As someone who loves playing in Iberia, the worst thing about Fate of Iberia is its existence means Paradox now consider the region 'done' and it just won't get any more attention. As evidenced by two years of nothing but making El Cid an adventurer in RtP.

Struggle ideas:
1. german colonization of eastern germany/western poland/baltic region with the northern crusades and all. Could have slavs, balts, germans and Catholics vs pagans involved.

2. The caucasus/greater armenia region between orthodox/apostolics/muslims, kurds, georgians, armenians, greeks, turks

3. Eastern slavic expansions into the east specifically the ukraine/volga area: featuring east slavs, turks, uralics, Christians, pagans, Muslims, jews, mongols

4. Egypt/the nile as a whole with ethiopia, nubia, coptics, crusaders and arabs and coptic Christianity, sunni, shia, pagans etc

(Edit) forgive me for my lack of knowledge on some regions and their history who could’ve potentially be included, I mostly only know about islamic and Christian history or European history

I still remember playing a game with friends and foes when it came out. I denied a feud and then lost the game because denying a feud just meant your house wouldn't retaliate, not that the other house didn't stop trying to murder everyone. They slowly picked off my family despite me belatedly trying to raise my family's intrigue because I had no way to organize resistance.
With things like Northern Lords I feel the game really suffers from the decision in the development of CK3 to completely gut the levies system to try to give player choice to the building aspect of the game. CK2s levies weren't perfect but the way they went about changing it destroyed the battles system. I assume Khans of the steppe has a similar flaw.
I still can't believe the decision to make the All Under Heaven was made by the same people who made the Iberian struggle. They made something so particular and then made only one more mechanic of its type, and then proceeded to not fill the map with more of it before expanding the map even further.
I had the reverse of legends of the dead. I started out liking it, but it was so samey that I have stopped using it in my games. The plague system is fine in CK3, although I once again dislike the building system changes from CK2 with the hospital building being a separate slot was a nice part of CK2. Most of my CK2 time was played before bloodlines were introduced, but the way legends are done always reminds me that I'm playing a game, and not in the sometimes wacky way that occurred in CK2. I remember having an ancestor who was part of a secret cult in CK2 being remembered as a saint due to the bloodlines mechanic, which was funny in a way that legends never really are. I cannot remember a single origin of a legend creation from my time playing CK3.
Roads to Power is my favorite DLC. Extremely unbalanced on launch(which made it very rewarding when you learned it), but the removal of the failure state was very fun and benefitted the idea of increasing the difficulty. I like the Byzantine part of the DLC, although it still feels like it's a bit too easy to become the empire if you are competent, and it doesn't fully appreciate the history of the 10th century where the emperor was a puppet to the co-emperor for a while. Still, it has the closest thing to the old levy system with the thematic army system which I also really appreciate.
I legitimately hadn't realized that the wandering nobles was not for adventurers. I played a bit during the time it was released, but had played so many adventurers after roads to power came out that I was just achievement hunting with it. I haven't played the game since All under heaven was announced, as at the time I was so mad at how slow the game is after 150 years, and since I've just played other games. CK3 is so slow that I have never gotten the "play to 1454" achievement and I rage uninstalled CK3 at the thought of it becoming even more impossible for my computer, a computer that is literally younger than CK3 and better than what 90 percent of the player base probably has.

Cat is S tier😍❤️

I have played over 2k hours of CK3 and I still enjoy playing as vikings. Mostly because of the varangian adventure allowing you to go basically everywhere and then quickly hybridise and raiding.

My issue with Friends and Foes isn't that the feuds are forced upon you. My problem is that we don't have enough hostile interactions available to take against whoever we're feuding with. Constant murder schemes are boring. Kidnap scheme is locked behind a perk for some reason and I don't ever see anyone using it.

It really kinda pisses me off the Tributary system, because when I saw this being added in Khans of the Steppe I thought a Tributary would be a character to another character, which is kind of, but its also stuck to a realm, because what makes it suck least for me, is that the Tribute doesn't expire, or doesn't loose its effects overtime. I hardly consider that a Nomadic empire can keep for example the Byzantine empire under tribute for 100+ years (I had a playthrough ruined by the fact the Khazars took the Russian empire, that was formed by rurik, abbasids and byzantines under tribute  which skyrocketed the their levy count to 70k+ and has imense taxes too and the empires 3 whole empires under tribute and would not ever fight an imdependence against them) I feel like it's ruined potential, and the better solution was after a certain character that was under tribute dies, the succesor of that character can decide to remain under tribute or no longer pay tribute and break the deal which I guess could ruin relations and give a special cb to the suzerain to reactivate the tribute back. You need to like fight for your tributeries to remain your's not have em fight once and be left under your heel for the rest of the game cus the AI is too dumb to decide to ally eachother and fight their independence. I hope they change the system, it really is not enjoyable and bare to watch for an empire to sit as tributary to damn nomads in early to midgame or even midgame.

Legends of the Dead is so weird for me. I played the base game for free on Gamepass first. I started playing with DLC right when that came out. I love Legends. They can be pretty goofy but declaring yourself the descendant of Joan of Arc or King Arthur and forming an Empire is fun. It of course sucks to lose your PC to a plague most of the time, and the number that can be overlapping is frustrating at times. However I still feel like it takes away from the immersion if they aren't there. For the silliness the legends add, the plagues really balance it out.

(also Matilda is in the HRE so I imagine Elegance of the Empire gets a lot of screen time)
Just a quick edit but... Roads to Power was literally called Roads to Power and not like, Adventures in the Realm or something. While it would be fantastic to add some crazy in depth adventure gameplay and I'd welcome it.. I feel like the DLC tells you exactly what it is in the name, so expecting else from it is a mistake.

15:30 I’m scared to do any more tournaments because I suspect they snuck in weighted chance depending on your luck. I’ve lost 3 or 4 god tier characters who were instantly killed in a duel or a wrestling for basically no reason.

03:10 Viking all the way. As a veteran EU4 transitioning to CK3 it's exactly what I need. thanks man!

I hope we can get another S-tier DLC, as a treat, for the All Under Heaven DLC... pls Paradox.

Tark REALLY wants us to know how much he hates coronation and loves roads

The main problem of legacy of the dead was the plague frequency. On the lowest setting you would get a plague every three to four years while the deguffs you got from the plagues lasted for decades in the affected areas. They also nerfed plague protection considerably making the burial site dutchy building completely worthless, reducing its protection from the whole dutchie to single county. This also introduced a different problem where if you enabled plagues you could not build any other type of duty building, not unless you wanted to lose your whole family to the plague, thereby losing the game!

King is back

I find acclamation succession annoying because you have to constantly monitor it to make sure you dont fall behind two seconds before your guys dies and now youve lost everything

the most unbalanced thing about landless adventurers is the "Seize the realm" scheme :D you just have to have good intrigue, build a few camp buildings boosting your scheme success chance, add a few agents into the scheme and in a few months BOOM, you got a duchy/kingdom/whatever, the old ruler and his house is gone, nobody hates you for seizing the realm, nobody cares that you are just a random adventurer dude thats on the throne out of nowhere, its just yours

The biggest issue of Paradox is that they are trying to build their whole role-playing experience on a moderately shitty writing... which just reasults in all their added events being generic repetitive schlock with very little creativity. They're making an rpg, but their writers put about as much nominal effort into it as a typical strategy game, which... in the end they'll just screw up in both aspects.

If they're making an rpg then they should be hiring writers who can actually make them interesting and non-linear plotlines that can be turned into event-chains and NOT treat writing as an afterthought for flavour.

Tarkusarkusar

The HRE once got mad that I conquered some meaningless duchy and launched a Holy War. I won, took the heir hostage and turned him Asatru. 😂 They were weakened becuase I dismantled the papacy but were still strong. So an Asatru heir was a nice boon.

Is this the Giga Chad tier list?