Now, there are some things that are not as favorable as the yet to be addressed question of Byzantine government system (and non-feudal systems in general), the direction of laws and the combat, but even putting aside my personal views like how combat is one of the least important aspect of games like these, I'd say the good far outweighs the bad. Which is actually a good sign and shows that Paradox responds to player input.Īnyway, back to CKIII, while obviously it will have a ton of DLC over the years because that's Paradox's business strategy, the framework for it is taking a huge chunk of CKII and all DLCs already in the base game while adding a much more detailed map (baronies shown as individual provinces), the highly requested branch dynasties and heavily building upon the more popular CKII DLC systems like ambitions from Conclave and dynamic religions from Holy Fury (I'm particularly impressed by that one as Paradox delivered even more than I expected in that department). Well, that and the whole mana bonanza (where even hiring mercenaries cost mana instead of gold for some reason), but the entire system was quickly revamped. Not even any serious differentiation between various government types, religions, culture and whatnot. we will see now.Eh, the issue with Imperator was that the framework was just barebones and that there was nothing more than that. They got burned badly with Imperator, but.

What people are affraid most seems to be the usual Paradox approach with selling the framework, then adding things on as the time passes.

Crusader kings 2 hellenic