• 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 #91 - Altering the Alps and Idealizing Italy

Hello there! I hope everyone’s summer is going well, and that you are as excited for this week’s Dev Diary as I am to write it!


As I mentioned last time, this week we are going to take a look at the area around the Alps, as well as take a look at Italy. For our first preview, we will take a look at the western Alps, around the Kingdom of Burgundy, southern Germany and northern Italy.


Keep in mind that not all the changes are finalized, so there might be more updates before everything goes live. All the pictures will be taken from 1066 and with De Jure map modes, so things might look somewhat different in other bookmarks.

Clipboard01.png


Clipboard02.png


So the first change we will be talking about is the changes to the County of Burgundy. We have cut it up, and made it into its own Duchy (of Franche Comté). The old Duchy of Upper Burgundy has lost its headway into the Swiss heartlands as well, moving the county of Schwyz (old Grisons), Zurichgau (old Schwyz) and Thurgau (old St. Gallen) into the new Duchy of Upper Swabia. In the later starting date, they will be part of the Duchy of Switzerland instead of Upper Swabia, a change that can happen throughout a game as well.

The county of Vaud has been added to the game, to the old Duchy of Upper Burgundy, cut out of certain parts of Geneva and Neuchatel. The final noticeable change on this side of the Alps, is that we have added Aosta to the mountains between Savoy and Italy.

For that part of the Alps, we wanted to make smaller changes, cut up some of the larger provinces and fix a lot of the barony errors and some of the county errors (see Schwyz further up the text). It was important for us to try and fix a lot of these minor issues, as it felt weird seeing some areas so misplaced on the map.

On the other side of the Alps, we have cut up some of the larger provinces. Monferrato has been cut up to make room for Ivrea, Lombardy has been cut up to make room for Milano, Como and Leventina, and Genoa has been cut up to make room for Noli.

Clipboard03.png


Clipboard04.png


We can start out in Italy, where we left off from the previous picture. Trent has been turned into its own minor Duchy, opening up Brenner Pass between Bozen and Innsbruck. Innsbruck and Tirol has moved a bit westwards, to make room for Pongau as part of the new Duchy of Salzburg. In Bavaria, we have added the county of Regensburg, as it was the capital of the Duchy for quite a while, and we wanted to see that reflected in the game. Passau has also been moved into the Duchy.

To the east, Austria has gotten quite the rework. We have added Traungau, Steyr Freistadt, Krems and Melk as Counties, moved Znojmo into Bohemia and Passau, as previously mentioned, into Bavaria, and Styria has been moved south into its own Duchy. The Duchy of Carinthia has been cut up into Carinthia and Carniola, and the Duchy of Friuli has been added around Aquileia.

Clipboard05.png


Clipboard06.png


So for our last location, we have central Italy. I figure I will talk about the mountains first, as we have added parts of the Apennines throughout Italy. We’ve felt this has increased the tactical value of Italy somewhat, as the choices you make for movement and county conquering feels a bit more valuable, and we also felt it cut up the county more nicely, particularly considering the new Kingdom we added in central Italy (this will be discussed further down).

We have added Perugia into the Duchy of Spoleto, moving the whole Duchy a bit further north. Rimini has been added to the Duchy of Ancona, turned the two county Duchy into a three county one, to lessen the amount of chokepoints post-mountainfication.For the old county of Aprutium, we have turned it into the Duchy of Abruzzo and moved it into the Kingdom of Sicily. And we have taken parts of the old County of Firenze, and added the county of Arezzo, to make sure Firenze doesn’t stick its fingers into everyone else, as it has had a tendency to do.

Clipboard07.png


So for what I assume will be the most controversial change to the region, the two new Kingdoms added.

For Carinthia, it felt weird giving even more land to a Kingdom that is meant to reflect the historical Stem-Duchy of Bavaria, when we have the Principality of Carantania, the March of Carinthia and later on the Duchy of Carinthia as inspiration that could take the same role. We have made sure, as this is quite the small Kingdom with a lot of land held by the same person in some bookmarked starts, that the AI won’t create the Kingdom right away, so it should be more of a player goal than an AI goal.

And… For Romagna, we wanted to cut Italy into its more historical pieces, without adding a Kingdom called “the Papal States” that was only for an unplayable Theocracy. This was done for several reason: having the Pope try to seek out central Italy as he did throughout history, having the old East Roman areas be more difficult to hold onto for the Kingdom of Italy in the first bookmarks, and to lessen the massive size of the Kingdom of Italy.

So I hope the Dev Diary didn’t get too wordy this time around, and that people can learn to love the changes made to the region! Next time around, we will have a (probably smaller) Dev Diary about the changes made to Holy Orders in Holy Fury!

PS. For those of you with an interest in the Habsburg jaw and the Archduchy of Austria, we have something special for you as well! (A special decision to create the Archduchy.)

Clipboard01.png
 
Last edited:
- I understand that making Papal State more proactive comes from gaming needs, but I don't think the best way to do that would be to create an artificial kingdom of Romagna with very little sense (unless you recover Byzantine terms that were already extinct from 300 hundreds years... Following the same reasoning you should consider Sardinia and Corsica as part of the Kingdom of Africa!). At this point I think it would be better to create some form of "donation" system where if a bordering catholic duke dies heirless the dukedom would find Papal State as new liege if the Catholic authority is high enough (maybe with a succesive event chain for the new duke that could accept the situation or rebel).
This wasn't exactly what happened. Actually the best representation for what happened is ck2 Crusade system - Pope asked help of fellow christian king to conquer former lands of Ravenna Exarchate from Langobards, and said lands were granted to Pope.

- IMHO I don't think the Kingdom of Italy should be split: it was historically a land so huge that was "only a geographical expression" until XIX century and forming it is one of the most fun challenges in the game (well, unless you start with Matilde and marry well... ;)
That wasn't a matter of size, but a matter of politics. By no means in 1814 (when this phrase was written) Italy was a biggest region in Europe.
 
I think the problem with redesigning Italy is the fact that history took a really weird turn that makes almost no sense once converted in CK2 terms:
- I understand that making Papal State more proactive comes from gaming needs, but I don't think the best way to do that would be to create an artificial kingdom of Romagna with very little sense (unless you recover Byzantine terms that were already extinct from 300 hundreds years... Following the same reasoning you should consider Sardinia and Corsica as part of the Kingdom of Africa!). At this point I think it would be better to create some form of "donation" system where if a bordering catholic duke dies heirless the dukedom would find Papal State as new liege if the Catholic authority is high enough (maybe with a succesive event chain for the new duke that could accept the situation or rebel).
- IMHO I don't think the Kingdom of Italy should be split: it was historically a land so huge that was "only a geographical expression" until XIX century and forming it is one of the most fun challenges in the game (well, unless you start with Matilde and marry well... ;)
- Another welcome change would be to split the various italian cultures and maybe include some form of strife between guephs and ghibellines (something like the arabic and darmic schools could be a decent start... or use factions, or cults, something please!).

Bottom line: I understand that the need to monetize pushes for newer and fancier DLS but right now the italian peninsula is one of the most overlooked areas of the game, and these map changes are a small step, and not in the right direction.

You mean like... 18 years rather than 300 right? Last Exarch was put to death 18 years before the 769 start.
 
I may have a better solution. If you want to split Italy why don't you do it with the now titular kingdoms of Pisa and Genoa instead of pulling kingdoms out of a magician's hat? Italy is already the land of republican thought. Why not making these realms de jure?
 
This wasn't exactly what happened. Actually the best representation for what happened is ck2 Crusade system - Pope asked help of fellow christian king to conquer former lands of Ravenna Exarchate from Langobards, and said lands were granted to Pope.
...Still a better solution (that could be applied also to the Norman conquest of Sicily) than the Kingdom of Ravenna
That wasn't a matter of size, but a matter of politics. By no means in 1814 (when this phrase was written) Italy was a biggest region in Europe.
I am very aware of the Italian history and the context of the Metternick's remark... But I still think that claiming the Iron Crown is a fun challenge in CK2.
You mean like... 18 years rather than 300 right? Last Exarch was put to death 18 years before the 769 start.
The pictures and post refer to 1066 start.
(and, as a personal note, for how much i love The Old Gods i think the Carolingian start it's really the definition of trying to extract blood from a stone)
 
Holy wow I never expected so many of my custom de jure changes I make after every update would get implemented into the base game! Italy looks great.

I don't know how I feel about Carinthia as a kingdom and being the size it is; any situation where you have to discourage the AI from forming a kingdom is suboptimal in my opinion, but I don't know that there's a great solution until the amazing and glorious CK3 system which allows an unformed kingdom's de jure area to overlap with that of another kingdom. Which totally will exist and is not just something I made up. For what it's worth, I'll probably move Verona and maybe Trent into it in my games, but that's probably not very historic.
 
It makes no sense to call the remnant of the Italy 'Italy', this makes no sense at all!

It would be like having a kingdom called Spain and having it only cover the northern part of Iberia.

Please rename it to something more accurate like Lombardy/Lombardia or Padania. That way Italy is only represented as the empire of Italia. Alternatively, have a decision create the kingdom of Italy instead of they control enough territory. Or have it trigger by event or something.

Rename it yourself.
 
- IMHO I don't think the Kingdom of Italy should be split: it was historically a land so huge that was "only a geographical expression" until XIX century and forming it is one of the most fun challenges in the game (well, unless you start with Matilde and marry well... ;)

But that's why we already have the Empire of Italia.
 
Turning the current Duchy level "Petty Kingdoms" of Wessex, Northumbria, Mercia and maybe even East Anglia into proper Kingoms and adding a decission in which an Anglosaxon/English/Norman ruler holding them could merge them into the Kingdom of England would be perfect, in a similar way to the "Become Samrat Chakravartin" event which forms India.
I'm afraid that can cause issues with de-jure territory for empires. Also the reason of my thoughts here isn't so historical but gamey - problem is that England in current shape and development is the only power in Brittania. It consists of 9 duchies (all other imperial kingdoms of Britannia have 15 duchies, including Mann: Wales - 4, Scotland - 6 with Mann, Ireland - 5), and this english duchies are pre-feudalised and have decent number of holding slots. As welsh counties are low-holdings, and Scottish/Irish are not only low-holdings, but tribal as well, I really, really feel things unbalanced.
Same reason I'm up for splitting Italy or France. After all, we're speaking about technical division of the map, so they would work for mechanics first; how they would be named or what banner should they have is, for me, secondary issue here.

...Still a better solution (that could be applied also to the Norman conquest of Sicily) than the Kingdom of Ravenna
I'm not sure. After all, we're speaking about technicals here - how would game define this territories (that's why I'm not using capital letters in "kingdom" and "king").
At 1066 this lands should be on Papal rule anyway, and I don't think Emperor (or vassal king of Italy) should have de-jure claim on them. And even then you'll need to separate this lands from, for instance, kingdom of Italy, to allow some lands to be granted to Pope, and others to feudal rulers (or being untouched at all). It would demand big scripting or it would be hardly railroaded, and both is bad. Otherwise, I believe no actual arguments was risen here AGAINST kingdom of Romagna (call it what's you like), besides personal preferences. What bad would happen?
About "artificial kingdoms"... well. It was more or less separate entity (until you're hardcore pro-Imperial) for the whole game timeframe. It wasn't "Kingdom of Something", but it was politically separated (again, more or less). That's already justify it's separation.

But I still think that claiming the Iron Crown is a fun challenge in CK2.
Never noticed. But, well, it's a matter of tastes.
Anyway, Iron Crown achievement have nothing about Italy or uniting Kingdom of Italy. You can go for any kingdom.
 
Looks like you guys are on a roll when it comes to cutting up large de jure kingdoms. Persia, Arabia, Mesopotamia, and now Italy.

Considering that, I highly suggest cutting Greece up. It will turn from one of the strongest kingdoms into one of the most oppressive, now that Italy, Persia and Mesopotamia are weaker.
 
I'm not sure. After all, we're speaking about technicals here - how would game define this territories (that's why I'm not using capital letters in "kingdom" and "king").
At 1066 this lands should be on Papal rule anyway, and I don't think Emperor (or vassal king of Italy) should have de-jure claim on them. And even then you'll need to separate this lands from, for instance, kingdom of Italy, to allow some lands to be granted to Pope, and others to feudal rulers (or being untouched at all). It would demand big scripting or it would be hardly railroaded, and both is bad. Otherwise, I believe no actual arguments was risen here AGAINST kingdom of Romagna (call it what's you like), besides personal preferences. What bad would happen?
About "artificial kingdoms"... well. It was more or less separate entity (until you're hardcore pro-Imperial) for the whole game timeframe. It wasn't "Kingdom of Something", but it was politically separated (again, more or less). That's already justify it's separation.
The point I stated in my earlier post is that this is a step in the wrong direction to improve the "hystoricallity" of an area that is in the desperate need of an overhaul: during the years a lot of different systems were implemented, any of them could be used to improve the situation in a better way than including a pseudo-random de-jure Kingdom.
Never noticed. But, well, it's a matter of tastes.
Anyway, Iron Crown achievement have nothing about Italy or uniting Kingdom of Italy. You can go for any kingdom.
It was a figure of speech: i was refering to this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Crown_of_Lombardy (that IIRC it is also a relic in the game)
 
Nice to see the rework of Italy! It gives me hopes to see a rework of Iberia soon. It would also be nice to have some ways to keep historical the Umayyads and their collapse in the XI century, instead of either expanding aggressively or collapsing to catholic rebels.
 
I understand the need for Romagna if it's for Pope programming.

I don't understand the need, logic or reasons for making Carinthia it's own kingdom.

The Duchy of Carinthia was the same rank as the Stem Duchy of Bavaria. It makes sense.
 
The pictures and post refer to 1066 start.
(and, as a personal note, for how much i love The Old Gods i think the Carolingian start it's really the definition of trying to extract blood from a stone)

And yet overarching game design is made with the full time bracket, and the intermediate time between bookmarks, in consideration. Give that, it makes perfect sense for Romagna (regardless of name) to be a de jure kingdom because under Papal control it was essentially a kingdom (just not a secular one) and when it wasn't under papal control, they would have been striving for it. At any given time most de jure Empires and a sizable portion of the Kingdoms aren't actually in effect.

Preference/antipathy towards a start date doesn't come into it.

Although I will say that Paradox 100% needs to add a motte-and-bailey to stone castle upgrade because currently that makes zero sense for start dates up to and including 1066.