click the auto-balance button and that's it. Don't pretend that mechanic was some super intuitive, meaningful and complex thing to have. I'm glad they removed that pointless bit of micromanagement.

@@castor9683 I enjoyed it actually. Just because you didn't don't assume others feel the same.

@@whodis3489 What are you talking about? Just from the streams alone you can tell that terrain matters a lot more and men at arms allow you to customize/specialize your armies more. It's a huge difference from ck2 where, aside from nomads, everyone's armies were the same and 99% of the time battles were won by whoever had the biggest one.

*Has gained Impatient trait* Paradox ought to show us some mercy. Waiting until Tuesday is gonna be hell. :(

It's on the first of September. Unfortunately I think it's launching 6pm Swedish time.

Yeah... it would kinda make sense to release the game on a Firday so that people can play the damn thing. But who am I to know any better, right?

That's still a thing fortunately

Under Military Effects it has "Defender Advantage +5" listed. Not sure if that refers to the die roll or not, but the part you're referring to just means whoever loses is going to be hit harder than usual.

It's a game in which the minimum amount of time that can pass is one day. In order to give the opportunity for other armies to reinforce the battle and other things, of course the battle is going to have to last several days. There'd be no time for depth if battles were over the same day they started. The time scale is obviously less realistic, but the battles feel more involved and strategic as a result.

I think Knights in this game are supposed to represent highly military minded people with powerful retuines, basically the Knights prowess is just a simplification of them commanding troops and leader Extra elite soldiers

Well, if you think about it "professional heavy cavalry" was usually composed of knights. You didn't have that many people with resources and training to be a professional soldier of a standing army since professional armies were not that common. I think by splitting them up you have a bigger connection with the knights, which were such a relevant part of medieval society, other than just a retinue you raise in times of war. It is not a perfect representation of reality, but then again, games never are.

Knights are top tier soldiers in the best equipment. (this would ofc include an armored horse, so he is like better heavy cavalry) Men-at-arms are professional soldiers Levies are Peasants

Knights (in the sense they're being used here) were far more effective than your average professional soldier was in combat for numerous reasons. First, a professional cavalryman would train for combat a fraction of the time your average knight would. Knights would train daily from the age of 7 upwards on average. Once becoming a knight, they would spend much time in peace participating in tournaments, sparring, hunting, etc. Further, in the process of becoming a knight, they would be required to accompany knights during the process of becoming a knight into battle. This mix of constant training and first-hand experience was an incredibly effective system. The most elite forces of the modern era train for a few years after reaching adulthood at about the same pace as a knight would train their entire lives after early childhood. Second, knights were far better equipped than a professional soldier in similar conditions. They were nobles who would direct vast fortunes towards not only having the best equipment, but having lots of it. Whereas a professional soldier would have an effective kit, a knight would be a walking armory, with many people (sometimes over a dozen) supporting a single knight by carrying arms, horses, etc, whatever the knight might need into battle. It's estimated that knights were worth around 10 soldiers.

Great, but what about armies that didn't use heavy cav, like the Saxons?

You simple dont understand it then

@@15RabauKe838 nothing to understand, the game look like Travian, and asking price is like for triple-a game classic paradox

They were op in real life too

They were broken in real life too, they were literally almost unkillable

@@lucatolloi1125 yeah for 30 min until they fell asleep from exhaustion...but to be fair even then enemy soldiers had massive difficulties killing them while lying on the ground

There will be no pre-loading of the game. CK3 launches on Tuesday Sept. 1st at 6pm CEST.

@@ParadoxGrandStrategy :(

Well, if you just see the "battle" in CK3 as the very moment the armies clash into each other (which usually lasted only one day in most cases in medieval times) then yes. But I always thought the whole process of two armies finding out where the enemy is, kind of "dancing" until both sides commit to combat on a battleground, then this might have taken several days or even weeks. I think it would just not be fun in a game like CK3 if your army would vaporize in a literal second, because a day in CK3 is not that much time, and the whole military aspect of the game would feel random and frustrating. Like it was in real life =D

Never ever

@@Cruxador Don't be so cruel! I don't believe you!

NEVER

if you play the byzantines you’re an alpha

You mean the first

@@thetalesofdugganfights7209 might be a timezone thing

Mean Twitch in my country it’s the 2nd of sept haha

@@azeemabadi1918 that must suck

Well, having more troops would always win the battles, no matter what. The system in ck2 was complex but never really made any difference in the battles, hell, even terrain could be ignored most times if you had a larger army than your enemy

Yup

Yes they can, and it's reflected in your characters models too!

@@Krescentwolf ok, ok, now I want the game EVEN MORE

An Angel they said that they have a special built In immortality tag, but aren’t using it, so a mod can easily hook up some events to it

@@ckkitty means only mods can add immortality?

@@an_angel or DLC.... they probably cut it so they can sell it later

Eh, they removed the flanks and added the knights. We still have dice rolls but now terrain bonuses seem to be more important, as in ck 2 you would almost always ignore them if you had a larger army

There's always dice rolls in paradox fights. It's kind of accurate I think, as a skilled commander isn't always going to beat a lower skilled one, luck plays a part. There's always unpredictably.

I think dice rolls are better. Since it might tip the balance abit if the opponent has a slight numbers advantage. Which is more interesting than always winning if you have 100+ more troops.

Even real life has its equivalent of dice rolls. Otherwise the US would never lose a fight or fail a mission.

could be just a timer so the battle doesn't immediately start like in CK2. This would let sides more time to bring in reinforcements and prevent those annoying "2k men immediately make a 100 dudes disappear in a single tick" moments

Do you know if there are still duels in battle or in the game period? No one is talking about duels which was my favorite in the game especially during battles or the crazy effects the berserker trait had on battle. No RU-vid are highlighting these features