Crusader Kings III

[garbon]

But will it be a mess like their most recent release.

Which one was that?

True, should have had an s.

[Zanza]

Nice. I played CK2 a lot, so I am looking forward to this.

[Caliga]

Also, those character faces look unbelievably crappy.

Don't worry, a dozen DLCs will come out to make them look much better.

[Habbaku]

I definitely look forward to this. Hopefully crusades work out of the box. 

[Valmy]

Hoping they finally figure out how to make small states fun and viable. A hope in vain.

Well they figured it out in CK2.

[ulmont]

My concern is that there's no way that the game won't feel incredibly barebones at launch compared to CK2+DLCs.

They said they have been working on it for 4 years and they recognize the potential for failure there, so I doubt it will be that barebones.  But somethings will be deliberately removed, yes.

[jimmy olsen]

My concern is that there's no way that the game won't feel incredibly barebones at launch compared to CK2+DLCs.

I guess that will depend on what new features will be added, and if they offer enough fun play mechanics. I don't expect that Muslims, Pagans, or Republics will be playable at launch, and I also expect India to not be part of the game.

Maybe it's just rumors, but I read on Something Awful they said no republics and pagans to start. I also read the map would be even bigger than in CK2.

[dps]

My concern is that there's no way that the game won't feel incredibly barebones at launch compared to CK2+DLCs.

I guess that will depend on what new features will be added, and if they offer enough fun play mechanics. I don't expect that Muslims, Pagans, or Republics will be playable at launch, and I also expect India to not be part of the game.

Maybe it's just rumors, but I read on Something Awful they said no republics and pagans to start. I also read the map would be even bigger than in CK2.

No republics, but it's not no pagans, it's no nomads--nomads will be back to being tribal.  And the map will supposedly have a bit more of Tibet and more of Central Africa.

[Josephus]

My concern is that there's no way that the game won't feel incredibly barebones at launch compared to CK2+DLCs.

Agreed, but that's a concern with any Paradox sequels now. For instance, can one really imagine a EU5, without many of the EU4 DLC features?
I think they've said they are going to take the best things from CKII and remove some of the others (ie. save them for DLCs).

[garbon]

More details about CKIII:

https://www.usgamer.net/articles/paradox-answers-12-major-questions-about-crusader-kings-3

[Tamas]

So Baronies will become the base "provinces" of the map but not only you still won't be able to play as a baron, but their importance in terms of management and role will also decrease? Weird.

Also RPGish levelling up is a bit meh. It is the quasi-RPG-ishness that I like in CK2 but because it was at least trying to be realistic and historical (well, not counting the silly events). Going more the classical RPG route doesn't appeal to me. But I understand it is more things to click at, so yay.

[Josquius]

I guess baronies and all the rest will be dlc

Well they figured it out in CK2.

They did not include it if they did.
You couldn't even play baronies iirc?
Playing a County was an exercise in trying to avoid expanding

[celedhring]

Baronies in CK2 are just spam. Half my events always seem to involve barons, majors or whatever I couldn't care less about.

[Tamas]

Baronies in CK2 are just spam. Half my events always seem to involve barons, majors or whatever I couldn't care less about.

Yes I am all for cutting them out but then why make baronies the default map unit?

[Valmy]

Oh I see I thought you were talking about counts. You just said small states...