Chances are they can always return back to flesh out religion more. At the moment even orthodoxy is bland in details as well, and this applies to all other religions.
- 1
-
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.
Chances are they can always return back to flesh out religion more. At the moment even orthodoxy is bland in details as well, and this applies to all other religions.
Exactly! We have more issues to handle before introducing China to the game. I don't think Paradox's next DLC will be on China, just because some fanboys want to play in an unrealistic China in a broken game.
- 5
- 3
- 3
Exactly my thoughts on the matter. This is why I am so skeptical about this addition.
- 5
- 1
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.
- 2
- 1
I just want rulers' relationship with the pope to matter. Historically, conflicts between secular rulers and the reform Papacy defined much of Western Europe for most of the CK period (at least, the post-1066 part of it). The starting 1066 Holy Roman Emperor famously had to kneel in the snow at Canossa to make a temporary peace with the Pope. In-game, he'd just create his own incestuous sex cult and shrug it off.
The track record of Paradox going back and changing things that were added in a DLC is not great (at least, not without creating another DLC to sell the changes later). Look at Royal Court, for example; we've had flavor and clothing packs, but the royal court appearances are basically the same (outside a few artifacts being added).
Even just from a marketing/bang-for-your-buck perspective, dev time spent on old DLC content is going to be deprioritized, because it only affects the experience of folks who have already bought that DLC, whereas time spent working on the base game affects everybody.
I'd actually argue that it would be easier from a balance perspective to add China later rather than sooner. Because China should play very differently from most of the rest of the map, which means that any balance changes for adding additional new things post-China would have to involve redoing the balance with both China and, e.g., Europe. Whereas if China is added later, you can just focus on how China interacts with the existing parts of the map, because they are (theoretically) balanced.
The steppe nomad example from earlier is a great one for explaining this. If they do steppe nomads before China, then they can balance the steppes versus the existing feudal/clan folks, and then when they add China, they can focus on tweaking the relationship between China and the nomads (and other Chinese neighbors), because the rest of the map is already balanced. But if they add China first (and presumably balance it for the relationship between it and whatever placeholders will be on the steppes without a nomadic government), and then add nomads, then they have to simultaneously balance the nomad-China and nomad-feudal/clan/Byzantine relationships at the same time, which is an extra layer of work.
- 7
- 2
Adding China (along with Korea and Japan, as some people here wish) should be a standalone game, much like Sengoku. Otherwise, what we’ll get will be a sloppy, half-baked addition; moreover, the issues we already have will only continue.
- 6
- 3
People want a game where East Asia also gets to interact with the West, so a standalone game like Sengoku likely isn't going to be as popular for PDX.
- 6
- 2
Look, there is never going to be a standalone game set in the same time period with East Asia. It's either brought into CK3 or it is not done at all. This should not be proffered as a solution because it is not a solution.
The debate itself is based on the fact that in the Floor Plan they themselves said they wanted to add it. You would have a stronger case for opposing it if was merely hypothetical, but it isn't, it's on the list the devs talked about and they haven't told us they've changed their minds since. After all, if I got a menu which had Apple Pie on it, I would be entitled to talk about how I would like my Apple Pie when it arrives and asking if it is going to arrive in the near future.
Arguing the Apple Pie shouldn't be served because you want entrees instead and are fearful the main course maybe undercooked is a weird position to take as a result.
- 10
- 2
- 1
Well, you never heard of the Total War: Warhammer Series?
Because CA has managed something unique, by giving Players the Option to connect their Campaign Map with all Campaign Maps from all Total War: Warhammer Games, this could work here too and should give Paradox more Money, because they can charge the Full Price for another Game.
And most importantly, Players who don't want China in their Game, don't have to take the Performance loss from having China on the Map.
- 2
- 1
I think it should be possible today to make a map expansion an option for the players as some sort of game rule. But even playing most East Asia expansion mods for CK3, I don't think there's that much performance issues by adding east asia.
- 4
It would be fair to also provide a game rule that disables Europe and North Africa, India, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Siberia.
- 3
Yeah. If players wants to play with a smaller map they can do so.
That said, there's already mods that basically enables players to do so anyway.
- 1
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.
- 1
I think the problem is if we add China later, can we get a properly fleshed out Nomad DLC/mechanics? Because at the end of the day, a lot of Nomadic interaction are with China and China has a habit of playing off nomads against each other to ensure no one can threaten them.
- 4
- 2
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.
- 1
- 1
.png){kind=avatar}
If we assume they will add East and Southeast Asia eventually, as they said they planned, I think it is better to do so earlier rather than later. The argument for doing it later, as far as I can gather, is that the currently on-map stuff isn't good enough. But it will never be good enough. I guarantee you that, whether they add China or not, whether they cut India and the Steppe even, when CK3's development wraps up, we will look at crusades and the Catholic Church and "feudalism" and whatever else and still it will not be remotely good enough. So that frankly doesn't strike me as a good reason to delay a map expansion.
The Swedes don't care about their own history. I've been beating the same drum for years that it's astounding how little Northern Lords cares about Scandinavia's post-Viking Age history, even though it's most of the game's timeline. But vikings are popular, and fourteenth-century Norway isn't. We'll get China and Japan, and more attention will be lavished on them than on Scandinavia, by the same token.
- 4
- 2
Sure we can, and should! China is hardly unique in that respect. The Byzantines did the same sort of manipulation, arguably even more successfully than the Chinese did! Interactions with Turkish tribes coming from the steppe obviously played a huge role in the Middle East as well (and by extension with India), the Magyars raided across Europe, and the Rus not only interacted regularly with the various steppe peoples but actually managed to expand into the steppe during this period (although not as much as they would in the EU period, obviously). The basic dynamics between steppe nomads and settled peoples were reasonably similar throughout the areas bordering the steppe.
It's perfectly doable to represent steppe nomads without China (only the ones near the Chinese border would actually interact directly in CK terms), but it's basically impossible to represent China without steppe nomads.
- 5
- 1
- 1
It is striking how both Northern Lords and Legacy of Persia restricted their concerns to the earliest start date. Christian Scandinavia and the Seljuks and Ilkhanate, etc are also interesting and could be flavored up!
- 3
I mean the Swedes still have Viking clothing on the later start dates,they didnt bother giving them new clothes.
- 4
It's wild how little they care about the later parts of the game, it feels incomplete and like it was completely forgotten.
- 1
- 1