Slitherine

Does anybody know how good the game crusader kings is? Ive heard a lot about it, but not on how good it is- just content.

I first liked it, but then I became bored with it and sold it. Paradox' carrer's been going downhill last few years. EU 2 was EXCELLENT, IMHO; then came Victoria, which was nice, but it didn't get right the management system (for me); next was Crusader Kings: Managing your royal family was nice, but that was all the game.

1.) The AI ALWAYS says NO to an alliance offer; waiting for their diplomats is the only way to make alliances.
2.) Warfare and empire management was bad and over-simplified
3.) No War-AI
4.) Mongol Hordes nearly unstoppable (well, this is a fact, buuut it is not playable)
5.) Easy money and nothing to do with it
6.) Royal family management boring after a while (three or four generations)


Next was Diplomacy, a capital disaster it seems.

sum1won wrote:Does anybody know how good the game crusader kings is? Ive heard a lot about it, but not on how good it is- just content.

It is a good game. I would not call it the best, nor would I rank it as better than Spartan or CoW, though I would consider it equally entertaining as Legion, though the two are very different games. IMHO, it depends on what you are looking for. If you are looking for a nice game to play once in a while when you really want to relax, I would say get CK. If you are looking for a game to play over and over and over and have the same fun the 25th time as you did the 1st time, then CK probably isn't your kind of game, though I do know a few people who consider CK to match my second description.

dithy