You're right, it's a "temporary" solution, until, that is, they make merchant republics playable again. They'll either have to "reshape" Italian counties for this or make a new system based on baronies (a-la "Family Palace" of CK2).
-
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.
I actually am a huge nerd in acnient history, and history in general. But ancient Rome is my favorite era. I am not a fan of Imperator: Rome however, and my argumetn about the map is not based on history but gameplay experience from my part. We can disagree what makes it interesting, but in my opinion Imperator: Rome is dull at the moment for many reason, but it's not the map in my opinion. However, eveything is the same, no personality, again in my opinion, the UI is... under par.. It has a diplomatic gameplay which is... dead, it feels like the game has no sould and is too easy. But thats mjust my opinipon and why I struggle to have fun with Imperator: Rome. I think I'll like it after a bunch of updates and dlc's.
The reason in CK3 however is that it could expand the diplomatic/political landscape, more baronies means more charcters(It seems like there is more baronies and counties than CK2 when looking at Scotland photo's). More charcters, tiles to upgrade, move you armies in, build defensive strategies with mean more options and that in the en mean a bigger game and a bigger world.
But we can disagree, that's actually okey too.
Imperator: Rome have probably had the best patches paradox have ever released, and all that rework for free.
This is purely speculation upon my part, but I would not at all be surprised if the overall county density was downgraded slightly from CK2, in part to accomodate for an eventual map expansion.
Merchant republics will not be playable in CK3. This leads me to suspect that the new development mechanics will be much more involved than we've seen previously, perhaps including a stronger presence of trade.
One county in Italy could easily outproduce three in Scotland. This looks like a strong indicator that playing tall will become a much more viable option, otherwise we wouldn't see nerfs in historically high pop areas and buffs in historically rural areas.
They know what they're doing
One county in Italy could easily outproduce three in Scotland. This looks like a strong indicator that playing tall will become a much more viable option, otherwise we wouldn't see nerfs in historically high pop areas and buffs in historically rural areas.
They know what they're doing
Last edited:
As far as I can tell development Will be about as simple as civilization value in Imperator: Rome.
The total economic output of Italy may have been larger than the total economic output of France during the CK time period. In terms of GDP per capita it may have taken into the 1800s for many countries to reach the GDP per capita of North Italy. Well technically North Italy is still richer in terms of GDP per capitathan France or United Kingdom.
Last edited by a moderator:
I wonder whether Amalfi being missing is to do with republics not receiving much of a focus in CK III (at least initially) - presumably Pisa, Genoa and Venice are returning though.
Demesne caps in CK2 are ludicrously low in historical terms. Mountains of historic positions are unplayable because they necessitate giving away much of one's land before unpausing.
I don't know how to stop having a huge demese be overpowered while keeping it historic, but a big improvement over what's in the game now would be to make each county one goes over the limit have diminishing returns, so that with a limit of 4, having 15 counties is twice as good.
Another think would be having circumstances where you suffer disadvantage for not giving away land; for instance, after a holy war, involved vassals should greatly dislike you if not compensated with conquered land.
Counties are the basic feudal unit in this game. CKII is mostly about feudal politics. You can't have very interesting feudal politics without enough counties and Sicily was an important enough kingdom to justify having enough counties. Maybe not a crazy amount like 100 and higher development if you want to portray a higher degree of centralization, but not far less than backwater Anglophone kingdoms.
It should be at least somewhat tempting for a German Emperor to laze around far away in Sicily.
I agree with the arguments, I just feel the urge to point ot that it can be tempting for outsiders to be conquered even if it has fewer counties. Number of counties doesn't equal importance... I mean more provinces =/= more important.
I argued this when people demanded more provinces for Bohemia. They failed to understand that if a country is to be centralized, it is better if it has fewer countrues.
There are also other tools to make it important.
But I agree that in areas which were politically fragmented the request for more counties does make sense.
Last edited:
WHY ARE THESE GAMES SO SLOWParadox: Fixes the problem
WHY DID THEY REMOVE PROVINCES!!!
This Paradox "fixes" is like treating a patient’s pain by cutting off injured parts of the body instead of healing the wounds.
Paradox: Fixes the problem
The thing is, they weren't faceless, because Italy (especially Northern Italy) was incredibly urbanized. You could put a dozen counties in Lombardy alone, each with their baronies and flags, no sweat at all. There just were that many large (for the time) cities.
Italy had a larger population than Germany last time I checked and maybe a higher economic output than France (even with smaller population) during the CK3 time period so it should be quite powerful.