• 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 hate that Italy was divided. What's now called 'Italy' is not Italy at all but just a little remnant. Might as well be calling it Padania or something, would be more accurate. Also when was Romagna ever a kingdom?

I also hate the useless mountain chain little wastelands that are added. I don't like having random grey patches in my empire, even if they're quite tiny.

I'll be reverting those two changes ASAP as soon as they are released.
 
Last edited:
these changes bring so much amazing detail! loving it.

two questions that spring to mind though are the name of Franche-Comté, which feels weird and anachronistic (perhaps 'Cisjurania' would be better, or something like "Middle Burgundy"?), as well as the lack of representation of Valtellina. i don't think we need a province for this strategic pass, but at least it would be nice to be able to march from Como or Leventina into Graubünden. unless you believe that the pass wasn't passable within the game period?
 
Btw the Random fantasy kingdom generators , I thought that it also generated a fantasy landscape like for the EUIV ... if not well it seems rather boring to just play in Europe but with simply different names. I hope we got also a world generator like EUIV for the new world .
 
Also this realm is known as "Papal States".
What? The Papal States are already a titular kingdom.
The Italy in this future patch is no longer 'Italy'. It's more like just half of it!

Romagna was not a seperate kingdom, but part of Italy!
Everything north of the in-game kingdom of Sicily was considered part of Italy, the Holy Roman Emperors claimed King of Italy as one of their titles. I don't want 'Romagna' to ever exist because it should be part of Italy!
I'll be removing that silly addition ASAP.
 
Last edited:
Wait, the Pope will own Kingdom of Romagna?
I don't think that is what is going on.

I personally would like it if the Papacy acted a bit more as if the romagna kingdom is it's goal. That way it would expand into Romagna over the course of a campaign.

I have played hundreds of hours and the Papacy is more likely to acquire crusade target territories than central Italian lands. :))
 
moved Znojmo into Bohemia
Great work, but seriously it's beautiful. So when are we getting Gorgeous Germany, Beautiful Bohemia and Mighty Moravia?
 
It is very nice and I know the map is super huge but I wonder if you get Bohemian lands right this time. For example the Vltava/Moldau river (the one going through D. of Bohemia from south to north) originates in the mountains north of Danube on the Czech side (not on the German/Austrian one) and there are many other inconsistencies in the Czech lands in the game right now.

Edit: the borders of the Czech Republic are more or less the same as they were in the middle ages.
I think the devs already suggested that they will do some changes to Bohemia aswell.

Improvement of this region has been discussed in at least 2 previous dev diaries about map, I can forward you at least to DD#78 and DD#90... or this thread currently opened in suggestions section.
The DD#78 has IMHO the best discussion based on apropriate sources
 
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.
 
What? The Papal States are already a titular kingdom.
I believed you asked when Romagna was a kingdom. Answer: it was a kingdom-tier title under the name of Exarchate of Ravenna, and it was a kingdom-tier title under name of Papal States. Details would demand to strongly define what is CK2 "kingdom-tier" realm (should Novgorod be kingdom? or Vladimir? or Kiev? or Egypt?), but I believe Exarchate of Ravenna and Papal States are fit into.
So yes. I believe that having kingdoms of Padania (or Lombardy), Romagna (or Ravenna), Sicily and Sardinia-Corsica, united into Empire of Italia (or Italy), is more accurate then doing one fully-controlled Kingdom of Italy. With, I hope, Romagna tends to fall under Papal rule. Also, just in case, the thing that Papal States are titular kingdom is plain wrong. Papal States was landed title through Donation of Pepin. So yeah, if your only objection is the name of this kingdom, I do agree.
 
Perhaps "Kingdom of Italy" should be renamed Kingdom of Lombardy, as it is the core territory of the Kingdom of the Lombards which it represents. My impression (not an expert here) is that for the centuries predating the 769 start, the duchies/principalities of Spoleto/Benevento which were separated by the Exarchate of Ravenna (see Kingdom of Romagna) were fairly autonomous - bordering on independent at times - as a result of the separation.

I don't know how that might affect later start dates though.
 
Perhaps "Kingdom of Italy" should be renamed Kingdom of Lombardy, as it is the core territory of the Kingdom of the Lombards which it represents. My impression (not expert here) is that for the centuries predating the 769 start, the duchies/principalities of Spoleto/Benevento which were separated by the Exarchate of Ravenna (see Kingdom of Romagna) were fairly autonomous bordering on independent at times as a result.

I don't know how that might affect later start dates though.

That exact same territory is called the Kingdom of Italy under the Holy Roman Empire though. Not like people are just making up ways to call a tiny thing Italy. The Lombards called their Kingdom Italia as well.
 
Nice DD!! thanks

I take the chance that someone mentioned the Dauphiné region, and the fact that this region represents the Marches of the Alps to initiate a reflection on how to improve the proper Dauphiné/Viennois (the county)

As you are reworking the area, what about splitting Vienne county in Dauphine?
If we take 1040 as date to set up the map, then the region of Vienne (representing the Archbishopric of Vienne) could be independant from the county of Dauphiné (representing the Dauphiné of Viennois under the counts of Albon, with Grenoble as capital). Vienne would be a very small county tho... The county of Dauphiné should include the major part of the Viennois, the Gresivaudan/Grenoble and the Oisans (all the way to Briançon). I think this allows to portray quite correctly the HRE period for the region (1040-1349).

After 1349, when the Dauphiné was sold to France and became fell into the direct authority of the royal family, both Vienne and the Dauphiné could be under the direct authority of the King, or his heir depending on the precise dates. During this period, Valence and parts of the Valentinois and Diois were part of the Dauphiné but maybe this part can be simplified.

The problem is: before 1040, there is no reasons to split up Vienne and the Dauphiné... Vienne was usually the capital of the whole region (not including the Oisans) under the successive Burgundian kingdoms, although the region was very divided, and representing it rule by a single count is strange. However, this can be kind of OK, to simplify the picture and make it fit into CK2 mechanics.

About the question of splitting the current county of Vienne, having Vienne separated from the county of Dauphiné would make sense.
However, this is less relevant before the HRE period. The second problem comes from the playability. Vienne would be a theocracy during the HRE period (even decades before 1040). I'm not sure this is interesting to split up a county, only to add an unplayable state.
So I am personally indecisive about what's better. If someday, theocracies become playable, I would go for splitting up the county.


Now the main thing I don't like about the Duchy of Dauphiné as it is in CK2, is its name. The Dauphiné is such a small region compared to this Duchy, and I don't like to see Lyon as capital of the Dauphiné. Maybe this is because the region where I grew up, but it seems wrong to me.
However, I understand what the duchy of Dauphiné is supposed to represent: a constellation of small secular and ecclesiastic states under the HRE (plus the Forez and Vivarais belonged to France), which were never united into a full Duchy. This is very hard to portray with the basics CK2 mechanics. Before the HRE, most of these regions were parts of the Duchy of Lower Burgundy, which in CK2, is split between the Duchy of Provence and the Duchy of Dauphiné.
So basically, a duchy encompassing the Lyonnais, Dauphiné/Viennois, Forez and Vivarais never existed.

I would not know how to call such duchy... the Duchy of Upper Lower Burgundy maybe (although this is just a joke ^_^). Maybe the duchy of Lyon, as if such duchy existed, Lyon could have been its capital. This is not great but I don't really know. If keeping the Duchy of Dauphiné, then Grenoble would be a more suited De Jure capital (I think that in the game, Vienne is a bishopric).
 
Last edited:
The southern duchies were autonomous, and the northern area continued to be called Italy after the conquest of the Franks. In the case of Carinthia, the whole area was previously part of Bavaria, and in the case of the new Romagna, it's not as if it won't usually drift into Italy unless they Papal States try to expand to their historical boundaries anyway. it was created not to accurately replicate history, but rather to encourage historical outcomes.
 
Last edited:
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.
The Actual name was Longobardia for Lombary and Italia , PAdania never exhisted its an invention of the past political party of the 90's.