• 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.

CKIII Dev Diary #25 - Map Features and Map Modes

Greetings everyone!

Today I’m here to talk a bit about the map. Building on top of our early map related DD#2 (if you have yet to read it, you can do so here), I’ll expand that discussion by outlining additional features, new information, and how you interact with the map itself!

Terrain
Let’s start with the terrain, which has a significant impact on several parts of the game. Different terrain types allow for different buildings to be constructed. For example, farmland allows for superior economy buildings, while mountainous terrain unlocks rather impressive defensive structures. They also have an effect on development, making development change faster or slower over time. Expect it to be a massive undertaking of developing the Sahara, while developing the fertile fields of India will be a much easier task.

As for combat, one of the most noticeable effects is that of combat width. When you are fielding a much larger army than your opponent, you will favour a high combat width, so you’ll want to seek to engage the enemy in plains or drylands. On the other hand, fighting in rough terrain like mountains or wetlands will restrict the number of units that can simultaneously engage the enemy, allowing small armies with powerful Men-at-Arms to truly excel. Terrain also affects army movement speed, along with the usual defensive bonus you would expect in rough terrain types, which is gained in the form of increased Advantage at the start of a battle.

The terrain types we have available are the following:
Farmlands - Has access to many different and powerful buildings, allowing you to easily customize your holding the way you want to. Paired with high development speed, farmland provinces are highly desirable to hold in your domain.
Floodplains - Another desirable terrain type used in certain areas, such as along the Nile. Similar in power to farmlands, but with some minor differences.
Plains - One of the most common terrain types, plains exist almost everywhere and provide a wide range of building options.
Drylands - A variant of plains with slightly different buildings available.
Desert - While deserts doesn’t offer a whole lot in terms of taxes, supply limit or development, it does have access to levies and a unique building chain increasing your number of available Knights.
Oasis - These exist only in certain areas. The terrain has access to similar buildings as desert, but without the penalties in supply limit or development.
Steppe - Mostly used by tribals on the wide steppe, this is where Horse Archers reign supreme. The steppe starts with low development, and has a significant penalty in development growth.
Forest - Has lower combat width and supply limit, but offers great buildings for improving archers and skirmishers.
Taiga - A variant found in the very northern parts of the map, with slightly lower combat width and supply limit than forest.
Jungle - Mainly found in India and offers even less combat width and supply limit. It does, however, have access to a unique building chain for improving your Knights and heavy cavalry.
Hills - Hills offers a small Advantage bonus in combat, and has access to both fortifications and decent tax buildings.
Mountains - Has access to great fortifications and defensive buildings, making it a long and risky business to siege down holdings.
Desert Mountains - Similar to mountains, but for desert areas (obviously), with lower supply limit, development growth, as well as a bonus that allows defending armies to take less casualties when retreating.
Wetlands - While wetlands still allow for some decent buildings, it’s a terrain type you don’t want to fight battles in if you can avoid it. Especially if there’s a risk of being on the losing side...

25_01_wetlands.jpg


25_01_farmlands.jpg


Context Sensitive Selection
We want it to be easy to gain information directly from the map. Whenever you change map modes, or have something “selected”, we update the map accordingly and allow you to often interact with the map itself. Clicking on the map on any given realm, will open that ruler’s character view. This in turn allows you to see rulers he is at war with, his allies, or direct vassals. All of this is shown directly on the map and is selectable, though you do not have to rely on finding it on the map; we still show relations and everything in the interface as well.

25_02_ruler_selection.jpg


This applies to everything we show on the map. Regardless of your map mode, you can always click to select the “entity” you are looking at. If you have the faith map mode active, you can click on a faith to open the interface for it, as well as seeing where its holy sites are located.

Realm Map Mode
Your bread and butter map mode is what we simply call the Realm map mode.
When zoomed in you’ll encounter what we call the detail level, and will see the map for what it is. Terrain of individual baronies, rivers, and holding graphics are all clearly visible.

25_03_realm_1.jpg


Zoom out a bit and you’ll transition into the Realms layer, your typical political map mode. Realms are clearly highlighted with their colour, allowing you to easily see all independent realms at a glance, while still showing the coat of arms of your direct vassals, to allow for easy realm management.

25_04_realm_2.jpg


Zoom out further and you’ll enter the paper map. This is the place to go for a rather fancy overview of the world (or excellent screenshots)! Only independent realms are shown, without any vassal breakdowns. For now, I’ll just tease you with a partial picture, as we’ll show the entire thing in a later DD. And yes, we got the mandatory sea monsters!

25_05_realm_3.jpg


Other Map Modes
Our other map modes remain consistent in the information they show as you zoom in and out, and do not have the level dependency of Realms. If you have the faith map mode open, you are gonna want to see faiths regardless of your zoom level. You’ll still get the spectacular paper map when you zoom further out, but the information shown on the map will remain the same.

De Jure - As you’d expect, we have dedicated map modes for showing the De Jure areas of duchies, kingdoms, and empires.

Faiths - Allows you to easily see what faiths are spread out around the world.

Cultures - For that nifty culture overview.

Houses - Since it’s a game about characters and dynasties, we want it to be easy to see which house is governing the different realms.

Counties - Highlights individual counties in their respective colour.

Terrain - Shows all terrain types in different colours, for that quick and easy overview of the dominant terrain in any given area. Very useful if you have several Men-at-Arms options available with different terrain bonuses.

Governments - The map mode for viewing what kind of government rulers have.

Development - Gives you an overview of what the development level is across the map.

25_06_house_map_mode.jpg


That’s it for today! I’ll be back next week with another map related entry. Where I plan to simply show you, well, everything regarding the scope of the map and how different parts of the world looks!
 
  • 112Like
  • 67Love
  • 18
  • 10
  • 3
Reactions:
Keep in mind this whole conversation started when I suggested, that maybe it would be okay to add a few extra CoA colors like a bronze or a purple, and in response I was told this would be immersion-shattering.

It would, at least to those who know something about heraldry and Medieval art.

The devs may or may not care. I do. You don't. This much is clear.

The netizens of this forum place an undue importance on "scholarly" and "historical" in what is ultimately an entertainment product.

I believe entertainment products have the civic duty to educate, wherever they can and provided it doesn't constrain the goals of their product. Keeping heraldry within the reigns of what's historical, or having a more Medieval-inspired art style, doesn't hinder the Medieval simulation (which is the objective of the game), it actually enhances it by giving you true insight into the past. This insight will enrich other interactions you may have in the future with other games set in the period, or even in your life.

Entertnaiment and education can't really be separate. That's not how our brains work. God knows I owe most of my geography to Paradox games.

"Realistic looking medieval art" is practically an oxymoron.

It's like criticising a black and white ink artist for not using colour. Realism was not their goal.

Wouldn't an Or Wyvern on Gules have been a better choice for England (attributed to England (Wessex) in the Bayeux Tapestry). Personally I like historic arms and historically attributed arms, but I'm not a big fan of modern fantasy ones, then I'd rather have the Plantegenet 3 Or Lions Guardant Passant on Gules.

I'm not a fan of attributed arms because they impose imagery which clashes with an earlier setting. None of the Anglo-Saxon kingdom attributed arms would make sense to an 8-9th Century Anglo-Saxon. The gold-on-red wyvern is one representation of the flag of Wessex, but there are others (like the Welsh description of the White Dragon fighting their Red Dragon, which is possibly also a late addition to the whole thing, but it is something).

Considering that the origin of the three lions passant is almost certainly Aquitaine (the lion was used in England first by Henry I, if I'm not mistaken, and would be an echo of his alliance by marriage with Aquitaine in the context of the fights between him and France, not in the context of England. Golden lillies on blue versus golden lions on red), I would not like to see them in England before a Norman conquest, at least. Even then they would not be appropriate, but at some point you've got to give in :D
 
Last edited:
  • 5
  • 4
Reactions:
Iberia is nowhere near as flat or unobstructed as the above image would suggest. Can we get some more mountain chains please?

I can confirm there are more impassable terrains (mountains) in Iberia: There are mountains South with the Baetic chain and you can even see the Mulhacén. Moutains North with the Cantabrian and Leon mountains. North-West you have indeed the Pyrenee. In the centre there are many moutains and chains as well with the Central and Iberian Chains.
Don't worry, Iberia is not flat. At all :)
 
  • 7
  • 4Like
Reactions:
Terrain
Let’s start with the terrain, which has a significant impact on several parts of the game. Different terrain types allow for different buildings to be constructed. For example, farmland allows for superior economy buildings, while mountainous terrain unlocks rather impressive defensive structures. They also have an effect on development, making development change faster or slower over time. Expect it to be a massive undertaking of developing the Sahara, while developing the fertile fields of India will be a much easier task.

As for combat, one of the most noticeable effects is that of combat width. When you are fielding a much larger army than your opponent, you will favour a high combat width, so you’ll want to seek to engage the enemy in plains or drylands. On the other hand, fighting in rough terrain like mountains or wetlands will restrict the number of units that can simultaneously engage the enemy, allowing small armies with powerful Men-at-Arms to truly excel. Terrain also affects army movement speed, along with the usual defensive bonus you would expect in rough terrain types, which is gained in the form of increased Advantage at the start of a battle.

The terrain types we have available are the following:
Farmlands - Has access to many different and powerful buildings, allowing you to easily customize your holding the way you want to. Paired with high development speed, farmland provinces are highly desirable to hold in your domain.
Floodplains - Another desirable terrain type used in certain areas, such as along the Nile. Similar in power to farmlands, but with some minor differences.
Plains - One of the most common terrain types, plains exist almost everywhere and provide a wide range of building options.
Drylands - A variant of plains with slightly different buildings available.
Desert - While deserts doesn’t offer a whole lot in terms of taxes, supply limit or development, it does have access to levies and a unique building chain increasing your number of available Knights.
Oasis - These exist only in certain areas. The terrain has access to similar buildings as desert, but without the penalties in supply limit or development.
Steppe - Mostly used by tribals on the wide steppe, this is where Horse Archers reign supreme. The steppe starts with low development, and has a significant penalty in development growth.
Forest - Has lower combat width and supply limit, but offers great buildings for improving archers and skirmishers.
Taiga - A variant found in the very northern parts of the map, with slightly lower combat width and supply limit than forest.
Jungle - Mainly found in India and offers even less combat width and supply limit. It does, however, have access to a unique building chain for improving your Knights and heavy cavalry.
Hills - Hills offers a small Advantage bonus in combat, and has access to both fortifications and decent tax buildings.
Mountains - Has access to great fortifications and defensive buildings, making it a long and risky business to siege down holdings.
Desert Mountains - Similar to mountains, but for desert areas (obviously), with lower supply limit, development growth, as well as a bonus that allows defending armies to take less casualties when retreating.
Wetlands - While wetlands still allow for some decent buildings, it’s a terrain type you don’t want to fight battles in if you can avoid it. Especially if there’s a risk of being on the losing side...

Will it be possible to change terrain types (either in gameplay or at least from the modding side?).
For example by investing in major agricultural development to convert plains to farmland.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Was that written anywhere before Geoffrey of Monmouth recorded it in 1136, after the Norman conquest? I assume it was based on an earlier legend but can't recall the exact details.

It's in the Mabinogion, but it could be highly alegorical of something else entirely. Also, I'm not sure when was the Mabinogion transcribed.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Hard disagree. There was a guy earlier in the thread who wanted the sea monsters on the paper map to be more authentic medieval art, but medieval art is awful, and it's why the renaissance was a big deal. People re-discovered aesthetics. If someone wanted to take away CK2's character portraits and replace them with art done in the style of those terrible paintings that monks do, or in the style of the Bayeux tapestry, that would make the game objectively much uglier if it would early more period authenticity points.
Imagine thinking Medieval art is awful.

Its honestly one of the best things to ever see the light of day due to how hilarious and just downright bizarre some of it is. Which from I read mostly came down to bored people needing to fill something in the spaces and deciding they may as well draw something to amuse themselves. Who cares, it's good stuff.

I think it is a shining example of so bad it's good.

I wouldn't include it in the game, unless its like a weird event image, but I also wouldn't say it's just awful.

I'll get hate for this but regardless of quality medieval art is so much more interesting than renaissance art. One generally looks bad to ok but really, really interesting. The other looks really, really good but that's about it. But you cant compete with the sheer (probably drug induced) insanity of medieval manuscript art. I'm not sure what it says about me as a person when I have very strong opinions about medieval manuscript art.
 
Last edited:
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Greetings everyone!

Today I’m here to talk a bit about the map. Building on top of our early map related DD#2 (if you have yet to read it, you can do so here), I’ll expand that discussion by outlining additional features, new information, and how you interact with the map itself!

Terrain
Let’s start with the terrain, which has a significant impact on several parts of the game. Different terrain types allow for different buildings to be constructed. For example, farmland allows for superior economy buildings, while mountainous terrain unlocks rather impressive defensive structures. They also have an effect on development, making development change faster or slower over time. Expect it to be a massive undertaking of developing the Sahara, while developing the fertile fields of India will be a much easier task.

As for combat, one of the most noticeable effects is that of combat width. When you are fielding a much larger army than your opponent, you will favour a high combat width, so you’ll want to seek to engage the enemy in plains or drylands. On the other hand, fighting in rough terrain like mountains or wetlands will restrict the number of units that can simultaneously engage the enemy, allowing small armies with powerful Men-at-Arms to truly excel. Terrain also affects army movement speed, along with the usual defensive bonus you would expect in rough terrain types, which is gained in the form of increased Advantage at the start of a battle.

The terrain types we have available are the following:
Farmlands - Has access to many different and powerful buildings, allowing you to easily customize your holding the way you want to. Paired with high development speed, farmland provinces are highly desirable to hold in your domain.
Floodplains - Another desirable terrain type used in certain areas, such as along the Nile. Similar in power to farmlands, but with some minor differences.
Plains - One of the most common terrain types, plains exist almost everywhere and provide a wide range of building options.
Drylands - A variant of plains with slightly different buildings available.
Desert - While deserts doesn’t offer a whole lot in terms of taxes, supply limit or development, it does have access to levies and a unique building chain increasing your number of available Knights.
Oasis - These exist only in certain areas. The terrain has access to similar buildings as desert, but without the penalties in supply limit or development.
Steppe - Mostly used by tribals on the wide steppe, this is where Horse Archers reign supreme. The steppe starts with low development, and has a significant penalty in development growth.
Forest - Has lower combat width and supply limit, but offers great buildings for improving archers and skirmishers.
Taiga - A variant found in the very northern parts of the map, with slightly lower combat width and supply limit than forest.
Jungle - Mainly found in India and offers even less combat width and supply limit. It does, however, have access to a unique building chain for improving your Knights and heavy cavalry.
Hills - Hills offers a small Advantage bonus in combat, and has access to both fortifications and decent tax buildings.
Mountains - Has access to great fortifications and defensive buildings, making it a long and risky business to siege down holdings.
Desert Mountains - Similar to mountains, but for desert areas (obviously), with lower supply limit, development growth, as well as a bonus that allows defending armies to take less casualties when retreating.
Wetlands - While wetlands still allow for some decent buildings, it’s a terrain type you don’t want to fight battles in if you can avoid it. Especially if there’s a risk of being on the losing side...

View attachment 574071

View attachment 574070

Context Sensitive Selection
We want it to be easy to gain information directly from the map. Whenever you change map modes, or have something “selected”, we update the map accordingly and allow you to often interact with the map itself. Clicking on the map on any given realm, will open that ruler’s character view. This in turn allows you to see rulers he is at war with, his allies, or direct vassals. All of this is shown directly on the map and is selectable, though you do not have to rely on finding it on the map; we still show relations and everything in the interface as well.

View attachment 574072

This applies to everything we show on the map. Regardless of your map mode, you can always click to select the “entity” you are looking at. If you have the faith map mode active, you can click on a faith to open the interface for it, as well as seeing where its holy sites are located.

Realm Map Mode
Your bread and butter map mode is what we simply call the Realm map mode.
When zoomed in you’ll encounter what we call the detail level, and will see the map for what it is. Terrain of individual baronies, rivers, and holding graphics are all clearly visible.

View attachment 574073

Zoom out a bit and you’ll transition into the Realms layer, your typical political map mode. Realms are clearly highlighted with their colour, allowing you to easily see all independent realms at a glance, while still showing the coat of arms of your direct vassals, to allow for easy realm management.

View attachment 574074

Zoom out further and you’ll enter the paper map. This is the place to go for a rather fancy overview of the world (or excellent screenshots)! Only independent realms are shown, without any vassal breakdowns. For now, I’ll just tease you with a partial picture, as we’ll show the entire thing in a later DD. And yes, we got the mandatory sea monsters!

View attachment 574075

Other Map Modes
Our other map modes remain consistent in the information they show as you zoom in and out, and do not have the level dependency of Realms. If you have the faith map mode open, you are gonna want to see faiths regardless of your zoom level. You’ll still get the spectacular paper map when you zoom further out, but the information shown on the map will remain the same.

De Jure - As you’d expect, we have dedicated map modes for showing the De Jure areas of duchies, kingdoms, and empires.

Faiths - Allows you to easily see what faiths are spread out around the world.

Cultures - For that nifty culture overview.

Houses - Since it’s a game about characters and dynasties, we want it to be easy to see which house is governing the different realms.

Counties - Highlights individual counties in their respective colour.

Terrain - Shows all terrain types in different colours, for that quick and easy overview of the dominant terrain in any given area. Very useful if you have several Men-at-Arms options available with different terrain bonuses.

Governments - The map mode for viewing what kind of government rulers have.

Development - Gives you an overview of what the development level is across the map.

View attachment 574076

That’s it for today! I’ll be back next week with another map related entry. Where I plan to simply show you, well, everything regarding the scope of the map and how different parts of the world looks!
looks cool
 
I'm really enjoying the discussion between @Cèsar de Quart and @Vokasak, because I feel they wonderfully incarnate two opposite views of what CK should be, and probably a ambiguity in CK's concept that represent its original sin (no judgment there, as everyone knows sins are fun! ).
Cèsar (why that accent grave by the way? César was already taken ?) sees the game - as he said himself - as a medieval simulation. I'd argue that Vokasak sees it as a roleplay-strategy hybrid sandbox.

Obviously those two extreme views are not going to find a middle ground - strictly speaking, sandbox and roleplay are the opposite of simulation. If you create something that did not exist, that is already breaking the simulation.

Take a flight simulator - you can do everything a pilot would and could do, but nothing else. You can't play out of role, and reach 40000 feets with a small Cessna.
In a sandbox, you can take Iceland and conquer half Europe if you so wish and are clever enough. Or you can take the judical dinasty of Gallura and work through the centuries until the HRE, France and Castille are all ruled by of Galluras. None of those outcomes is likely, let alone realistic, but let's face it, it is fun.

I've said before that there is no possible middle ground between those two extreme views, yet this does not mean that a middle ground does not exist. I think we'd all agree in this forum (surely César and Vokasak, too) that CK is this middle ground.

Sure, it is a hard balancing act for CK's developers, as one step in one direction means getting further from the other and disappoint some of the fan base - but overall it is a good balancing act.

Some sparse thoughts more on the matter at hand:
  • Saying that Medieval art (or any art, really) is bad art is just trolling. A lot of people have correctly mentioned how every art is contextual, and the criteria of beauty are acquired taste. If that is not enough (after all, many have argued throughout the centuries that beauty is objective - wrongly in my opinion, but elegantly), I'll just ask you to go visit the Cappella Palatina or the Monreale Dome - and if you still think the overwhelming beauty of the mosaic is bad art, I'll be ready to discuss with you.
  • That said, I agree with Vokasak that not all art styles are appropriate for a video-game. A video-game must be first of all usable and easily legible. For example, if reducing the number of colors in a coat of arm leads to have confusingly similar coat of arms, that should justify sacrificing historicity for usability. After all, even historical coats of arms had the primary function of being easily discernible, so it's more a matter of translation between visual languages than of historicity.
  • EDIT Similarly, we can debate if the paper map is an improvement or not - but medieval looking maps like the ones that someone showed are just too visually rich and imprecise to be of any use. It is true that the 19th century map is more about a fake common idea of the Middle Age than its actual mapmaking tradition, but it also has the advantage of being clear and readable enough for gaming purposes.
  • I firmly agree with César that games should be as educational as possible, with the caveat that this does not compromise their primary function - entertainment. This is all the more true since, after all, games are a private endeavour and societies like Paradox depend on sales rather than on grants from cultural institutions. I agree that a game like Kingdom Come did a wonderful job in this regard, I loved what I learned, and all the times I went on Wikipedia to learn more, almost more than I loved the gameplay.
  • EDIT I would add that anyway, the idea of a Medieval art is already a messy hotpot per se, holding together a myriad of styles, traditions and languages. That is why I feel little at ease when someone criticises a art style for not having enough "medieval flavour". What is medieval? 10th century byzantine icons, 11th century arabo-Norman mosaic, 13th century Northern gothic, or 14th century early Renaissance? And can we really separate what would look medieval to us, 21st century schizoid gamers, from the 19th century romanticisation of the Middle Ages? And, if we accept that CK is at least partly about sandbox and alt-history, can we really tell what medieval art and imagery would have looked like? I think all those questions leave a huge marge of freedom for Paradox creatives.
 
Last edited:
  • 5
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Cèsar sees the game - as he said himself - as a medieval simulation. I'd argue that Vokasak sees it as a roleplay-strategy hybrid sandbox.

Obviously those two extreme views are not going to find a middle ground - strictly speaking, sandbox and roleplay are the opposite of simulation. If you create something that did not exist, that is already breaking the simulation.

I think both are necessary. The simulation needs to run for the AI, while giving the player options within the context of the believable setting it presents. Normans ruing in Portugal, the Balearic Isles or Cyprus? Why not? Could have happened! The Capets as Byzantine Emperors, or a Holy Roman Empire founded outside of the Carolingian sphere? No. The player can go those routes because it's his game, his fun, but the simulation behind it needs to be as realistic as possible and account for when the player pushes scenarios that are bonkers, pushing back. If the Sunni Fatimid Caliph enters the Valley of the Dead, comes back possessed with the spirit of Ramesses II and tells everyone to convert to the Ancient Egyptian religion... that's cool. But you better be prepared to have a god damn hard time playing that game. King of Portugal and Norway because of bizarre inheritance? Better be prepared to see one of those two kingdoms rise in rebellion, because your position is almost untenable. Almost, because you, as the player, are the ultimate Alexander. But being Alexander should be hard.

And, mind you, all along I've been arguing for mere cosmetics to be faithful. I have never touched on the game mechanics until this last paragraph.

Recently I've been playing a randomised game in the Carolingian Age scenario (most settings to historical, but you still get interesting stuff like a Holy Roman Empire of Britannia and a wholly Visigothic Spain, or a Nestorian Persia... granted, I did try the generator a few times until I found a setting that wasn't too bananas). I'm enjoying it because the late 700's are a time of which we don't have a whole lot of reliable sources, and imagining that all the weirdness is a result of the Fall of Rome having gone a bit differently is fun after all. I see the Holy Roman Empire in Britain and I go "ok, how could this have happened? Could it be... King Arthur's realm? Nice, Christian Persia! It's likely, lots of Nestorian emissaries in the East. ++ If it was set in 1250, I would have a harder time buying the differences, but that's just me being a square.

I don't need absolute fidelity, I need the illusion of it. And, at least for me, a big part of this illusion is aesthetics and details. Are the titles correct? Are the situations believable? Aesthetics and details, after all, don't affect gameplay in a mechanic way. They're just there... for flavour. And what better flavour than based on the actual time period the game supposedly wants to portray?

I've said before that there is no possible middle ground between those two extreme views, yet this does not mean that a middle ground does not exist. I think we'd all agree in this forum (surely César and Vokasak, too) that CK is this middle ground.

Sure, it is a hard balancing act for CK's developers, as one step in one direction means getting further from the other and disappoint some of the fan base - but overall it is a good balancing act.

Sure.

Some sparse thoughts more on the matter at hand:
  • Saying that Medieval art (or any art, really) is bad art is just trolling. A lot of people have correctly mentioned how every art is contextual, and the criteria of beauty are acquired taste. If that is not enough (after all, many have argued throughout the centuries that beauty is objective - wrongly in my opinion, but elegantly), I'll just ask you to go visit the Cappella Palatina or the Monreale Dome - and if you still think the overwhelming beauty of the mosaic is bad art, I'll be ready to discuss with you.
  • That said, I agree with Vokasak that not all art styles are appropriate for a video-game. A video-game must be first of all usable and easily legible. For example, if reducing the number of colors in a coat of arm leads to have confusingly similar coat of arms, that should justify sacrificing historicity for usability. After all, even historical coats of arms had the primary function of being easily discernible, so it's more a matter of translation between visual languages than of historicity.
  • EDIT Similarly, we can debate if the paper map is an improvement or not - but medieval looking maps like the ones that someone showed are just too visually rich and imprecise to be of any use. It is true that the 19th century map is more about a fake common idea of the Middle Age than its actual mapmaking tradition, but it also has the advantage of being clear and readable enough for gaming purposes.
  • I firmly agree with César that games should be as educational as possible, with the caveat that this does not compromise their primary function - entertainment. This is all the more true since, after all, games are a private endeavour and societies like Paradox depend on sales rather than on grants from cultural institutions. I agree that a game like Kingdom Come did a wonderful job in this regard, I loved what I learned, and all the times I went on Wikipedia to learn more, almost more than I loved the gameplay.
  • EDIT I would add that anyway, the idea of a Medieval art is already a messy hotpot per se, holding together a myriad of styles, traditions and languages. That is why I feel little at ease when someone criticises a art style for not having enough "medieval flavour". What is medieval? 10th century byzantine icons, 11th century arabo-Norman mosaic, 13th century Northern gothic, or 14th century early Renaissance? And can we really separate what would look medieval to us, 21st century schizoid gamers, from the 19th century romanticisation of the Middle Ages? And, if we accept that CK is at least partly about sandbox and alt-history, can we really tell what medieval art and imagery would have looked like? I think all those questions leave a huge marge of freedom for Paradox creatives.

Very solid points.

Cèsar (why that accent grave by the way? César was already taken?

It's not a typo. Catalan has such an accent for a different pronounciation of E, that of "bet" instead of the first vowel sound in "made". The Spanish "César" [Thesar] is written "Cèsar" in Catalan, and pronounced [Sɛzar].

Should have chosen a more English-friendly name, I know :rolleyes: 10 years ago I was too young.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
About the realm name "Somogy". In the map, Somogy is the name of a Slavic country between Bulgaria, Great Moravia and Bavaria. This principality was a vassal of the Frankish Empire and later of East Francia. This country was never called Somogy (which is now the name of a county in Hungary in its former territory). The county was usually called after its holder's name (the Principality of Kocel/Pribina). It could be called the Balaton Principality (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Lower_Pannonia) or Mosaburg (which was its capital).
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Awesome update, thank you!

I am surprised that Steppe is "starts with low development, and has a significant penalty in development growth.". Steppes are actually very fertile lands. Shouldn't they be similar to farmlands in the development?

Most of the Eurasian Steppe is actually a frozen wasteland, with only the southern parts being fertile, and those i'm sure will be farmland tiles.
 
Not surprised but still disappointed to see the Roman Empire being called the "Byzantine Empire". If the focus on character RPG is now bigger, how does it make sense to call yourself the Basileus of the Byzantine Empire?

The games mainly uses exonyms, and while the Byzantines were Romans, the title Byzantine empire does help with distinction, as well as give bonus pomp to reforming the Roman Empire.
 
  • 5
  • 1
Reactions:
The games mainly uses exonyms, and while the Byzantines were Romans, the title Byzantine empire does help with distinction, as well as give bonus pomp to reforming the Roman Empire.
To add to this, the HRE *also* used the title of "Roman Empire" at various points, with "Holy" being a later addition.

The exact term "Holy Roman Empire" was not used until the 13th century, before which the empire was referred to variously as universum regnum ("the whole kingdom", as opposed to the regional kingdoms), imperium christianum ("Christian empire"), or Romanum imperium ("Roman empire")
Taken from wikipedia, cites Ildar H. Garipzanov, The Symbolic Language of Authority in the Carolingian World (c.751–877) (Leiden: Brill, 2008).
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
. Bad art? Yeah, we figured that one out with trial and error.

Sure some medieval rt isn't good, but are all paintings from any time period good? NO! But to say all art from a timer period is bad is just stupid. That's like saying all carpentry made in the 5th century is bad, it doesn't make since, especially since quality of things like art is subjective. You sound pretty arrogant when you say all medieval art is bad.
 
  • 3Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
It's not a typo. Catalan has such an accent for a different pronounciation of E, that of "bet" instead of the first vowel sound in "made". The Spanish "César" [Thesar] is written "Cèsar" in Catalan, and pronounced [Sɛzar].
That's some weird IPA but I like that I still can read it lmao
 
Maybe already written here but I NEED the diplomacy map view from ck2 :) so that I know what allies to get and what conflicts to nurture :D right now very hard to understand what wars have been fought between other kingdoms and empires, and what other rulers' sentiment are about eachother (and to one-self for that matter)
 
  • 1
Reactions: