• 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.
Showing developer posts only. Show all posts in this thread.

rageair

CK3 Game Director
Paradox Staff
43 Badges
Sep 10, 2011
1.824
11.487
  • Cities in Motion
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • War of the Vikings
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Magicka
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • The Showdown Effect
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • 500k Club
  • War of the Roses
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
Greetings!

A long time in the making, this diary is dedicated to plans, and what we have in store for CK3. From more present matters to musings and thoughts ranging into the far future. Crusader Kings is a unique game series, and one that has been close to my heart for a long time - the focus on characters as the driving force, emergent narratives, and player freedom make it truly stand out.

Ever since I took the reins of the project I’ve continued to follow the original vision, which some of you might remember from the very first Dev Diary: Character Focus, Player Freedom and Progression, Player Stories, and Approachability. As you can see, the points correspond fairly well with my initial sentiment, and I do not intend to deviate too far from these points - that said there are always things we can do better or differently within them, and I think that we could do even more to, for example, improve the cohesion of player stories or the sense of progression. I am a firm believer in that everything in the game should help you in making stories (while not necessarily being explicitly connected).

Internally we’ve always worked with the premise “Live the life of a Medieval Ruler”, which means that we want the game to be uniquely true to how life was during the period. We want to attribute more than just ‘death, suffering, and war’ to the era we portray. Highlighting things that you might not see elsewhere, such as family, or the challenges of rulership, is important to us. Going forward this will remain a priority, though it is important to note that we do exaggerate and romanticize a lot - it is a game after all!

thinking_ani.gif


This all leads me to the next point; what are we doing?

As a project, we aspire to have a cadence of roughly four releases per year, not including post-release support in the form of patches or hotfixes. During this year we’ve released Royal Court, Fate of Iberia, Friends & Foes, and as mentioned previously we’re aiming to have a free update out before the year is over. We want to have a steady stream of new content, while also maintaining the game by acting on feedback. For next year, our ambition is to have somewhere around four updates (barring unforeseen circumstances).

Going even further (long-term) we have the ambition to shorten our cycles, so we can get more content and updates out. The project is (by Paradox Development Studio standards) still young, and has a long future ahead of it. There’s so much to do, and so many ideas still to explore. Though as I mentioned this is an ambition and not a promise - it might be complicated to get everything in place, but rest assured that we’re always evaluating what we can do to achieve this.

Of course, we’re also watching initiatives that other studios are driving, such as the Stellaris Custodian Initiative, with interest. While we’re not organized in a way where we could adopt a similar structure today, it’s something that’s worth investigating - again, this is a long-term thing, and it’s very possible that we would find another setup that works better for Crusader Kings.

For next year we want to do something similar to Royal Edition again, an Expansion Pass with a bundle of intriguing content. One drawback of the Royal Edition was the fact that the main beat, the Major Expansion, came later in the cycle. For the next one, we want to either start off the cycle with the Major Expansion, or make it obvious what the theme is going to be from the start. This should make it much clearer what you’re actually getting in the package as a whole. We’re also exploring what formats and formulas of expansions could make up a future Expansion Pass, as the ‘1 Expansion, 2 Flavor Pack’ formula is not set in stone.

In addition to this, we also aim to do experiments now and then. For this year, the experiment was Friends & Foes; a smaller content format that was born out of the minds of the team. We’re looking into a few different experiments for the future, which I can unfortunately not share right now. Though something we can share is that we’re looking into more community involvement.

But what are we doing? What’s the next Expansion about?

As I’ve mentioned before, it’s too early to reveal the theme. However, the next Expansion is leaning towards the roleplaying side of the game. Without revealing too much we’re focusing in large parts on reinforcing the connection between map and character. The theme is not one that has been the subject of an expansion in previous iterations of CK - to make things extra clear; we’re not doing trade, imperial/byzantine mechanics, nomads, or similar this time.

That said, I know that many of you are also hungry for more systemic expansions, and that’s understandable! Of course, the next Expansion isn’t devoid of systemic changes or mechanics just because it’s leaning heavily towards roleplaying. CK, like all GSGs, requires systemic content to remain true to what they are. There will be plenty of systems, both as part of the Expansion and the free update that comes along with it. For Flavor Packs we’re also going to aim to have systemic content as part of the formula - Fate of Iberia proved that a combination of flavor (events, clothes, illustrations, etc.) and a central systemic feature (the struggle) served to elevate the experience as a whole.

As of now, we have a team of designers that is unlike anything we’ve had before - it’s not only a large team, but they’re also highly skilled and competent. This, in part, is why we’ve chosen to do an Expansion focusing on the roleplaying side of things, and it’s also the reason why we had the capacity to do the Friends & Foes experiment.

My aspiration is to shift focus towards more systems-heavy expansions after the next one, and we’re gearing up the team to be able to do just that. I’m of the opinion that there must be balance, and as we’ll have had two roleplay-focused expansions in a row, by then it’ll be time for the scales to shift towards the systemic side. We’ve expanded our team of programmers significantly, so the future looks bright for those of you that crave new and exciting systemic content…

Looking toward the future, what will we be doing over the coming years?

Now, there are a lot of areas that I want to explore in the future! Please note that anything I write or list here is not in any way chronological, and they’re not explicit promises. Great ideas come along at any moment, from any direction, and we want to stay flexible with our plans.

The current formats of Major Expansions, Flavor Packs, and Event Packs I believe let us cover every style of content we want to do, and we intend to keep these formats (while maybe tweaking the formulas a little bit here and there!).

Flavor Themes
Starting off with Flavor Packs; the regional focus is great and allows us to deep-dive into the history of a particular area - but as fun as it is to hit the books on a specific region, it’s possible that we’ll also be looking into non-regional Flavor Pack variants. Anything can be possible as long as there’s a central system where flavor can be woven in. That said, at least the next Flavor pack is likely to remain regional in nature.

A long-term goal is to revitalize and create diverse and varied gameplay throughout the map. Something we want to do is to explore regions outside of Europe, as both of our Flavor Packs so far have been within the region. We want to show how much fascinating history and intriguing gameplay can be found around the world. Examples with a lot of surprisingly deep history include regions such as Tibet, Persia, the Caucasus, and North Africa, to name only a few.

Of course, in due time we also want to explore regions within Europe that are very popular for players, some examples including Britain, France, and the West/East Slavic lands. It’s likely that we’ll alternate a bit, especially if someone on the team is extra passionate about a theme. Also one final thing; a lot of you are asking for a Byzantine Flavor Pack, but I know for a fact that the scope of a Flavor Pack wouldn’t sate your ravenous hunger for East Roman content… when we eventually get to them, it’d more than likely be as the part of a Major Expansion!

As for non-regional, there are some ideas floating around; further exploring governments such as the Tribal Government, or building flavorful systems around for example Epidemics (which is a system that would, foundationally, be free if/when we make it), etc. A benefit that this format would have is that we’d be able to make systems that don’t fit the larger theme of a Major Expansion, but that we still feel would be great for the game.

Just to reiterate; don’t take anything I say here as a statement that we’re doing one of these themes right now!

Ambitions for Expansions
There are already years worth of ideas for what we could do for Expansions. I’ll go through a handful of the areas I’d like to explore in the future, focusing on some of the topics commonly seen around the community. Note that these are not necessarily standalone Expansion themes, some might be combined, others divided. While there are some themes that I think are more important than others, there’s really no saying what we’ll look at first or in what order.
WIPdeck.png


Trade & Merchant Republics is something I hear a lot about - and it’s something that I really want to get to in time. However, I found the CK2 implementation in The Republic to be incredibly lackluster; in a game with thousands of interesting starts, it added only a handful more, and it didn’t actually have that much to do with trade. For CK3 my vision would be different - medieval rulers didn’t trade, per se, and noble rulers didn’t regularly barter resources with each other, so while that’s not a thing I’d want, there are a lot of interactions that could be added around trade and the people who did the trading. A system for CK3 would be character-driven, and there’s definitely an opportunity for new playstyles that aren’t as limited as the ones in CK2…

Imperial Mechanics, especially in relation to the Byzantine Empire, is another common topic. Empires are generally not very exciting, essentially having the same mechanics as a king does. I believe that there’s an opportunity not only for emperors, but to be part of an empire. In many cases, such as in Byzantium, the Abbasids, or even the HRE, being a part of the empire should be as interesting as ruling it. There are many ways of going about this, but ideally, I’d want to get a lot of differences in there - no two empires were ever really the same, after all.

Laws were another system that was lackluster at best in CK2. While they allowed a degree of customization and mechanical impact, the implementation was static and fairly uninspired. Conceptually laws were a huge part of being a ruler and being part of a realm, and while we do have vassal contracts (which I’d like to revise at some point, too) there’s room for more. For CK3, a law system would be deeply driven by characters, rather than confined to a static setup. Dynamism and evolution would be two keywords for the vision here.

Religion in CK3 took a great step up from previous iterations, but there’s always more we can do. There are a plethora of ideas floating around, and as religion was such a common part of everyone’s lives by this point in history, it’s hardly surprising. It’s hard to nail down exactly what I’d like to do here as there’s just so much, but CK3 is uniquely suited to simulate all the drama that happened between everyone involved within the sphere of faith, be they Pope, Grandmaster, or simply an influential ruler. There’s also a lot of potential around crusades, and all the happenings before, during, and after them. I’d also really like to get faith to play a larger part in the everyday lives of rulers, as it’s much too easy to ignore as it stands.

Nomads are just one part of the whole; the Steppe. This region is unique, and we’ve never done it real justice. In CK2 every ruler on the Steppe was a Genghis-in-the-making, with little focus beyond war. In reality, the Steppe was like an ocean - and the nomads were the only ones who had mastered it. I’d like to make the Steppe as a region stand out with mechanics of its own, and I’d like a large part of nomadic life to be about moving, focusing on the dynamism of the place and the people within.

The Late Game is another area that I’m very interested in expanding, as the game currently plays very similar across the entire timeline. Sure, there are some differences, primarily in how easy it is to rule, and how much you’re able to claim in wars, but the differences could be more fundamental. This is one of those topics where there are a million things we could do, but an ambition I have is that the game should stay interesting for longer than is currently the average play session (around 200 years or so). Looking at Eras and their effects on the game is one venue, so is taking a look at holdings, economy, and other fundamental components of the game.

I think it’s quite obvious that I eventually want to Expand the Map, to include the rest of the Old World. If we’d do it all at once or in segments is still up in the air, but regardless of what approach we take, it’s imperative that the area feels different to play in from the western half. While it’s obvious that the area would require a lot of unique art, I’d also want it to work differently from a mechanical standpoint - governments, faiths, etc. It’s an ambitious goal, but one I wish to tackle eventually.

Floorplan.png

An incredibly rough floor plan for the future.

General Areas
Of course, there are also areas of the game that I want to revisit, rework, rebalance, or expand in general - it’s not all about expansions or flavor, existing systems, and core loops must be revisited now and then to keep the game in a good state. Of course, this would be done in free updates, either free-standing or as part of a bigger release. Here are some of the things that I’d like to get to within a reasonable timeline, some more important than others. This is not an exhaustive list.

Alliances
are too binary as they stand, while it’s true that it’s easy to understand how they work, it also results in a lot of unwanted busywork when you have to fight in wars you’ve no interest in (or you have to take a big prestige hit…) - at the same time, it’s much too easy to get a lot of allies that, at a moments notice, are ready to drop everything in order to help in your wars. I’d like to see a pact-based system where you have to negotiate more, without making it annoying to find and get the alliances you need. You should, for example, never be fooled into a marriage hoping to get an offensive alliance, where it turns out you simply can’t. Exactly how/what we’d do is still in the works, but it’s high up on my list.

Clans do not feel unique enough, while they have some mechanics that simulate the sphere’s tendency for spectacular rises & falls, there’s more we can do to show the differences from Feudal. I’d like to explore what made Clan realms so different historically and draw upon that for a more flavorful set of differing mechanics. I definitely also want to make the Clan, as in the group of people, matter more in the government bearing its namesake.

Warfare is not and never will be a primary focus for CK3, that said it’s not as character-driven as it could be, outside of commander advantage and the occasional great knight. There’s also a real problem with delivering content (usually in the form of events) during times of war, as the player more often than not gets interrupted by something appearing in the middle of the screen while maneuvering units. I’d eventually like for us to be able to deliver content in a way that doesn’t interrupt warfare, and use that system to highlight characters and heroic acts (Battle of Agincourt, anyone?). I’d also like to rework the major annoyances of warfare, such as supply.

Modifier Stacking is becoming an issue in some places, especially for Men-at-Arms modifiers (primarily from buildings) and Building Cost Reduction modifiers. While some issues can be solved by tweaking numbers (we’ve for example reduced prestige sources in the past) others require a redesign/revisit of the underlying problem. For example, I’d like to take a long, hard look at MaA modifiers, seeing as the player can very easily destroy AI armies with little work. I’d like to not only rebalance the sources of MaA boons but potentially also create new options for fun management.

AI is an enigmatic beast, with aspects that are incredibly diverse. One of them is warfare AI, where Crusades stand out as an area in need of improvement - on one hand, historical crusades were incredibly disorganized, but on the other, we don’t want the player to feel like they’re hopeless endeavors. No matter what we decide to do, we’ll have to strike a balance - if the AI played perfectly optimally, crusades would steamroll everything, and I don’t want that. There are of course other aspects of the AI where I want to see improvements, such as the marriage AI, but we’ve at least made some good strides with the economical AI over the last few updates, so that’s not a priority. We eventually want personalities to shine through every aspect of the AI, and we have some plans for that, which will likely come in steps.

Community & History
As I touched upon earlier, we’d like to invite you in the community to take part in some of the things we’re doing in the not-too-distant future - my guess would be within Q1 of next year (though still TBD). Without spoiling too much it’d have something to do with the content we’ll be making…

While not directly related to the game, an (at least if you ask me) incredibly cool initiative that we’ll be driving is to have more collaborations with historical media - this goes hand-in-hand with what I mentioned early on in this diary, regarding us wanting to show how medieval life actually was! This means that you’ll be seeing even more podcasts, videos, etc., about themes close to the game. Who knows, we might even get historians or professors to be guests or consult for our upcoming content.

For those of you playing on console there will be a post later this week, answering some of the questions you have.

That’s it for now! I invite you all to discuss what you see here - share your thoughts about the themes, ideas for what you’d like to see, suggestions on how things could be done, and so on!
 
  • 262Like
  • 113Love
  • 46
  • 19
  • 9
Reactions:
The floorplan picture amuses me, that's a fun way to visualize the mentioned subjects.

However I notice that there isn't any doors leading into the Caucasus/Tibet section of the house, wonder if anyone ever pointed that out to whomever made the floorplan image you used for this.
The Caucasus and Tibet section of the house is where they lock Wokeg and me respectively. The lack of doors is, I'm told, deliberate, and they feed us through throwing us food from a hole in the wall. Today is cinnamon bun day!
 
  • 105Haha
  • 9Like
  • 3Love
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Warfare is a place where I have a lot of ideas, too bad most of those have been deemed: "good ideas, just not for Crusader Kings 3". I will keep lobbying for my ideas!
 
  • 47Love
  • 35Like
  • 13Haha
  • 4
  • 2
Reactions:
Well. That is a very interesting Road Map. Many thanks. Hopefully there will be some new start dates as well in the plan. Like the Iron Century (935), Latin Empire (1204) and Rise of Islam (632 don't judge me I will go down with this ship in that case. It is literally the earliest start date possible and I want it).

Judging you very hard and you should feel ashamed

Really hoping (and optimistic from the rest of the dev diary) that we'll see more opportunities for progression outside of territorial expansion in the future.
That's definitely something we want to improve. Territorial expansion at the expense of all else is something of an antithesis for how CK3 best works, so simple map painting isn't something that's top of our priority list at all.

I know you can't get into it too much - but can you say anything about to what degree (if any) "reinforcing the connection between map and character" is going to be graphical in the way Royal Court was?
Not really in the same way as Royal Court, no.

REALLY, really glad this is the approach you have in mind for Trade. Character-driven and about interactions with "the people who did the trading" rather than resource management.
100% our intention. This game is not Victoria; trade is explicitly not something we want to sit there and go crazy in-depth with from a numbers and resources standpoint. That game is much more well-suited to that!

Instead it should be about how trade developed the people and the places in which those people lived. CK3 is about them!

More random character deaths please
I gotchu fam

One thing I would very much like with the advent of the eastern edge of the map (and presumably the associated additions of parts of Japan, Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines and Indonesia) would be an introduction of events of natural disasters. Volcanoes could have event chains in those countries and parts of Pakistan, Iran, the southern Arabian Peninsula, Ethiopia, Georgia, Russia, Greece, Italy and obviously Iceland; earthquakes could happen across all of those regions and also, like, Turkey and a few other regions; typhoons could happen in the Pacific; etc.. These also could tie in with and/or interact with epidemics.

A number of significant natural disasters happened during the timeline of CK3 in real life. Antioch experienced a series of major earthquakes that contributed to its disappearance into obscurity, including two in the 12th century, the second of which killed the leader of the city. The 946 "Millennium"/"Tianchi" eruption of Baekdu (백두산)/Changbai (长白山) on the modern border between Korea and China was one of the most powerful of the last 5000 years, creating a large caldera at the top of the mountain and devastating the surrounding lands. The 1362 eruption of Öræfajökull (previously called Knappafellsjǫkull) in Iceland wasn't too much smaller, and obliterated the surrounding area to such a degree that they literally just named it Öræfi (which used to mean "a land without a harbour" but took on a meaning of something more like "wasteland" or "desolation"). Of course there's also the famous kamikaze typhoons that took out the Mongol armies as they tried to invade Japan.

It wouldn't even necessarily be a major part of the game—it would simply provide some cool new flavour and challenge (and also maybe for some of the disasters, particularly typhoons or volcanic eruptions, it could leave the land more fertile afterwards, with maybe a decreased time/cost required for building new holdings/buildings or increasing development or some other bonuses like that.

You're talking my language. Love the idea of natural disasters and the like as content some time in the future!
 
  • 40Like
  • 16
  • 7Love
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
... and Rise of Islam (632 don't judge me I will go down with this ship in that case. It is literally the earliest start date possible and I want it).
My dear Noble/Madam/Sir, I admire your ambition and boldness. Also no.
Really hoping (and optimistic from the rest of the dev diary) that we'll see more opportunities for progression outside of territorial expansion in the future.
:) I should certainly hope so.
Would this kind of differentiation between empires be hard-coded (HRH works like x, Abbasids work like y, ERE works like z) or would it be tied to the culture system? I've always thought the latter would make for really interesting stories of characters of a particular culture spreading around the map and their thoughts/methods of government spreading with them.
I would be incredibly surprised if any such design wound up being hard-scripted.
Going to continue to be boring on this and use every single opportunity to ask for Council power and Council laws that restrain the player's actions and have to be untangled over the course of the game. "Getting out from under your Council". It really made a difference in CK2, slowed early game snowballing, gave a sense of progress beyond territorial expansion and the risk of backsliding into a Council-run realm was a risk to be managed in the mid/late game.
I would like to make much more detailed council mechanics, in some form, personally.
More random character deaths please
:eyes: I've been considering some...
 
  • 41Like
  • 11
  • 2Love
Reactions:
Hey, it seems that we only need to smuggle a few more Twilight Imperium fans into the developer team, should be an easy thing to do!
I certainly would not mind having a larger playgroup for my galactic domination endeavors.
 
  • 11Haha
  • 3Like
  • 3Love
Reactions:
Excited about potential AI improvements especially around the Crusades. I get the idea that Crusades were not the most organized military effort in history, but the AI being braindead is not a fun way to balance them. It is never fun to watch the AI Crusade participants constantly embark and disembark and get systematically wiped out every time lol. I think it would be fun to make the Crusades more flavorful too. They could use mechanics similar to Norse adventures and have participants abdicate for a time to go on Crusade, and the Crusade could be a new tag where it's army size and quality is based on the power of participants and how much money was donated. I am sure the team has plenty of ideas, but these are just some of my thoughts.
Thank you for your bold comments :)
 
  • 37Haha
  • 2Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Look.

Look.

I understand the whole “no magic unless I, with my modern eyes and modern context can come up with an explanation that makes sense to me”, and that it’s the philosophy the devs have taken (for now, at least, but who knows when I finally find the weak link I can bribe with a whole $20) but the past is a different country. Magic existed for people back then.

The Enlightenment hasn’t happened yet. You keep your modern, Western epistemology away from my shapeshifters and animists ;)
Let's not mix things up though... Medieval beliefs in the supernatural have nothing to do with societies! :)
 
  • 21
  • 5Like
  • 4
Reactions:
but the past is a different country. Magic existed for people back then.

The Enlightenment hasn’t happened yet. You keep your modern, Western epistemology away from my shapeshifters and animists ;)
We keep neglecting to represent the time when the great enlightenment thinkers closed the rift between us and the magical world and banished magic forever.
 
  • 52Haha
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
There is a lot of focus on Europe in the diary while a lot of other areas feel underdeveloped in comparison as it is. I.e. lack of major decisions to work for (Western Europe tends to have multiple per kingdom while other regions may just have "unite this chunk of the map" and that's it. Also lack of special buildings outside of Europe (including gold mines - there's a bunch of gold mines outside Europe that are not in the game despite being more prominent than many of European ones).

Many in the design team, me among them, are very passionate about portraying the world outside Europe, and we will, but it's a gradual process.
 
Last edited:
  • 24Love
  • 18Like
  • 4
  • 3
Reactions:
You know what technically fits here?
Finally being able to draw on the map which heir gets which counties during partition succession (keeping in mind the rules of partition as they stand)
Never been done as a CK expansion, reinforces the connection between map and character, leans into the roleplaying side of the game, and affects every part of the map.

Of course, they'd never actually implement such a feature, because it'd benefit the player >> the AI, but it's a lovely dream.
:) I don't think that's an unsolveable problem at all, FWIW.
 
  • 44Love
  • 9Like
  • 4
  • 2
Reactions:
You and I both joke, but I have sat at the foot of many an Indigenous scholar with an eye towards decolonizing their field of study (including sciences) and let me tell you, there’s a whole complicated conversation out there about how reality and knowledge seeking is approached. Also something about strict definitions of concepts and true/false binaries.

Way over my head. I was sitting at their feet, after all, and for good reason. ;) But I have taken away from those lessons that one should be careful when overlaying their current experience and reality onto someone else’s, especially if the context is so different.
You are right, of course, and it is something we keep in mind whenever we make any at least "vaguely" supernatural content: we don't say if something is "real" or not, but that people said or believed something. It's something that so far hasn't found much space, to be fair, but I do agree that there is still much wiggling space for content that takes into account rituals and beliefs without jumping head-first into openly supernatural stuff. :D
 
  • 28Like
  • 3
Reactions:
I do hope regency is in the work. The more the game grows, the more its absence reverberates.
:) Regencies are a personal interest of mine.
Squeeeee! <3

I'm so happy to see all of this. Even though this plan sounds like it may take like 10 years to realise fully, and things may change along the way, I do at least appreciate the reassurance that the team has the ambition to tackle CK3's huge potential.

It's something I've been wondering about, because the first season pass, although full of fun and transformative content, felt very... safe, focusing on improving areas of gameplay and regions of the map that were already popular with players and had solid foundations (after all, nobody can deny that roleplaying was always CK's strongest side, and by earlier Dev Diaries' own admission, Scandinavia and Iberia were in the top most played regions already).

So it made me wonder if that was going to be the direction of CK3 in the long run, or if you were eventually also willing to take risks and challenge things which the history of CK2 might suggest lay out of your comfort zone.

But hearing that non-Feudal government forms, expanding the map and giving some love to the less popular regions are in the cards gives me hope again that the reign of Crusader Kings the Third won't just go down in history as a peaceful consolidation of its predecessor's conquests. I'm looking forward to seeing how it will avenge the Second's failures as well and how it intends to make a name for itself on frontiers heretofore thought indomitable.
<3 We absolutely want to make riskier, more adventurous DLC in future.
Can we get more bookmarks? 935 and 1187 would be fab
Several of us on the team would very much like to do so, but bookmarks are also a substantial up-front cost in history work + some added maintenance for each period added. This especially makes post-1066 or pre-867 ones more difficult to produce, since the history files in those areas are not really actively maintained atm and often are just whatever CK2 had at the point the databases were split. That's not to say that we don't want them or won't do them, but they're an investment, and as with all investments, doing one thing comes at the cost of doing another.
This is awesome, thank you for the update!

also just a wild thought and I’m not sure how doable it is, but it would be interesting to have a successful Crusade/Jihad/Great Holy War create a dynamic struggle of sorts for the appropriate region? That might be interesting and keep the conflict/interaction fueled outside the current binary “is there a crusade or not” form of interaction. There’s just a lot of similarities (for probably obvious reasons) between the interaction of the Crusader Kingdoms and the comingling of the various Iberian Kingdoms and Emirs so it makes sense to maybe improve on that initial iteration of struggles of it can be done in a sensible way.

anyway just spitballing
I think that would be a highly appropriate use of the struggle system. ;) Some consideration may even have gone into the system's initial design with a view to doing something like that eventually.
Mass disinheritance should be replaced with a more subtle mechanic that provokes conflict among potential heirs. Things like a one-heir-knight army should be possibly discouraged but not if it results in unpleasant hobbles for players. There will always be gamey tricks or outright exploits and fixing them isn't as important as improving other systems.
100% agree. Disinheritance is a fine game tool but horribly unimmersive atm - it's one of the most drama-causing things in the Middle Ages and we don't reflect that nearly as well as we could.
ere i have a question actually. there are certain behaviours in ck2 that are not present in ck3, but ought to be (spouses, for instance, tended to be better at staying in the same location in ck2 than they are in ck3 - i made a whole thread about it). how much of the code in ck2 is salvagable and able to be repurposed for ck3? its easy enough to say "why not simply do it the same way you did it then" but, you know, i dont know how to use a computer, it could be far more complex than all that for all i know

i ask because i think the playerbase, myself included, tends to vastly underestimate the difficulty involved in implementing a "simple" change. i notice this dev diary talks a lot about some of the things ye would like to do better in this game than the previous iteration (which is great, dont get me wrong) but not a whole lot about things that could be brought forward, and i think there are a few, even if just temporarily until something more in-depth could be sussed
I’m pretty sure, other than database entries and maybe localizations, that the code is different enough that it isn’t straight up portable.

Just based on my minimal goofing around under the hood, things are drastically different. For one thing, most things were based on a mean time to happen variable. For another, a lot of the way events are scripted has changed drastically.

Generally, if you don’t know how to code, the rule is “if it sounds easy to you, it isn’t”.
Just to confirm what kawamuratc said, CK2's script is generally non-transferable. The games run on different engines, were developed separately for some time, and adhere to different scripting standards. The major exception here is the history files, specifically character histories, which can be transferred between the two (title and province histories theoretically can but in practice effectively can't). Localisation can also be ported without too much difficulty (and IIRC some of the disease event loc is the sum total of what we took from CK2), FWIW. :) I'll take a look at your thread and see what I can do, regardless.
I still see no mention of coronations, Me and many others really hope this is coming in the free update this year. https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/coronations.1518172/
It would be really swell to reintroduce mechanics/event chain for coronations.
;_; I miss 'em too. Some day, some day, they're something I really want to get in, but I haven't the foggiest when.
No Italy on that map makes me sad, not gonna lie. The richest and most populous region in Medieval Europe, with an urbanization rate that was only equaled by 1820 England, birthplace of the Renaissance, main theater of the fight between Pope and Emperor... and it's not even in there.
^^' It's not untalked about, if that's of any comfort.
It's great to see the devs responding to player requests for some guidance (vague though it must unavoidably be) about the future of the game.

Most of the strategic picture laid out in this DD gives me confidence in the devs. Three cheers for the future of CK3:
  • Yes! CK3 is distinctive in PDS' portfolio because of its roleplaying aspect and it's great to see that kept central.
  • Yes! A Byzantine DLC deserves a Major Expansion to begin to do justice to the special features of a thousand-year empire and society.
  • Yes! You need to announce at least the Major Expansion if you want players to buy an Expansion Pass.
I am also pleased that many of the things that I am personally most interested in (mainly role-playing) are high on the team's priority list, even though I know that must be a disappointment to others.

The one big decision where I would disagree with the devs is the decision to further expand the map to the whole of the Old World. There are four reasons why I think this would be a suboptimal outcome.

Firstly, I worry that it will be difficult to keep faith with the existing Minimum Requirements. When I built my current PC, I allocated my budget around the CK3 system requirements. Since my lowspec CPU is also doing duty as an iGPU, its dinky cache is already busy, busy, busy. :eek: Unlike many forumites, I'm not worried about lag (I never play the game higher than speed 3) or fps (I played with 8 fps with HoI4 on my last PC!). But more map inevitable means data to process. There are visible judders when I go into the Royal Court. Even allowing for some huge optimizations,I worry about whether the game will stay playable, because more map surely means more characters. Which raises another difficulty.

How do you fit Southern African into a character-based game? The region must have contained fascinating people and rich cultures that would provide a very entertaining experience for CK3 players. Unfortunately, historians badly lack information about individuals south of the Congo basin until the very end of the CK3 era. I would love to be corrected if anyone knows better, but I don't think we know the name of a single person in the Mapungubwe kingdom that was the dominant power in the 11th and 12th centuries. In the Congo basin we have Kongo king lists, but only from the 14th century. I think. Archaeologists have done a great deal to reconstruct these societies and you could borrow a lot from the oral traditions of the Bantu and Khoisan peoples (e.g. for name lists), but not to the level of individuals. You would also have to make some very big assumptions about the mental and cultural life of people in these places. And there was almost no interaction between these societies and the rest of the map (with the important exception of the Swahili towns). The same points could be made about almost all of what we now know as eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East as well.

And staying in the East, East Asia doesn't fit into the CK3 framework. It's the opposite problem to the previous one: we know a huge amount about the people and society of China in particular during this era. As a Chinese speaker, I would dearly love to play a CK game set in East Asia and I loved CK2 Jade Dragon, but the existing mechanics, events & art of CK3 just don't match up at all. CK3 is built around a warrior elite of landed dynasties, which are very different from the civilian elite of scholar-officials that emerged as the norm in most of East Asia during this period. And how are the powerful eunuchs of imperial China going to be adequately represented in a dynastic game that doesn't even have a Mameluke mechanic yet? I would encourage you to keep nurturing your East Asia ideas and do them justice by pitching to the PDS management a plan for a spin-off game. All Under Heaven: A Crusader Kings Game , now that would be a dream come true!
6ymPsbs.png


Finally, the existing map could be exploited so much more. Adding Mamelukes, merchant republics, Magdeburg charter cities, monastic orders, nomadic peoples, Silk Road trading towns, camel-based Saharan societies, post-Roman Empires.... at one Major Expansion a year, there are enough different character-focused experiences to keep the team busy for at least the rest of the decade.

I'm sorry this post ended up being focused on the one area of disagreement, but that's because I like so much of the vision that you set out in the OP!
:D Thank you for a very informative and well-positioned post! I'm afraid I don't have a hugely substantive reply for you, but this type of feedback is very much appreciated.
Incredible, really looking forward to the future! I have just one question, you mention expanding the map east a few times, but are you also considering expanding south? We probably don't need all of Africa, but I'd love to get more of the Swahili Coast and Kongo, plus pushing south could make Indonesia fit a bit better.
:eyes: I would like to get more of East Africa in, but that's a very no-promises situation, as there's a lot of discussion to be had there. One the one hand, it's nowhere near as large a task as SEA/EA, on the other, sources tend to be heavily lacking for a lot of non-North African history for a whole host of (generally sucky) reasons.
I don't suppose you've been watching a certain fantasy TV show like half the planet have you? If so, I really hope you guys implement more spontaneous and unexpected death into the game as there is in that show. For a game about medieval drama there isn't nearly enough dying(specifically, others dying) throwing wrenches into your plans IMO. Especially when it comes to birth I feel like CK3 so far has had its cake and eaten it too, with medieval birth rates of women pumping out 10 kids but not medieval death rates too, most kids easily survive to adulthood no sweat(and mothers dying is also quite rare, though I have seen it happen).
All I ask is that the Devs apply some logic to all of this too. Setbacks are all very fine and dandy. Until they happen in a way that defies all logic and common sense.
^^' Not gonna lie, really happy to get this type of request. It can be difficult to justify content sometimes, but more randomised setbacks that don't feel keyboard-snappingly frustration are something I would really, really like to add more of. The mid-game is where we thrive, and everything going according to plan without the chance of life occasionally sucker-punching you really shortens the hell out of the mid-game.
I personally find it very odd to not see development, technology and buildings being mentioned specifically, as their inclusion is bizarrely static, with a constant upwards trajectory and with incredibly little depth applied to them.

Even Rome 1 had more to it when it came to actually developing what you control, with population coming in instead of development, where if you had too many without infrastructure it went badly for your largest cities, and that's without going into the actually more simulationist games in CKs family...
fenno-ugrics left without even the slightest mention, unless paradox has cruelly included them in the west / east slavic sphere
:p As mentioned in the dev diary, the floor plan is just a rough framework. To be clear:
  • A more variable economy & attendant systems is not off the table (though I'll admit the DD has sorta subsumed it a bit into late-game expansion and republican stuff, which makes it easily missed).
  • Finno-Ugrics are also not off the table for a flavour pack. Were we to do them, I could potentially see them getting piggybacked in with a broader steppe DLC or alongside nomad content, but they would most certainly not be bundled in with a Slavic DLC. We made a point of not bundling the Sami in with the Norse DLC for this reason - all that would do is take content away from the focal area of the pack whilst doing an absolute injustice to another vibrant place and people.
Since Roleplaying is such a big focus of the game, I think it would be great for the societies and most importantly the secret religion/cult mechanic from CK2 to make a return. They offered very interesting side content for every campaign and could be brought to the next level with a modular system like the one for religion and culture. Additionally the possibility to have a secret religion, induct others into your secret cult, grow its influence on a completely different layer than the obvious political one to the point where you can cause a religious uprising was an incredible idea and would add probably the most interesting and unique new Intrigue lifestyle.
Though I would like to see expanded secret faith mechanics in CK3 (our current stuff is very lacklustre, IMO), I'm honestly not a big fan of societies, and don't really want to see them make a return, at least in anything like the same format. Devil worshippers and overt magic aside, they just felt extremely samey. The way they were structured and thus how they played meant that their content was churned through extremely quickly, and though it was generally very memorable the first time you fought a bear, broke into your opponent's lab, or obtained a pistol, that also happened every time you got involved with a society, and because of their structure adding new content for them was frustrating very partially because events would be churned so quickly that content always felt like much less than was actually added.

Unless you were the chill open religious orders, I guess, but then you didn't really do much of anything anyway.

There was also not much of a cost to being in a society as early as you could and everything to gain, so the gameplay impetus was to always to get into one, and get your kids into one, AQAP, and the demand always there for everyone to have access to every society type so that you could always access every type of bonus available. The whole thing just felt... like a neat idea in theory but a bonus factory in practice. I honestly think there's much better ways to approach what they were trying to do, non-governmental groups and diegetic missions, than re-implementing even an improved version of societies.

So tl;dr = secret faith stuff, hopefully yes, societies, for me, hopefully not.
Good DD:

You inspired me to make my own floorplan of all the reasons I haven't been playing CK3 this year: View attachment 885635

In all serious though, why is warfare always spoken about with contempt by the CK3 devs as if it's not 1/3rd of the game experience at any time, a massive part of RPG, and the biggest most broken and player unfriendly system in the game.

Please reconsider the importance of warfare fixes. Please recognize that currently it brings the most harm to RP, not because events happen during it, but because it has some of the biggest effects on your characters ongoing RPG situation and as it currently stands, constantly punishes the player with secret rules and mechanics. Even the most pacifist player has to contend with the warfare system when attacked.

Basic warfare problems: <snippity snip of a bunch of fairly valid stuff>
Whilst I think calling warfare broken is hyperbolic (it works, it just doesn't work the way you or I might want it to), I can certainly agree that it's opaque in a way that disadvantages new players whilst disproportionately advantaging (and so making things trivially easy and thus boring for) veteran ones.

Wanting to downplay warfare as a primary focus isn't wanting to do nothing with it, it's saying that we don't want to add complications in the way often clamoured for by people who remember CK2's warfare. In my opinion, at its core, CK2's warfare essentially had the same problem you're describing for CK3 here (as well as many of the literal points). It wasn't more medieval in character, it wasn't more newb-friendly, it wasn't even particularly complex in an interesting way (though I'll concede that, aside from knights, it was more flexible for modding purposes), it just had lots of hidden details, secret rules, and things you could do to optimise stuff in a way that was fundamentally just short/long-term micro but which would add up if you could be bothered to sit down and do it all the time, every time.

For CK3, we did away with much of that, and tried to make a more accessible version of the same system that lost the micro but retained the key points. This, naturally, sucked for people who actually did like the micro, as well as for people who had learnt it/did it automatically and now just felt its absence. Unfortunately I think the more key thing here is that that system with less micro isn't a fundamentally different system, just a less frustrating/less gamey one, and it hasn't actually removed many of the hidden implicit rules or metas of warfare or, most importantly, made war more immersive and medieval in flavour.

So, to my mind, consider that section not as saying "we don't want to do warfare", but more that we don't want to return to adding lot of optional-but-effective army management stuff. Especially not when, as noted in the DD, we already kinda have issues with that in the form of modifier stacking for MaA. Warfare in CK is a huge part of the game and a massive part of any roleplay experience, but the type of niche tactical and long-term logistical choices that some folks want just aren't what many of us would like to do with it, and, per Rageair's words, won't ever be a primary focus for the title.
Additionally, are there any plans to introduce any unique Muslim content? While Christians have a series of events involving the pope, restoring the schism etc., it's a little sad that Muslims have few to no unique events for themselves at all atm
Certainly something we'd like to do! We've added bits'n'pieces of Islamic content since release (e.g., marked improvements to the historicity of the caliphal situation), but they're certainly lacking in events and decisions compared to much of the Christian world.
It's also a bit wierd that it's Muslim-only when you consider clan is a Gaelic word used to describe the social order in Ireland and Scotland, which weren't feudal for the period in the game.
^^' Sorry to say that the etymology of the word doesn't really have any bearing here - Goidelic clans don't really bear much of a resemblance to Arabic-style clans (which are the type-model for clan governments in-game) beyond some very superficial points, they just happen to share a term in English. :eyes: Now, were we to do that British Isles flavour pack...
My first suggestion would be to get copies of Duby and Le Goff books (not the first time I've recommended them, they're very accessible but their authors were some of the best Medievaists of their day, and they're still very solid), and to stack up on copies of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, Ibn Battuta's Travels, Martorell's Tirant lo Blanch, the Alexiad and probably something from earlier on, like Vita Karoli, Emperor Constantine's De Administrando Imperio or De Ceremoniis, or Luitprand's notice on his embassy to Nikephoros Phokas, also some local epistolaries, which while mostly stylistic, do reveal personal attitudes, forms of address and language.

As I re-read The Sunday of Bouvines recently, I was inundated with ideas for CK3 events. I'm sure the ream would have the same. The best thing is that these events would be based on real historical attitudes and social ritual. Tournament teams, poetry courts of love, the way hatred and rivalry was expressed, the way friendships formed and how they developed, the way important nobles died and the ritual funerary customs that followed... This would only enrich the experience and teach actual history to players.
The Art Of Courtly Love is another useful reference that offers plenty of material should the developers wish to add historically appropriate romantic events for Western Europe, particularly France and England. (I do suspect they have already made use of it, as some events people have complained about are, according to this work, actually quite appropriate for the period.)

I’ve previously suggested riddle events; for this subject, medievalist professor (and riddle expert) Craig Williamson would be the go-to person for the academic community involvement the devs mentioned.
:) Thank you for your input. Per Flockingbird's comment, we have/do use many of these for event concepts or tonal guidelines already, but many is not all.
This is a truly great developer diary. I'm so glad to see the team being open with the community like this when it comes to long-term plans. If you give us positive things to talk about it, it's a lot easier to stay positive. :)

With that said, I am very disappointed that the game is going to remain a map painter for a very long time. It's not that roleplay enhancement isn't good but the current game doesn't give the player many long-term projects to pursue other than blobbing all over the map. There isn't really a satisfying way to play tall in CK3. Playing tall in CK3 currently involves constructing buildings which give you extra resources to fight more wars. It's not very inspired. Reintroducing tributaries from CK2 would have also gone a long way to making tall play better. Tributaries allow you to become a major region hegemon without actually blobbing.

No hint of China in that floor plan which seems to span like 5 years, so I guess that's off the table as possibility, entirely. Too bad.
Glad you liked it! Letting people truly play tall is an on-going project of ours, so all I can say is that we're trying/have plans, though I appreciate that that can still feel frustrating when it might be who know's how long away before we get it really right.

^^' Per the dev diary, expanding to include the rest of the Old World is a thing we'd like to do, so China falls under the "Expanding the Map" room. With a small note that room size is not proportional to priority/projected size - unless it's the British Isles' room being bigger than France's room, in which case it's 100% proportional, and if anything we should get a chunk of France's room to represent the best boi Plantagenet continental possession, Gascony.
Walls: A History of Civilization in Blood and brick, by David Frye
Hmm, interesting. Thanks for the recommendation, I'll check it out!
Automated Warfare - add to PC !
It will help.
For some who are not interested in warfare(maneuvering units) at all, or do not like it, or completely role-playing.
(Please see thread in forum - "Automated Warfare - add to PC")
:) It has been discussed.
I will say that if there is a Byzantine DLC, try not to add too much LARP content. Legions, praetorians, and the old provinces were gone. A restoration of the empire by Byzantium would be fundamentally Greek. What you'd probably see are exarchates or katepanates in regions like Egypt, Africa, and Italy. Restoring the empire would mostly involve expanding these systems to historical Roman lands. Katepanates weren't limited to territories that were far removed from Constantinople - Bulgaria, Macedonia, Armenia, and Antioch (Syria/Mesopotamia) were all under katepanates at one time or another. They were essentially very large civil-military provinces, akin to army commands, that brought together governorates and the forces stationed in them.
Could not agree harder, and I will die on this hill - I'm honestly not a huge fan of the whole "restore Rome" focus the Byzantines have at the moment, even. Byzantine content should be about playing medieval Rome, with medieval Roman content, clothing, mechanics, and focuses, not a weird mishmash of the Principate, the Dominate, and the Ermine Street Guard. They weren't constantly slavering to do Justinian 2.0, and it's missing out on one of the most fascinating dysfunctional-yet-effective societies of the entire period to portray them as nothing but revanchists eternally sad that Romans speak Greek now rather than Latin. *Ahem*. Uhh, yes, +1.
Great dev diary

I apologize because I'm sure this has been asked a million times, but are there any plans for including tournaments in the game?
I believe we've got a couple of people interested in the subject on the team.
 
  • 26Like
  • 16Love
  • 9
  • 1
Reactions:
How do you fit Southern African into a character-based game? The region must have contained fascinating people and rich cultures that would provide a very entertaining experience for CK3 players. Unfortunately, historians badly lack information about individuals south of the Congo basin until the very end of the CK3 era. I would love to be corrected if anyone knows better, but I don't think we know the name of a single person in the Mapungubwe kingdom that was the dominant power in the 11th and 12th centuries. In the Congo basin we have Kongo king lists, but only from the 14th century. I think. Archaeologists have done a great deal to reconstruct these societies and you could borrow a lot from the oral traditions of the Bantu and Khoisan peoples (e.g. for name lists), but not to the level of individuals. You would also have to make some very big assumptions about the mental and cultural life of people in these places. And there was almost no interaction between these societies and the rest of the map (with the important exception of the Swahili towns). The same points could be made about almost all of what we now know as eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East as well.

This would certainly be a challenge, but not unprecedented. There are already many areas of the game world where historical ruler names and dynasties were hard or impossible to come by. We have to make do with what sources have come down to us, and then fill in the gaps in as respectfully a way as we are able, without losing sight of the goal of making compelling gameplay features.
 
  • 13Like
  • 8
Reactions: