• 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.

CK2 Dev Diary #65: Along the Silk Road

Greetings!

Today I’d like to talk about one of the features that we’ve decided to improve and overhaul - the Silk Road. The Silk Road was introduced in the Horse Lords expansion and, while profitable, was very annoying to manage and fickle in its behaviour. As the Silk Road is essential in modeling the importance of China, it will also be unlocked by owning Jade Dragon. Owners of Horse Lords will receive all improvements we’re making, of course.

More often than not, the Silk Road was consciously ignored by players as it was too much of a hassle to manage. You used to compete with everyone for where to build your trade posts - not just with other realms, but with your own vassals. Another problem was that the Silk Road was way too easy to cut off - 100 men looting Dunhuang would completely cut off trade downstream, which wasn’t very realistic at all. With limited routes the trade usually had nowhere to go, and it was not uncommon to see the road completely blocked off if both origin points were under siege.

The Silk Road has received plenty of new routes - based on various historical records, such as those made by Arab traders, Radhanite Jewish merchants and the Chinese themselves. It’ll be very hard to cut it off entirely, as there’s plenty of paths for the trade to take!
Silk Road Basic Outline.png

The Silk Road origin points are now north of Tibet, southern Tibet and via the ocean to southern India.

The new vision we have for the Silk Road is one where you want to control (and fight over) specific counties along the Silk Road, where Trade Posts can always be constructed. These ‘hot-spots’ are placed in various counties with historical precedent along the road itself - i.e. Khotan, Kashgar, Debul, Merv, and even counties as far away as Jerusalem, Antioch and Alexandria. We currently have 51 Trade Post locations spread across the Silk Road.
TradePosts.png

The Trade mapmode now shows icons for Trade Posts, so you can at a glance tell where they can be built.

The value of the Silk Road depends on many factors, such as raids, occupations and the current attitude of China. Raids and occupations will no longer instantly cut off the Silk Road, instead they will decrease the value that travels downstream by a certain percentage - 10% for any county being under siege (i.e. raiders) and 25% for any occupied county. This means that, while the the Silk Road still has a dynamic and interesting value, it’s never arbitrarily cut off by a few raiders.
Raiding.png

You can now easily spot where hostilities are occurring along the Silk Road.

It will generally always be better to control Trade Posts further up the road itself - Trade Posts located further down the road are more susceptible to raiders and occupations, as the trade has to travel through more counties to get there. It’s far from useless though, as a Trade Post working at 50% efficiency still produces a LOT of wealth.
dynamicallyColoredRoad.png

In this screenshot you can see that a war in Bengal is choking the Silk Road passing through eastern and central India. There are also notable conflicts in the northern Steppe route, as well as minor conflicts in Egypt, Persia and Iraq.

Trade Posts now work similarly to hospitals - whoever holds the county controls the Trade Post (this doesn’t apply to Merchant Republics, who work like they’ve always had, even on the Silk Road). This means that you will want to hold as many Silk Road Trade Post counties as you can in your personal demesne. This makes it more fun to play as a vassal, as your liege can’t steal your Silk Road Trade Post slot just because you weren’t fast enough to build it first!

Silk Road Trade Posts are worth a lot of money, and they used to be destroyed first by besieging enemy armies even if there were other holdings in the county that were not yet sieged. This has been changed - they are still destroyed when occupied, but are now sieged last. This means that you can protect them with castles and forts, again improving the experience for whoever builds one. It’s now much less of a risk to build the various buildings Silk Road Trade Posts now contain.

The attitude of China might affect the value of the Silk Road - Plagues, Unrest, Invasions, Civil War and Famines decrease it, while Golden Ages increase it! Sometimes, China might decide to close down the Silk Road and turn inwards, though if you’re powerful enough - militarily or by controlling enough counties on the Silk Road - you just might be able to force them to open right back up...

All in all - it should now feel much more rewarding to control the Silk Road and the Trade Posts it contains. You will actively want to seek out and control the Silk Road, and keep it safe from raiders.
Socotra.png

The Emir of Socotra, with a Silk Road Trade Post in his demesne.
 
We do need a definitive statement from the devs on this (not necessarily in this thread, but at the point of purchase). I understand and support the fact that you need RoI to play Buddhists. But if they market JD as a Tibetan expansion, people are going to be unhappy if they can't play most Tibetans. It's been suggested (I think by @JP5243) that the best way forward would be to make any Monastic Feudal ruler playable. So you could play any Tibetan, but you couldn't play a Buddhist in Khotan or Pali. That seems a reasonable compromise.

The problem I think is that the way Buddhism is implemented it is meant to be played with Hinduism/Jainism. They are way to open to switch between the three religions, and you'd just get into a state where your heir would no longer be Buddhist and you'd get a Game Over.
 
That really is not what the Silk Road is meant to simulate. Especially because there would have to be a "source" of the trade (i.e. China). It really doesn't make sense to add the Silk Road to Europe.
It always felt weird to me that the Silk Route seems to be one way only in this game. Trade should be two ways. If it's blocked in Bengal you should still be able to trade with the western part of India, not have it entirely blocked. It looks like this DLC will partialy solve that, though.
 
Why not model the other major trade routes in Europe?

As much as I would love that, it has became apparent that the Silk Road mechanic is quite stressful, thus expanding isn't really a viable option.

Yet I would propose alternative solution in order to portray: provincial modifiers.

There would be two kind of modifiers "trade port" and "trade route", both would grant fixed modifiers... Something like:

Trade port:
  • 10 galleys
  • 10 gold/month

Trade route:
  • 5 gold/month
  • Movement speed 50%

I took the time map rough sketch according to this map (sorry if I misplaced some locations).

CCF2hLJ.jpg


I get that it isn't ideal, but IHMO it would far better than nothing.
 
We do need a definitive statement from the devs on this (not necessarily in this thread, but at the point of purchase). I understand and support the fact that you need RoI to play Buddhists. But if they market JD as a Tibetan expansion, people are going to be unhappy if they can't play most Tibetans. It's been suggested (I think by @JP5243) that the best way forward would be to make any Monastic Feudal ruler playable. So you could play any Tibetan, but you couldn't play a Buddhist in Khotan or Pali. That seems a reasonable compromise.

Thanks for the credit. :)

Yes, I suggested that back in dev diary #64. I think it's quite likely, especially given that at least from what I have seen, Monastic Feudal is that different from Feudal.
 
Trade Posts now work similarly to hospitals - whoever holds the county controls the Trade Post (this doesn’t apply to Merchant Republics, who work like they’ve always had, even on the Silk Road). This means that you will want to hold as many Silk Road Trade Post counties as you can in your personal demesne. This makes it more fun to play as a vassal, as your liege can’t steal your Silk Road Trade Post slot just because you weren’t fast enough to build it first!
Thank you! You mentioned in one of the streams that this might not be the case so I am relieved that it is. This game does not need skewing in favour of independent rulers.
 
We do need a definitive statement from the devs on this (not necessarily in this thread, but at the point of purchase). I understand and support the fact that you need RoI to play Buddhists. But if they market JD as a Tibetan expansion, people are going to be unhappy if they can't play most Tibetans. It's been suggested (I think by @JP5243) that the best way forward would be to make any Monastic Feudal ruler playable. So you could play any Tibetan, but you couldn't play a Buddhist in Khotan or Pali. That seems a reasonable compromise.
Except PDX don't market JD as a tibetan expansion. The map expansion will be free. I don't know it the government form for tibetans will be free too (but it is not mentionned in the description of the DLC so I guess this will be free too).
That said, as a buyer of ROI, I wouldn't mind them making buddhism a free feature (or unlockable with HL or JD); ROI is for playing in India. This is a problem not being able to play as most of the rulers of the Tarim Basim and Tibet even with HL and/or JD.
 
As the Silk Road is essential in modeling the importance of China, it will also be unlocked by owning Jade Dragon. Owners of Horse Lords will receive all improvements we’re making, of course.

Oh and I must say this is an applaudable good choice.

On a similar note it's been asked a few times on the stream, what if a person doesn't have Rajas of India how much of this content is lost if you cannot play as a Buddhist?

Now I have RoI but it's a fair point. And with the ever fluctuating nature of characters and even the multi-religious start dates I've seen, it could lead to some game overs.

Perhaps some thought about dual unlocking Buddhists with JD is warranted.
 
Please, please, please add trade routes to other regions as well!!! Also my suggestion for you would be to create 3 types of the trade routes, depending on how much it was important it would generate certain amount of income and would have more branches. The types wold be:
1. The biggest routes like Silk Road, there were at least 3 of them as much important: Volga route, Amber road and Sahara route.
2. The smaller once, regional routes like: Salt road, Atlantic route, Danube route (Vienna, Budapest, Belgrade, Constantinople) and others.
3. The local trade routes, they would have only one branch, smallest income and they would be connected to the regional or main routes (like the route from Ragusa to Belgrade)
 
I'm not sure. Are you offering to allow merchant republics to build trade posts in Mediterranean? It's revolutionary idea! :)
Actually, there is one more thing about Silk Road. In main Europe we have a lot of cities (with markets) and trade republics that build trade posts. But vast majority of Silk Road comes through nomadic and tribal lands without nice targets to raid, so it's a source of gold for nomads and tribal.
That's actually why it's added in nomadic expansion.
Giving an example of my proposal : Playing as Venice, I could have the possibility to create an extension of the Silk Road from Alexandria to Venice, yes maybe exploiting all the trade post I have built on the road ( maybe for example, one in Krete, one in Dalmatia or in the Apulia Coast and so on). If my enemy destroy or capture them the " Silk Road Flow" go the their traide post and cities ( like the historical wars between Genoa and Venice). Venice was one of the wealtiest cities in the world during the Middle Age because it exploited the Silk Road and transported goods from the East markets to West. Until the Portoguese discovered another way to go to India and so on.
 
One question regarding the new DLC puzzles me: will there be the Tangut state (also known as Xi Xia or Western Xia)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Xia#/media/File:Song-Liao-Xixia-1111.png Its territory is partially covered by the map. If so, what type of government will it have? It was to some degree a Sinicized state, run by Chinese-style bureaucracy and strong Chinese culture influence as far as I understand.
 
One question regarding the new DLC puzzles me: will there be the Tangut state (also known as Xi Xia or Western Xia)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Xia#/media/File:Song-Liao-Xixia-1111.png Its territory is partially covered by the map. If so, what type of government will it have? It was to some degree a Sinicized state, run by Chinese-style bureaucracy and strong Chinese culture influence as far as I understand.

Yes. In one of the streams we could see them on the map in the 1066 start date.
 
I personnaly would have liked another solution to the disruptions of trade : trade stockpiles ! On each county, there is a feature showing us if they're is much to pillage or not... I would have liked, on each trade post, to have a stockpile... (Buildings could increase them, btw) Ready to pillage as well... Decreasing or replenishing as long as the silk road is cut or not... That would be great ! :)
 
I'd personally like to see the silk road expanded all the way to France, England, Spain, etc.

That, or at least see a dynamic trade system, as the years go on, the silk road expands, and moves farther west at key dates. So that during the last stages of the game, you have the classic trade routes along the north of france, Denmark, etc. through the English channel, and along Sweden, etc, as well as through all the Mediterranean.
Not quite that far, but I modded the game to expand it to the midditerranean, even the western parts, my terminuses are venice, rome, tangiers and cordoba.
20170904192708_1.jpg

isn't trade post own by county holder in current version?
Yes and the finally decided not to change that.

That was the first thing I wanted to ask, but then, as counterthought, I just tried to imagine a trade route in Europe that have trade value of same exponent.
I couldn't.
Perhaps not but there's a trace value in the silk roads file so it doesn't have to be the same exponent.

I feel that Constantinople has been cheated out of its rightful place on the Silk Road:

"From Merv, a variety of trade routes led to the Mediterranean via Baghdad to Damascus or Antioch or Constantinople (Istanbul), and to Trebizond (Trabzon) on the Black Sea." (Frances Wood, The Silk Road)

"The main trade route extended for 4,000 miles from the city of Xian in China to Constantinople in Turkey." (Muhamad Olimat, China & the Middle East: From Silk Road to Arab Spring)

"It is common to think that the western terminus of the Silk Road was Rome in Italy. The narrator intones as much at the end of each film in the 30-part NTK/CCTV series, and the final scene of that sprawling epic shows the “expedition” arriving at the Roman Coliseum. Indeed Rome must have been an important destination for Chinese silk during the first two or three centuries of the Silk Road (perhaps to ca. 200 CE), but for a much longer time, beginning in the fourth century, the “Rome” to which all roads led in the Mediterranean world was “Eastern Rome” or Constantinople. Even in its long centuries of decline down to its conquest by the Ottoman Turks in 1453, the wealth of the city was legendary, and its location ensured it a role in the trade with the East." (Daniel Waugh, 'Constantinople/Istanbul', The Silk Road)

NB: I am not the stereotypical ERE fanatic on these forums; I've never played them in any PDX game. But when I saw that Silk Road map, something looked odd. My understanding was that the strength of the Silk Road trade had a major effect on Byzantine prosperity or poverty.

EDIT: As well as complaining, I should say that this looks like a really effective overhaul of the Silk Road by the devs. A shiny new feature might have seemed like a better marketing prospect, but they have instead worked on a feature that was functioning but not to the level that they expected. That's a really positive decision.
Yeah I usually mod it to reach that far too. further actually. All of the midditerranean.

As I recall there was some kind of decision about it. Constantinopole, they said, was a big, tech-great and developed province, if you add Silk Road to it it became a lot better.
But I do agree, and every time I mod trade I do add Constantinopole to silk road.
As do I.

CK2+ has you covered there. The only thing you'll miss is the achievements.
Except Ck2+ has a lot of other strange ideas that I don't enjoy. Like splitting germanic into norse and germanic.

It always felt weird to me that the Silk Route seems to be one way only in this game. Trade should be two ways. If it's blocked in Bengal you should still be able to trade with the western part of India, not have it entirely blocked. It looks like this DLC will partialy solve that, though.
There should really by a network or interconnecting trade routes which each our wealth unto one another. For an example Mali should trade with Silk road cities in north africa.The amber and varangian routes meet the silk road in crimea and in constantinople. And so on. Problem is as soon as you have more than one trade route the map gets very cluttered.
 
Last edited:
The problem I think is that the way Buddhism is implemented it is meant to be played with Hinduism/Jainism. They are way to open to switch between the three religions, and you'd just get into a state where your heir would no longer be Buddhist and you'd get a Game Over.

The decisions that allow conversions between Dharmic religions would of course only be available with RoI. The same with events. Otherwise, you'd just have to be careful, just as Catholics have to be careful if you're playing without SoA or SoI

Except PDX don't market JD as a tibetan expansion. The map expansion will be free. I don't know it the government form for tibetans will be free too (but it is not mentionned in the description of the DLC so I guess this will be free too).
That said, as a buyer of ROI, I wouldn't mind them making buddhism a free feature (or unlockable with HL or JD); ROI is for playing in India. This is a problem not being able to play as most of the rulers of the Tarim Basim and Tibet even with HL and/or JD.

I'd be very surprised if the government form is free, given the precedent of Horse Lords.
 
I feel that Constantinople has been cheated out of its rightful place on the Silk Road:

"From Merv, a variety of trade routes led to the Mediterranean via Baghdad to Damascus or Antioch or Constantinople (Istanbul), and to Trebizond (Trabzon) on the Black Sea." (Frances Wood, The Silk Road)

"The main trade route extended for 4,000 miles from the city of Xian in China to Constantinople in Turkey." (Muhamad Olimat, China & the Middle East: From Silk Road to Arab Spring)

"It is common to think that the western terminus of the Silk Road was Rome in Italy. The narrator intones as much at the end of each film in the 30-part NTK/CCTV series, and the final scene of that sprawling epic shows the “expedition” arriving at the Roman Coliseum. Indeed Rome must have been an important destination for Chinese silk during the first two or three centuries of the Silk Road (perhaps to ca. 200 CE), but for a much longer time, beginning in the fourth century, the “Rome” to which all roads led in the Mediterranean world was “Eastern Rome” or Constantinople. Even in its long centuries of decline down to its conquest by the Ottoman Turks in 1453, the wealth of the city was legendary, and its location ensured it a role in the trade with the East." (Daniel Waugh, 'Constantinople/Istanbul', The Silk Road)

NB: I am not the stereotypical ERE fanatic on these forums; I've never played them in any PDX game. But when I saw that Silk Road map, something looked odd. My understanding was that the strength of the Silk Road trade had a major effect on Byzantine prosperity or poverty.

EDIT: As well as complaining, I should say that this looks like a really effective overhaul of the Silk Road by the devs. A shiny new feature might have seemed like a better marketing prospect, but they have instead worked on a feature that was functioning but not to the level that they expected. That's a really positive decision.


Apparently it made the ERE too powerful. It's almost like we could have had a DLC that expanded upon the ERE, a country that had a greater effect on the region the CK2 map covers than China, to show the issues the ERE had such as during times of succession. You could even have things like Generals trying to take over the country...oh wait.
 
Oh no it's being expanded, now i'll never get the silk road achievement in game ;)