-
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.
Of course. There is no fixed point of start for the middle ages. But the era was still absolutelly different from the CK2 era gameplay wise. There is no consens about 'Late Antiquity are Middle Ages now'.
Yeah no it’s universal that Late Antiquity ends with the Arab conquest as that’s when the east leaves the Classical age and enters the Muslim Middle Ages
Late Antiquity: Emperor Dicolean to Hercalius.
Personally the idea of A Jesus bloodline is heresy! And I’m Agnostic at best.
Is there ever? A date is just a date. It's valid only for classification purposes. In real life the changes are gradual and vary in different regions, of course. But 476 is an imaginary border that is good enough for me. If you make a game, you need to pick one option and stick with it, right?
That still leaves about 200 years prior to the Charlemagne start date open for exploration, if we were to follow your conclusion. Personally, I'm a sucker for the so-called "Dark Ages" (particularly because they weren't actually that "dark" at all), so a start in the early Islamic period or even before that would be quite interesting to me.
Of course, date pushing is particularly hard and extensive to do for a DLC, so I more than understand if Paradox isn't keen on doing it.
As far as Europe goes at least, 476 makes for a pretty valid year to use as the start of the Medieval time (even though the Western Empire was pretty much dead since 410 at least). Would be interesting to explore the Chalcedonian-era Christian options and the formation of a Christian Orthodoxy.
A date isn’t just a date, it’s basically a world with different mechanics. Ck2 is medieval era game that focuses on Fedualism, their isn’t any of that on a large enough scale in late Antiquity.
Late Antiquity can be better summed as the period Different parts of the world went into the dark or early Middle Ages. Culminating with the end of Persia, the rise of the Caliphate and the Roman empires descent into its dark age.
Italy for example dosent hit the dark age till the gothic war and Lombard invasion in the 500s, while Gaul felt it in the 400s.
I don't know how it's in other countries, but in Latvia, which is where I'm from, 476 is taught as the starting date in schools and 1453 (the fall of Constantinopole) is taught as the end date. 1492 (Columbus's discovery) and 1517 (Luther's reformation) are mentioned as alternatives.
A tangible reward would be the Christ's (or other) bloodline, immortality or an artifact.Claiming to descend from Jesus would make any Christian following any sort of orthodoxy totally freak out!
Is that the tangible reward thou speaketh of?
I would like to see some fantasy content, but I'm not sure I'd use the da Vinci's code as inspiration.
When it comes to adding start dates, I think a more viable option is something between 867 and 1066, some history files are already in the game and I think it'd be interesting to have that part of history opened up. Maybe even fix up the fact that the Pope is absolutely necessary for some events, something which Silfae touched upon when he mentioned that he initially planned to make the papacy title the pontifex title upon hellenic reformation. So it's not impossible, just probably very tedious and would require a lot of testing to be sure.
Another DLC idea is Sunset Invasion 2: Titicaca Boogaloo where the Mayans come once the Aztecs wreck havoc and decide to declare war on both aztecs and others.
Maybe some DLC that improves the imperial experience based on culture religion and title. Like you already have such immersion for E(RE) and HRE, and the Persian Empire kinda, just like the Slavic Union and India. Like yeah they get some opinion bonuses and bloodlines but in comparison not as engaging. So perhaps in order to improve that we could take a look at some practices in history that involve rulers of such regions and see how they might have behaved when you press upgrade. CK2 is a great game for playing out alternate history scenarios and I think it'd be cool to use speculative history more to add yet another layer of fun to it.
Another DLC idea is Sunset Invasion 2: Titicaca Boogaloo where the Mayans come once the Aztecs wreck havoc and decide to declare war on both aztecs and others.
Maybe some DLC that improves the imperial experience based on culture religion and title. Like you already have such immersion for E(RE) and HRE, and the Persian Empire kinda, just like the Slavic Union and India. Like yeah they get some opinion bonuses and bloodlines but in comparison not as engaging. So perhaps in order to improve that we could take a look at some practices in history that involve rulers of such regions and see how they might have behaved when you press upgrade. CK2 is a great game for playing out alternate history scenarios and I think it'd be cool to use speculative history more to add yet another layer of fun to it.
.png){kind=avatar}
Hummm... back to the less arcane stuff with some thoughts on what could be done in a new DLC:
- Proper implementation of the great schism.
- More realm management by giving more detail to the demesne provinces (but please, refrain from implementing buttons just to press for bonus XPTO a la EU4!)
- Events fleshing out the design of the previous point
- More trade management
- Naval battles and naval traits
- Proper implementation of the great schism.
- More realm management by giving more detail to the demesne provinces (but please, refrain from implementing buttons just to press for bonus XPTO a la EU4!)
- Events fleshing out the design of the previous point
- More trade management
- Naval battles and naval traits
Here in Finland they teach the middle ages as starting around the year 1000 and ending in the 1500s. 1 CE-1000 CE are part of the iron age. I think they chose the year 1000 because that's around when Sweden started the conquest of Finland bringing Christianity and contact with the rest of Europe. The 1500s are chosen as the end because of the discovery of America, the reformation and the start of the renaissance.
Rus needs an upgrade! Here's my list of ideas:
Proposals for a Rus-themed DLC
- Playable Novgorod
Novgorod should have its own government in the feudal group. Because, let’s face it, who would you rather play as, a virgin overweight posadnik picked amongst the merchants, or the Chad Alexander Nevsky, who smashed the Crusade?
All jokes aside, even though merchants ran the shit in the city for the most part, they elected prince of Novgorod from other princes in the Rurikovich dynasty. Only when the need called for it, mind you, but it’s better to allow this slight historical inaccuracy (let’s assume there’s always a need) than leave this Medieval powerhouse unplayable.
The system should work similarly to eldership elective, but instead of elders it’s merchants who pick heirs from members of your dynasty.
However, an elected prince of Novgorod should be unable to change laws, revoke titles, etc. In order to become an autocrat in Novgorod some kind of decision has to be taken.
- Trade routes
The route from the Varangians to the Greeks and the Volga trade route should be implemented. And northern provinces should have unique resources. Just like Mali has gold and salt, Novgorod should have access to sweet fluffy furs.
Tie in there some Ural and Siberia exploration events to find even more resources in the east and expand trade routes there.
- Complex Orthodoxy
Gaining your own patriarch is not as easy as gaining independence. Don’t believe me? Ask Ukraine!
Anyway, Russia itself got it’s own patriarch only in 1589. More then a century after Byzzies were gone. Before that were metropolitans who were appointed by the patriarch of Constantinople. There should be some way for rulers to wrestle with Constantinople Patriarchate for the control of local church, akin to free/papal investiture.
Also, the residence of said metropolitan is a big deal. His residence changed from Kiev to Vladimir to Moscow, and every city that convinced metropolitan to move there received a major political boost.
- Yarlyk
Basically, nomadic viceroyalties to rule conquered feudal realms. The Golden Horde appointed one prince to rule all other princes, and appointed another one upon his death.
- Ushkuiniks
Can be implemented as a Novgorod-based mercenary band that starts pillaging the land if no one hires them for a long time.
- Princely conventions
Princes loved to gathers and bicker. Such gatherings could result in land redistribution, gains in claims (or the opposite), maybe befriending a neighboring prince or gaining a new rival. A pricne named Vasilko once lost his eyes after one such convention.
Also, faced with a foreign invasion, princes should unite against the common threat. They were bad at this, yes (Mongols can attest to that), but at times they did pursue the collective action against Cumans and Pechenegs and that one feeble attempt against the Mongols at Kalka. If a major princedom is lost (lets say, if Cumans took Kiev) princes should gather and try to form an alliance to retake the land together. And then, upon their success, start a feud because now everyone wants it.
Such conventions should be exclusive to Rurikovich dynasty. An upstart who proclaimed himself a prince of Rostov the other day should not be a part of the club. And also, maybe all other Rurikovich members now have claims on his lands, because who does he think he is?!
Anyway, such conventions should make the Rus feel more like a single entity, even though divided.
Proposals for a Rus-themed DLC
- Playable Novgorod
Novgorod should have its own government in the feudal group. Because, let’s face it, who would you rather play as, a virgin overweight posadnik picked amongst the merchants, or the Chad Alexander Nevsky, who smashed the Crusade?
All jokes aside, even though merchants ran the shit in the city for the most part, they elected prince of Novgorod from other princes in the Rurikovich dynasty. Only when the need called for it, mind you, but it’s better to allow this slight historical inaccuracy (let’s assume there’s always a need) than leave this Medieval powerhouse unplayable.
The system should work similarly to eldership elective, but instead of elders it’s merchants who pick heirs from members of your dynasty.
However, an elected prince of Novgorod should be unable to change laws, revoke titles, etc. In order to become an autocrat in Novgorod some kind of decision has to be taken.
- Trade routes
The route from the Varangians to the Greeks and the Volga trade route should be implemented. And northern provinces should have unique resources. Just like Mali has gold and salt, Novgorod should have access to sweet fluffy furs.
Tie in there some Ural and Siberia exploration events to find even more resources in the east and expand trade routes there.
- Complex Orthodoxy
Gaining your own patriarch is not as easy as gaining independence. Don’t believe me? Ask Ukraine!
Anyway, Russia itself got it’s own patriarch only in 1589. More then a century after Byzzies were gone. Before that were metropolitans who were appointed by the patriarch of Constantinople. There should be some way for rulers to wrestle with Constantinople Patriarchate for the control of local church, akin to free/papal investiture.
Also, the residence of said metropolitan is a big deal. His residence changed from Kiev to Vladimir to Moscow, and every city that convinced metropolitan to move there received a major political boost.
- Yarlyk
Basically, nomadic viceroyalties to rule conquered feudal realms. The Golden Horde appointed one prince to rule all other princes, and appointed another one upon his death.
- Ushkuiniks
Can be implemented as a Novgorod-based mercenary band that starts pillaging the land if no one hires them for a long time.
- Princely conventions
Princes loved to gathers and bicker. Such gatherings could result in land redistribution, gains in claims (or the opposite), maybe befriending a neighboring prince or gaining a new rival. A pricne named Vasilko once lost his eyes after one such convention.
Also, faced with a foreign invasion, princes should unite against the common threat. They were bad at this, yes (Mongols can attest to that), but at times they did pursue the collective action against Cumans and Pechenegs and that one feeble attempt against the Mongols at Kalka. If a major princedom is lost (lets say, if Cumans took Kiev) princes should gather and try to form an alliance to retake the land together. And then, upon their success, start a feud because now everyone wants it.
Such conventions should be exclusive to Rurikovich dynasty. An upstart who proclaimed himself a prince of Rostov the other day should not be a part of the club. And also, maybe all other Rurikovich members now have claims on his lands, because who does he think he is?!
Anyway, such conventions should make the Rus feel more like a single entity, even though divided.
My buddy and I have been meddling around with different pagan religions and trying the new reformation mechanic. It has been a blast to reform the hellenics and and creating the catholic subsuming african religion. But we thought the game lacked in heresy. Our suggestion would be to implement a lesser reformation mechanic inside an established religion, so you could create a heresy in your preferred style. It should be a limited capability reformation, but enough that you could either take something out of a religion or to add something in.
This idea mostly came from browsing the abrahamic religions heresy list, differences tend to lie in flavour and less in mechanics. And the AI could create some themselves making the world even more gloriously chaotic.
This idea mostly came from browsing the abrahamic religions heresy list, differences tend to lie in flavour and less in mechanics. And the AI could create some themselves making the world even more gloriously chaotic.
Honestly this speaks more about Latvian education system than about historical periods.
The concept of Middle Ages starting in 476 and ending in 1453/1492 is based on Italian Rennaissance cliches... and is pretty outdated for several centuries or at least decades.
Don't get me wrong, our Czech education system sucks in this regard as much as Lithuanian... but at least - as far as I know - it is taught that the real middle ages have started with introduction of Feudalism, division of power between the Church and lay rulers... and gradual emergence of cities as independent socio-economic force - neither of which existed before 10th century.. in some early forms probably from 9th.
That is the general look at things. Then there are other than West-European perspectives. We have seen Finnish/Scandinavian, in which Middle Ages start around 1000 AD. In Central Europe the date for the true middle ages is around the Lechfeld, Creation of Ottonid empire or foundation of regional states such as Poland, Bohemia and Hungary - which is 9th-11th century. Times before that belong to the Migration period, which has very little to do with this game's mechanics.
In the Middle East the true milestone is Islamic expansion of the 7th century, from Byzantine perspective it would be either the era of Heracleitos or the Macedon dynasty?
But since the devs have made it clear, can we please once and for all abandon this nonsense about pushing the start date of this Medieval game to Late Antiquity?
Just read this every evening before you go to sleep:
This game really still has a lot of potential interesting things to explore which actually belong to the Medieval period of Crusader kings - with feudalism, powerfull church, cities, Islam, etc.
Personally, I'd love to just have some of the "unintended features" of previous DLC looked at. Problems stemming as far back as Reaper's Due still haunt the game to this day, with threads still being made about them - one example being the prevalence of disfigurement, resulting in an absurd number of characters wearing masks. Game rules deal with some of these issues, but not all. Holy Fury brought a great amount of features to the game, so I think it would be prudent, in my humble, amateur opinion, if the devs focused more on fine tuning the game before delving into another major DLC.
I've been calling for this for years. The way patriarchs are created is mediocre and could stand a great deal of improvement.
I agree that more dates in between 867 and 1066 would be nice. For example the formation of the early Ottonian HRE, the foundation of Normandy, the Shia takeover of Egypt and the Great Schism itself would make for interesting starts.
