• 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.

CK3 Dev Diary #04 - Development & Buildings

Greetings!

This week's Dev Diary is all about your holdings on the map - Baronies and counties, what they do for you, and what you can do with them! As seen in the map DD, Baronies are now physically present on the map. A group of Baronies makes up a greater unit, called a County.

DD4CountyView.jpg


While certain things are still on a per-Barony level, such as buildings, two of the most important values you have to deal with are on a per-County basis - Development and Control!

Development is the measurement of technological advancement and general infrastructure in a County. Development directly increases taxes and levies you get out of the holdings, and it also unlocks some other special options. Development increases very slowly across the duration of the game, and radiates outwards from high-development Counties to those nearby. For example, Constantinople (aka the City of the World’s Desire), starts with a very high Development level. This will slowly spread outwards, reaching the most remote areas much slower than their Greek heartland. Naturally, there are other ways to increase your development, such as through the Steward’s ‘Increase Development’ task, although this is a fairly slow process, and usually only worth doing in certain Counties. Having terrain such as Farmland or Floodplains in your Counties make them ideal candidates for development, and when they have gotten some levels of development you can just sit back and enjoy, as it slowly spreads throughout the rest of your realm!

Control, on the other hand, directly represents the power you have over the County. This naturally decreases during sieges and by forcefully seizing territory, taking the place of the ‘new Administration’ modifiers from CK2. If you don’t pace yourself, and use your Marshal to increase Control in newly conquered territories, you might find yourself with a slew of useless land. This also increases the importance of keeping peasant rabble and similar nuisances out of your lands…

Each County also has an opinion of their holder, referred to as the ‘Popular Opinion’. This represents the sentiment of the local peasants, and tends to decrease if you’re not of their culture or faith, promoting the use of ‘local lords’, vassals of the local culture/faith, to handle such territory for you - as converting it will take quite some time. Unhappy Counties tend to cause problems down the line… more on this in another DD.

Now, on to the Holdings themselves! Each County will have a certain amount of slots available for Baronies, with some being constructed at the start, and others not. The three core types of holdings remain unchanged - Castles, Cities and Temples make up the majority of holdings on the map, each with their own main purpose. Castles provide levies and fortifications, cities provide taxes with a secondary focus on Development, and temples provide an even mix of taxes and levies with a secondary focus on increasing Control. This means that if you want a County to develop really fast, building many Cities might be the thing for you. If you want a resilient domain perhaps you’d prefer Castles, etc.

DD4Holding.jpg


Based on the terrain of the province, each Holding has access to a number of buildings. Regular buildings primarily focus on increasing taxes and levies, with some secondary effects such as increasing fortifications or increasing supply. These are usually straight upgrades, and are long-term investments that you should always consider, much like in our other games.

DD4Buildings.jpg


To spice things up, we've also introduced the concept of Duchy Capital Buildings. These buildings can only be built in the capital Barony of any De Jure Duchy, limiting their availability across the map. To build them and have them be active, you need to hold their associated Duchy title personally - this way you can’t simply hoard Counties in which you can build these special buildings, as just like in CK2 you will get severe penalties for holding too many Duchies personally. The buildings themselves are very expensive, but come in many flavors - allowing you to tailor your experience. The Military Academies track of buildings increases the effectiveness of your Knights and allows you to have more of them, establishing marches will make the entire Duchy more defensible, the Siege Workshops will increase the effectiveness of your trebuchets, and so on!

DD4DuchyCapitalBuildings.jpg


We also have the concepts of special buildings. These aim to represent historical buildings, both ancient and those built during the time period. Placed in predetermined baronies on the map, you have the usual suspects such as the Pyramids or Colosseum, along with more fringe or lesser-known constructions such as Offa’s Dyke or the Buddhas of Bamiyan. Some of these will be possible to construct during the course of the game, such as the Tower of London or the Alhambra. All of these constructions provide unique and interesting bonuses, with some of them being represented with 3D models on the map.

That’s it for this time! Stay tuned for the next DD, where we will tell you about the new scheme mechanics!
 
  • 5Like
  • 3Love
  • 2
Reactions:
I’m curious if the holdings are as bound to rulee types as in CK2.
 
Given that one of the most popular mods of CK2 is all about more unique and personalized castles, I hope there is an effort to have a lot of building options and not just boring buffs to levy size and tax.
 
1. Why Bastion and Curtain Walls make money?
2. Why the administrative and military buildings do not have expenses? I still don't know why the devs keep up with that building has no costs, it's like Military Schools and Strategic Marches have no staff costs, nothing is free, staffing, administration and maintenance costs exist and exist! It was not only spending to build, but it is necessary to maintain, it is as if Constantinople did not bring costs to the Empire for being the administrative capital of a great Empire.
 
one of the things i always disliked about ck2 was the concept of the "historical capital." i mean, i dont mind the idea of a sort of "proper capital" that rulers would generally prefer to hold and base themselves in for the sake of legitimacy, but i disliked how it wasnt subject to change. saxony could never drift southeast towards dresden, for instance - the ai ruler would spend the whole game desperately trying to get his hands on brunswick long after it had de jure drifted into the duchy of brunswick under the welfs. ai charlie would never be happy basing himself in his historical capital of aachen, hed piss off all his vassals by tyranny-revoking paris instead

sounds like now not only is it going to still be like that, but if saxony does not hold brunswick he will straight up not be able to build or enjoy the effects of this new duchy buildings system. if theres a start date after the formation of the duchy of brunswick, saxony is just shit out of luck

i get it, and i get the thought process behind it, but man some flexibility would have been nice lads

(that said, it feels like i have something negative to say in every dev diary so id like to try and balance it out with SOME positivity. i like the idea of bishoprics helping with control, its nice that they actually have a use now)
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
So if I take muslim territory as a christian, to exert control, will it be easier to get a muslim in my court to hand over the title to him?
I don't think you would ever want to do that, you should just convert them. I could see something like that for culture though, maybe if you conquered a Muslim county with Andalusian culture, you would give it to an Andalusian cultured Catholic. I don't know, a Christian or Muslim lord giving out land to people of a different religion seems ahistorical, and while you shouldn't be restricted from doing so, it should be more trouble than it's worth and the AI definitely shouldn't be giving titles out to characters of a different religion.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Kind of baffles me. They are very aware we enjoy a pop system, but they chose not to include one in CK3.

Gotta Remember they're already simulating much more advanced 'pops', they have thousands of fleshed out characters with traits and opinions, Dynasties, and locations. A pop system would be nice but I can understand why they don't do it.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Do anyone else find the holding images to be a bit too dark, the city especially is so dark it is a bit hard for me to actually see the houses and it kind of look like a hill. I would say it kind of play into the sterotype that medieval era was a dark place which is very much incorrect and it is not just these images but how dark the map look and so on which also seems to play into the same thing.

Compare CK3 to Imperator Rome and CK3 seems to try to tone down colors while Imperator: Rome don't do that and its map look alot more brighter. Imperator: Rome use White marble alot which is kind of unrealistic since marble was likely colored and medieval europé also made Heavy use of color so maybe it is time to make some progress.
 
Will you be able to change what the holding type is in CKIII, unlike in CKII where you had to turn tribal to destroy the holding types you didn't want (say excess temples)?
 
I'm hoping the terrain resources, e.g. wood & stone, and navigable topography, e.g. surface water, flat, factor into the cost and time to build improvements.

Definitely appreciating the inclusion of agriculture. It will be nice to see what buildings are offered for the cosmopolitan parts of the world.
 
Very excited about development and popular support. In CK2, development was only abstract: what kind of tax income did a place have and what modifiers did it get (including prosperity). I like a system built in from the start.

Same thing with popular support — glad it’s not just a province modifier. I’m especially glad there’s a mechanic and encouragement to try to use local rulers.
 
The Military Academies track of buildings increases the effectiveness of your Knights and allows you to have more of them, establishing marches will make the entire Duchy more defensible, the Siege Workshops will increase the effectiveness of your trebuchets, and so on!

So the marches give the defending side a combat bonus. I take it from a previous DD that the controller of a fortified province is considered defender in combat? When the province is controlled not by the owner (but occupied), does this bonus still apply to the occupier? Depending on the actual idea about marches (organisational or infrastructure), this bonus might only apply to 'owner and controller'. So when the owner designates a march (here by building), he need not fear to have this investment turned against him?

Asking for a friend.
 
Three questions.

1. Is there a limit to how many buildings can be built in each holding?

2. Can development be decreased through actions like raiding?

3. The DD mentioned conversion would take some time, does that mean conversion is no longer random, and will have a kind of progress bar attached to it.
 
Three questions.

1. Is there a limit to how many buildings can be built in each holding?

2. Can development be decreased through actions like raiding?

3. The DD mentioned conversion would take some time, does that mean conversion is no longer random, and will have a kind of progress bar attached to it.

According to the dev diary the answer to 1 is that it depends on terrain apperently. No idea about the other questions or if development might affect buildings in a holding.

Although a Progress Bar for Religous Conversion would suck, I have a feeling provinces would instantly be really easily to convert with a set time, I like a really low percentage chance per month for a province to convert. It should be centuries or at least decades to convert a province, not a few years.
 
This looks... boring and rigid. The fact that the development of a province is represented yet again by a completely arbitrary number is precisely what I need to feel detached from the game an uninterested in province's growth. Actual population numbers would be much more appreciated. And as for the Duchy building, the fact that they are constricted to "Duchy capitals" makes them too game-y to be enjoyable as an option, and worries me that this game will have an exceedingly static in terms of domains, representing counties/duchies/baronies as rigidly hierarchical and unchanging in the centuries, while this couldn't be further from what actually happened in the Middle Ages. So far, not impressed.

Development doesn't just mean population does it? I look at development as two fold. The infrastructure provided by the city e.g. sewers, paved roads etc... Libraries, labs etc... in addition to the population factor of a region. I agree that development to show both population size of an area along with the sophistication of the area to be the wrong approach.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Development doesn't just mean population does it? I look at development as two fold. The infrastructure provided by the city e.g. sewers, paved roads etc... Libraries, labs etc... in addition to the population factor of a region. I agree that development to show both population size of an area along with the sophistication of the area to be the wrong approach.
It basically represent Everything, population is just one factor out of many.
 
  • 1
Reactions: