• 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 #87: Royal Modding

Hello everyone and welcome to the 87th CK3 Dev Diary!

I’m Matthew, one of the Programmers on the CK3 team, and today I am going to talk to you about a variety of improvements and changes we’ve done to modding for the 1.5 patch which will be accompanying the Royal Court Expansion.

We’ve added a variety of mod support in 1.5 so I’m not gonna cover everything, but I will give a few big ticket items that will let mods do a lot more fun custom things as well a few smaller fun ones. I’ve also attached the output of script_docs on 1.5 at the end so modders curious about the new triggers and effects in game can get a bit of a sneak peek for the release.

The Royal Court​

Of course the Royal Court itself is open to mods, it is all defined in the gfx/court_scene folder though the majority of the complex scene_settings itself is best built using the in-game editor that we are shipping with the court scene. It lets you position and change objects and switch between different settings much faster than trying to edit them all by hand.

Trust me, cause I remember the time whilst the editor was work in progress and doing changes by hand crushed my soul.
The in-game editor tool for the royal court 3d scene

I am not going to go into a huge amount of detail on the royal court modding because it is actually pretty straightforward with the editor, you position things and pick the assets you need for a configuration and then it just puts things there.

One aspect I will go into a bit more info on quickly is the character positioning, because the rest of the positioning is set within the editor but the characters are not positioned individually because of course not every court has the King of England to reference.

Instead the character positions are given a set of valid roles, and you pick a position where someone who has one of those roles may go. For example the two guards you see in the back are two positioned instances of the guard and knight role, which has a variety of rules of who it should pick.

If you have a bodyguard or champion court position appointed for example then it tries to use them as a special guard, but if you do not then it will fallback to picking any of your knights instead. You can also have some more special roles such as if you have a court jester or poet appointed then they can show up in your court too.
The script for the poet court scene role


Characters can not show up in multiple different roles and it is a “greedy” picking of first come first served in who is taken up, but you can write some fairly complex rules to decide who can go where as well as what animations they can choose from!

Same-Sex Marriage​

Coming with 1.5 is support for same-sex marriage, not only just in mods either but as a new game rule alongside the Same-Sex relations game rule so you can use it in un-modded games too. We've updated a variety of AI logic and interactions and content to take that into account when playing.
Same-sex marriage between the Duke of Brittany and his husband

Mods are of course able to implement this into their different worlds without it having to be a game rule, it can be based on different cultures or anything in the game world at all.

This is something that we’re very happy to be able to put into the game and have support in the game rules for unmodded games too, it is something that a lot of the team and community wanted and we are glad it is finally going to be shipped in 1.5.

Scripted Widgets​

CK3 is one of our most moddable games yet, not just in terms of the content that can be added but the system's mods can script. And our new UI system is the most open we’ve had in terms of what custom UIs mods can add and edit, but one issue it had was letting you add brand new things entirely and keeping compatibility nicely.

In 1.5 there is a new system called “scripted widgets”, what they allow for in essence is a mod to define their own brand new windows in the gui files and then add an entry into the gui/scripted_widgets folder with the name of their gui file and the main window.

For example:
gui/test_custom_widget.gui = my_first_cool_test_widget
gui/test_custom_widget.gui = my_second_cool_test_widget

Then with that simple line of script their window will appear in the game in the same way any of the windows we support in code do. Now of course there are some limitations, the windows do not have any special data context like a code one does but it can access anything that is set globally or on the local player character which covers more than enough cases normally.
A scripted widget making a new example window with a testing button

This may not sound hugely impactful, but it means that mods going forward can easily create large systems which can then more easily be compatible with other mods that add systems or if they feel brave enough even with larger Total Conversions if they do not cross over in incompatible design choices.

I am really excited to see the new UIs that mods end up making for their gameplay systems and getting to try a few different mods together. Hopefully their windows have a bit more functionality and effort put into it than my testing one…

Value Breakdowns​

Another bit of UI functionality that mods could not nicely mimic is getting breakdowns of their numbers in the same way we break down a value like your prestige income or how much piety it’s gonna cost to start that war in their own UI.
In 1.5 we’ve added the GetScriptValueBreakdown UI function which lets you specify the name of the script_value you want to break down and the scope context to do it on and it gives you the exact same data as if we’d natively done it from code.

For example in my custom widget I’ve made the button tooltip give a breakdown of the cost if I were to increase my crown authority entirely separate from the usually needed button to evaluate that cost in the realms UI.
Example of custom value break downs in custom UIs

We hope this will let mods better explain their own custom values in a more clear way, be that something like your mana in a fantasy mod or custom score for a special event chain.

Events and Localization​

To make life easier for our modders and designers to work with events we’ve added and reworked a few debug buttons in the event window.
Now every event has these five icons in the top right corner.
The 5 debug icons in the event window

In order they let you:
  • Regenerate the event contents, useful if you’ve changed something that cannot hot reload.
  • Toggle the data system globally, this makes most everything in square brackets show exactly what you typed instead of localizing to some output, this is available via the console commands too
  • Copy the event text to your clipboard
  • Shows you the trigger evaluation that had to be true for you to get this event
  • Debug info about the current scope context and how keys used to build the description
We’ve found that having easy access to these makes it a lot simpler to debug events and iterate on content.

Though do be warned that toggling off the data system can give you some truly cursed looking windows since now instead of seeing the number 4 you see the joyous underlying constructs such as this monstrosity of a window:
The character window with the localization data system disabled showing the raw function calls

In a more mechanical improvement we’ve also added a boilerplate reduction for having events on a cooldown, instead of needing to manually check and juggle flags and variables yourself you can now specify a cooldown on the event in days/weeks/months/years as some value and it will automatically handle applying a flag that will clear after that time blocking the event from being fired on a character.

Console Commands​

We have added a variety of new console commands in 1.5 to help make creating and testing mods a bit easier, and instead of explaining them myself I am just gonna cheat and rip their change log entries out!
  • Added console command "bypass_requirements" (alias "bypass") that lets you do decisions, interactions, schemes, laws, and title creation despite the requirements not being met
  • Added console command "instasiege"
  • Added console command "save_every" and startup parameter "-save_every=x". These will make a save every x years, and ensure they do not get overwritten by normal autosaves
  • Added console command AI.try_send_decision
  • Added console command AI.try_send_interaction
  • Added console command Ironman.ToggleIgnore. When ignored, saves will act as if they're not ironman, including that when you hit save it'll result in a non-ironman save. This can be toggled during gameplay
  • Added console command ToggleShowAllKillers
  • Added console command complete_schemes, guaranteed_scheme_success/failure, and guaranteed_scheme_secrecy_success/failure. The success/secrecy ones only affect the player
  • Added console command set_date
  • Added console command show_regions_in_tooltip
  • Added console command toggle_keys_on_map
  • Added console commands "yesmen_instant" (AKA "ymi") and "instant_responses". The yesmen button in the console can now be right-clicked to run "yesmen_instant"
The bypass and save_every commands have been especially helpful in setting up scenarios to test scripts and make sure it works exactly as you had intended in your mods. As are the forcing the AI to try out an interaction instead of waiting for them to do it of their own free will.

Modifiers Everywhere​

In 1.5 we’ve made some improvements to modifiers so if you use an invalid modifier type somewhere it will error and let you know its not going to work.

Which has been very useful as in 1.5 we’ve greatly expanded upon modifier support in buildings, now buildings can not only apply modifiers to you in general but they can also apply specific modifiers based on culture parameters which are applied by traditions. These can be used in the modifiers affecting the character, province, county and duchy_capital_county modifiers.

In addition there is a province_terrain_modifier which can apply a modifier based optionally on: terrain type, being coastal, being by a river, and by culture parameter. So traditions can really matter in your mods and let cultures play in vastly different ways.
The script for various culture tradition based modifiers on buildings

Clock’s a ticking​

Release day is coming soon and we’re very excited to see what mods are going to do with Royal Court, especially with the court scene itself which we hope in the future to see some fantastic 3D scenes especially from fantasy mods.

I’m gonna get back to the last minute release period scramble, thank you for reading and I hope you’re looking forward to Royal Court’s release and the great mods we’re gonna be able to see in the future too!
 

Attachments

  • effects.log
    288,5 KB · Views: 0
  • event_scopes.log
    302 bytes · Views: 0
  • event_targets.log
    22,2 KB · Views: 0
  • modifiers.log
    58,9 KB · Views: 0
  • on_actions.log
    35,7 KB · Views: 0
  • triggers.log
    195,8 KB · Views: 0
  • 104Like
  • 60Love
  • 27
  • 5Haha
  • 5
  • 1
Reactions:
The third paragraph is where you jump the shark though. The comparison to court window is rather missed, because it's directly related to the DLC, so I'm not sure why it would be met with complaints. Even scripted widgets, which essentially add custom windows for custom systems in and expansion that adds new systems with their windows is still somewhat related. Yet when it comes to same-sex marriage, because you went with a game rule option instead of unlocking it with a cultural perk of the cultural rework, it doesn't really connect to this specific DLC in the same your other examples do. So yeah, not the best comparison

So, I'll try my best to explain the context (or at least my understanding of it) behind his post.

Out of the modding changes explained in the first post it seems only the royal court scene editor and position is "DLC-only", so I don't see how his comparisons were "not the best" as you say. We have scripted UI widgets and tooltip functionality, improvements to the debug mode, at least 12 console commands, and better error logging. Some of these could even have been left hardcoded for Paradox developing softwares but was added as an improvement to all modders.

I'm willing to guess all of these took some development time, yet curiously, there are no complaints about any of these. Even more so considering not everyone uses mods, and not everyone that uses mods will use a mod that will be affected by these, so these changes may only affect a small amount of players.

All of these seem to be able to be used by modders for anything, not just things related to royal court. And this being added as a main rule is not relevant to the context of his post because this negativity about same-sex marriage always happened even when it was only going to be a change for modders.

Yet that part of your third paragraph is still monumentally better than its second half, because that's where your remark about good faith posting dives head first into the realm of irony. First of all, the bit about ahistorical nature of this particular modding tool is a misrepresentation of the post you found worthy of your sass, as it didn't mention anything of the sort. Secondly, the argument that no one is complaining about the non-modding changes to "any other of the myriad of reworks and changes" coming in 1.5 and the DLC makes no sense in the context of a dev diary related to modding. What, do you want people to post off-topic here? Given how that's against forum rules, that would be a rather weird thing for PDX employee to do.

This is not the first time that same-sex marriage is the only thing picked on for the "time and resources argument" after a list of several changes. Check Dev Diary #55 for the mere mention of it already getting negative reactions (and no other changes mentioned there did so). You can also see the historicity arguments BlackNinja also mentioned on his post (which was not used much on this current thread, but I guess he wanted to take the opportunity to debunk those as well).

Or, if you want even more of this just go to the "Legalize Gay Modding" thread in the User Mods section, that one is quite long and it got a lot of negativity even before Paradox participated.

There is no need for "off-topicness" here; there are other things in this dev diary that took time to develop and are not relevant for everyone, yet only one of them is singled out.

Let's take a look at Dev Diary #21 about Faith Reformation. The Carnal Exaltation and Ritual Cannibalism tenets are visible in screenshots, yet there are no dislikes. The only concerns are about the prevalence of reformation (and just by Roxas15 on page 6 and Larque on page 15, historical concerns), but nobody asked (neither did Roxas15 or Larque) these tenets not to be included in the game or complained about the development time of adding them in. Ironically when user MetalGearDaner asked in page 12 if same-sex marriage was possible, another user replied right after that it would ahistorical, and a larger discussion started about it in page 13.

So that was an example of pre-release dev diary about ahistorical content and almost no complaints, why? Why when same-sex marriage is mentioned then these arguments appear? Why were people then not concerned about the development time? Why are people ignoring the other ahistorical content possible in the game? (With or without DLC)

Thirdly, to cover all bases here, since you didn't actually limit your claim of how there's no criticism of other parts of 1.5 and Royal Court to this thread alone, it also warrants pointing out that people had most certainly been complaining about other aspects of 1.5 and Royal Court in their relevant Dev diaries. Even though, weirdly enough, none of the previous dev diaries had anything to do with same-sex anything. Hell, people complained about not being able to change aspects of a culture without using divergence or hybridisation so much you devs changed your mind about it. And on top of that we have a whole plethora of user-made threads critical about various aspects of the incoming update, starting with the court itself. Some are right on the first forum page right now.

What does this even have to do with anything? The context of his post is not that people "only complain about same-sex marriage", it's that people keep complaining about it with double standards. Even then, have the features you mentioned been complained about their development time or historicity? A DLC that is taking almost 8 months to finish since announcement and that allows you to create a Mongol-African or Indian-Icelandic culture? In your examples the complaints are about implementation rather than on these two grounds.

And before you project your questionable "everyone that questions our priorities on this is a bigot" at me as well, let me point out that I didn't question it myself. Because I have no problem with this change myself. Nor do I have a problem with gay people themselves, as you'd may like to insinuate. Instead I attended pride parades in support of their rights (in a country that doesn't really respect them) and while I'm not gay myself I fall on another part of the LGBTA spectrum.

This is not relevant but just a quick heads up, LGBT+ groups can be bigoted towards other groups of the LGBT+ community, lesbian TERFs are an example.

Anyway, when the same arguments keep being used, even after debunked, and these same arguments are not applied to other aspects of the game or its development process it can lead one to think the issues the posters have lie elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
  • 27
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Now, maybe it's still smaller in scope than literally every single example that both @Draky and @chelvo talked about. Which, for the record, I find doubtful in and of itself because things like "make warfare less terrible" are rather vague and open-ended. And as such leave room for starting with smaller changes. Kinda why even small mods like those lowering replenishment rate were already met with positive response in the recent thread on the state of warfare. Either way, it still feels like you're downplaying the scope of this change compared to your previous statements on the issue.
For the replenishment rate, keep in mind there is also the problem of finding a value that is generally liked and not having to redo it when other things are updated.

So a mod can just put in a value the modder likes, and then people who agree can download the mod, and people who don't have to download the mod. But Paradox has to find a value that works for everyone, which is a lot more work at it requires multiple different people test multiple different values (while I personally would like to see replenishment rates lowered, I do know there are some who don't, or only slightly lowered, as they see it as a mechanic that just forces needless weighting). Now I'm sure someone will mention game rules, so let me just head that off. If they add a game rule they still need to find something at works for most people, to set as the default, and then need to figure out what and how many options there are for the game rule. So in someways game rules creates more work, at least when there aren't obvious choices for what the game rule options would be.

The other is that they do all this work to change the replenishment rate, but they still haven't overhauled the war system. But when they overhaul the war system later, as is being requested here, they would probably need to go back a figure out the optimal replenishment rates for the new war system. Meaning they would have to do the same thing twice. This is why the devs often like to cover interconnect systems as a whole, because it reduces the amount of redundant work. And as I haven't heard any major calls for overhauling the marriage system, this doesn't really apply to gay marriage (as any changes to the marriage system are likely to be minor or are very far off).

The third paragraph is where you jump the shark though. The comparison to court window is rather missed, because it's directly related to the DLC, so I'm not sure why it would be met with complaints. Even scripted widgets, which essentially add custom windows for custom systems in and expansion that adds new systems with their windows is still somewhat related. Yet when it comes to same-sex marriage, because you went with a game rule option instead of unlocking it with a cultural perk of the cultural rework, it doesn't really connect to this specific DLC in the same your other examples do. So yeah, not the best comparison
So if complaining about the devs not focusing on "actual content for the game", the new mod tools probably make more fitting targets as they require you to download something and aren't available in the vanilla game, unlike gay marriage which can now be accessed without mods.

Also the lack of connection to culture isn't true. The game rules for gay marriage does actually mention culture "...and whose cultures practice concubinage". So just because you don't see how things might be connected, doesn't mean they aren't there.

Also more importantly, gay marriage is probably a system that for the most part is pretty isolated. Such systems are easy to do even if not connect to the main theme of the update. Another thing that fall into this category is many types of bug fixes. You don't see people complaining about the devs wasting time fixing a bug because it doesn't match the theme of the update. So the problem is for the war improvements people want to see is that they are very interconnected and so due to the redundancy problem mentioned earlier they are best tackled as a whole.

Thirdly, to cover all bases here, since you didn't actually limit your claim of how there's no criticism of other parts of 1.5 and Royal Court to this thread alone, it also warrants pointing out that people had most certainly been complaining about other aspects of 1.5 and Royal Court in their relevant Dev diaries. Even though, weirdly enough, none of the previous dev diaries had anything to do with same-sex anything. Hell, people complained about not being able to change aspects of a culture without using divergence or hybridisation so much you devs changed your mind about it. And on top of that we have a whole plethora of user-made threads critical about various aspects of the incoming update, starting with the court itself. Some are right on the first forum page right now.
I feel this is taking things out of context. This in the context of this dev diary and specifically the devs wasting their time. So for instance your mention of complaints about not liking the implementation of certain things, like how there was no way to change certain aspects of culture without hybridization or divergence which isn't a complaint about he devs wasting their time, thus don't apply.

Also personally, I find how people complain about the devs wasting their time on certain features interesting. For example with complaint about how the royal court itself, the person making the complain generally feels the need to give the reasoning behind that complaint. But with gay marriage the reasoning for why it is a waste of time is usually left off. Now I'm not saying everyone complaining about the addition of gay marriage being a waste of time is bigot, and I don't think blackninja9939 was either. But I do agree with their statement that it is more likely to get singled out as a waste of time whenever the topic comes up (and this isn't the first time the topic of gay marriage has come up on these forums among other features and for some reason it draws the most ire). And the reason for that is that bigots inflate the number of claimants about gay marriage being a waste of time and make it the topic of conversation for those who have non-bigoted reasons to complain.

edit: clarity
 
Last edited:
  • 10
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Excellent there will be the addition of checking the triggers for events.

As far as gay modding, I am not going to be political correct and rest assured I am not a biggot at all but even then, given the scope of the game, it is mostly a waste of resources better spent coding other event types that provide content for the different mechanics in the game - for instance have x good situational events that address dread, prestige, renown, piety, stress, more dilemmas in management of the realm, etc. In the same cathegory, the same goes with cannibalism, btw. Another waste of resources. Hopefully there will be no Sunset Invasion anytime soon...

As far as the actual 3D depiction of the Royal Court goes, I feel it is yet another big waste of resources. Hopefully the whole 1.5 patch in its entirety will bring more meaningful changes to the gameplay. To end in a positive note, I'd say I am fired up for the culture changes.

And now getting ready for the downvotes! ;)
 
Last edited:
  • 17
  • 5
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Your comment actually is in good faith unlike the initial user, hence why they get sass and you get genuine answer.

You're not thinking about scale, reworking some code and script to enable gay marriage is infinitely less time than any of the reworks you proposed. They require new designs, overhauling UIs, new art, plenty of new code and content. Spreading over the course of likely weeks for any larger rework.

Adding in a fairly highly requested modding feature that only needs two disciplines and in very focused areas? Much less time.

And I'm gonna be incredibly blunt here, nobody is complaining we added scripted widgets as mod support. Or made a court scene editor that mods can use too. Or any of the other bits of mod support we added. Or about any other of the myriad of reworks and changes coming in 1.5 and Royal Court of which plenty enable incredibly ahistorical behaviour on top of the options already provided.

But gay marriage gets singled out for complaints? Lets not pretend that is for any remotely genuine reason or concern in where we spend our time developing the game, because we all know it isn't.
Thank you for your support, and for standing up for your LGBT fans and colleagues! <3
 
  • 11
  • 2Love
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Speaking of gay stuff and choice... Is there a chance Harald Fairhair will not be gay in the next patch? Like, I get it, some players want to rewrite history in this game, but some may prefer to stick to more historical scenarios. I would like to let Harald's sons to become a problem for my kingdom, but him being gay makes it hard to have so many children.
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
It's clear the vast majority of the fanbase is in favor of the homosexual rule addition but I still find the bad faith arguments against it frustrating. I would consider myself mostly anti-woke and think most identity politics are cancerous. But there are absolutely no good reasons that the devs should ignore a highly requested and easily provided feature that expands roleplaying options for all players. I've been critical of snippy devs before but in this event they have every reasons to be.
 
  • 5
  • 5
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Speaking of gay stuff and choice... Is there a chance Harald Fairhair will not be gay in the next patch? Like, I get it, some players want to rewrite history in this game, but some may prefer to stick to more historical scenarios. I would like to let Harald's sons to become a problem for my kingdom, but him being gay makes it hard to have so many children.
The last character I played was gay, his wife was a lesbian and they had 4 sons, probably missing something else if you really have a hard time having kids with a gay character. Maybe take the seduction perk that boosts fertility ? It's the first one on the tree.
 
Excellent there will be the addition of checking the triggers for events.

As far as gay modding, I am not going to be political correct and rest assured I am not a biggot at all but even then, given the scope of the game, it is mostly a waste of resources better spent coding other event types that provide content for the different mechanics in the game - for instance have x good situational events that address dread, prestige, renown, piety, stress, more dilemmas in management of the realm, etc. In the same cathegory, the same goes with cannibalism, btw. Another waste of resources. Hopefully there will be no Sunset Invasion anytime soon...

As far as the actual 3D depiction of the Royal Court goes, I feel it is yet another big waste of resources. Hopefully the whole 1.5 patch in its entirety will bring more meaningful changes to the gameplay. To end in a positive note, I'd say I am fired up for the culture changes.

And now getting ready for the downvotes! ;)
As long as you're consistent and don't have double standards I think it seems fine. However, I get the impression (since you didn't explain why you think it's a waste) that you consider either things you're not interested in or at the very least ahistorical things (which RC isn't, and I'm pretty sure Paradox would never disallow ahistorical features or possibilities using these features) a waste of development resources.

I at least don't see it that way; I don't consider stuff I'm not interested in as a waste of development resources because I don't just think of stuff I want — I know other players would be happy having those features even if it's something that doesn't make a difference to me. For example I never played multiplayer and never will but I don't mind when multiplayer gets worked on.

Not related to your post but I also realized that I don't think anyone ever said another feature was a waste of development resources and asked same-sex marriage to be implemented instead of it, so it's also something to think about.
 
Last edited:
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I think the question of whether or not something is considered a "waste of resources" is less a matter of "what I want" or "what I don't like" and more a matter of what will actually improve the game... at least for most people here. Yes, there will be some complaining because they don't like gays. Yes, there will be some complaining because they don't like feature X. But when it really comes down to it, most complaining aren't really complaining for those reasons, but instead because these changes really don't improve the game in a meaningful way. Yes, people who want gay marriage will consider it an improvement. And it is an improvement for them. However, will adding it draw in more players? Will it get more people playing the game again who have stopped playing? I'd say any increase in numbers due to that change will be minimal. On the other hand, features and changes that people list as reasons why they stopped playing the game or consider the game to be "shallow" will have a far greater impact on those very important numbers.

The dev did point out that dev time for some of the important changes and features like improving AI warfare are far more time consuming to do and I get that. Many of these features and changes that will have a high impact on bringing players back to the game are going to take a lot of time and effort. However, one of the things that reviews of RC have brought up already are that the events aren't great and are repetitive (meaning not enough of them). Adding new events or reworking existing events to better use characters who make sense or to use characters that are meaningful to the player is really not that difficult or time consuming except if you talk about adding a lot of them as more = more time. That alone would have more impact on more players than gay marriage, which being as it is a rule will end up being used by a limited (though not necessarily small) number of players. Other changes can also be made in stages, allowing you to make a change that will improve, for example, AI warfare somewhat without having to take the time to completely rework it. There are certainly ways to take things that are keeping people from enjoying the game and adding them in without needing a significant amount of dev time to do so if they wanted to do it.

And as was pointed out, the devs specifically said adding in gay marriage would be a challenge as it impacts a lot of parts of the game and would need a lot of testing and work to get it working properly. So the suggestion that it isn't a big deal to add by the dev is a bit inconsistent and probably not very accurate.

Personally, I think any feature (even highly requested ones) that does not actually improve gameplay value of the game should be held off until a later time while they work on getting the game up to a level where players don't get tired of it so quickly. And to be clear, just because gay marriage is a gameplay item doesn't mean it actually improves gameplay value. If that isn't in the game, will it prevent a player from enjoying the game? No. They may prefer it to be there, but if it's not there, they will either enjoy or not enjoy the game the same as if it was there because it really doesn't affect anything in gameplay unless they find it fun to try and convert the entire map to be gay or something. Otherwise it's just a "novelty" (and I am not meaning to use that in any rude way, but just as a definition of something that has little meaningful impact to the game). This is true for any similar feature that may be added. Compare this to adding in something (yes, this is a big feature) like regency in a way that's improved over CK2's regency mechanic, which would actually improve an aspect of gameplay and that's honestly a pretty minor issue in the game overall.

Look at it this way, if you added gay marriage to the game separate from anything else so that you aren't impacting the results by other features, you might draw in some players who had stopped playing the game who want the feature, but they'll play a game or two and remember that the game itself gets old quickly because it's missing so much content that they'll put it down again because gay marriage doesn't actually fix any of the real issues in the game.

As a side note, I also think RC would have been far better off to be added at a later date as well. I like RC and it has some really interesting aspects to it (I even like the court even if many do not). But I really don't think anything other than cultures will bring people back to the game and it's yet to be seen how well they managed to get the cultures working. I think another DLC might have been better at this stage than RC... something that would add a significant boost to the gameplay value of the game.
 
  • 8Like
  • 7
Reactions:
I have played a lot of fantasy mods for CK2 and all had the problem that when you introduce different races which were infertile to each other you could not tell the AI that and it often married infertile partners resulting in the extinction of their family line and even dynasty.

Granted, gay marriage will likely happen less often (hopefully), but I am still wary about the AI ruining their dynasty through infertile marriages.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
So, I'll try my best to explain the context (or at least my understanding of it) behind his post.

Out of the modding changes explained in the first post it seems only the royal court scene editor and position is "DLC-only", so I don't see how his comparisons were "not the best" as you say. We have scripted UI widgets and tooltip functionality, improvements to the debug mode, at least 12 console commands, and better error logging. Some of these could even have been left hardcoded for Paradox developing softwares but was added as an improvement to all modders.
And out of everything you listed the specific comparisons blackninja actually used were the royal court scene that you yourself just admitted is directly related to the DLC and the widgets, which as I argued is at least tangentially related to the type of UI mechanics already used in the DLC.


This is not the first time that same-sex marriage is the only thing picked on for the "time and resources argument" after a list of several changes. Check Dev Diary #55 for the mere mention of it already getting negative reactions (and no other changes mentioned there did so). You can also see the historicity arguments BlackNinja also mentioned on his post (which was not used much on this current thread, but I guess he wanted to take the opportunity to debunk those as well).
I already mentioned the Azure patch dev diary myself so there's no need for you to act as if I were somehow unaware of it.


There is no need for "off-topicness" here; there are other things in this dev diary that took time to develop and are not relevant for everyone, yet only one of them is singled out.
I outright quoted the relevant part of their post in the text of my paragraph you're replying here and it explicitly brought up lack of complaints about changes brought in the upcoming DLC going beyond the scope of this thread. So you should direct the remark about there being no need for off-topicness at them.


Let's take a look at Dev Diary #21 about Faith Reformation. The Carnal Exaltation and Ritual Cannibalism tenets are visible in screenshots, yet there are no dislikes. The only concerns are about the prevalence of reformation (and just by Roxas15 on page 6 and Larque on page 15, historical concerns), but nobody asked (neither did Roxas15 or Larque) these tenets not to be included in the game or complained about the development time of adding them in. Ironically when user MetalGearDaner asked in page 12 if same-sex marriage was possible, another user replied right after that it would ahistorical, and a larger discussion started about it in page 13.

So that was an example of pre-release dev diary about ahistorical content and almost no complaints, why? Why when same-sex marriage is mentioned then these arguments appear? Why were people then not concerned about the development time? Why are people ignoring the other ahistorical content possible in the game? (With or without DLC)
If you think people are ignoring not only other ahistorical content but these specific examples just because they weren't complained about in a pre-release dev diary, you're not really paying much attention to the forums. Things like incest, nudity or cannibalism are common targets of criticism about CK3 being ahistorical or "pandering to memers", while what people arguing that consider more important content is being ignored.

Also, quoting pre-release dev diary is just apples to oranges comparison here in the first place. For two reasons. First, people were much more optimistic then and willing to give Paradox the benefit of the doubt. Now with Royal Court development having a crawling pace and other issues, the overall attitude on the forum turned more sour from what I've observed. Secondly, during the development of the base game things were still up in the air one way or another. But came release, (lack of) gay marriage was something that was already hard-coded into the game, which then had to be undone to make it work. Which by Paradox's own admission, required enough work to do that it couldn't even been done in a major patch like 1.4. Not exactly the case with cannibals, is it now?


What does this even have to do with anything? The context of his post is not that people "only complain about same-sex marriage", it's that people keep complaining about it with double standards. Even then, have the features you mentioned been complained about their development time or historicity? A DLC that is taking almost 8 months to finish since announcement and that allows you to create a Mongol-African or Indian-Icelandic culture? In your examples the complaints are about implementation rather than on these two grounds.
Yeah, no, you made that "context" up. Such remark is nowhere to be found in either blackninja's comment (which simply talks about gay marriage being singled out for complaints, period) nor the post they were replying to. Instead that post literally called the complaint at hand "an important point", that's simply worded in an "uncouth" manner.

And the other half of this tangent of yours is just a false. I've seen people call the whole culture rework as something that doesn't give enough gameplay for how large it is, as in their eyes you'll only interact with it just a few times during a campaign and then forget about (and I've seen that complaint numerous times). While calling culture-changing parts of it in particular more "meme content". Which kinda falls squarely under the umbrella of wasted development time and ahistorical content. And the court itself has not only been called a waste of development time, it's been outright accused of being the culprit behind the very 8 month development time you brought up.


This is not relevant but just a quick heads up, LGBT+ groups can be bigoted towards other groups of the LGBT+ community, lesbian TERFs are an example.
There's no needs for a heads up for something obvious. There is a reason why I brought up that bit last.


For the replenishment rate, keep in mind there is also the problem of finding a value that is generally liked and not having to redo it when other things are updated.

So a mod can just put in a value the modder likes, and then people who agree can download the mod, and people who don't have to download the mod. But Paradox has to find a value that works for everyone, which is a lot more work at it requires multiple different people test multiple different values (while I personally would like to see replenishment rates lowered, I do know there are some who don't, or only slightly lowered, as they see it as a mechanic that just forces needless weighting). Now I'm sure someone will mention game rules, so let me just head that off. If they add a game rule they still need to find something at works for most people, to set as the default, and then need to figure out what and how many options there are for the game rule. So in someways game rules creates more work, at least when there aren't obvious choices for what the game rule options would be.
Which is simply an issue of testing and not the kind of the more intensive work described in blackninja's post. And changing a hard-coded element also requires plenty of testing, albeit more of the QA variety.

As for doing it via game rules, I don't see why Paradox shouldn't just keep the current one as the default if they went with this route to tackle this subject. They picked the current rate in the first place for a reason. And I'd wager the casual players are at this point a majority so the default would be aimed at them, while the minority asking for harder warfare wouldn't be overwhelmed with rules.


The other is that they do all this work to change the replenishment rate, but they still haven't overhauled the war system. But when they overhaul the war system later, as is being requested here, they would probably need to go back a figure out the optimal replenishment rates for the new war system. Meaning they would have to do the same thing twice. This is why the devs often like to cover interconnect systems as a whole, because it reduces the amount of redundant work. And as I haven't heard any major calls for overhauling the marriage system, this doesn't really apply to gay marriage (as any changes to the marriage system are likely to be minor or are very far off).
As I already pointed out, what was actually being requested in the post blackninja replied to there was simply to make "warfare not terrible". Which is extremely vague and open to interpretation, because of how completely subjective it is. Which is precisely why such a demand could be technically fulfilled with even a small change like my example. Which, admittedly, is one of the plethora of reasons why there is little value in "X is terrible" as a criticism.


Also more importantly, gay marriage is probably a system that for the most part is pretty isolated. Such systems are easy to do even if not connect to the main theme of the update. Another thing that fall into this category is many types of bug fixes. You don't see people complaining about the devs wasting time fixing a bug because it doesn't match the theme of the update. So the problem is for the war improvements people want to see is that they are very interconnected and so due to the redundancy problem mentioned earlier they are best tackled as a whole.
Not how Paradox itself made it look like during Azure's development. And bug fixes are standard part of any version release and fixing bugs is pretty much expected of software developers, because customers are paying for software that works properly. So it's probably the worst comparison you could have made. Especially in context of Paradox, especially-ier in context of CK3 team in particular, which hadn't released even a minor bug patch in seven months. As such major patches are the only time left for them to release bug fixes.


I feel this is taking things out of context. This in the context of this dev diary
Like I said, I was just being thorough. If what you're saying is the case, things only revert to my previous point about how an argument about lack of complaints about non-modding parts of the upcoming update in a thread dedicated to the modding changes makes no sense. Because it relies on portarying people not posting off-topic as somehow something wrong. Which is not only a rather fallacious argument, but it'd require people to outright break forum rules. Which would be a weird sentiment coming from an employee of Paradox.


So for instance your mention of complaints about not liking the implementation of certain things, like how there was no way to change certain aspects of culture without hybridization or divergence which isn't a complaint about he devs wasting their time, thus don't apply.
That one specific aspect of the culture overhaul? Sure. Other aspects of it, including the new system as a whole? I've seen criticism of them that essentially amounts to there being too much time spent on those compared to how much culture matters in game. And technically, there actually was a poster talking about devs wasting time in the dev diary about the change of direction in regards to changing existing cultures. It's just they portrayed the dev diary itself as a waste of time.


Also personally, I find how people complain about the devs wasting their time on certain features interesting. For example with complaint about how the royal court itself, the person making the complain generally feels the need to give the reasoning behind that complaint.
And yet there's a post complaining about the court (or at least it's art aspect) being a waste of time without giving a reason as to why just two posts below your comment. Rather ironic coincidence.


But with gay marriage the reasoning for why it is a waste of time is usually left off. Now I'm not saying everyone complaining about the addition of gay marriage being a waste of time is bigot, and I don't think blackninja9939 was either.
No, it's pretty much exactly what they said. Their claim was that gay marriage gets singled out for complaints about how dev time is allocated and that it's not for any genuine reason. Which, even putting aside how the claim about it being singled out is disproved even by the next DLC's very namesake, is pretty explicit. You can try to soften it with how it was about only posters who give no reasons as to why this is a waste of time while they give reasons in other cases or even how it was about only comments made by German albinos, during a blood moon, while the Wild Hunt was running through the sky, but that's not actually there in blackninja's post.


But I do agree with their statement that it is more likely to get singled out as a waste of time whenever the topic comes up (and this isn't the first time the topic of gay marriage has come up on these forums among other features and for some reason it draws the most ire). And the reason for that is that bigots inflate the number of claimants about gay marriage being a waste of time and make it the topic of conversation for those who have non-bigoted reasons to complain.
The phrase "more likely" is also nowhere to be seen in their comment. If that was their actual claim, I wouldn't have objected to it, even if you can see more of bad faith criticism in the dev diary about same sex concubinage than this one (though to be fair, a handful of posts here had been removed and the one I did notice before it was gone was rather bad).


Wait Tribal Kings don't get courts?
Not by the base game rules, no.
 
Last edited:
  • 7
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Granted, gay marriage will likely happen less often (hopefully), but I am still wary about the AI ruining their dynasty through infertile marriages.
I think it's safe to even with the option turned on, het AI characters (the default majority) are never going to marry a same-sex partner, ace AI characters almost never, and bi AI characters pretty rarely.

So it seems likely to only be a meaningful problem if the player goes out of their way to choose settings that make it a problem.
 
  • 8
  • 1Like
Reactions:
As long as you're consistent and don't have double standards I think it seems fine. However, I get the impression (since you didn't explain why you think it's a waste) that you consider either things you're not interested in or at the very least ahistorical things (which RC isn't, and I'm pretty sure Paradox would never disallow ahistorical features or possibilities using these features) a waste of development resources.

I at least don't see it that way; I don't consider stuff I'm not interested in as a waste of development resources because I don't just think of stuff I want — I know other players would be happy having those features even if it's something that doesn't make a difference to me. For example I never played multiplayer and never will but I don't mind when multiplayer gets worked on.

Not related to your post but I also realized that I don't think anyone ever said another feature was a waste of development resources and asked same-sex marriage to be implemented instead of it, so it's also something to think about.
The basis of the game is historical in nature and all that happens there should strive to conform to the social, ethical, anthropological and scientifical of the past ages it represents.

Heavily developing the gay angle of the gameplay or having cannibalism as a trait plus all the accompanying implementarions only steals resources from developing a better simulation of the ancient times whose lifes are depicted in the game.

This being said, I am happy we are finally finished with the "legalize gay modding" meme, more happy even that it is optional (unfortunately contrary to cannibalism) and hopefully looking forward to have more substantial content than these gameplay tangents in the future.
 
  • 13
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I think the question of whether or not something is considered a "waste of resources" is less a matter of "what I want" or "what I don't like" and more a matter of what will actually improve the game... at least for most people here. Yes, there will be some complaining because they don't like gays. Yes, there will be some complaining because they don't like feature X. But when it really comes down to it, most complaining aren't really complaining for those reasons, but instead because these changes really don't improve the game in a meaningful way. Yes, people who want gay marriage will consider it an improvement. And it is an improvement for them. However, will adding it draw in more players? Will it get more people playing the game again who have stopped playing? I'd say any increase in numbers due to that change will be minimal. On the other hand, features and changes that people list as reasons why they stopped playing the game or consider the game to be "shallow" will have a far greater impact on those very important numbers.

The dev did point out that dev time for some of the important changes and features like improving AI warfare are far more time consuming to do and I get that. Many of these features and changes that will have a high impact on bringing players back to the game are going to take a lot of time and effort. However, one of the things that reviews of RC have brought up already are that the events aren't great and are repetitive (meaning not enough of them). Adding new events or reworking existing events to better use characters who make sense or to use characters that are meaningful to the player is really not that difficult or time consuming except if you talk about adding a lot of them as more = more time. That alone would have more impact on more players than gay marriage, which being as it is a rule will end up being used by a limited (though not necessarily small) number of players. Other changes can also be made in stages, allowing you to make a change that will improve, for example, AI warfare somewhat without having to take the time to completely rework it. There are certainly ways to take things that are keeping people from enjoying the game and adding them in without needing a significant amount of dev time to do so if they wanted to do it.

And as was pointed out, the devs specifically said adding in gay marriage would be a challenge as it impacts a lot of parts of the game and would need a lot of testing and work to get it working properly. So the suggestion that it isn't a big deal to add by the dev is a bit inconsistent and probably not very accurate.

Personally, I think any feature (even highly requested ones) that does not actually improve gameplay value of the game should be held off until a later time while they work on getting the game up to a level where players don't get tired of it so quickly. And to be clear, just because gay marriage is a gameplay item doesn't mean it actually improves gameplay value. If that isn't in the game, will it prevent a player from enjoying the game? No. They may prefer it to be there, but if it's not there, they will either enjoy or not enjoy the game the same as if it was there because it really doesn't affect anything in gameplay unless they find it fun to try and convert the entire map to be gay or something. Otherwise it's just a "novelty" (and I am not meaning to use that in any rude way, but just as a definition of something that has little meaningful impact to the game). This is true for any similar feature that may be added. Compare this to adding in something (yes, this is a big feature) like regency in a way that's improved over CK2's regency mechanic, which would actually improve an aspect of gameplay and that's honestly a pretty minor issue in the game overall.

Look at it this way, if you added gay marriage to the game separate from anything else so that you aren't impacting the results by other features, you might draw in some players who had stopped playing the game who want the feature, but they'll play a game or two and remember that the game itself gets old quickly because it's missing so much content that they'll put it down again because gay marriage doesn't actually fix any of the real issues in the game.

As a side note, I also think RC would have been far better off to be added at a later date as well. I like RC and it has some really interesting aspects to it (I even like the court even if many do not). But I really don't think anything other than cultures will bring people back to the game and it's yet to be seen how well they managed to get the cultures working. I think another DLC might have been better at this stage than RC... something that would add a significant boost to the gameplay value of the game.
I'd say that frustration comes from a fact that there was no new content for quite a while. Many perceive that in a negative way clearly because devs used this time to make a feature just for a certain part of community. And at this moment, when the game has very little to offer to core CK fans, devs decision to add some social justice only emphasizes old problems with the game. So yeah, I agree, a minor DLC would work for community better than this.
 
  • 10
  • 1Like
Reactions:
The basis of the game is historical in nature and all that happens there should strive to conform to the social, ethical, anthropological and scientifical of the past ages it represents.

Heavily developing the gay angle of the gameplay or having cannibalism as a trait plus all the accompanying implementarions only steals resources from developing a better simulation of the ancient times whose lifes are depicted in the game.

This being said, I am happy we are finally finished with the "legalize gay modding" meme, more happy even that it is optional (unfortunately contrary to cannibalism) and hopefully looking forward to have more substantial content than these gameplay tangents in the future.

As much as you have the right to think this is what the game is supposed to be and wish for it to go on that direction, what the game actually is will be defined by Paradox's vision for the product. I'm not Paradox but it's very obvious that CK series was never meant to be a 100% strict realistic medieval simulation. CK3 isn't, CK2 certainly wasn't (immortality, aztecs, demon cults etc), and I don't think CK4 will be.

My advice is to either change your expectations or look for another game that actually is what you envision otherwise you may be forever disappointed.
 
  • 14
  • 2Like
Reactions: