• 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.

Dev Diary #109 - Floor Plan for the Future

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:
Wow nice to hear about all this good news :) the next update will be focus on "reinforcing the connection between map and character" Can we Expect have access to a randomize world, be able to choose the duchies capital and finally have the possibility to build great monument in our country capitals ? Also can we Expect to have a bit more choice in our building composition ( like multi decision choice when we update a building or just more different building giving different bonus. May we also expect to have dynamic holy site that allow the faith which are on a big part of the map to be more strong that little or divergent faith. And finally in the ruler personalization will we have access to the horse inside our inventory because it was something really important for a lord to have a good horse

thank in advance for the answer we will have ( if you are allow to give some) and many thanks for this DD really interesting and open to your community

I suspect "reinforcing the connection between map and character" means tracking our character on the map, likely depicting them as a unit on the map, following their movements and the roleplaying will come from what happens as our character travels about and interacts with the other characters travelling about. Maybe you'll share a boat with a count from Bulgaria for example while on a pilgrimage, a character you would never otherwise interact with.
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I suspect "reinforcing the connection between map and character" means tracking our character on the map, likely depicting them as a unit on the map, following their movements and the roleplaying will come from what happens as our character travels about and interacts with the other characters travelling about. Maybe you'll share a boat with a count from Bulgaria for example while on a pilgrimage, a character you would never otherwise interact with.
They already have characters meeting at an Inn. So maybe that's the logical next step
 
  • 3
Reactions:
In theory, they could add Southeast Asia first, then East Asia, instead of both at once. Sure, it would be weird to have Vietnam without China for a while, but not much more so than what we've got right now in the eastern edge of the map.

If they are going to do it, which it seems they are, do it all at once. China, India, Japan, Vietnam, the works. Get it over with. Balance it all as quickly as possible.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I suspect "reinforcing the connection between map and character" means tracking our character on the map, likely depicting them as a unit on the map, following their movements and the roleplaying will come from what happens as our character travels about and interacts with the other characters travelling about. Maybe you'll share a boat with a count from Bulgaria for example while on a pilgrimage, a character you would never otherwise interact with.
This would be great. I sometimes played Civ IV (or possibly II or Freeciv, it was a long time ago) with a mod that placed your leader on the map and it was a huge change. CK2 had this more than CK3 does, but you could go much further.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Still waiting on the post for console.
But while Ill wait any hopes on getting any possibly older (like EU4 ) games on console? Im sure Victoria will join the ranks and as CK3 and Victoria3 are gonna keep your hands full Im sure we wont get an EU5 anytime soon.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Im sure Victoria will join the ranks and as CK3 and Victoria3 are gonna keep your hands full Im sure we wont get an EU5 anytime soon.
Paradox contract out their Console projects, because adapting Paradox-style UIs to work well on console is outside their wheelhouse.

And the reason EU5 isn't happening any time soon is because EU4 has not even been internally declared EOL. (Although it's getting close; it sounds like pretty much all remaining development is going to consist of balance tuning and country flavour.)
 
  • 1
Reactions:
It's nice to see the devs actively responding to people and debating suggestions. It's clear you love Crusader Kings and want to both improve it and listen to what the players want.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
  • 3
  • 2Like
Reactions:
If they are going to do it, which it seems they are, do it all at once. China, India, Japan, Vietnam, the works. Get it over with. Balance it all as quickly as possible.
I think the problem with doing them all at once is that each of them would require an incredible amount of detail that just can't be sidestepped. In China, you'd have to worry about making sure all of your descendants pass the Imperial exams and you'd need extremely chunky Mandate of Heaven mechanics, and in Japan, it would be a little bit odd to sidestep the fact that CK3's timeline covers the establishment of the shogunate. To say nothing of every other region you just mentioned which I unfortunately don't know that much about.

It would be a bit awful to have a massive expansion happen and then have to contend with the fact that every region added is as barren of content as the Steppe, Africa and large swathes of the Islamic world currently are.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
It would be a bit awful to have a massive expansion happen and then have to contend with the fact that every region added is as barren of content as the Steppe, Africa and large swathes of the Islamic world currently are.

So the playerbase is perfectly used to it. Jokes aside, I have no doubt it would massive. Would shogunate not used similar mechanics to feudal?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I think the problem with doing them all at once is that each of them would require an incredible amount of detail that just can't be sidestepped. In China, you'd have to worry about making sure all of your descendants pass the Imperial exams and you'd need extremely chunky Mandate of Heaven mechanics, and in Japan, it would be a little bit odd to sidestep the fact that CK3's timeline covers the establishment of the shogunate. To say nothing of every other region you just mentioned which I unfortunately don't know that much about.

It would be a bit awful to have a massive expansion happen and then have to contend with the fact that every region added is as barren of content as the Steppe, Africa and large swathes of the Islamic world currently are.

But the counterpoint to that is that these regions would be interconnected.

Say they begin by introducing Southeast Asia first. Then once they introduce China, they would have to go back and redo SE Asia so that any mechanics which dealt with China in the abstract would have to be revisited. You are making a rod for your own back at that stage are you not, you've broken the additions into smaller bites but if each bite has to be regurgitated and re-examined, what you have gained?

In my opinion what is required is focus and honesty rather than a piecemeal approach. Yes, introduce the entire landmass of East Asia at once. But focus on THE critical landmass, China. Make it clear that it's the china expansion. Communicate with the player base that China will be the region that will be getting the attention as a priority (considering the outsized impact it would have on the others, this seems the only way it can be approached). If time allows, develop unique mechanics for as many distinct regions as possible but make clear anything not covered will be subject for future development.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Would shogunate not used similar mechanics to feudal?
Sure, the Kawakura and Ashikaga periods can reasonably be called feudal.

However, at both of CK3's start dates, which lie in the Heian period, Japanese government was (notionally) modelled on Tang dynasty China, the offices of Barbarian-Subduing Generalissimo and Imperial Regent were distinct in both fact and law, and the regime was not yet feudal.

The Kawakura period, when the two offices became inseparable in fact and the structure of Japanese land tenure and military organization had become clearly feudal, began in the late 12th century.

(It's also worth noting that in 867, the Japanese central government had no control at all over significant parts of the island of Honshu.)
 
  • 2
Reactions:
So if the floor map is anything to go by, the devs basically want to re-do CK3 from scratch ...

Thanks but no thanks. I am definitively leaving the CK3 train.
 
  • 9
  • 2Haha
Reactions:
Sure, the Kawakura and Ashikaga periods can reasonably be called feudal.

However, at both of CK3's start dates, which lie in the Heian period, Japanese government was (notionally) modelled on Tang dynasty China, the offices of Barbarian-Subduing Generalissimo and Imperial Regent were distinct in both fact and law, and the regime was not yet feudal.

The Kawakura period, when the two offices became inseparable in fact and the structure of Japanese land tenure and military organization had become clearly feudal, began in the late 12th century.

(It's also worth noting that in 867, the Japanese central government had no control at all over significant parts of the island of Honshu.)
My understanding is also that most of the Heian aristocracy lived in Kyoto, and to be posted elsewhere in Japan was tantamount to exile. Aristocrats did not manage the land they "owned" on location but delegated that task to subordinates. The system wasn't "feudal" (itself a vague term) but it wasn't quite as strictly bureaucratic as in China either. Feudal contracts as they work in CK3 may not be entirely inappropriate, with some modifications. Conrad Totman explains how this works in his book Japan before Perry (where he also calls the Nara and Heian periods "An Age of Aristocratic Bureaucracy"):
By [794], Fujiwara and other aristocratic families had begun to use the same legal devices as the monasteries to acquire and enlarge estates of their own. The aristocrats succeeded, moreover, in gradually altering the land-holding regulations so as to give themselves tax advantages and eventually total tax immunity. They also acquired administrative authority over their estates, which came to be known as shōen, and managed them through family offices called mandokoro.

Shōen must not be confused with "estates" as known in other societies. Most shōen were tracts of agricultural land within which were found some paddies, dry fields, or forest land that belonged to others. Holders of shōen were not rural gentry living in manor houses but aristocrats, most of whom lived in Heian, or monasteries or shrines whose headquarters were in the vicinity of Nara-Heian. Commonly a large-scale holder possessed several shōen scattered about central Japan. Shōen were not "owned" in the sense of an owner holding title free and clear with unrestricted rights of purchase and sale. Rather, a shōen holder held an imperial government charter identifying the boundaries of his lands and the limits of his tax liability and administrative authorities in those lands. A shōen holder, whether aristocratic family, monastery or shrine, thus was in effect a chartered corporate body empowered to administer the affairs of its own estates, subject only to the limitations written into its charter.

[...]

Exercising on their shōen a limited authority derived from specific imperial decrees, aristocratic families, monasteries, and shrines gradually assumed the real functions of government. During the ninth and tenth centuries, mandokoro and associated organs in the family mansions in Heian took over functions that formerly had been vested in central-provincial-district offices of the imperial government: administering the populace, collecting taxes as estate rents, and keeping the peace by use of mercenary forces. They were becoming de facto governmental bodies themselves.
Something else that would by necessity have to be distinct from the Chinese system is the treatment of the Japanese emperor and how to depict the Fujiwara regency. For a while, I have been entertaining the idea of writing a post speculating on how East Asia could be depicted mechanically in CK3, for fun if nothing else. With the developers expressing their desire to get to that part of the world eventually, I may get around to it sooner rather than later.
 
  • 4Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Sure, the Kawakura and Ashikaga periods can reasonably be called feudal.

However, at both of CK3's start dates, which lie in the Heian period, Japanese government was (notionally) modelled on Tang dynasty China, the offices of Barbarian-Subduing Generalissimo and Imperial Regent were distinct in both fact and law, and the regime was not yet feudal.

The Kawakura period, when the two offices became inseparable in fact and the structure of Japanese land tenure and military organization had become clearly feudal, began in the late 12th century.

(It's also worth noting that in 867, the Japanese central government had no control at all over significant parts of the island of Honshu.)

Not sure you can reasonably expect the game to reflect a change in government for a culture. Or at least not one unique just to that culture. Because the same arguments can be made about Europe and the feudalism doesnt accurately represent reality everywhere at all times from 867 to 1453. Compromise is needed.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Something else that would by necessity have to be distinct from the Chinese system is the treatment of the Japanese emperor and how to depict the Fujiwara regency.

What we really need is a more modular system for government, landholding etc similar or connected to culture.
 
  • 5
Reactions: