• 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:
A question

It seems from this ( http://media.pcgamer.com/files/2013/03/551920_571561449529034_471929354_n.jpg ) that Denmark is divided into sub-kingdoms.
Now, I readily admit that I might be somewhat biased, but I was under the impression that Denmark was already unified by 867 (the propaganda of Harold Bluetooth aside), because the work done on the Dannevirke in the 8th century was much too extensive for it to simply having been a local undertaking.
 
Since people do not know which aspects of the map are final and which are not isn't it a good idea to just give Paradox your feedback early so they can take it into account if they wish? If I was Paradox I would love seeing all the interested users

Yes, but when it comes to things that they are obviously going to change (e.g. Asturias, Lothringaria and the like) then it's just plain silly.
 
Oh, and please add a Holmgång event! Would be pretty sweet to settle disputes between characters with single combat! And of course, there should exist an option to decline (in which case you get a huge opinion penalty to everybody and get the "craven" trait) or to have somebody else in your court fight for you (Meldrick?) :p
 
Just to prove that it's clearly an early build, here is the start date if you load up the history files. Note how much has currently undergone no change at all. They haven't finished yet. So while there may be cause for concern in Eastern europe, no need to worry about Asturias/the Frankish kingdoms and so forth.

S2vlNOF.png


(Thank you to whoever originally posted this in the other thread).
 

Attachments

  • S2vlNOF.png
    S2vlNOF.png
    528,8 KB · Views: 132
Last edited:
Just to prove that it's clearly an early build, here is the start date if you load up the history files. Note how much has currently undergone no change at all. They haven't finished yet. So while there may be cause for concern in Eastern europe, no need to worry about Asturias/the Frankish kingdoms and so forth.

Yes and no. After all the history files were updated with a purpose in mind.
 
Just to prove that it's clearly an early build, here is the start date if you load up the history files. Note how much has currently undergone no change at all. They haven't finished yet.

That can only be a good thing. Perhaps they're still on the stage where we can influence their decisions. They are the best and most responsive devs ever after all <333
 
My fear is that Castille is here to stay, for no other reason than becasue we have an established "Castilian" ethnic group in the game.
Which is terribly wrong in 1066, let alone 867. City charters given to the city councils by the King of Leon were still in Astur-leonese in the XII century, but nevermind, the fact is that in 867 there is no way someone from Asturias or Leon could be considered "castillian". The fact that Paradox doesn't want to flood the game with archaic cultures is very understandable, but Asturias-Leon was a differentiated cultural and political entity until at least the starting date of Europa Universalis. With the new expansion they cover almost all the timespan of relevance of the Leonese Kingdom, from its beginings as Asturias (ok, 711..) to 1230, the union with castille. And even then it was still a union of Kingdoms, in game terms it's well represented, with the rulers favouring the Castillian Title over the Leonese, but that's no reason to just forget that at the begining of the game the predominant political entity in northern Spain was Leon, not Castille.
 
The fact that Paradox doesn't want to flood the game with archaic cultures is very understandable..

Very true. But in this time frame it really can't be avoided.

I can overlook the whole "castilian" thing if they have Europe (particuarly Italia) populated with pockets of Latin speakers I can take control of.
 
They've confirmed that the Pope will never be playable.

He already is, or at least was in 1.09 before 1.091. You just needed to vassalize the Pope as an Emperor with an antipope then grant independence to the Pope, and then press your own claim on the Papacy=BAM, you are the Pope. Now, since you only receive weak claims when granting independence, you'll have to wait for an incapable Pope, but it can still be done. Someone claimed that since 1.091 you get a game over, but I have yet to have this verified, and know for a fact it worked in 1.09 and made the Papacy hereditary.
 
Please don't have the Vikings owning the county of Dublin. Yes, they would have maintained a fort on the site of the modern city, but they had very little territorial control in any part of Ireland during this phase of invasion. Kings of Brega would be a more important addition, with perhaps an independent viking holding within the province.
 
Very true. But in this time frame it really can't be avoided.

I can overlook the whole "castilian" thing if they have Europe (particuarly Italia) populated with pockets of Latin speakers I can take control of.
I've always thought that "Northern Iberian" was a reasonable compromise for 1066, as only major cultures that played a significant role in the game timespan are depicted.
In 866 it would still be okish to have Northern Iberian if they also changed the predominant title from Castille to Leon, leaving Asturias alone, although it would still be very ahistorical.
On the Latin thing, that would be brilliant XD
 
I wonder about a couple of things - is there going to be Orthodox/Catholic division at this point? Or is the Photian schism considered to be the Great schism in this historical start? I also wonder whether Great Moravia is going to be orthodox, catholic or pagan. Its ruling class converted sometimes between 850-900 (863 - Rastislav invited Constantine and Methodius to Great Moravia) but most of the country was pagan.
 
I wonder about a couple of things - is there going to be Orthodox/Catholic division at this point? Or is the Photian schism considered to be the Great schism in this historical start? I also wonder whether Great Moravia is going to be orthodox, catholic or pagan. Its ruling class converted sometimes between 850-900 (863 - Rastislav invited Constantine and Methodius to Great Moravia) but most of the country was pagan.

To be honest, there was no schism at all because Christian was never a united body. What we see as the schism is actually a failed attempt of the West Patriarch (a.k.a Pope) to united all Christian together. So a few narrative event would be adequate to describe the schism (basically just some bad word trading between Pope and Ecumenical Patriarch)
 
I can overlook the whole "castilian" thing if they have Europe (particuarly Italia) populated with pockets of Latin speakers I can take control of.
Why?

However cool it may be, classical latin was already an almost dead language by the larger population at the time of the Western Roman Empire collapse, each province speaking its own variety of vulgar latin (giving rise to that dialectal continuum that still exists today in Romance Europe). At the times of the late Empire, a strong diglossia between classical latin - written and spoken by the secular and clerical elites - and vulgar latin was already in place.

As much as it was throughout the middle ages.

The latin cultures are fine as they are. Perhaps a Norman-Italian Sicilian melting pot would be a fine addition, but no more than that.

(Less sure about the Iberian ones.)