There's will be an option for turn on/off the aging in future, right?

Users who are viewing this thread

If it were up to me, I'd double down on the aging and add slow technological advances over the course of the gameplay. Better armor, better weapons and horse breeding to get bigger and stronger warhorses and fief building over about 3 generations. That sort of thing.
 
If it were up to me, I'd double down on the aging and add slow technological advances over the course of the gameplay. Better armor, better weapons and horse breeding to get bigger and stronger warhorses and fief building over about 3 generations. That sort of thing.

The more I read the Forums, the more I just want to play CK2 :grin:
 
Given enough time, the devs will give players that option as long as they don't let the idiots here who say otherwise influence their decision-making.

This thread full of these special people basically all amount to this:
*muh realism*
*muh immersion*
*muh balance*
*omg my character died from aging too fast how realistic I coomed so much xdd*
*omg the game gave me a character with 0 skills and perks after my old one died, muh realism just like my ck2 games*
Bloody hell, the cringe levels with these semi-deviants are off the charts.?
 
*omg the game gave me a character with 0 skills and perks after my old one died, muh realism just like my ck2 games*

I think nobody here wants it to be un-optionial
.
And it would be really gross if TW took from CK2 inheritance without education in any form. If player could choose companion, who would teach his kids, so they'd had percentage of the companion's skills...

Okay, I'm getting too crusadie right now.
 
I think nobody here wants it to be un-optionial
.
And it would be really gross if TW took from CK2 inheritance without education in any form. If player could choose companion, who would teach his kids, so they'd had percentage of the companion's skills...

Okay, I'm getting too crusadie right now.
I suspect this issue with clan inheritance and children with questionable RNG stats is why TW is giving the character creation system and skill perk system an overhaul. A wait-and-see approach is usually my method of judging things upon games I'm interested in.
 
Given enough time, the devs will give players that option as long as they don't let the idiots here who say otherwise influence their decision-making.

This thread full of these special people basically all amount to this:
*muh realism*
*muh immersion*
*muh balance*
*omg my character died from aging too fast how realistic I coomed so much xdd*
*omg the game gave me a character with 0 skills and perks after my old one died, muh realism just like my ck2 games*
Bloody hell, the cringe levels with these semi-deviants are off the charts.?
This guy gets it. Those special people are mad now that the game is in Early Access, and normal people are showing up to the forums.

To the rabid CK fans: I don't care if you want to behead everyone you meet, pretend you've had sex with a woman, and make believe you're a powerful and respectable leader. Just don't make me waste my time by putting an expiration date on my character if I choose not to play The Sims.

I think nobody here wants it to be un-optionial
.
And it would be really gross if TW took from CK2 inheritance without education in any form. If player could choose companion, who would teach his kids, so they'd had percentage of the companion's skills...

Okay, I'm getting too crusadie right now.
Yes, there are those people.:
 
Last edited:

Well, then I hope, they're not getting, what they want.

I have no problem with aging, but, again, what CK2 did great, is the setting pool at the start of the game. Anybody who refers to Crusaders should know, that having an option to choose which features you want to use is crucial part of good experience.

Actually I can't see a problem in choosing in Campaign tab, whether you want or don't to play with aging and inheritance. If you want to feel like in best medieval The Sims game, it's your choice. Nobody should feel forced to play certain type of game, if they actually wouldn't have to.

Albeit, as always, it's up to developers to decide if they want to give us a choice or not. But I hope their pride won't get hurt if somebody could make their own decision.

Giving no choice will make nobody happy.

(maybe except all of those elitist, who like to see the game less accessible and fun for people preferring different playstyles)
 
Last edited:
Well, then I hope, they're not getting, what they want.

I have no problem with aging, but, again, what CK2 did great, is the setting pool at the start of the game. Anybody who refers to Crusaders should know, that having an option to choose which features you want to use is crucial part of good experience.

Actually I can't see a problem in choosing in Campaign tab, whether you want or don't to play with aging and inheritance. If you want to feel like in best medieval The Sims game, it's your choice. Nobody should feel forced to play certain type of game, if they actually wouldn't have to.

Albeit, as always, it's up to developers to decide if they want to give us a choice or not. But I hope their pride won't get hurt if somebody could make their own decision.

Giving no choice will make nobody happy.

(maybe except all of those elitist, who like to see the game less accessible and fun for people preferring different playstyles)
Agreed.
 
They should give the player more options to play the game as they please.

Knowing people, there will be some people who will disagree and prefer that everyone else be forced to play the game that they want to play.
 
Back
Top Bottom