Hello everyone, I'm Tegus, one of the programmers working on Crusader
Kings II. Welcome to the fifth dev diary for CK2 and the first one written
by me. In today's dev diary I'm going to talk a bit about the map and why
we've chosen to implement a new one in CK2.

As you all know, in our games the map is an important tool for both
displaying information and setting the mood of the game. In HoI3 we had a
grayish map that we felt was appropriate for a war game. We took this map
and altered it slightly when making Victoria 2, but this time the map was
drawn with vivid colors to portray the progress of the era. The next game to
use the map was Divine Wind because we all felt that EU3 was in need of a
graphical face lift. While this map technology looked good in the
mentioned games, there were certain technological limitations which we
wanted to improve upon or get rid of.

With CK2, we have devoted time to rewrite the graphics code for the map
from scratch. We are back to a pure 3D map similar to the one used in EU3:
Rome. We have visible topology and you will be able to rotate the world
around the way you please. While neither the technology nor the art assets
are in any way final, we do feel that the new map already has great
potential and is a big step in the right direction towards our visual
goals. Hopefully this new tech will also span multiple games, so we
can steadily improve it.



To be fair, if I would describe what we have done with the map so far, it
would just be sentence after sentence of technical mumbo-jumbo, so I'll
spare you the details. Let's instead focus on what visual details that
have been improved and what we want to add before the game is shipped.

We've improved the looks of the water significantly and added refraction
so you can actually see topology under the ocean surface. Aerie has taken
the time to find real-world topology data(although we've exaggerated it
somewhat), it definitely gives a cool feel to the terrain. Borders have
also gotten some love and now use a new system which enables us to make
them much smoother. Much of the previous jaggedness is gone. We've also
begun to implement and test a more detailed lighting model, which we will
continue to improve upon until we release the game. Another cool
feature(which isn't really part of the map) are the units, whose tabards
now show the heraldic flag of the unit leader.



But there are still some things which we're missing. We need trees and
rivers. We need to add province names and realm names, which exist in all
our latest games. I'd like to add more information to borders, so borders
between two realms are colored by the realms' respective colors. There are
of course lots of more things we want to do, but I won't spill the beans
just yet.



All in all, we are very happy with the way the new map is coming along.
Hopefully you will enjoy it as well once you get to play the game!

Fredrik Zetterman, Deluxe programmer, currently working on Crusader Kings
II

 

[ComradeOm]

I think that discussions concerning terrain map are somewhat emotional because of those two developer comments:

This. I don't think that anybody in this thread is seriously advocating a return to EUII-style 2D - its not 2007 and that conversation is over - but a lot of people, myself included, are very concerned about this notion of scrapping the political map. This is a feature that 90% of players use 90% of the time. Instead of trying to improve the terrain map to the point where people might think about using it, I'd prefer if Paradox worked on enhancing the political map

 

[LordofSaxony]

This. I don't think that anybody in this thread is seriously advocating a return to EUII-style 2D - its not 2007 and that conversation is over - but a lot of people, myself included, are very concerned about this notion of scrapping the political map. This is a feature that 90% of players use 90% of the time. Instead of trying to improve the terrain map to the point where people might think about using it, I'd prefer if Paradox worked on enhancing the political map

They should just have two options,

a) political map with terrain with only colored borders indicating the variety of kingdoms, etc

b) political map with no terrain, same style as usual in Paradox games (ie, EU3: Divine Wind, etc).

That way it would please all parties, since you can pick what you prefer.

 

[vwclaymore]

What is wrong with a terrain map that has a colored political map layered over it so you can see terrain underneath the political map? Isn't that what they are really suggesting? Best of both worlds in my opinion.

 

[vwclaymore]

By the way, when's the next dev diary supposed to come out?

 

[Drachenfire]

IIRC, there will not be additions to the number of provinces in the area covered by CK1: the new provinces will be in the trans-Ural region, in Persia, in East Africa, etc. I like what the devs are doing overall with the map (they have obviously put a lot of thought and effort into this work and deserve considerable encouragement), but I am thinking that there will be map mods changing some things and adding provinces: in fact, I would encourage map modders to make smaller-scale maps, that is, you could make a map just of the British Isles + some other nearby lands like the northern littoral of continental Europe. Or maybe the devs could release a map pack with different campaign maps.


I take this from earlier in this thread (see the stickied developers' comments thread that Veld has been maintaining):
-How many provinces in the map?

-910, if I remember it correctly. 1013 with the sea provinces.

-What is the status of province drawing on the map? Is this far advanced now, and if so how has it been researched? Will you be requesting accuracy feedback on the province set-up?

-It is pretty much done, don't think we'll change anything now. It's mostly the old provinces from CK1 with a couple more added. The betas will and have commented on the accuracy of the map.

-That's kinda disappointing to hear, I gotta be honest. The province set-up in CK1 was pretty problematic, as far as historical accuracy goes. Pretty much the whole life of CK1 we were told it was impossible to fix the map, and a lot of research from various people on the boards went into improving it recently for map mods. Now you seem to be saying "well, we ignored it and you'll be stuck with the same map for the sequel".

-Changing province borders is trivial, and I expect further corrections will be made once the Alpha phase kicks off.

The British Isles as is ... is below:
http://worthplaying.com/article/2011/1/27/news/79528/images/291587/

I've only played one CK1 game as England. But it seems to be one of the regions that causes the most argument. Has much been added, for those of you who have spent some time playing there?

*nod* I do know modders will be on top of redoing the map. Its just….. very disappointing that in addition to waiting for CK2, we will then have to wait on modders to redo the map yet again, almost immediately after CK2 is released.

I know that a great many of us are not pleased with the shape and number of the provinces as they are in alpha right now, as they are based on the CK1 original territories, which were unsatisfactory as well. While I greatly welcome expanded territories to include Arabia and Ethiopia (I really do), I am gravely disappointed that all the work that went into correcting the map may be ignored.

I know so much has gone into the corrections that were adopted by the leading developers of CK1 scenarios. Kurak was the first to update a Wales map, then an Irish and Scottish map that was eventually incorporated into two of the most widely played modes in CK 1. Players greatly appreciated the precision of these new territories. Jord’s Dues Vault Improvement Pack incorporated a new Wales map that was very much needed, while Veld’s TASS mode incorporated Kurak’s Wales and Ireland map. Now, we have Fiftypence' Mappa Regnorum which has not only corrected the size, number, and shape of much needed provinces of the British Isles, he is now working on the rest of Europe. Look at his map. I know if you research his thread you will see he has incorporated much of the community's imput creating provinces that people what to play in, and shaped in such a way that is pleasing for those that play in those regions.

These corrected provinces are done with the support of players who play within those regions mostly, and so there is a sense of … completeness that would be lacking in the CK2 map if these improvements are not incorporated. For as nice as the terrine map may be, more people would appreciate attention to a more precise map that has been trending in CK1.

I play almost exclusively in the north-west corner of Europe, and have to say that the provinces displayed by map for CK2 Alpha is more or less an eyesore. I'm not talking about the terrine, but the size, shape, and number of provinces devoted to these countries. USE the knowladge of the community for these nations.

Please, please take into account the work done in correcting the number, size, and shape of these provinces. Look at the precision and impute the community has contributed to in making the best map, which aims at satisfying those players who will be playing in those regions and countries.

Additionally, it would be gravely dissapointing if CK2 did not incorporate all the additional corrections that the community has contributed to in Jord's DVIP and Veld's TASS. I mean, seriously, so many dynasties and characters have been fleshed out there that not to use that as a resource is mind numbing.

 

[Caranorn]

I agree with every point Drachenfire made in his most recent post. When it comes to modding I'm in addition worried that the same or similar limitations might exist in CK-II that were encountered in CK-I. Namely the number of land provinces. That's one reason why even the CK-I mods could never be entirely satisfactory as any province added at one point ment removing a province elsewhere. Worse, removing rivers which before had represented both obstactles and avenues for naval movement (at least originally, maybe naval movement on rivers was removed in DV as i don't recall seing any since then)...

Anyhow, maintaining the CK-I original provinces for CK-II (as it seems to be at this time) was a big disapointment to me...

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

Worse, removing rivers which before had represented both obstactles and avenues for naval movement (at least originally, maybe naval movement on rivers was removed in DV as i don't recall seing any since then)..

Rivers have never had any effect in CK1, there was no naval movement across or along rivers and neither are they obstacles for armies.

I'm in addition worried that the same or similar limitations might exist in CK-II that were encountered in CK-I

CK-II is built with the Clausewitz-engine, where the only limit is your hardware, since each province will slow the game down a bit.

 

[Gathenhielm]

I agree with every point Drachenfire made in his most recent post. When it comes to modding I'm in addition worried that the same or similar limitations might exist in CK-II that were encountered in CK-I. Namely the number of land provinces. That's one reason why even the CK-I mods could never be entirely satisfactory as any province added at one point ment removing a province elsewhere. Worse, removing rivers which before had represented both obstactles and avenues for naval movement (at least originally, maybe naval movement on rivers was removed in DV as i don't recall seing any since then)...

Anyhow, maintaining the CK-I original provinces for CK-II (as it seems to be at this time) was a big disapointment to me...

Why would there be a limitation in the number of land provinces? No other game since EU3 have this.

Now there will probably be a limitation on some level because of the strain on performance...

 

[safferli]

What is wrong with a terrain map that has a colored political map layered over it so you can see terrain underneath the political map? Isn't that what they are really suggesting? Best of both worlds in my opinion.

This is the way it's done in V2, so it's entirely possible it'll be in CK2 as well. Note, I do not know, I have no inside information.

 

[Captain Frakas]

CK-II is built with the Clausewitz-engine, where the only limit is your hardware, since each province will slow the game down a bit.

There is a limit in the density of province per area.

 

[Ruwaard]

*nod* I do know modders will be on top of redoing the map. Its just….. very disappointing that in addition to waiting for CK2, we will then have to wait on modders to redo the map yet again, almost immediately after CK2 is released.

I know that a great many of us are not pleased with the shape and number of the provinces as they are in alpha right now, as they are based on the CK1 original territories, which were unsatisfactory as well. While I greatly welcome expanded territories to include Arabia and Ethiopia (I really do), I am gravely disappointed that all the work that went into correcting the map may be ignored.

I know so much has gone into the corrections that were adopted by the leading developers of CK1 scenarios. Kurak was the first to update a Wales map, then an Irish and Scottish map that was eventually incorporated into two of the most widely played modes in CK 1. Players greatly appreciated the precision of these new territories. Jord’s Dues Vault Improvement Pack incorporated a new Wales map that was very much needed, while Veld’s TASS mode incorporated Kurak’s Wales and Ireland map. Now, we have Fiftypence' Mappa Regnorum which has not only corrected the size, number, and shape of much needed provinces of the British Isles, he is now working on the rest of Europe. Look at his map. I know if you research his thread you will see he has incorporated much of the community's imput creating provinces that people what to play in, and shaped in such a way that is pleasing for those that play in those regions.

These corrected provinces are done with the support of players who play within those regions mostly, and so there is a sense of … completeness that would be lacking in the CK2 map if these improvements are not incorporated. For as nice as the terrine map may be, more people would appreciate attention to a more precise map that has been trending in CK1.

I play almost exclusively in the north-west corner of Europe, and have to say that the provinces displayed by map for CK2 Alpha is more or less an eyesore. I'm not talking about the terrine, but the size, shape, and number of provinces devoted to these countries. USE the knowladge of the community for these nations.

Please, please take into account the work done in correcting the number, size, and shape of these provinces. Look at the precision and impute the community has contributed to in making the best map, which aims at satisfying those players who will be playing in those regions and countries.

Additionally, it would be gravely dissapointing if CK2 did not incorporate all the additional corrections that the community has contributed to in Jord's DVIP and Veld's TASS. I mean, seriously, so many dynasties and characters have been fleshed out there that not to use that as a resource is mind numbing.

I agree with every point Drachenfire made in his most recent post. When it comes to modding I'm in addition worried that the same or similar limitations might exist in CK-II that were encountered in CK-I. Namely the number of land provinces. That's one reason why even the CK-I mods could never be entirely satisfactory as any province added at one point ment removing a province elsewhere. Worse, removing rivers which before had represented both obstactles and avenues for naval movement (at least originally, maybe naval movement on rivers was removed in DV as i don't recall seing any since then)...

Anyhow, maintaining the CK-I original provinces for CK-II (as it seems to be at this time) was a big disapointment to me...

Not suprisingly, given my previous posts in this thread, I can only say that I fully agree with posts of Drachenfire and Caranorn.
I personally like how the terrain looks, but it is the number of provinces and their borders (from what I've seen so far), which are bit disappointing so far.
Which is a pity, since there are mods, which have already improved the map (of CK1).

 

[Caranorn]

Rivers have never had any effect in CK1, there was no naval movement across or along rivers and neither are they obstacles for armies.



CK-II is built with the Clausewitz-engine, where the only limit is your hardware, since each province will slow the game down a bit.

I thought I remembered movement by river, but than again it's been ages since CK-I came out...

 

[Calgacus]

I was the one who raised this issue, but I will say in all fairness that creating many provinces in preferred W. European areas will create imbalance. The bulk of economic and military power on this map should lie in the Mediterranean and Middle East, not north-west Europe. In the alpha, Wales has six provinces ... quite generous compared with some regions (e.g. three times the provinces of Sardinia). I do support an increase of provinces because it makes the game more realistic and playable, but they can't just spam certain regions with provinces because there is pressure from enthusiasts of these regions. Expanding province numbers should mean doing it right across the map.

Getting the provinces right (whatever number we have) is the first step though.

PS, I'd like to point out that Ireland in Kurak’s Wales and Ireland map was actually worse than CK1, though it is good in the Mappa Regnorum.

I've only played one CK1 game as England ... Has much been added, for those of you who have spent some time playing there?

At a glance it's essentially unchanged except for some adjustments to the Chester-Lancashire area and a tiny reduction of inaccuracy for Westmorland.

 

[Wezqu]

By the way, when's the next dev diary supposed to come out?

Usually on the first tuesday of the month or near it.

 

[unmerged(31881)]

I thought I remembered movement by river, but than again it's been ages since CK-I came out...

Rivers.

Will they have names? That hover-over display thing?

 

[vadermath]

Since we're talking about it, will the Dev Team be using the large amount of info provided by the DVIP mod? Not to do so would be silly, IMHO; saves a lot of time.

 

[Ruwaard]

]I was the one who raised this issue, but I will say in all fairness that creating many provinces in preferred W. European areas will create imbalance[/U]. The bulk of economic and military power on this map should lie in the Mediterranean and Middle East, not north-west Europe. In the alpha, Wales has six provinces ... quite generous compared with some regions (e.g. three times the provinces of Sardinia). I do support an increase of provinces because it makes the game more realistic and playable, but they can't just spam certain regions with provinces because there is pressure from enthusiasts of these regions. Expanding province numbers should mean doing it right across the map.

Getting the provinces right (whatever number we have) is the first step though.

PS, I'd like to point out that Ireland in Kurak’s Wales and Ireland map was actually worse than CK1, though it is good in the Mappa Regnorum.



At a glance it's essentially unchanged except for some adjustments to the Chester-Lancashire area and a tiny reduction of inaccuracy for Westmorland.

Not necessarily, more provinces in the relatively poorer regions, should also mean more poor provinces. However I'd also like to see the ability to develop provinces, so that certain technologies and investments should allow extra settlements (with the maximum of 8). In which case the mediterranean region and the middle east should start with the maximum or near the maximum number of provincial settlements, but the poorer European provinces should get the ability to develop (open up the ability for new and more settlements). For example there's a huge difference between Brugge (Bruges) in Flanders in 1066 or in 1399. During this period the European regions did a lot of catching up with the southern regions.

 

[Calgacus]

Not necessarily, more provinces in the relatively poorer regions, should also mean more poor provinces. However I'd also like to see the ability to develop provinces, so that certain technologies and investments should allow extra settlements (with the maximum of 8).

Yes, well the dynamics would have to be different than they are in ck1. In Ck1 provinces as poor as necessary to balance what we're talking of are useless and defenseless.

The key change necessary is distinguishing income/wealth from manpower. Non-urban agricultural societies generally gear their societies more towards warfare. Urbanised societies generally have more in regards to wealth/economic diversity. So France should probably have, say, twice the military manpower of Iraq, but [say] a quarter of the wealth. Likewise Khurasan should have more manpower than Italy, but less wealth. And so on.

 

[Drachenfire]

Personally, my favorite map was done by Cool Toxic for his CK Dynasties/Dark Ages mode.

Cool Toxic's map was the super-sweetest in terms of provinces. Wales was drawn nearly the best thus far, in my opinion. It has Caernarfon and Meirionydd, Dyfed and Pembroke, and Kidwelly-Gower, amongst others. It's the best map I've never played on. But for Wales and Brittany, my gods I have not seen a better map to date.

The sketch of the map has been finished.

http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/3038/mapk.jpg

I'm sure his project is now on hold pending CK2 release, but this was/is one of the best drawn provincal maps I've seen.

 

[Ruwaard]

Personally, my favorite map was done by Cool Toxic for his CK Dynasties/Dark Ages mode.

Cool Toxic's map was the super-sweetest in terms of provinces. Wales was drawn nearly the best thus far, in my opinion. It has Caernarfon and Meirionydd, Dyfed and Pembroke, and Kidwelly-Gower, amongst others. It's the best map I've never played on. Calgacus will need to comment on Scotland. But for Wales and Brittany, my gods I have not seen a better map to date.




I'm sure his project is now on hold pending CK2 release, but this was/is one of the best drawn provincal maps I've seen.

It's a nice map, but I don't like the set up in regions such as the Netherlands/Low Countries. However it does show that different people have different regions were they look at first to judge a map.