Hi folks!

It's been a while, and I bet you're all wondering what we've been up to... Now, I can't reveal anything about the upcoming expansion quite yet, but, to tide you over, I thought I'd talk a bit about our other efforts. As you know, with every expansion comes a slew of free improvements and fixes. This time the focus has been on the latter; clearing up old bugs and issues (the change log is currently 620 lines long). Sometimes, that has required us to do some fairly major code rewrites. For example, we got rid of the rule that your 'government type' was determined by the type of your Capital Holding. (You know how it was game over when you got a Temple Holding as a capital, even for a tiny period? Well, now that kind of thing cannot happen anymore.) The government form is now something more persistent, and can have various rules that override those of your religion (whether you can raid, take concubines, etc.) To go along with this change, we also reworked the portrait frames to clearly distinguish between the various government forms.

In a similar vein, almost since release we've been plagued by bugs with characters leading multiple regiments and/or flanks, which could even cause crashes. Part of the problem was that the whole system was rather strange, so we decided to consolidate it in the following way: only the ruler, the Marshal and characters you have appointed Commander (a new title) can lead flanks or your own demesne and retinue regiments. Vassal levy regiments can still be led by your loyal vassals, but a character can never both lead a flank and a regiment. Mercenaries become more useful because they come with their own, good, leaders. Flank leaders apply their martial bonus to all regiments in the flank. Oh, and the combat system has been updated under the hood to correct various quirks that few people ever noticed, but which could sometimes cause never-ending battles and such.

In the process of implementing the new Commander title, we decided we might as well throw in a more convenient Honorary Title view. This is a perfect example of how what starts as a simple bug fix can turn into a whole new little quality-of-life feature. In this whole house cleaning process, we've also made some serious optimizations to the speed and memory usage of the game.

To finish off, here are some random snippets from the change log:

Spoiler

- Revised the pagan Subjugation CB so that it completely subjugates the target but no Holdings ever change hands
- Added "Stop Seduction" and "Stop Spying" decisions
- Failing to imprison vassals of vassals now correctly forces them to abdicate and flee the realm
- AI will not join wars against spouse
- When your heir has an equal tier title to yours, _your_ laws are now copied to his primary title on succession
- Character Finder: The 'Married' filter now excludes concubines too
- Character Finder: Councillors now correctly show up too!
- Fixed a problem with allies of vassals staying in the war when the vassals's liege joins the other side
- Fixed some cases of ANY_ALL in location tooltips
- Duels now potentially give the Kinslayer trait
- The Yazidi Sheikh and Hurufi Caliph now have access to the Muslim subjugation CB and the Jihad CB
- The Paulician faith can now properly mend the schism
- The Hashshashins can now resurface after being scattered
- Fixed some issues with 'excommunication' for Yazidis
- Sons with traits blocking them from inheritance no longer count as "unlanded sons", causing prestige loss
- AI: Toned down seduction by characters with many children
- AI: Toned down impregnation chances for seduction affairs with characters with many children
- Handsome and lustful men now also populate the cabins in the wild for the pleasures of people who find them attractive

That's all for now, but from now on, we plan to post a dev diary every Tuesday, even if it's a short one!

 

[ngppgn]

You might be right about the relationship between the religion... but Jesus in the Quran is more than an cameo character in it. They still believe in his virginal birth. And while God wasn't his father God was the one who created Jesus in Mary's body.

ANd Jesus will be the one who will slay the false Messiah

And Muhammad need not be a historical author of the quranic text, sice copies (parts of) it date back to the fifth century at the very least. Any argument counting on Muhammads intention is a petitio principii.

But this is derailing the thread a bit too much.

 

[_Santiago_]

I just hope this expansion will finally bring about the option for certain duchy-tier titles to turn into republics by a players decision (and I don't even dare to ask for inland republics to be included here). Just a simple decision. That is all.

 

[Sahraine]

*Tears of joy*

I will continue to buy anything that comes out for this game..until the end of time.

 

[TheDungen]

I just hope this expansion will finally bring about the option for certain duchy-tier titles to turn into republics by a players decision (and I don't even dare to ask for inland republics to be included here). Just a simple decision. That is all.

Well the thing is it doesn't make that much sense why would a feudal lord with nigh absolute power over his lands ceade that power to a republic (which is ironic since in game republics are actually better than feudal states). It would be better with it being handled by events where you have an option to create a republic as the result of being faced with some crisis or something. It could ether be made specific to some historical republics or they could place it as an event chain under the buisness focus. Obviously when creating a republic the 4 most powerful vassals should become the Patricians.

Been trying to mod that but the creation of the particians is hardcoded. Kind of like the grant viceroy/title decions. If you get what I'm trying to say paradox.

 

[_Santiago_]

Well the thing is it doesn't make that much sense why would a feudal lord with nigh absolute power over his lands ceade that power to a republic (which is ironic since in game republics are actually better than feudal states). It would be better with it being handled by events where you have an option to create a republic as the result of being faced with some crisis or something. It could ether be made specific to some historical republics or they could place it as an event chain under the buisness focus. Obviously when creating a republic the 4 most powerful vassals should become the Patricians.

Damn now I feel compelled to write a mod that does this.

Well yours is a nice idea,but I'm rather just talking about giving people an option to do this,if they want to (I know I would like to,and I'm sure there are others). I often prefer to distance myself from the "rabbit hole" that is comparing our real world history with what Crusader Kings can simulate,that's a dangerous path.

 

[MishaTX]

The AI doesn't revoke your titles unless it has a reason to.

I know. Much like the AI always has a very good reason for seducing anything with the Attractive trait, whether it be a local courtier or their liege Emperor's wife, not to mention the logical restraint the AI shows when AIs with the Intrigue focus chooses who to kidnap/assassinate.

 

[TheDungen]

Well yours is a nice idea,but I'm rather just talking about giving people an option to do this,if they want to (I know I would like to,and I'm sure there are others). I often prefer to distance myself from the "rabbit hole" that is comparing our real world history with what Crusader Kings can simulate,that's a dangerous path.

Doesn't mean it couldn't be handled in a more immersive way than a simple desicion. For an example, make the decion "Invite Republican thinker", which leads to an event chain about your nobles pressuring you into converting to a republic. The name of the decision makes it perfectly obvious what it is, but it still doesn't totally break the immersion.

Though I still would like it linked to the lifepath system, it feels a bit underwhelming as it is and anything added to it would be great.

I know. Much like the AI always has a very good reason for seducing anything with the Attractive trait, whether it be a local courtier or their liege Emperor's wife, not to mention the logical restraint the AI shows when AIs with the Intrigue focus chooses who to kidnap/assassinate.

Who said good reason, I said reason. And it does have a reason because it's a machine and it follows a specific proceedure when doing these things. That said the AI do spam the WoL targeted decisions a little to much.
I really cant find out how it handles revokations because like giving out titles revoking them is again a hardcoded decision.

 

[fanoI]

Why a King would want to become voluntary a Doge losing de facto all his powers (historically the Doge of Venice was a figurehead nothing more!)? Why the nobles would to force him to do this (in a Republic the nobles would held no powers too!)? The only possible Republican paths IMHO are these:

1. Noble Republic similar to an Elective Monarchy but the elected Monarch has no real powers all powers being in the nobles who controls him. That is: autonomous vassals and lower demesne limit.
2. Constitutional Monarchy as happened in England when the Barons imposed the Magna Charta to the King. A Republic in which the First Minister is elected with the King as a figurehead
3. A proper Republic this could happens only via revolutions but the King should be forced to abdicate and the leader of the revolution should become the head of State. Historically you would have been gone in exile (maybe in the court of your cousin the King of France) but you will be landless so... Game Over again!

 

[Thure]

Constitutional Monarchy as happened in England when the Barons imposed the Magna Charta to the King. A Republic in which the First Minister is elected with the King as a figurehead

Which is out of game timeline... The Magna Carta was more like a faction to lower Crown Authority than the attempt to establish a Noble Republic...

 

[TheDungen]

Why a King would want to become voluntary a Doge losing de facto all his powers (historically the Doge of Venice was a figurehead nothing more!)? Why the nobles would to force him to do this (in a Republic the nobles would held no powers too!)? The only possible Republican paths IMHO are these:

1. Noble Republic similar to an Elective Monarchy but the elected Monarch has no real powers all powers being in the nobles who controls him. That is: autonomous vassals and lower demesne limit.
2. Constitutional Monarchy as happened in England when the Barons imposed the Magna Charta to the King. A Republic in which the First Minister is elected with the King as a figurehead
3. A proper Republic this could happens only via revolutions but the King should be forced to abdicate and the leader of the revolution should become the head of State. Historically you would have been gone in exile (maybe in the court of your cousin the King of France) but you will be landless so... Game Over again!

Yeah but the republics of the CK2 era aren't that kind of republics, they are patrician republics, like rome. Where the partician families are nobles by any other name.
Most of the republic in CK2 are italian and none of those happened through revolution. Simply be the fact that the power of the cities came to eclipse the power of the lords (who in these cases weren't really feudal). The only other 'republic' is the hansa who wasn't actually a republic as much as a coalition of small republics. Mostly free imperial cities. These again didn't come to be through revolution but being given relative autonomy by the feudal lieges and then growing to eclipse the local nobility.

Which is out of game timeline... The Magna Carta was more like a faction to lower Crown Authority than the attempt to establish a Noble Republic...

Actually the english push towards a 'parlimentary' system is well within the era. England always had a diffrent form of feudalism. It has it's root in the round table of all things, or well the thing that inspired the round table. In the breton and welsh culture the king and his closest men would discuss things sitting in a circle signifying the idea that as long as the discussion lasted they were all equals. This system of the nobles co ruling the realm with some measure of equality is probably a big part of why england ended up with the system it did. Dealing with the issues relating to this is what england was doing for most of the ck2 era. And it's not currently well represented. Also the british isles should start of as tribal in the early starts. Perhaps even in some of the later ones. They weren't really feudal (in the gameplay sense of the word, in reality the tribal ringforts are as feudal as feudal gets) until the normans took over.

 

[Thure]

Yeah but the republics of the CK2 era aren't that kind of republics, they are patrician republics, like rome. Where the partician families are nobles by any other name.

In the case of the Hansa this is wrong But yes, it's based on this concept ingame.

 

[TheDungen]

In the case of the Hansa this is wrong But yes, it's based on this concept ingame.

Even the hansa is not the kind of republic he speaks of. The cities were granted autonomy by higher lieges trying to weaken their feudal vassals. And eventualy grew so powerful that they eclipsed their former feudal lieges. Then they banded together and formed the hansa.

But yeah the CK2 republic system is based on the italian ones. The hansa didn't have patricians like that, it's counterpart should be member cities. Each whohc should function kind of like a republic in their own right.

Granted my idea rings ahistorical too, but it's not unbelivable that the nobles might sue for cogoverning a duchy. That's kind of close to what happened in some of the italian cases. Except those weren't really feudal per se either.

 

[Zolotaya]

Again that makes every role aside from the emperor unplayable.

Not necessarily. You do not need to resort to the console or exploitative play to play as a d_level viceroy now and if something was going to be introduced regarding c_level viceroys, the system would need to be fleshed out and include more mechanics than it does currently.

An example of something that I'd consider is the "assignment" of certain c_level viceroy titles to the powerful dynasties within the ERE. This would need to be mapped out and designed properly for it to work within the existing game but it is something that is a possibility.

For the last two postings I've been speaking from a future developmental perspective regarding c_level viceroys. This does not mean that I see this realistically happening.

Edit:

The Magna Carta was more like a faction to lower Crown Authority than the attempt to establish a Noble Republic...

The Magna Carta was related to the type of feudalism unique in England and while it had no connection to establishing a Noble Republic (which is the part of your statement I agree with) the analogy to the game mechanic of lowering Crown Authority is also not correct.

 

[TheDungen]

Not necessarily. You do not need to resort to the console or exploitative play to play as a d_level viceroy now and if something was going to be introduced regarding c_level viceroys, the system would need to be fleshed out and include more mechanics than it does currently.

An example of something that I'd consider is the "assignment" of certain c_level viceroy titles to the powerful dynasties within the ERE. This would need to be mapped out and designed properly for it to work within the existing game but it is something that is a possibility.

For the last two postings I've been speaking from a future developmental perspective regarding c_level viceroys. This does not mean that I see this realistically happening.

If counties remain as they are with a viceroy function then at the death of your character the viceoraity will return to the liege bumping you to the most powerful member of your family. At the start of the game, unless you are very agggressive in landing your sons, that is no one and you game over. Note that taking a county inside the empire won't help more than momentarily since usurping a viceroyality doesnt cause it to stop being a viceroyality.

 

[fanoI]

All depends how much the Republican system is moddable so all these discussions could not make sense but these could be the possible governments of the Medieval Republics on the CK2 timeline:

1. Consular Republic (limited period): similar to the Roman model with a sort of Senate ad with Consuls (probably two) as head of State. They surely not ruled for life and new Elections were held any 6 month / 1 year. Probably to make the thing less annoying the election should be any 5 years... in a CK2 year at speed 5X I do practically nothing. These would represent Genoa (until 1339), Pisa and I'd think the other Italian Communes well.
2. Patrician Republic (rules for life): the Venetian model then used by Genoa from 1339. Practically the one Paradox implemented for "The Republic" DLC but IMHO 5 Patrician houses are too little and the elective system does not make really sense (too much easy to seize the Republic).
3. Patrician Republic (limited period): modified version by Genoa of the Venetian system because for them the puppet held too much power in any case!
   
4. Signoria (rules for life, hereditary succession): a "Patrician Republic" that goes bad in which a Patrician family takes so much power that in the end he seizes effectively the Republic. The other four patricians families will remain trying desperately to change the government form to a more "Republican" one while the Signore strive to be recognized as a proper noble (from the Pope and / or the Holy Roman Emperor) putting the definitive end to the Republic. Historical examples: Commune of Milan / Signoria of Milan, Commune of Florence / Signoria of Florence, with Andrea Doria this happened in Genoa too but it is really out of timeline and was more "subtle"
5. Merchant League / City Confederation: this is the model used by the Hansa any City has his proper government (they could be different too) the head of State (Burgomaster?) is elected between his pairs to be the head of the League. Technically any decision should be taken collegially by a Diet. This model should represent the Hanseatic League.
6. Noble Republic (rules for life): as the names imply a Republic of Nobles - not Patricians - that elect between themselves their leader. The difference between an Elective Monarchy is really is subtle and it is in laws I'd say: the elected ruler has really little power that is the crown should be autonomous vassals and cannot be ever changed and probably he should have demesne penalties (to avoid that he tries to overcome his limitation acquiring lands), the nobles can rule cities tough. This is Poland as the time of "the Golden Liberty" (out of timeline) and stretching it a bit could represent the government of Kiev.

While the change from Republic to Monarchy could be a player decision (as it this that the Medici and others "Patricians" did historically) I don't see how to change from Monarchy to Republic could be a player decision: you are playing a noble house why you should degrade yourself to be a merchant? The Italian Republics maybe does not appeared via revolutions but for a power vacuum of the feudal lord themselves (de facto was HRE that lose power) and in the end because the Emperors seen them as more controllable that the nobles themselves, a complex situation that I don't think can be simulated in game... for sure a part for the Noble Republic the feudal noble should abdicate all his titles (Game Over)!

 

[Zolotaya]

If counties remain as they are

I've stated from the original post you quoted me to the latest that if c_level viceroys were to be implemented change would ensue.

Let me poke a few holes into your assertion, nevertheless, just for giggles:

with a viceroy function then at the death of your character the viceoraity will return to the liege bumping you to the most powerful member of your family. At the start of the game, unless you are very agggressive in landing your sons, that is no one and you game over. Note that taking a county inside the empire won't help more than momentarily since usurping a viceroyality doesnt cause it to stop being a viceroyality.

• Taking a county outside of the ERE borders as a normal feudal title via claim will secure your play through quite easily. This can be accomplished without console or exploitative play.
• Securing all baronies within a county (assuming it is a feudal holding title) will ensure the county viceroy is given to your heir, one way or another. This assumes that the c_level viceroy mechanics work the same as the d_level viceroy mechanics do. Again you are not resorting to console or exploitative play.
  
• Acquiring a normal feudal title by marriage is quite simple to do and again is not exploitative or resorting to the console.

Acquiring titles by marriage is not "very aggressive" and is expected and even is an encouraged play-style within the current game. Nothing exploitative about it.

 

[TheDungen]

• Taking a county outside of the ERE borders as a normal feudal title via claim will secure your play through quite easily. This can be accomplished without console or exploitative play.
• Securing all baronies within a county (assuming it is a feudal holding title) will ensure the county viceroy is given to your heir, one way or another. This assumes that the c_level viceroy mechanics work the same as the d_level viceroy mechanics do. Again you are not resorting to console or exploitative play.
  
• Acquiring a normal feudal title by marriage is quite simple to do and again is not exploitative or resorting to the console.

Acquiring titles by marriage is not "very aggressive" and is expected and even is an encouraged play-style within the current game. Nothing exploitative about it.

• For a one province count to take a county outside the ERE isn't all that easy. Most indapendant realms are at least duchies, also you'd have to fabricate a claim unless you happen to be on the border because you cn only holy war adjecent. Not undoable but cumbersome.
  
• Barons aren't playable You Game Over before they hand out the viceroy county.
  
• Yes and will place you outside of the ERE so you can't play inside the ERE you can start inside the ERE and then after your first character you get booted out.
  
  You could however play duchies for a longer time. Revoke a county hand it over to a family member. When you die you switch to that count. Then you usurp the duchy and revoke a count and keep going like that.
  
  Again all these force you to play against a system which is a total immersion breaker.

 

[Damarrocarion]

Taking a county outside of the ERE borders as a normal feudal title via claim will secure your play through quite easily. This can be accomplished without console or exploitative play. Acquiring titles by marriage is not "very aggressive" and is expected and even is an encouraged play-style within the current game. Nothing exploitative about it.

Two things:

1: What if you want to play in fairly central part of ERE, you still have to grab a piece of land from some a.se-end bit of the world just to escape from c_viceroyalty
2: What if you start with no heir? Then you are looking for at least 20 years or so before you can start playing marriage game, by the time your county could well be revoked. And of course, you still have to press the claim and if you, for example, put your sons wife to throne, you need to wait for him to pop out a kid and hope he is not murdered by his wife before that.

EDIT: So yeah, what TheDungeon said...

 

[elpibeuruguayo]

Anything about perfomance?

 

[DC123456789]

Any sort of bureaucratic ERE should probably have some sort of patrician system where there are a number (largely than 5, definitely) of powerful noble families that petition the emperor to grant them and their family members positions (i.e. viceroyalites) while trying to increase their own power base and, ultimately, seize the throne for themselves. That way even if you don't get anything you can continue along with your "estates" and try to petition the emperor later.