In new video, CK3 game director tell Chinese community that he is "extremely excited" to reveal the next expansion to them

[Obeliskkai]

We keep arriving at the argument that devs will add it, and that's true, you are quite correct that they will, or at least that's their intention.

What I cannot understand is why we aren't focusing on the actual topic of discussion: whether the devs should make China sooner rather than later. There are plenty of indirect statements to that effect, but nobody really comes out and says it for some reason. Judging by the fact that my most disagreeable statement (in terms of reactions) was me saying I'd rather see it done well at the end of the development cycle than at any other point, I image people are avoiding it because it is a more uncomfortable and difficult matter to discuss. After all, it is true that we all have our tastes and also that the decision isn't up to us, much like @Silens mentioned earlier on.

To your credit, you are the one who makes statements about this particular discussion the most in here, at least from the "add China asap" side of the conversation.

There is also the fact that a large body of players, myself included, would like to play China sooner rather than later. People ask for China and East Asia regularly and have been doing so for years, even during the CK2 days. To leave it to the end of the development cycle (which is going to be at least the rest of this decade if not more) is not only to ask those players to wait an inordinate amount of time (when they have waited an inordinate amount of time already) but the request is predicated on a fallacy...

That to leave it to the end is for it to be done 'well'.

There is no evidence that leaving it till the end would mean it would be done better than if it were introduced this year. There is also a chance that at the end of the cycle (when we have to assume CK4 is looming) any implementation would actually be poorer as China and wider East Asia would have to be integrated all at once into multiple more systems than exist at present.

And of course it could be seen as somewhat insulting to add the region at the end of development when everyone's attention will be moving on to CK4. CK4 will likely have East Asia in from the beginning after all, so to add East Asia at the fag end of one development cycle when it would be present from the get go in the big new thing is going to fall exceptionally flat.

Sooner rather than later would be preferable. This year would, in my opinion, be ideal as the basics required to add China have been dealt with (the development of alternate paths through the game such as Administrative Empire, which could be modified to produce a 'Celestial Empire' form of government) and it would make trade easier to add next year given the sources of so many goods that would be present in the Trade system are in the East Asia region.

Of course, the decision as to whether it is this year was made a long, long time ago. Even the decision as to whether it maybe next year. We will know relatively soon I imagine.

 

[Ares Enyalios]

Honestly, it runs super slow after 150 years. A map expansion is the last we need right know. I rather have more to do in mid and lategame than that.

 

[Tomray94]

There is also the fact that a large body of players, myself included, would like to play China sooner rather than later. People ask for China and East Asia regularly and have been doing so for years, even during the CK2 days. To leave it to the end of the development cycle (which is going to be at least the rest of this decade if not more) is not only to ask those players to wait an inordinate amount of time (when they have waited an inordinate amount of time already)

Here we arrive at the fundamental point of disagreement I believe, which is good, because it means we can finally understand what the real difference between our perspectives is.

You consider 2028-29 (just to give a concrete number) to be an inordinate amount of time. I completely agree with you, this game should not take a decade to be complete. That being said, unless the CK3 team grows substantially, then some things will have to go for 2026, others for 2027 and others even into 2030 unfortunately enough. You believe you've waited enough for China and I have sympathy for the position, but my issue, to reiterate, is that it cannot be Catholic mechanics and the Crusades which have to wait until 2027-2029.

I am not arguing this purely because they existed in CK2 or because they are referenced in the title of the franchise, but, more substantially, because they are a key part of gameplay in half the map as it currently stands. That the inclusion of East Asia may make that only 33-40% of the map would not diminish the necessity of these mechanics anyhow. The Crusades affect Arabs, Orthodox Christians, North Africans, most Catholics and most Muslims alike. Catholicism is the religion of all of Europe at game start, excluding only its peripheries to the east and south (Ukraine and Russia, Balkans and Byzantium, respectively). Not having these mechanics makes gameplay poorer from the Canary islands to Mesopotamia and from England to Poland.

We are talking about events that affect England and Egypt simultaneously, whereas the task of adding China affects only the nomads, which are peripheral to gameplay at the moment, and the countries which will explicitly be added through the map expansion itself and are presently non-entities. I don't think it is right to forgo refining of what exists for addition of what doesn't and I cannot agree with the view that "there will always be calls for further refinement, therefore China will be put off indefenately this way", as was stated by another user earlier in the thread, because most of us here have been very explicit about what we consider to be necessary polish prior to China's addition. We are not asking for perfect Catholicism or perfect Crusades, but merely for a first rework of these things to make them actually matter and be flavorful.

After that, there is no real opposition to China, besides maybe the need for a trade rework, in which case, I atually agree with your argument that it would be best done with China or after it.

but the request is predicated on a fallacy...

That to leave it to the end is for it to be done 'well'.

There is no evidence that leaving it till the end would mean it would be done better than if it were introduced this year. There is also a chance that at the end of the cycle (when we have to assume CK4 is looming) any implementation would actually be poorer as China and wider East Asia would have to be integrated all at once into multiple more systems than exist at present.

My only evidence for why it may be done well in the end is CK2's Holy Fury, which was the perfect expansion to a nearly completed game. Some people may still have gripes with it, but I would forever defend the view that it was a perfect send-off. More to the point, it included ideas from CK3 that were backported, to the best ability of the devs, into CK2, most prominently the religious reform mechanic for Pagans.

Whether similar attention will be paid to the end of CK3, I cannot say. EU4, the most recent example of a near-finished Paradox game, has been silently left to rot apparently, which is a terrible outcome of course. But, either way, I don't think we can rule out a CK3 equivalent to "Holy Fury".

Of course, the decision as to whether it is this year was made a long, long time ago. Even the decision as to whether it maybe next year. We will know relatively soon I imagine.

Indeed, let's hope we can get a dev diary telling us the basics in 1 or 2 weeks, so we may know what the next chapter is about. Maybe then our conversation will be more grounded and in-line with developer plans.

 

[FondMemberofSociety]

In-game, he'd just create his own incestuous sex cult and shrug it off.

If only his vassals would do something about a stunt like this... they are in an organized religion after all, isn't that supposed to be used to organize people in situations like your empire breaking from the organization?

But vikings are popular, and fourteenth-century Norway isn't.

Even if 14th-century Norway ain't popular I still want to do a Great Northern Empire run someday b/c I failed in Empire: Total War.

That to leave it to the end is for it to be done 'well'.

There is no evidence that leaving it till the end would mean it would be done better than if it were introduced this year.

I have to say, knowing what I know about Chinese history, if what we see now in-game is how they represent the Caliphates & the ERE, there's a snow golem's chance in the Nether that Pdox will make a 'good' China.
Fundamentally speaking we need a new form of in-game government that is based on people's position within the state apparatus and the regions they wield power over could vary a lot, instead of the current variations of "people fixed to the land". When LoP was announced I thought this was it, and I was wrong; When RtP was announced I thought this was it, and I was still wrong.
I don't know if doing it later would make the needed changes come true, but if it's done this year or the next, it won't. Unless there is a secret team working quietly for this moment and China gets added along with sweeping fixes across the Caliphates and the ERE ... well I should go back to dreaming.

is that it cannot be Catholic mechanics and the Crusades which have to wait until 2027-2029.

I am not arguing this purely because they existed in CK2 or because they are referenced in the title of the franchise, but, more substantially, because they are a key part of gameplay in half the map as it currently stands.

Come to think of it, Crusades reworks were delayed to the tail end of CK2's lifespan.

 

[Tomray94]

Come to think of it, Crusades reworks were delayed to the tail end of CK2's lifespan.

yes, and when they came it was great. So you can imagine my displeasure when I found out that this was not actually a backported feature, but something that required re-doing anew in CK3.

 

[Emperor 1997]

yes, and when they came it was great. So you can imagine my displeasure when I found out that this was not actually a backported feature, but something that required re-doing anew in CK3.

Crusades should be higher Priority than adding China to the Game.
But guess, the Devs really like to see the Pope calling an Crusade for an Kingdom in China or India.

And why does the Pope prefer to attack weak Rulers, if Rome is held by an powerful Hellenic Ruler, makes absolutly no sense and allows an Player, to quickly wipe out all Catholics from Italy, because the Pope really wants to conquer England back instead of Rome.
In CK2, I have had Moments, where I was about to lose my Kingdom, because of the Crusade against me, which is not case in CK3.

 

[ray243]

I wonder if adding China early is because PDX wants to see a big revenue jump and new user base increase before they can justify making more DLCs long term for non-Asia regions.

 

[Tomray94]

Crusades should be higher Priority than adding China to the Game.
But guess, the Devs really like to see the Pope calling an Crusade for an Kingdom in China or India.

And why does the Pope prefer to attack weak Rulers, if Rome is held by an powerful Hellenic Ruler, makes absolutly no sense and allows an Player, to quickly wipe out all Catholics from Italy, because the Pope really wants to conquer England back instead of Rome.
In CK2, I have had Moments, where I was about to lose my Kingdom, because of the Crusade against me, which is not case in CK3.

When I tried to do a Norse Pagan Ireland run in CK2, I remember getting Crusaded into oblivion, it was an exhilarating feeling honestly. It goes without saying that this has never happened to me in CK3 either.

 

[zeruosi]

Nobody is saying that in this thread. When India was added in CK2 it affected everyone, old and new computers alike. Performance suffered significantly. And it took them a good two or three years before they found a solution to the mid game lag.

Their solution was to reduce courtier fertility and to kill off any character without a title or court position after a period of time. Drastically reducing the number of characters. Something CK3 brought over.

The worst part was, India was one of the least popular regions in CK2, and they never added any additional content to it after Raja’s of India, so what was the point?

It’s perfectly reasonable to be concerned that a bad China implementation would add little to the game but make the overall product for everywhere else worse

India, as my favorite region to visit, has almost no special family symbols or bloodlines.

 

[BladeRunner2250]

I wonder if adding China early is because PDX wants to see a big revenue jump and new user base increase before they can justify making more DLCs long term for non-Asia regions.

I can tell you this much I am immediately buying a large amount of PDX stock if they announce the China DLC, because it shows where their priorities are (not in a good way for us customers).

 

[zeruosi]

I think you might be overestimating the scale of such a map expansion. Given the current size of the map adding all of east Asia (China, Indochina, Korea, Manchuria, Japan, and all of the south east asian islands) would constitute in my estimation (based on a mockup drawing) at most a roughly 130% increase in land size.

Of that extra 30%, somewhere inbetween 10 and 15 percent is for just Manchuria and an expanded eastern part of Mongolia. Which being very sparsely inhabited would have a similarly large baronies as is the case in the current ck3 steppe region.

Thus leaving it only a 115 to 120% of the original map size for the more densely populated areas with around india level barony size. Speaking of which, the missing parts of Indochina and China together are only slightly larger than the combination of the 3 Indian empires currently in ck3 with regards to land area.

The region is indeed very diverse culturally and so would likely require a lot of varied flavour to be added. But it is by no means as big an addition as you seem to think it is. Especially since the flavour can be done later in dedicated flavour packs. The developers do not seem to have an issue with leaving very barely flavoured regions in the game.

I have to correct you one thing, although Gansu has appeared on the map, there are still over 4 million square kilometers of mainland China (excluding Manchuria), and nearly 2 million square kilometers of the Indochinese Peninsula. The area to be expanded is 1.5 times that of the Indian subcontinent plus Myanmar

 

[zeruosi]

People think Chinese history fans wants a game only about China or east Asia but in reality a lot of such players also wanted to have China interact with Europe as well.

People love things like Han dynasty army Vs Roman legion fantasy matchups of course.

Believe me, this is an Internet disaster.

 

[ChowMeinDelivery]

And if past releases are anything to go by, even if you don't buy the DLC, chances are the map expansion is part of the free update. Just that without the DLC you'll likely get a feudal (=free base game gov) China, while you get the specific mechanics (i.e. imperial government) with the expansion.

My point is that the map and the amount of characters will be the same with or without the DLC, as the map expansion (like any other change to the map) will be part of the free update.

The map expansion being part of the free update isn't a "probably." Don't quote me on this (in the unlikely event that I am wrong), but the way Clausewitz handles map data prevents changes to the map being unlocked behind triggers (e.g. whether or not you own a DLC).

 

[zeruosi]

Technically, nobody has to argue any point, because neither side decides about it. The devs will decide, and they aren't part of our discussion, nor is gameplay the only consideration they take into account. No, they also have to see economic factors.

It's not secret that current China is an increasingly attractive market, many Chinese players are drawn to the game already (and other GSG as well). CK3 is the only game in the lineup that doesn't have China in it, every other GSG - EU, Vic, HOI - has; and it should be noted that China is often among the top player choices. It's no coincidence that PDX released a new years wishes video in Chinese, so they are aware of that market and target group.

I think you're taking a very lazy stance here, leaning back and having others try to talk you into agreeing. No, we're both standing on the same neutral grounds, we can both consider pros and cons and try to find a mutual understanding, and that is probably the possible fruitful result of discussing taste. And yeah, I do agree that there are good arguments for it and good arguments against it.

But it's just a discussion about finding common ground over taste, to further our mutual understanding on a communications platform for a game. We're not the ones making the decision, and I think it's a bit far-fetched to think that the executives at PDX will read the forums and build their decision-making on forum posts. As funny as that it is to imagine that, I think we can both agree on how unlikely that is.

The execs and devs will decide regardless of what both of us want or don't want or can or cannot agree on, as they always have. That's basically it. Realistically, in addition to gameplay, they have two other considerations: technical limitations, i.e. performance, and economic expectations from taking or not taking a certain direction. And the latter speaks strongly in favor of adding it.

I know, it's always leaving a bitter aftertaste when bringing business and money-making into a discussion about games and gameplay, but it is what it is. But for what it's worth, I do look forward to it, so that I can finally have my CK3 -> EU5 -> Vic3 -> HoI4 run as China and/or Japan.

IR：I feel like you've forgotten about me

 

[zeruosi]

Yeah. The reality is the people on this forum don't fully represent the full fanbase of CK3. Given this is an English speaking forum, this means a lot of Chinese, Japanese and Korean fans aren't really represented here in significant numbers even if there's a big fanbase just looking at the people posting in those languages on steam.

Not to mention there's a few popular mods that added east Asia.

Yes, I don't know about Japan and South Korea, but Chinese people really prefer to communicate on their own Internet and forums.
(Otherwise, there wouldn't have been such an outrageous Ming Dynasty update for EU4.)

 

[Goalshunter13]

Whatever Chapter 4 is, it is, as they said, the necessities to do Trade and Merchants later. (Chapter 5 as hinted by the 2024 review by Mr. Oltner)

Realistically, i dont mind if it is China or not. If it enables trade to be more fleshed out later, i am in favor of it

 

[Tomray94]

Are we playing the same game here? Count to Emperor doesn't take anywhere close to 4 generations, even if you restrict yourself to only landing dynasts.

Forgot to reply to this before, yes, it doesn't take even 2 generations to do if one is really commited, I just roleplay myself into doing it in 3-4 generations so I don't get bored of a campaign and shut it down before it reaches the 1150s even (just to emphasise, I almost always play 1066).

 

[FortressofRain]

My CPU is in the 73rd percentile of Intel processors and it still performs pretty poorly in the mid-late game. I don't want to even imagine how it will fare if China is added to the map.

With all the tarriffs and trade bs going on...its going to funny if the pc industry slows down and people in even western nations or china can't get new pcs or graphics cards to upgrade their conputers or run the expanded map. If they aren't careful they gonna increase the scope and end up locking a majority of their player base from being able to play past 100 years in any campaign or run the game. Lol. Imagine the YouTube reviews...people quiting campaigns after the grandkids are born. Lmao. =>

I don't think PDX is saying they would move on from western Eurasia tbh. It seems like after adding East Asia, they would return to flesh out more details in the western regions.

So what you are saying is maybe we'll get Crusades or Papal elections in 2035? =>

 

[Goalshunter13]

So what you are saying is maybe we'll get Crusades or Papal elections in 2035? =>

No, but if they release China now, which they would eventually do anytime in the future anyway, they could come back next year for more european and middle east stuff.

I don't get the drama, They basically confirmed 2026 will be Trade and Merchants (with probably Italian flavor) on the 2024 review diary.

As the other people pointed out, China isnt even a given at this point. Only the devs know what 2025 will be. But regardless of what it is, i'm happy if China comes now or on the future.

 

[Obeliskkai]

Whatever Chapter 4 is, it is, as they said, the necessities to do Trade and Merchants later. (Chapter 5 as hinted by the 2024 review by Mr. Oltner)

Realistically, i dont mind if it is China or not. If it enables trade to be more fleshed out later, i am in favor of it

Trade routes and the sources of goods being in place would seem to meet that criteria as the alternative would be to abstract goods at the edge of the map, they would just 'appear'.