• 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.
It's time for another cycle of developer diaries on Crusader Kings II and I thought I'd begin by talking about the new start date and giving you a broad overview of the upcoming expansion; The Old Gods. Yes, we're pushing back the earliest possible start date to 867 AD. This is a special bookmark that comes with the expansion (and you will not be able to start at dates between 867 and 1066 without modding.)

Europe is a very different place in 867... Many of the familiar countries have not yet come into being. There is no Hungary, no Poland, no Russian principalities and the British Isles and Scandinavia are full of petty kingdoms. The Carolingians still rule the Franks, but the great Empire of Charlemagne has been divided between four of his descendants. In the Byzantine Empire, a new dynasty has just risen - the House of Makedon - destined to restore some of its former glory. The Muslims are in the middle of a drawn-out crisis as the once enormous Abbasid Caliphate has fractured, with a succession of Caliphs being murdered by their own Turkish generals.

CKII_ToG_DD_01_Europe_867.png

Most importantly, however, the North and East are completely dominated by bustling tribes of unrepentant heathens who remain less than impressed with the White Christ. Why debase yourself before a dead man on a cross when you can loot the riches of his fat clergy instead? Just as the fury of the Northmen descends on the undefended shores of Europe, other, equally pagan threats are on the rise in the steppes of Tartaria. Like the Avars before them, the feared Magyar horse lords are pushing into Europe from beyond the Carpathians. Why is all this more important than the affairs of Christians and Muslims? Because with The Old Gods, all these heathens are finally playable! (But you probably knew that already. :D )

CKII_ToG_DD_01_Magyar_Invasion.png

Playing a pagan chieftain is at least as different as playing a Muslim. Not only that, there are significant differences between the various heathen religions. Some are aggressive in nature, like the Norse and Tengri beliefs, and some are more defensive, like the Finno-Ugric faith. For example, the warlike Norse will suffer a prestige loss for being at peace for too long, and will need to wage war or set sail to pillage and loot. The Finns don't have this problem, but on the other hand, their vassals will dislike having their troops raised (like Christians). Some faiths get defensive bonuses and larger garrisons in their homelands, some don't, etc. However, they can all potentially be reformed to withstand the allure of the new religions.

CKII_ToG_DD_01_The_Great_Heathen_Army.png

In the coming weeks, I will explain the different religions in detail. I will, of course, also talk about other new features, like traversible rivers, new cultures, Zoroastrians, Adventurers, and much more. Stay tuned, and here are some more screenshots to tease and titillate!

CKII_ToG_DD_01_Loot_and_Pillage.pngCKII_ToG_DD_01_Varangians.pngCKII_ToG_DD_01_The_Last_Zoroastrians.png



[video=youtube;V-edUnWQgyM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-edUnWQgyM[/video]

Web page: http://www.crusaderkings.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/Crusaderkings
Twitter: http://twitter.com/Crusaderkings
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Will Northern navigable rivers freeze over in Winter? Do the rivers chosen not have that problem?
From the look of it, they just added a bunch of seaprovinces(so wide!) so I don't think there is any special river feature:(
Thats probably also the reason they added the river between Onega and Volga, which dosn't exists since the the tributatires of lake Beloe isn't connected to the Baltic.
Without the fake river the engine wouldn't cope with having the volga navigable.
 
If there is nothing to differentiated rivers from typical sea zones, then that means that any province next to one will count as a coastal province. So now I guess "inland" republics are possible.
 
Its the same state, same rulers. If you look at k_burgundy's title history, you can clearly see that it's earliest ruler was Lothair II.

They'll rename it probably...

As I've already said it'll be because the ruler is holding both in personal union, and the propensity to hold Burgundy as a higher title is higher than the propensity to hold Lotharingia and a primary title, as a result, the ruler immediately switches to using Burgundy at start up. The same problem existed with Kiev-Galich until it was fixed to make rulers favour Kiev as their primary title over all other Ruthenian duchies.

|If you're wondering about Burgundy, stop scrolling and read - They are not going to rename the Burgundy title. The sole reason it is like that is because of the way the two titles are perceived by the AI relative to each other. Give them a little bit of time and Lotharingia will be favored by the AI on release.
 
Last edited:
If there is nothing to differentiated rivers from typical sea zones, then that means that any province next to one will count as a coastal province. So now I guess "inland" republics are possible.
But these things isn't rivers at all, it is just seazones, so it will just be the places where they have added the new seaprovinces that republics are possible(and I hope they don't take this further and cover the entire map in sealanes 100-1000x the size of the RL rivers)
 
As I've already said it'll be because the ruler is holding both in personal union, and the propensity to hold Burgundy as a higher title is higher than the propensity to hold Lotharingia and a primary title, as a result, the ruler immediately switches to using Burgundy at start up. The same problem existed with Kiev-Galich until it was fixed to make rulers favour Kiev as their primary title over all other Ruthenian duchies.

They are not going to rename the damned Burgundy title. The sole reason it is like that is because of the way the two titles are perceived by the AI relative to each other. Give them a little bit of time and Lotharingia will be favored by the AI on release.

Its rude to use bolded text like this, especially over such trifling details. Calm down.

'renamed' was wrong, sure. I forgot both these titles are already in the game for a moment. Then yes, its simply a matter of adding a small Dignity bonus to Lotharingia.
 
Its rude to use bolded text like this, especially over such trifling details. Calm down.

'renamed' was wrong, sure. I forgot both these titles are already in the game for a moment. Then yes, its simply a matter of adding a small Dignity bonus to Lotharingia.

It's eye catching. "Rude" is a somewhat extreme way to look at it.
 
Its commonly considered like shouting and anger and will often be interpreted as such.

Perhaps. I underlined it to try and mitigate that. I've gone back and revised it now, I wasn't aiming it at you but instead wanted to get people to look at it as they read through to try and avoid a thread full of "Has anyone noticed Burgundy is wrong?" My apologies if it seemed like a personal attack.

Lol, irony.
|
|
|
V
 
Ok, most of Eastern Europe is really wrong in this screen shot:

attachment.php


I can only hope that this is an early build and not the final setup.

First of all, Great Moravia is way too big there, it simply didn't control all those areas in 867. In that year Moravia was a fairly small state and was still forced to pay tribute to the Franks, it was only around 875 that Svatopluk began his military conquests that expanded the state beyond modern-day Czech Republic and Slovakia. All those maps you see (like the ones on Wikipedia) showing Moravia being huge are showing the state at it height, which is around 890, not 867. At the start Great Moravia should be only the most powerful Slavic kingdom in the region, not a superpower like it was later. You're missing out the Czech tribes, the Silesians, the Vistulans, the Principality of Lower Pannonia, etc (all of which should be represented as Slavic Duchies).

And come on, Croatia didn't exist as a united kingdom until 925! In 867 it was still two duchies (or Petty Kingdoms) called Dalmatian Croatia and Pannonian Croatia.

I've literally no idea what "Lesser Poland" and "Bereg" are supposed to represent, care to explain? At that time the area of "Lesser Poland" was split between several small Slavic tribes, Vistulans, Volhynians, maybe some Lendians, etc. There was defiantly no state that ruled that whole area. And Bereg? I've never heard of any such entity existing at that time. The area of Bereg was under Bulgarian rule, but was probably still populated by Avars.

And what's up with the Magyars? They're way too big. In this shot you have them ruling over most of Southern Ukraine, when in reality they controlled only a fairly small area on the Black sea coast. I mean you've got them ruling over Galich, which is in far western Ukraine, near Poland. The Magyars never ruled that area (at least not before their migration to Hungary). And you've given them Pereyaslavl and Korsun counties, those areas were parts of the Polianian and Severian Slavic tribes, definitely no Margays there.

I assume that "Konugardr" is meant to represent Kiev under the rule of Askold and Dir? Ok, but I really doubt that they had such a massive kingdom. More likely they just controlled the city of Kiev and surrounding areas, you have them ruling over what were in fact many independent tribes, like the Dregovichs and Drevlyans, who were not taken under Rus rule for a long time (at best I would say they would rule the area I have as "Polianian" in the map below).

I think the locations of the Volga Finnic tribes is also pretty wrong. About the Muroma specifically, the city of Murom was under Varangian rule by this stage, although I don't know if that means the whole Muroma tribe was under their rule, or just that city. Same situation with Rostov (Sarskoye Gorodishche) and the Merya.

Here's my own maps that I made to try to show situation of the states/tribes and ethnic groups in the region.

Political map: (not all these people are independent and many are of the same culture)
(Link to full sized image)


Tribal/ethnic map:
(Link to full sized image)


I did a whole thread about this: Mapping the Slavic Tribes for "The Old Gods", with more maps. Please read it Devs, or at least give some explanation of why you're setting it up this way.


Edit: Oh, but in all my criticism, I forgot to say that I am really psyched about this and am going to enjoy playing the Old Gods a lot! I'm really very glad that you guys are making it. The navigable rivers thing is really cool as well, and something I wasn't expecting you to do.
 
Last edited:
A very interesting DD indeed.
This Addon is going to bring many new starting options.
I can't wait to play as a Herkus Monte (sometimes also called Herkus Mantas) styled Lord and establish a prusso-baltic kingdom to keep the lands from the roman catholic yoke.
 
The reason is that they're not prepared to map every ethnic group as an independent state. Great Moravia overlaps a lot of what you've shown, while the Rus states will probably have little bearing on slavic tribes (they were invited to rule by all the tribes, allegedly). It doesn't look like they've worked on Lithuania and Finland yet, as they're exactly the same. Same goes from everything past de jure Rus and Ruthenia, they seem to have taken the sceenshot to avoid showing things that aren't done yet.
 
On subject of skin color - in my personal mod i made iranianians and altaics (except mongols) use the same graphics as andalusians. Most arabs except andalusians still use their old graphics. This was easy way to simulate their ethnicity slightly more correctly. There is also mod that add a lot of graphical cultures (berber, chagatai, bolgar, west slavic and more), http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?642409-Cultures-and-Portraits-Revamp

I gather the Caliphate is represented by e_arabia + d_sunni. Or are they using their own titular empire title?

Also, the thieves! I was first one who named zoroastrian dukes Satraps for my own minimod :D

Hmm, name of that persian satrap is not in the list of names of persian culture in last patch. Does it mean now names depend not only on culture, but also religion? So zoroastrian persians use different names than muslim ones, same for pagan vikings vs christian vikings?
 
Last edited:
Hibernian said:
Please read it Devs, or at least give some explanation of why you're setting it up this way.

not a dev, but I've seen no material that suggests new anti-blobbing mechanics. And on current mechanics, a Great Moravia split 5 ways would be an integral part of the HRE in 10 years in most games. There does seem to be a general preference to federations in a lot of cases.
 
You split the Russian tribes into a million pieces Hibernian, but you keep the Balts in one big one. If the russian tribes should be split up, then the Balts should definetely also, by the same logic.