• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

CK2 Dev Diary #95: Amending Africa

Greetings!

We’ve shown you plenty of map changes already, including updates to Russia, Scandinavia, and most recently Italy and the Alps. But surely, we couldn’t do all of these wonderful updates without looking at the continent that deserves it the most, right?

So let’s have a look at Africa.

You read that right. Africa is finally getting the love and attention it deserves! Northern Africa and Mali have long needed an update. Where counties resembled squares and rectangles more than anything else. But no more!

Let’s start with the northern kingdoms. The kingdoms themselves remain the same. Only Mauretania has been renamed to Maghreb, and has along with the kingdom of Africa been placed in the Empire of Maghreb. Mainly to break down the very large Arabian Empire slightly. On the county level, every single county has been repainted in order to place them where they should be and give the borders a much more natural feeling.

01_updated_maghreb.png


02_updated_k_africa.png


All in all, the new provinces and additional holding slots will make North Africa stronger than before. But to offer additional protection against aggressive Holy Wars from the major powers of Europe, we’ve increased the number of sea zones slightly in the mediterranean. The stronger realms of central Europe will now have to first conquer their way down to the coast of Iberia, Southern Italy, or go through Mallorca or Sardinia, before they will be able to reach the shores of Africa. This should give the realms in Africa some time before the Europeans attempt to make their way onto the continent.

As for Mali. The area has about twice the number of provinces compared to what they had before. This in turn allows for more than just the lonely kingdom of Mali to exist, which has been split into the three kingdoms of Ghana, Mali and Songhay. One kingdom for each of the major powers that inhabited the area during the timeframe of the game. They’ll all still be part of the empire of Mali, which is finally no longer the only empire with a single De Jure kingdom.

03_updated_mali.png


Here is an overview of the De Jure kingdoms:

04_west_african_kingdoms.png


Updating the existing parts of the map is not the only thing we’ve done for Africa however. Kanem-Bornu and the region around lake Chad is now on the map as well! The area consists of the two kingdoms Hausaland and Kanem. These consist of three and four duchies respectively and together form the empire of Kanem-Bornu. So not only do we get new rulers and titles to play with, but it allows both east and west to move across the continent without always having to expand north and, usually, through a Muslim blob that more often than not forms in Northern Africa and Arabia. Instead, you’ll be able to cross Africa through Ghana/Mali in the west, through the Sahara and the Fezzan corridor in the center, and finally through Wadai and Abyssinia in the east.

05_kanem_bornu.png


Let’s not stop there though.

To make Africa more distinct from other regions, a second trade route has been added to the game; the Trans-Saharan Trade Route.

06_trade_route.png


It requires either Horse Lords or Jade Dragon to be unlocked and functions very much like the updated Silk Road from 2.8. There is however, a certain twist to it. The base value of the trade route is very low. Granting next to no bonuses to the counties it passes through. What you need to do in order to benefit from it, is to control certain locations along the trade route and construct unique production buildings in established trade posts. To be clear though, these are merely special buildings within the trade posts just like you would upgrade a trade post on the Silk Road. These buildings represent some of the trade goods that historically had a large impact on the trade in the region. The most important of these will be the Gold Mines.

08_gold_mine.png


There are two Gold Mines located on the map, both of them in the kingdom of Mali. The Gold Mines will allow Mali to amass great wealth. Just like they did historically. If you would prefer to do it differently and take the mines from them, conquering Africa will very much be worth the effort. Not only will Gold Mines greatly increase the value of the Trans-Saharan trade, it will also grant the owner a large bonus to the county’s income. There will also be some flavour events that can trigger for anyone owning them.

Remember that what I’ve shown here is still a work in progress and things may be subject to change. Now, let’s wrap up the dev diary with some smaller additions.

We’ve renamed the West African religion to simply “African”, as to not exclude the newly added region around lake Chad, and updated the Patron Deities accordingly. The religion will also get a new set of shields for displaying the CoAs on the map.

african_shields.jpg


I hope that you look forward to these changes and the overall improvements for Africa!
 
Last edited:
  • 1Love
Reactions:
i have many question for any moderators or developers who watch this tread thank you please

question 1:
hello i don't know if that haven been request but could you ad a kingdom title between morocco and tunisia since there was historical dynasty/kingdom (like in antiquity with numidia) who ruled the region (central maghreb) independently such as the hammadid dynasty or the zayyanid dynasty ?. and according to french wikipedia the central maghreb region was called maghreb-al-awsat (a separate region between morocco and tunisia ?) so way not :eek:?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammadid_dynasty
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Tlemcen
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maghreb_central (french wikipedia sorry)

question 2:
could you ad a mixed/melting pot "maghrebi" culture (or algerian,tunisian,morrocan like in eu 4) (since if don't get wrong the hilalians and maqil arabs tribes invaders created a culture melting pot with native berbers in some region) ?

question 3:
why there is no algerian-saharan province ?

question 4:
i don't know if this is really historical but a kingdom title in libya (like in eu 4 with kingdom of fezzan and the fordable one: kingdom of tripolitania) ?

question 5:
are we are getting new face pack/portrait pack for the maghreb region (or all of n.africa including egypt ?) or is this only a map change ?

question 6:
way there is no coastline province for sub-saharian kingdom ?

question 7:
should there by one or several desert province/corridor between egypt and nubia/abyssinia ?

question 8:
should there by some sort of maraboutic/sufi islam in mostly saharan/sub-saharan province ?

question 9:
if coptic culture is confirmed should egypt get a third "sa'idi" culture (for both muslim and christian) ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sa'idi_people

question 10:
do you gonna change something to berbers culture (breakup intro various "minors" groups such as the kabyle or the riffian ? or "great" group such as the zenata and the sanhaja ?)

question 11:
and sorry if this not related tho the topic (and than i shouldn't no post it ?) but could you ad an iraqi culture ? since in my own opinion i don't see any reason o_O for the region tho be levantine (like in eu 4 where the region is mashriqi culture and the levant is syrian culture if i don't get wrong)

question 12:
are we are getting new face pack/portrait for the new region (as well as the old) in "black africa" ?

question 13:
do we gonna get any musical/songs expansions for north africa and black africa ?

question 14:
is berbers who are still pagans (early start date) will have the renamed "african" religion or new historical religion "berbers paganism" ?

and thank you please for you response and also sorry for my english and please excuse me if there is too much question :)
 
Last edited:
Dang your right, significant improvement. Now the same should be done for the Alan’s.

I am of the opinion that the Jews should share graphics with the Assyrians, whatever the case may be. Years ago, I was advocating that Jews and Assyrians share graphics, whatever the case may be. I advocated Mediterranean portraits with Persian clothing, and I think that's still a fair option if it's ever reconsidered. I also thought that Mediterranean portraits and East African clothing might likewise be viable. Another option is Ashkenazim use German or Russian clothing and Sephardim use Spanish clothing, but that would not work well with the abstractions the game presents (such as a lack of Mizrahi culture, or the newly distinct Italian portraits/clothes).

The Jews might need the change more than Assyrians, though- they still wear Christian icons. The Assyrians at least were Christians, even if they used the Iberian portraits.
 
How much clearer does he have to be before spelling it out?
No need to be nasty. I’m simply asking for confirmation of something. I hadn’t noticed anything about the Crimean Goths in any of the dev diaries or responses so far and was wondering whether I’d missed something or if perhaps it was a tongue-in-cheek statement.
 
Great update. Three issues only
1. The Canaries should have a separate religion from the Subsaharans since Guanche religion had little to do with the continent.
2. Between Maghreb and Africa should be another kingdom since the region has either been independent or a contested region (A bit like Lotharingia)
3. New portraits for the Berbers please.
 
Great update. Three issues only
1. The Canaries should have a separate religion from the Subsaharans since Guanche religion had little to do with the continent.
2. Between Maghreb and Africa should be another kingdom since the region has either been independent or a contested region (A bit like Lotharingia)
3. New portraits for the Berbers please.

1) Hasn't the Guanche religion as we know it now been influenced by time, Spanish rule, and local linguistic patterns (eg I heard their mother goddess is Tanit with a new, localized name)?
2) I think "contested region" is more likely for an argument, it seems to have mostly just kept switching between Africa/Tunis and Morocco/Maghreb/Mauretania
3) Would be nice. There's a few outliers like the pseudo-Iberians of the Atlas, or the dark (future) Tuaregs, because Africa I guess, but I believe there is a fair average to go for.
 
Last edited:
1) Hasn't the Guanche religion as we know it now been influenced by time, Spanish rule, and local linguistic patterns (eg I heard their mother goddess is Tanit with a new, localized name)?
2) I think "contested region" is more likely for an argument, it seems to have mostly just kept switching between Africa/Tunis and Morocco/Maghreb/Mauretania
3) Would be nice. There's a few outliers like the pseudo-Iberians of the Atlas, or the dark (future) Tuaregs, because Africa I guess, but I believe there is a fair average to go for.

there was at least two dynasty who ruled (part or all the region in central maghreb) the region Independently such as the hammadid dynasty and the zayyanid dynasty (who are boot present in crusader kings 2) so way not :eek:?
 
Last edited:
Huh, I might actually dust off my copy and start dumping money back into CK2; I've admittedly been half-skipping on the DLC lately but an improved Africa game actually makes me want to try a spin south of the Sahara.
 
As someone who plays down in Africa a lot (mostly in east Africa trying to survive the great green blob), this is really welcome news. Of course, it is a little sad that east Africa isn't getting love like the rest of it it, but I guess it did start out more developed.

My big fear is that without player action, the area will just add to the great green blob, even with tribal attrition. They'll just come sweeping down through Nubia, like they seem almost always to do and then chew there way through the central African region.

It would be nice if some proper representation of the baqt was added that prevents Nubia being so quickly conquered - after all, it did survive to the end of the CK2 period because of the baqt. I know that they have now made Makuria a permanent tributary of the Caliphate now to try and rectify the problem, but that isn't really a fair representation of the baqt, which really was mutually beneficial to both parties.
 
It would be nice if some proper representation of the baqt was added that prevents Nubia being so quickly conquered - after all, it did survive to the end of the CK2 period because of the baqt. I know that they have now made Makuria a permanent tributary of the Caliphate now to try and rectify the problem, but that isn't really a fair representation of the baqt, which really was mutually beneficial to both parties.

Not disagreeing, but a big reason for the baqt being missing from the game is that the reasons it was mutually beneficial are not there. (It can only be put in with railroading that doesn't make sense in-universe.) It's a symptom of the fact that all land makes you stronger; in reality anyone ruling Egypt would have much to loose and little to gain by conquering the much poorer more sparsely inhabited Sudan, but (see my sig) the fact that most things cost the same regardless of local wealth means that it's not so in game.
 
Just thought of something else; I find it a bit odd that the easternmost Duchy in the Kingdom of Kanem is the Duchy of Wadai? If anything, during the game's timeframe the area should be part of the Kingdom of Nubia, as the Daju culture group you've got inhabiting the area were culturally closer to Nubian than Zaghawa. On top of that, the Wadai state itself didn't come into being until the 1630s, and it was also founded by people coming from the Nubia region! The only time it went the other way was when the Tunjur people took over the Daju state in the 13th century, and they came from the west (later being conquered by the aforementioned people coming from Nubia)...

I suppose an alternate method would be to add an extra province and thus create two Duchies with two provinces each; the western one can be used by the Tunjur and represent what would eventually become Wadai, while the eastern one can be used by the Daju and represent what would eventually become Darfur? I mean, that'd be more useful for games converted to EUIV, but still...
 
Oh, and here are some sketchy pictures showing what I was trying to describe earlier about how I'd tweak some of the borders?

39000253_308846436343765_2919146862860566528_n.png

With regards to this one, I should also note I think the provinces of Air/Agadez (the purple ones) should be redrawn so that the westernmost one connects with the other two? At the moment one has to go through Gobir to get from Tahoua to Agadez, when in reality Gobir is much further south and there's a more direct route to the north, plus the Songhai Empire did once conquer this area specifically as far as I can see.

38924278_275574279903401_5917338484225343488_n.png
39080084_239655103357730_7025938378763796480_n.png
39001894_839709889570145_4595121996014026752_n.png
 
Great update. Three issues only
2. Between Maghreb and Africa should be another kingdom since the region has either been independent or a contested region (A bit like Lotharingia)
3. New portraits for the Berbers please.

there was at least two dynasty who ruled (part or all the region in central maghreb) the region Independently such as the hammadid dynasty and the zayyanid dynasty (who are boot present in crusader kings 2) so way not :eek:?
The kingdom of Central Maghreb is a problematic issue. I am playing with designs of the region for quite some time and I still am not really convinced about neither having it or not having it.

I don't have strong position on this, although in my suggestions and mods I usually split the Middle gingdom between Ifrikiya and Maghreb (al-Aqsa AKA), mostly because I don't like people calling these historical regions with their modern names. It makes people believe that the middle kingdom should be Algiers / Al-Jazair, although the city became prominent much later.
My major argument against the middle kingdom is that it never had its own core. In early stages the rustamid capital was Tahert, then Hammadids had their capital in Qala'a and later Bejaia and the Zayyanids had their capital in Tilimsan/Tlemcen. The recent capital of Algiers became prominent only after the fall of Zayyanids.
The other major argument against this is that Hammadids and Zayyanids were often considered local autonomous subjects of the main powers of Ifrikiya and Maghreb and, unless those powers were in internal or other crisies, the middle region was subordinated to them.

OTOH, both the Hammadids and Rustamids from the early starts and 1066 were - at their times - rather important entities. Also the intermediate periods (during which these states in the Medium kingdom were able to stay independent rather than autonomous), usually lasted at least few decades and were roghly as long as the periods in which the area was under influence of Ifrikiya or Maghreb.. so I never can decide. However I think that both ways are possible


EDIT: (to merge / avoid doubble post)

Oh, and here are some sketchy pictures showing what I was trying to describe earlier about how I'd tweak some of the borders?

39000253_308846436343765_2919146862860566528_n.png

With regards to this one, I should also note I think the provinces of Air/Agadez (the purple ones) should be redrawn so that the westernmost one connects with the other two? At the moment one has to go through Gobir to get from Tahoua to Agadez, when in reality Gobir is much further south and there's a more direct route to the north, plus the Songhai Empire did once conquer this area specifically as far as I can see.

38924278_275574279903401_5917338484225343488_n.png
39080084_239655103357730_7025938378763796480_n.png
39001894_839709889570145_4595121996014026752_n.png
Any reasoning for the changes in Ghana?
They don't really make much sense to me. Why should Adrar region all the way to Ifni be part of Ghana kingdom, when it was dominated by the Sanhaja Berbers throughout the entire period?
 
Last edited:
Perhaps it could be something that can be formed as a titular Kingdom or something via event provided that you're an independent Duke in the area and don't hold any Kingdom titles? Could be Mauretania for Catholic/Orthodox rulers, after the Roman Province, and perhaps also the Mauro-Roman Kingdoms...

Any reasoning for the changes in Ghana?
They don't really make much sense to me. Why should Adrar region all the way to Ifni be part of Ghana kingdom, when it was dominated by the Sanhaja Berbers throughout the entire period?
Well, I suppose that could change; I thought from the maps I saw of the Ghana Empire that it extended to that territory, and then I figured if the former territory of Timbuktu - the bit covering the trade route across the Sahara, I mean - was falling under their control as well, it might be worth shifting the odd province on the edge in there for gameplay purposes. Happy to back down on that part, though.
 
Perhaps it could be something that can be formed as a titular Kingdom or something via event provided that you're an independent Duke in the area and don't hold any Kingdom titles? Could be Mauretania for Catholic/Orthodox rulers, after the Roman Province, and perhaps also the Mauro-Roman Kingdoms...
This game does not cover Roman era, but medieval period. During this period there was no Roman kingdom of Mauritania and the Sahara was more connected to the Maghreb than to the Sudan/Sahel. "Moors" don't exist, it was a Western European umbrella term for all Muslims, just like Muslims called all Catholics as Franks regardless they were from Germany, Scandinavia or Britain.

Should the devs abandon a setup of West Africa based on historical data to give a possibility to create a fantasy/anachronistic kingdom? The game already has tools for alternative history, there are custom kingdom titlws. Why should they change also historical de jure setup?

Well, I suppose that could change; I thought from the maps I saw of the Ghana Empire that it extended to that territory, and then I figured if the former territory of Timbuktu - the bit covering the trade route across the Sahara, I mean - was falling under their control as well, it might be worth shifting the odd province on the edge in there for gameplay purposes. Happy to back down on that part, though.
The current setup is there for a reason. If you are suggesting it should change, I suppose there is a reason too.

The empire of Wagadu (AKA Ghana) never controlled anythng beyond Awdaghust, so it makes no sense to have it control Adrar and anything north of it. Archaeological researches suggest that the Sudanians have lived there before the advance of Berbers just prior to the first CK2 bookmark, but during the CK2 period it makes no sense.

For the Taghaza corridor we don't have that many information, but even the area of Arawan, Walata and Timbuktu leaned towards Berber control during much of the CK2 period. Arawan was always under Berber control. The Timbuktu area (note that Timbuktu rose to importance during late 13th/14th century) wasn't very important until the late Mali period.

But what's even weirder is movinf the Inland Niger delta and Timbuktu into the de jure kingdo mof Mali. Most of its area was wither under the Soninke people of Ghana or contested with Bebers, so why do you think it should move to k_Mali? Sure that during the apogee of Mali it controlled also this area (just like pretty much the entire region).. .that's why there is the empire of Mali.
 
Last edited:
There should be a formable kingdom for those in between Africa and Maghreb once they reach a certain size. The religious chaos in the Maghreb should also be better represented as us Berbers are never the best at following foreign religions. Also the entire Moroccan coast should be part of the Berber kingdoms and Empires, not the West Africans.