I suspect the map design is probably pretty much done at this point, but my only real wish is to see it expanded more into Arabia and particularly Persia. Primarilly to give Islam a little more strategic depth to bounce back from Crusades and such.
-
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.
Offmap areas, dude. If we can't play Muslims I see no use for the Sheikhdom of Salt Desert #54 except as a system lag.
There will undoubtedly be an expansion pack that focuses on Muslim and Pagan nations.
As I said, there are people who wanted in CK1 to recreate Alexander the Great's empire.
That much detail for all of Europe and it will lag like HOI3 in the later years.
But I like the idea
It seems comparable to CK. Also, keep in mind that the map as a whole will be a lot smaller. No New World, no sub saharan africa, no far east.
Vanilla should be tailored towards the game's own mechanics, let modders do the rest.
Indeed, I suspect, or atleast I hope, that the game will have much less 'set' borders. Some duchies had a little land here, a little there and a little back there aswell. While it may not be feasible I hope the borders between counties and w/e will be as fluid and changeable as possible.
I'm sure you're right, yet I hope the base game doesn't discount the muslims too much. True, PI games are honsetly Euro-Centric, which is fine for games like EU and Vic where Europe did dominate the globe... But the Mulism and eastern steppe threat during this period cannot be discounted and should not be under-represented.
Yes, a medieval game would play much better with a point to point system. But I guess that's a matter for the far future...
My personal opinion though , is that the map should at least be extended to Tien Shan Mountain - basically encompassing all of Transoxinia. That way , even if the Muslims got pwned all the way into Persia , there's always the threat of a Muslim counter attack from Central Asia .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transoxiania
Furthermore , when the Mongols first historically appeared , this was the first place in the Muslim world proper that they took . At least extend the map into Samarkand and Tashkent- and maybe even Herat . If I was a Crusader who just conquered Bukhara , why would I stop there ? Push all the way to the Tien Shan Mountains !
I don't see the use of a Shiekdom of the Empty Quater in Arabia, but I do see the use of an Emir of Samarkand or a Emir of Herat and of a Sultan of Transoxinia. This , along with the Southern Urals should be the two spawning points of the Mongols .
The Seljuks originated from this region , as did the Timurids . This was the first place , within the scope of the Crusader Kings map that the Mongols initially invaded. If you want the simulate a Mongol Invasion with any piece of sense , you have to fully incorporate this region . If you want to simulate the fact that many of the Muslim Worlds largest empires during this period originate from this region , you need to include all of Transoxinia . Simply cutting it off at Bukhara makes absolutely no sense . Either expand the map that far , or make Transoxinia an off map province where Empires like the Timurids and the Il Khantate appear in . They provide revenue and a territorial base , but you can't enter these provinces .
ive got a map question, that isnt about size or shape but isnt really important enough for its own thread so i'll ask it here and well,
Should North Africa be yellow? Its my understanding that during the Middle Ages, the Algeria part of africa wasnt a desert, but the 'granary of rome' and one of the highest populated regions there was.
The desert came with the little ice age or the end of the warm period or something.
But in paradox games, its always yellow, should it not be kinda green?
Anyway on topic. those maps on the first page would be awesome to see as the map in the game.
And as for eastern expansion. Seeing alittle more Persia would be good, but i dont think it should be expanded further, atleast not until the expansion. The game is about Europe. And there is a serious problem if it extends into central asia, of the King of England holding one province in the far east, at a time when Central asia was a mystery to europeans, they guessed at a great empire of Presbyter John to show at how unknown it was.
So for it to be plausible to not only see whats going on there, but conquer a province in Central Asia as easily as a province in Morocco causes problems.
So in short, Central asia shouldn't be in it, atleast not until the playing-moslems expansion in which case it would only be on the map if youre playing moslems or something, as its just not practical to have it there if youre playing a European King.
Should North Africa be yellow? Its my understanding that during the Middle Ages, the Algeria part of africa wasnt a desert, but the 'granary of rome' and one of the highest populated regions there was.
The desert came with the little ice age or the end of the warm period or something.
But in paradox games, its always yellow, should it not be kinda green?
Anyway on topic. those maps on the first page would be awesome to see as the map in the game.
And as for eastern expansion. Seeing alittle more Persia would be good, but i dont think it should be expanded further, atleast not until the expansion. The game is about Europe. And there is a serious problem if it extends into central asia, of the King of England holding one province in the far east, at a time when Central asia was a mystery to europeans, they guessed at a great empire of Presbyter John to show at how unknown it was.
So for it to be plausible to not only see whats going on there, but conquer a province in Central Asia as easily as a province in Morocco causes problems.
So in short, Central asia shouldn't be in it, atleast not until the playing-moslems expansion in which case it would only be on the map if youre playing moslems or something, as its just not practical to have it there if youre playing a European King.
I disagree actually about the Persia part . If you are not going to expand further , then take out Bukhara from the game and terminate the map at Khorasan . It does not make sense for Bukhara to be in , but not Samarkand at the very least . Not much was known of Central Asia , true , but the same could be said about most of Persia too . In fact , Kiev in Russia was probably as mysterious to a Peasant in Burgundy as Tashkent in Central Asia! Even a Crusader probably knew next to nothing about what laid beyond the Tigris river , if that even .
If I was a highly sucessful Kingdom of Jersualem , and just destroyed Islam in Persia , there's very little stopping me from following Alexandria the Great and smashing what's left of Islam in Bactria/Transoxinia ? The Persian Empire , before Alexandria had a firm hold over Bactria , and Alexandria could conquer that region . Nine centuries later , the Arabs conquered Bactria , all the way up to Tashkent after overrunning Sassanid Persia( though they didn't go any further) . If Persia is mine , I could just as easily send armies north to push all the way to the banks of the Jaxartes and Oxus . Sending an army through the Hindu Kush into India will be a bridge too far , as will sending an army into the Northern Chinese plain, but if Persia is mine , I would probably pursue Islam and drive it out of Bactria.
Game allow Crusaders repeat Alexander Big's achievements, game be broken. There is absolutely no call to represent anything further east than Baghdad and I personally would stop short even of that.
It's a shame Muslims aren't playable but let's play it where it lays.
About North Africa: the drying-out of Libya and Tunisia is often associated with the Banu Sulaym / Banu Hilal tribal movement, which was already largely complete by 1066. Otherwise, I don't know exactly where the arid zone should start.
It's a shame Muslims aren't playable but let's play it where it lays.
About North Africa: the drying-out of Libya and Tunisia is often associated with the Banu Sulaym / Banu Hilal tribal movement, which was already largely complete by 1066. Otherwise, I don't know exactly where the arid zone should start.
I would actually Semi Agree with that - if you are not going to include the Southern part of Central Asia , you might as well not include the Iranian Plateau in the game . Only problem is , how do you accurately model the Il Khantate and Seljuks then?
Realistically , I think it IS possible for and yet not be broken : On a few conditions
1: Conquering Iran and Beyond will likely not be achievable until quite late in the game.
2: Unless you are a Crusader State , or a highly successful Byzantine Empire OR King of Russia , it's almost impossible to achieve. If your state is centered in Europe , it's going to be more or less impossible unless you are going for WC. So , no Duke of York has become the new Count of Samarkand( or even Baghdad for that matter) , unless the Duke of York is a highly successful crusader controlling Egypt , the Levant , and Mesopotamia , and it's 1350+ . In that case , why on Earth are you still a duke , instead of King of Jerusalem Egypt , Africa ,Mesopotamia , Persia and Arabia?
3: You must play very well , and somehow survive a Gazillion Religious Revolts across your predominantly Muslim Empire. Enjoy playing wack a Rebel. :rofl:
4: WC . But then again , if WC's are possible , technically , we could call the game broken . But then : wouldn't every Paradox game be considered broken ? Furthermore , the Rebel situation would be quite insane . I'm sure CK2 would have some measures to prevent astonishingly large continent wide Kingdoms.
Actually ,one could argue that even the POSSIBILITY of a successful World Conquest in Crusader Kings means that the game is Broken.
But , if I was a highly successful Kingdom of Jerusalem , or a Byzantine Empire , and if I begun my rampage throughout the Middle East around 1100 or so , I don't think it would be unreasonable for my borders to reach the Oxus by 1350 or so- except for all the problems associated with managing such a monster blob , and the need to keep playing whack a Rebel
So I took my patchy historical understanding and complete ignorance of Gaelic to Ireland:
I chose to anglicise the names of all provinces named after towns. This isn't so hard to justify for the Hiberno-Norse coastal towns, which were long established by 1066 and still possesed a distinctive hybrid culture. It's harder to argue for in the case of places inland or conquered much later by the English. However, it seems like pedantry to use Gaelic in these cases. For Carlow and Carrickfergus, their significance as local centres post dates conquest.
CK being a game of families, I wanted to avoid naming provinces after dynasties wherever possible. Of course it isn't always possible in Ireland. Where no suitable alternative existed, I tried to go for dynastic names that were established before the CK period and endured well into the medieval period (often right through it).
In some areas (Tir Conaill, Ui Faelge), a name with a personal origin transcended the original family and became the de facto name of the area. Others not so much. The worst example is Ui Cairbre, which wasn't present there in 1066 but did at least go on to form an important barony ('Carbery'). But in so many places, particularly Connaught, there's just no graceful way to do it.
Irish medieval politics is like dropping LSD and looking through a kaliedoscope pointed at a strobe light while in the throes of a crippling migraine.
I chose to anglicise the names of all provinces named after towns. This isn't so hard to justify for the Hiberno-Norse coastal towns, which were long established by 1066 and still possesed a distinctive hybrid culture. It's harder to argue for in the case of places inland or conquered much later by the English. However, it seems like pedantry to use Gaelic in these cases. For Carlow and Carrickfergus, their significance as local centres post dates conquest.
CK being a game of families, I wanted to avoid naming provinces after dynasties wherever possible. Of course it isn't always possible in Ireland. Where no suitable alternative existed, I tried to go for dynastic names that were established before the CK period and endured well into the medieval period (often right through it).
In some areas (Tir Conaill, Ui Faelge), a name with a personal origin transcended the original family and became the de facto name of the area. Others not so much. The worst example is Ui Cairbre, which wasn't present there in 1066 but did at least go on to form an important barony ('Carbery'). But in so many places, particularly Connaught, there's just no graceful way to do it.
Irish medieval politics is like dropping LSD and looking through a kaliedoscope pointed at a strobe light while in the throes of a crippling migraine.
Additional provinces sounds cool, and those images that have been posted look great.
Been playing Vicky2 here lately, and the other day I fired up CKI . . . I hate to admit it cause I feel like I'm transforming into one of those eye-candy consumer gamers who just like the bells-n-whistles at the expense of good design and mechanics, but . . . the CKI map hurt my eyes.
I would suspect this will of course happen, but I just wanted to give my plug for PI 'prettifying' the CK map a bit, and adding to the atmosphere and aesthetics in the various map-modes, more along the lines of Vicky2.
Instead of it giving a feeling of terrain, the "terrain map mode" in CKI just looks like a bunch of staticky squiggles drawn in earth tones. The colors for the political/diplomatic map modes seem way too glaring or something. Not being able to zoom in and out also felt like I had had a finger amputated.
Certainly attention to the provinces is a good thing, but I hope it won't come at the expense of making the map(s) more aesthetically pleasing and easy to look at.
Been playing Vicky2 here lately, and the other day I fired up CKI . . . I hate to admit it cause I feel like I'm transforming into one of those eye-candy consumer gamers who just like the bells-n-whistles at the expense of good design and mechanics, but . . . the CKI map hurt my eyes.
I would suspect this will of course happen, but I just wanted to give my plug for PI 'prettifying' the CK map a bit, and adding to the atmosphere and aesthetics in the various map-modes, more along the lines of Vicky2.
Instead of it giving a feeling of terrain, the "terrain map mode" in CKI just looks like a bunch of staticky squiggles drawn in earth tones. The colors for the political/diplomatic map modes seem way too glaring or something. Not being able to zoom in and out also felt like I had had a finger amputated.
Certainly attention to the provinces is a good thing, but I hope it won't come at the expense of making the map(s) more aesthetically pleasing and easy to look at.
I agree. CK's map in any mode was vomitous both in composition and layout. Thank God for the attractive shields and sprites which diverted one's attention somewhat. In Pdx's defence, early alpha screens released when Snowball was still in charge of development suggest they inherited the map and graphics from them.
It's all but certain the new game will have V2 style graphics, they're even redoing EU3 to fit that
It's all but certain the new game will have V2 style graphics, they're even redoing EU3 to fit that