• 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:
Any chance there's going to be a middle ground to putting local lords in charge and leaving the region's culture as it is (forever) and putting your own culture in charge and just dealing with rebellions until they've assimilated?

I really think it might be cool if you could put local lords in charge, get them (or their children) to assimilate into your culture and then use that as leverage of sorts to assimilate the local population faster. It might be cool for Bulgarian counties, for example, not to mind too much that their rulers are Greek, as long as they're still the Asen dynasty. (Or whoever.) Or maybe a slightly lesser bonus from marrying those dynasties into the families you put in charge of those lands.

It would really be a nice motivation for keeping dynasties other than my own in power, or strategically marrying my dynasty for political purposes that are internal and relate to the peasantry.
 
So, we should take this to mean that *only* historical buildings will exist as special buildings? Personally, I'd find that a little... Disappointing... A lot of us like doing our own thing, and we might very well want to make our own special buildings. Just like how the Monuments in CK2 weren't restricted just by where you happened to be living, and what actually historically happened there. It becomes alternate history as soon as we take control, after all. Why would buildings all turn out the same? I understand the appeal of building historical structures, but could we get the chance to build our own special buildings, too?
I agree. You must add Great Works where we want to put them.
 
Looks very good even while the term "Military Academy" is an eyesore to me.
 
Why are duchy capitals fixed? What happens if you own most of the duchy but the capital is owned by someone else? Are these buildings available? Are they only available if you own the capital of the duchy? Do you need to control (directly or indirectly through vassals) the whole duchy in order to buiild them?
 
Are we still restricted to just holding castles like in Ck2? I always thought it was silly considering there were many cities built and run by feudal lords especially that of Prague. In my opinion it would be better to give bonuses to burghers who own cities make it better for them to be in charge while at the same time not restricting the player if they want to have a large city to control.
 
Now that there is development that represents the overall strength of the county, will we see a somewhat similar system that is in the Game of Thrones mod? Where low development means you have a tiny little keep and high development means you have a massive castle.
 
I can't believe the ability to recruit nobles of minority cultures wasn't in CK2 before tbh, it made some games with cultures like Vlach a total pain to get up and running, and often ended up in cultures going entirely extinct way too frequently.

It's interesting that the number of building slots is limited, is it only terrain, or will development also have an impact on this.
Ever seen a Czech Bohemia at the end of the game? They almost always become german.
 
I can't believe the ability to recruit nobles of minority cultures wasn't in CK2 before tbh, it made some games with cultures like Vlach a total pain to get up and running, and often ended up in cultures going entirely extinct way too frequently.

Hopefully it won't have anymore that Liege message wanting to educate the children of foreign vassals to the proper culture and religion of the liege. It frequently led to total assimilation and that as boring as hell.

Ever seen a Czech Bohemia at the end of the game? They almost always become german.

Not only the Czechs but Holland, Burgundy and even Italy by the end of the game were fully germanized...
 
Meh, debatable. I’m pretty sure the new barony on maps was pretty new, and personally the new war mechanics are a way different from Ck2 with knights and supply and all that.

Baronies are certainly new, but that they can't be independent made the baronies-on-map thing kinda pointless.

i don't want new for newness's sake. i want new that make the game better, more interesting and at the moment I don't see it.
 
So there is no anwer for question, does development go also down by wars and sieges and epidemics are whole map is ever developing powerhose where is no fail. Developments should realy go down so it can represent a fall for empires. CK2 tech system makes lategame boring couse all have maxed out province techs and all have same buildings and only matter who has more provinces to get levy and taxes.
 
Looks very good even while the term "Military Academy" is an eyesore to me.
You have to come up with a better name for it. Military manuals was a thing in medieval era and while military Academy may be too modern for a name Im not sure what is a fitting name for military infrastructure during medieval era.

Are we still restricted to just holding castles like in Ck2? I always thought it was silly considering there were many cities built and run by feudal lords especially that of Prague. In my opinion it would be better to give bonuses to burghers who own cities make it better for them to be in charge while at the same time not restricting the player if they want to have a large city to control.
Likely given the esclamation mark for city and temple.
 
The new buildings look very nice, but I'm a sap for having a lot to pick from. Hopefully we also have a lot of slots to work with. Although the cost could be an issue, but I suppose it depends on how much money we're making now. CK2's building system, personally, suffers from a lack of being able to well, constantly fund things or build things. I still have somewhat unfond memories of waiting decades to build a single village.

But this could be my viewpoint of playing CK2 more 4X-style, where I feel I should be upgrading yearly, if not monthly (when possible). Decades between upgrades is pretty suffering to someone like me.
 
Thats awesome. I do really like the new stuff.
Yet as it has been asked before, I hope there will be the possibilty of landscaping and readjusting building zones :)
 
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 may represent everything, but it represents it poorly. Something more hands-on a la MEIOU population would do wonders to make statecraft actually involving.
 
Tl;dr:
Restraining the choice of the player (by not letting him chose its capital, for example) in a game that wants to highlight its role-playing aspects is a... Paradox.

#####################
Long rant version:
Ok, this, is the 4th development diary, and I have to confess that my eagerness for CKIII has considerably waned.

When I first read that CKIII DD were eventually out, I remembered how much I liked the Pre-CKII launch DDs, when every week increased the sensation that the game was all we had hoped for, and more.

DD1 on Dynasties got my mouth watering, and the promise to focus on role-playing caught my fancy probably more than it should have.

DD2 came with a disappointment. I was sad to see how historical realism was sacrificed for the sake of game experience. Barony tied to their county were just a downgrade from the great novelty of CKII. No biggie, but the sentiment that CKIII could be less than we hoped for started sipping in.

I was relatively fine with DD3 - I don't play CK for military tactics - and while I was a bit disappointed to see the flank system go, that was replaced by the supply line system. Let's call it even.

And now DD4, long-awaited. The sensation that Paradox is going in the wrong direction grows stronger. Baronies linked to the country did obliterate some important game dynamic, were historically inaccurate and a missed opportunity, but at least you weren't meant to play as a baron.

But now I understand that the "capital" (for lack of a more historically appropriate word, as the idea of capital comes with the nation state...) of Duchies (and I assume Kingdoms and Empires as well) would be fixed. This is completely inaccurate (even more so in the earlier phases of the game, when the capital is scarcely more than "the castle where the ruler resides") and will lead to issues (see the Saxony case that someone raised).

But even more than that: that restrains the choice of the player - that is paramount in RPG. I find it paradoxical (pun absolutely intended) that a game that is purportedly aiming at highlighting the role-playing aspects starts by... restricting the player's choice.

I appreciate this is just DD4 and I hope that Paradox will surprise me, and I especially await the DD about diplomacy, intrigue and character interaction - the three main parts in an RP-oriented game. It's no deal-breaker, but it surely sounds like a false start.
 
Last edited:
Loving the dds so far, they are great for what they are, the bare bones of all the systems, i can't wait till we get further into them and start seeing more of the depth in each system. Really looking forward to it
 
I'm really not a fan of the building UI you've chosen. It's going to involve a lot of scrolling through a list that doesn't seem to be organized any particular way and has no search feature. It could really use some work to be made quicker to use.
 
You have to come up with a better name for it. Military manuals was a thing in medieval era and while military Academy may be too modern for a name Im not sure what is a fitting name for military infrastructure during medieval era.

Sure. How about "Training/Mustering ground/field"?