Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

dynasty? what means...?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
gweinel

gweinel

Elflord
Mar 23, 2001
385
0
Visit site
Trying to figure out how the game is played i was wondering...
You play the person behind the dynasty like EU2? You are member of the dynasty and want to improove its position?
If someone doesn't want that name of the dynasty has the possibility to play another one? (For this i have in mind the very awful dynasty of Ducas at 1066 in Byzantine Empire, and the very good dynasty of Macedonias "Porphyrogenitous" which ruled the previous years (until 1055) and the decent dynasty of Komninoi which starts from 1081 i think). If you play the person behind the throne can you overthrow a dynasty? (A very common thing at least in Byzantium).

Thanks
 
The way I understand it, you are not playing the 'power behind the throne' as in EU but rather the man on the throne or men as time progress
 
Originally posted by gweinel
Trying to figure out how the game is played i was wondering...
You play the person behind the dynasty like EU2? You are member of the dynasty and want to improove its position?
If someone doesn't want that name of the dynasty has the possibility to play another one? (For this i have in mind the very awful dynasty of Ducas at 1066 in Byzantine Empire, and the very good dynasty of Macedonias "Porphyrogenitous" which ruled the previous years (until 1055) and the decent dynasty of Komninoi which starts from 1081 i think). If you play the person behind the throne can you overthrow a dynasty? (A very common thing at least in Byzantium).

Thanks
Click to expand...

Don't worry about the Doukas - Kommenos link; if you want things to go historically, when you start the game as Kontstantinos X Doukas, make sure at some point your neice Eirene marries Alexios Kommenos (although Eirene was only born in 1065) as she historically did in 1081. Then hopefully the Kommenoi dynasty can inherit the throne...
 
In CK, you ARE the monarch. With his merits and physical limits. :)

Drakken
 
Originally posted by BarristerBoy


What do you mean by that? How will the monarch's merits affect what the player can do?
Click to expand...

I meant that from what I read, we won't be as omnipotent and omniscient than in EU2. :)

Drakken
 
Originally posted by Wasa


Well put, Drakken..must make a note..:D;)
Click to expand...

I will check how they handle knowledge about characters in the Beta. Especially about so-called "innate" or "genetic" traits. I believe the game would already set a precedent in realism by limiting knowledge access about characters' traits, even the Monarch's, to block any chance of Lebensborn simulation. I don't want the player to know too much about his characters. I don't want the player to play a Bene Gesserit. The more secret the characters' traits are, the more realistic it will be, the funnier it will be for us.

"To lebensborn" could even become an inside expression. It would be defined as an act of a player planning his character's marriages with the scient purpose of having unrealistically flawless characters in the future. ;)

Drakken
 
Last edited:
This really sounds exciting. :)

So, basically, you know very little about your monarch. He/she could be a complete nutter and a heretic. Sounds good to me! :)

"Rod the Rampant rose to the throne"
"The Pope has exorcised, excommunicated and flogged Rod the Rampant" :D

Will the game use the historical bloodlines or will there be alterations depending on the player's choice?
 
Originally posted by Norgesvenn
This really sounds exciting. :)

Will the game use the historical bloodlines or will there be alterations depending on the player's choice?
Click to expand...

From what we know, it will start out as historical (1066) then diverge from there; the bloodlines will completely reflect the choices a player has made as well as some genetic magic of course (i.e. luck)

tuna
 
Originally posted by Drakken

.................
. The more secret the characters' traits are, the more realistic it will be, the funnier it will be for us.

......................
Click to expand...

Exactly! The more realistic the amount of knowledge we have the more realistic the game will go. Marriages will go more along realistic lines (i.e. based on what lands/alliances you could possibly get out of it) rather than what kind of children you could produce.:)
 
Originally posted by Sonny


... rather than what kind of children you could produce.:)
Click to expand...

You sound like you're doing it on autopilot...:p
 
Originally posted by BarristerBoy
What does "lebensborn" mean?
Click to expand...

Lebensborn was the Nazi genetical program with the goal of enhancing the genetical pool of the German race by creating pure Aryan children for the future. They chose "perfectly Aryan" males and females and coupled them to each other so that they may have genetically 100 % Aryan children. It was a mix of both Mendel's genetic theories, determinism and updated social lamarckism, since the adults were put in an outside environment to train them and develop both their physical and psychological traits. They thought that the environment would enhance also the children's traits and abilities at birth.

With dynasties - thus individuals' interrelations and mating - as main feature in CK, the problem of Lebensborn can rise up artificially in the game if the players know too much about their characters' innate traits. In sum, players could preplan marriages to decrease bad traits and increase good traits, instead of planning gamble marriages as alliances between dynasties with the realistic chance that both the groom and the bride may be totally unfit to have "normal" children. In the end, it could result in totally unrealistic übercharacters as heirs if these children are a simplified result of their parents' traits coupling, thus giving an illegitimate advantage to the player. That is why I think that ALL of characters' innate traits should be hidden from the player - even the Monarch. Only life-acquired traits should be known to the player.

Drakken
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by Sonny


Exactly! The more realistic the amount of knowledge we have the more realistic the game will go. Marriages will go more along realistic lines (i.e. based on what lands/alliances you could possibly get out of it) rather than what kind of children you could produce.:)
Click to expand...

Yeah it will be real funny when we get a Charles II.:D
 
Originally posted by Idiotboy


Yeah it will be real funny when we get a Charles II.:D
Click to expand...

The worst is that if traits are hidden, you can only guess that you have one in hand. So there is a chance you might find it when it is too late. :D
 
Originally posted by Drakken


The worst is that if traits are hidden, you can only guess that you have one in hand. So there is a chance you might find it when it is too late. :D
Click to expand...

Actually I would prefer that very large defects (mind or body) are well known. If he current head is only moderately stupid it should be hidden.
 
Originally posted by Idiotboy


Actually I would prefer that very large defects (mind or body) are well known. If he current head is only moderately stupid it should be hidden.
Click to expand...

Agreed to some point. :)

Drakken
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back