Greetings friends, 'tis I, Doomdark, your faithful purveyor of hopes and dreams!

This month, I shall speak of those who know no loyalties and would shamelessly sell their services for money. No, I don't mean prostitutes. No, not politicians either. I am speaking, of course, of mercenaries! Brave, yet prudent, these companies of professional soldiers were the closest thing to standing armies around for much of the Crusader Kings II period. In the game, there are a number of predefined mercenary regiments that can be hired by anyone with sufficient funds (though not heathens and infidels - there are limits, even for soldiers of fortune.) As long as they get paid, they will fight loyally, and, unlike regular levies, they even reinforce, albeit slowly. They do not come cheap however, and woe to the lord who cannot pay their fee. At best, mercenaries who do not get paid will simply abandon their employer. At worst, they will defect to the enemy. Some disgruntled but enterprising condottieri might even attempt to seize land to call their own (as, for example, the Victual Brothers actually did with the island of Gotland in the Baltic Sea.)



Yes, mercenaries can seize territory, at which point they start acting like regular states. This brings us to the in may ways similar, but rather more pious, knightly orders. These humble soldiers of God can be hired not for gold, but for Piety. However, they will not fight brothers of the faith, and they will request ownership of the holdings that they seize (acceding is a very pious act). Landed mercenaries will retain their standing army, though it will no longer reinforce (eventually, it might thus be lost), and everyone will have a Casus Belli on them. Landed Holy Orders can still freely call on their main force, however. (If lost, they can raise it again through a special decision.) Similarly, the Byzantines have access to the Varangian Guard, which is treated much like a "vassal" mercenary force.



Should a mercenary regiment or a Holy Order lose its last holding, it will return to being a landless entity available for hire.



Here's a bonus screenie of what occupation looks like in the terrain map mode.



That's all for now. Next month, plots and intrigue (unless I change my mind!)

Henrik Fåhraeus, Associate Producer and CKII Project Lead

 

[Nuril]

Why are you so obsessed with females in this game?

Someone has to be, otherwise they'd be ignored and just end up being currency. That's not fun. Some triggered variant of EU:Rome's "Gender Equality" might be nice, so you could use that to create a company that isn't restricted to men while it's active. As a general modding tool that can be used to make exceptions when writting stuff (or put it on more equal terms if a specific culture is more of that vein etc.). Before that "Gender_equality" code was added I personally modded so that certain positions were open to women in certain tribes/cultures if they were skilled enough to make themselves stand out or if they had the rights to the position (inheritence). All ya had to do was change the "is_female = no" to "or = { is_female = no finesse = 8 }" and so forth. It comes in handy to have the conditions that flexible for all sorts of purposes.

And hello, Drachen.

 

[Negru Voda]

Map is something you look at all the time, visually it is the most important part of the game.

Gameplay's is something you experience all the time, by playing the game, it is the most important part of the game


either way, no one's denying that the Polish map area is inaccurate. PI is just first taking care of gameplay (mechanics like the mercs/holy orders), then of Polish province borders.

 

[RedRooster81]

I'm with you, Nuril. I often had very strong daughters but kind of iffy sons in CK1, so I was happy to find Damsels Not in Distress. I hope it remains as easy to change things in CK2 as in EU Rome. I did notice in an early screenshot that there is a law to allow female chancellors. I hope that female marshals and bishops are also easily to mod in. Whether historical or not, there was an interest in the CK1 community for females in positions of authority and power, so I don't see why not. I would also like to see female generals. As in the case of the Order of the Hatchet (and then some), women could take a role in the defense of their families and homes, as a final militia; in times of desperation, being overrun by an invader, I could see it happen. Women need not have been passive observers of war, banned from royal council meetings, but rather active participants, who knew that if the enemy overrun the castle that they and their daughters were often among the most prized loot. They were historically important as warriors among Celtic peoples (including in Roman Britain), and certain Germanic groups, too. I also don't see why at least noblewomen with certain qualities could not take a leadership role in war.

 

[Hyzhenhok]

Not really. In CK1, all that mattered was having a high-Martial leader with a big army. For example: When fighting an enemy army composed mostly of Heavy/Light Cavalry, it didn't make any difference if your army was mostly Archers and Spearmen, a balanced, combined-arms type force or the same Cav-horde your enemy was.

It did make a difference, but only ever so slightly. All other things being equal, the side with more knights and heavy infantry would generally win. That's because these are the two important units that are active during the two phases of battle that did the most damage to both troops and morale. The only time I encountered this mechanic actually mattering was in multiplayer, especially when playing lower level titles where extracting every possible advantage was crucial. It was significant enough that we played with a house rule against switching to Feudal Contract except by event or before a certain date, since the extra knights provided made it a no-brainer.

Here's hoping it's a little more important in CK2, and is easier to influence than in CK1 (where you just set your laws and monotonously adjusted province power balances, and fixed them whenever events led them astray. If you even cared at all).

 

[Infocalypse]

I'm with you, Nuril. I often had very strong daughters but kind of iffy sons in CK1, so I was happy to find Damsels Not in Distress. I hope it remains as easy to change things in CK2 as in EU Rome. I did notice in an early screenshot that there is a law to allow female chancellors. I hope that female marshals and bishops are also easily to mod in. Whether historical or not, there was an interest in the CK1 community for females in positions of authority and power, so I don't see why not. I would also like to see female generals. As in the case of the Order of the Hatchet (and then some), women could take a role in the defense of their families and homes, as a final militia; in times of desperation, being overrun by an invader, I could see it happen. Women need not have been passive observers of war, banned from royal council meetings, but rather active participants, who knew that if the enemy overrun the castle that they and their daughters were often among the most prized loot. They were historically important as warriors among Celtic peoples (including in Roman Britain), and certain Germanic groups, too. I also don't see why at least noblewomen with certain qualities could not take a leadership role in war.

Sorry RedRooster, but for the first time in CK2 discussions, I am not with you here. Women as marshals and bishops are just too ahistorical for my taste. Let there me a mod with them, let there be a trait for a woman disguising as a man to rise in power, but I do not see women as catholic bishops or marshals in medieval times without _very_ good reason against all customs.

 

[RedRooster81]

Sorry RedRooster, but for the first time in CK2 discussions, I am not with you here. Women as marshals and bishops are just too ahistorical for my taste. Let there me a mod with them, let there be a trait for a woman disguising as a man to rise in power, but I do not see women as catholic bishops or marshals in medieval times without _very_ good reason against all customs.

No need for apologies. Friends are allowed to disagree. And sometimes I post things that are a bit out there to see what everyone else thinks, sometimes quite a bit out there, but I love to consider the possibilities. CK2 will offer a very wide field to consider the possibilities of what might have been.

I was just suggesting in the above post that it should be possible for those who would want it as a feature, as a minimod, for which you could have laws allowing for female council members, including marshals and bishops. It should probably not be in the vanilla CK2 but the door should be left a crack open for modders to easily modify it.

Now to elaborate a little: maybe not marshals per se (though maybe again in particular circumstances), but if you have no one who can lead the army, then maybe a particularly valorous female member of your dynasty could take up the royal banner and rally the troops. So it could be an action during a siege or pitched battle (I recall in CK2 running out of generals with some regularity). In the centuries before our timeline, back even in the EU Rome timeline, females took military leadership roles and in Celtic Britain actually formed their own companies. More recently, Robert Guiscard de Hauteville's second wife Sichelgaita is supposed to have ridden with him on campaign, in mail, and have on occasion taken part in the action. But mid-XI century Sicily was very far from the center of Christendom, where as in other frontier cultures gender roles, cultural and religious boundaries, and the like do tend to get a bit blurred.

For bishops, it would likely have to be a heretical situation, like the Cathars, who believed in spiritual and indeed clerical equality between the sexes. So if you are a Cathar then maybe you should be able to assign female bishops. But with four hundred years of European religious history at your disposal, I would like for the boundaries to be rather fluid. Finally, I would offer that abbesses could rise to a position of power capable of holding religious authority, say at the baronial level, but historically had to work through male go-betweens. So at this point, I want to talk possibilities, even at the very far range of what was likely to have happened. In some far-fetched alternative reality, maybe some parts of Cathar theology were integrated into the Catholic mainstream (I can already hear the objections to this line), at least in Occitania. I don't know. I can imagine writing events to that effect and see what happens.

 

[Caban]

Pretty sure this game won't be coming out for quite a while still, and a map isn't made in a day.
I'm sure the folks at PI are aware of the issues with the Polish areas, and will have it ready to go by launch.

 

[Logos88]

No need for apologies. Friends are allowed to disagree. And sometimes I post things that are a bit out there to see what everyone else thinks, sometimes quite a bit out there, but I love to consider the possibilities. CK2 will offer a very wide field to consider the possibilities of what might have been.

I was just suggesting in the above post that it should be possible for those who would want it as a feature, as a minimod, for which you could have laws allowing for female council members, including marshals and bishops. It should probably not be in the vanilla CK2 but the door should be left a crack open for modders to easily modify it.

Now to elaborate a little: maybe not marshals per se (though maybe again in particular circumstances), but if you have no one who can lead the army, then maybe a particularly valorous female member of your dynasty could take up the royal banner and rally the troops. So it could be an action during a siege or pitched battle (I recall in CK2 running out of generals with some regularity). In the centuries before our timeline, back even in the EU Rome timeline, females took military leadership roles and in Celtic Britain actually formed their own companies. More recently, Robert Guiscard de Hauteville's second wife Sichelgaita is supposed to have ridden with him on campaign, in mail, and have on occasion taken part in the action. But mid-XI century Sicily was very far from the center of Christendom, where as in other frontier cultures gender roles, cultural and religious boundaries, and the like do tend to get a bit blurred.

For bishops, it would likely have to be a heretical situation, like the Cathars, who believed in spiritual and indeed clerical equality between the sexes. So if you are a Cathar then maybe you should be able to assign female bishops. But with four hundred years of European religious history at your disposal, I would like for the boundaries to be rather fluid. Finally, I would offer that abbesses could rise to a position of power capable of holding religious authority, say at the baronial level, but historically had to work through male go-betweens. So at this point, I want to talk possibilities, even at the very far range of what was likely to have happened. In some far-fetched alternative reality, maybe some parts of Cathar theology were integrated into the Catholic mainstream (I can already hear the objections to this line), at least in Occitania. I don't know. I can imagine writing events to that effect and see what happens.

There is also a case in Portugal of a famous lady whose name i can't recall, who defended her husband castle against castillian troops, in her husband absence. So says the legend that when they were getting low in bread reserves, she ordered to drop all the bread out from above the walls to make the Castillian (whom were also starving) think they had plenty of suplies and the siege could last for years!

Still, i know there were rare cases of female warriors, but still, i think there shouldn't be some kind of law or mechanism to make that frequent even if you want it. Maybe a very very rare event should give rise to this female warrior with a lot of bonus and many more penalties to simulate the odd of the situation.

But in my opinion, women shouldn't even have the martial stat, it simply wasn't in the ladies education. Joan D'arc was no noble lady, a noble lady should be worried with sowing and being gracious and stuff (I'm sorry if there is a feminist here but this was the way it worked) apart from that sure they can be a stuwart or a diplomat or even a very competent spy master! I'm all pro substituting the martial stat in a women for another stat like seduction (making the marriage proposal more successful or even making the king fall in love with yourself. This can be done for intrigue and plotting, If you can make the king take interest in your daughter, your favor with him could rise, just like the Boleyn family with henry the VIII)
But still, I think a women should have an active role in underground politics by spying, of trying to make their sons succeed in the throne. If a war comes about a women, then she can have a champion to deal with martial adversaries.

 

[Logos88]

Another question, I know the game is still in Alpha but i have to make this clear. When you call an order to war, you hire the entire order army like in the screenshot? can't you hire just a fraction of the force? I think you should be able to do it.

First I don't think is realistic that all of the order abandon their business and come to help you in your iberian small war with one Taifa. I understand if the majority of the order goes in a crusade to the holy land.

Second the financial strain in a small kingdom for hiring the entire order would be monstrous, you would take decades to recover, leaving them exclusive to France, The Empire or England.And making impossible for Portugal, Aragon or Leon to hire them.

Third, I really really hope there is a hierarchy in the orders, with the grand master but also lower patents with smaller regiments.

For the mercenaries, ok, most of the time the companies were not divided the fought has a whole unit, and I don't have a problem if you have to hire the hole of them.

 

[demanvanwezel]

There is also a case in Portugal of a famous lady whose name i can't recall, who defended her husband castle against castillian troops, in her husband absence. So says the legend that when they were getting low in bread reserves, she ordered to drop all the bread out from above the walls to make the Castillian (whom were also starving) think they had plenty of suplies and the siege could last for years!

Still, i know there were rare cases of female warriors, but still, i think there shouldn't be some kind of law or mechanism to make that frequent even if you want it. Maybe a very very rare event should give rise to this female warrior with a lot of bonus and many more penalties to simulate the odd of the situation.

But in my opinion, women shouldn't even have the martial stat, it simply wasn't in the ladies education. Joan D'arc was no noble lady, a noble lady should be worried with sowing and being gracious and stuff (I'm sorry if there is a feminist here but this was the way it worked) apart from that sure they can be a stuwart or a diplomat or even a very competent spy master! I'm all pro substituting the martial stat in a women for another stat like seduction (making the marriage proposal more successful or even making the king fall in love with yourself. This can be done for intrigue and plotting, If you can make the king take interest in your daughter, your favor with him could rise, just like the Boleyn family with henry the VIII)
But still, I think a women should have an active role in underground politics by spying, of trying to make their sons succeed in the throne. If a war comes about a women, then she can have a champion to deal with martial adversaries.

I thought that was the legend of how carcassone in southern-france came at it's name
(out of the head) Carcas was the wife of the moorish lord of carcassone(which wasn't called that way yet) who together with all his men died during a siege of charlemagne

at the end of the 5th year only a pig and a bag of grain and some servants and carcas were left, in the end she ordered the pig to be fed the grain and to be thrown of the wall and the servants to stand on the wall dressed as soldiers

when the franks saw this, they thought that the moors had enough food, so they broke up the siege, when they retreated carcas let ring the chuchbells, and one of the franks called it "carcas sonné"=> carcas resounds

 

[rybka]

Gameplay's is something you experience all the time, by playing the game, it is the most important part of the game

Thats why I wrote VISUALLY.

either way, no one's denying that the Polish map area is inaccurate. PI is just first taking care of gameplay (mechanics like the mercs/holy orders), then of Polish province borders.

I am aware what they try to show in this DD, but they show it together with something which is completely wrong. Why do you as a private company want to show something, which is really wrong? How this is going to improve your image?
I mean, wouldnt it be better to cut out the map from screens if it is not ready and say 'we do not show the map, beacause we still work on it to make it as accurate as possible'? Map is not the scope of this DD anyway. You would not have posts complaining about inaccurate map, people usually remember bad things not good.

Look on DDs fo Magna Mundi the game, they show only what is the focus of the DD, you can hardly see any map or things which are irrevant to DD. Isnt this better approach?
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?536875-Magna-Mundi-Developer-s-Diary-15-Espionage

 

[Negru Voda]

Why do you as a private company want to show something, which is really wrong? How this is going to improve your image?

yea, now that I hear your argumentation I think you are absolutely correct. but we might be getting off topic here.

oh well, they'll probably fix the map of Easter Europe as well before launch.

 

[bengrimm]

seems great

 

[TempestDK]

If there were no screenshots of the map people would complain.

Also the DDs are NOT about showing the finished functionality ... since none of it is probably done yet. It has been stated again and again (and again) that screenshots are of the Alpha version. Every game developer shows screenshots, even of things that aren't done yet and have place holders in it. Otherwise no one would see anything until the product was released.

Wait until the game is released before you all start going anal over the map borders ... because we all know that will happen, and there is no real reason to have this discussion in every single DD. Keep the borders discussions to the Map DD if you still think you have anything to add to that discussion.

 

[unmerged(9481)]

Can members of the Holy Orders marry or will they be considered celibate clergy in relation to marriage proposals?

 

[Logos88]

Maybe it is just legend that was adopted like so many tales, but I will search the portuguese tale and post it here.

 

[RedRooster81]

Can members of the Holy Orders marry or will they be considered celibate clergy in relation to marriage proposals?

The Templars, Hospitallers, Teutonic Knights all swore oaths of celibacy and obedience. The knights of the Order of Santiago in Castille and Leon however could marry, and had to abstain from martial relations for certain periods during the year.

 

[rybka]

If there were no screenshots of the map people would complain.

Also the DDs are NOT about showing the finished functionality ... since none of it is probably done yet. It has been stated again and again (and again) that screenshots are of the Alpha version. Every game developer shows screenshots, even of things that aren't done yet and have place holders in it. Otherwise no one would see anything until the product was released.

Wait until the game is released before you all start going anal over the map borders ... because we all know that will happen, and there is no real reason to have this discussion in every single DD. Keep the borders discussions to the Map DD if you still think you have anything to add to that discussion.

I may be oldfashioned, but there are things you do not show in an official presentation of your work:
- things you are uncertain
- things which are wrong (unless you you want to point out that they are wrong)
If you still show them you risk that discussion will focus on these things not on what you really wanted to. We have an example here.

 

[RedRooster81]

I may be oldfashioned, but there are things you do not show in an official presentation of your work:
- things you are uncertain
- things which are wrong (unless you you want to point out that they are wrong)
If you still show them you risk that discussion will focus on these things not on what you really wanted to. We have an example here.

I would note what Doomdark said regarding the screenshot in question:

Here's a bonus screenie of what occupation looks like in the terrain map mode.

They are still a long way from reaching their release date, but I think attention needs to be paid as to what purpose any specific screenshot is supposed to convey. Not "look at this screenshot. We think that we got Poland's provinces just right this time."

 

[rybka]

I am not against Parodox, they make the only games I play. I sure hope that map will be nice this time. I am only saying that a bit more of awarness what you publish would not hurt. I will now stop this discussion, sorry for off topic.