This may be a foolish and/or premature thread as I don't have the game yet, but I'm interested in a discussion on the future possibilities for CK. I followed a lot of the mod projects for EU2/HoI/Vic although I've never taken part, but this is an area where I have a bit of a vested interest in the history. 
I'm also very interested to see how Paradox's implementation of the 'game not simulation' dynasty-based event system works. One of the things that got me into Paradox games in the first place was the immersion created by the historical events. That said, I absolutely respect the gameplay value of the decision they made and I'm not interested in arguing with it -- I'm sure they've had that debate to death internally. And I recall a number of 'that's too deterministic!' arguments on the other boards.
But still, it seems to me that you don't necessarily have to scrap the entire 'historical flow' just because it's no longer the same cornerstone of design that it used to be. Perhaps it might work on a more simple level -- allowing you a smaller penalty for some action that would otherwise be difficult if it actually happened, or even some 'flavor' events to provide a bit of context as you go marauding through the Holy Land.
I guess my first question is: is this still technically feasible? Obviously, if you start in 1066, the likelyhood of having the historical Tancred character inherit the Principality of Antioch is probably fairly low, so you'd have to have a philosophy behind event-writing to figure out what's important enough that it would happen 'to the province' or 'to anybody ruling that place' and where you might actually say 'if you are descended from such-and-such de Hauteville and control Antioch, x happens in 1109.'
And after that: is it worth it? Is the dynamic/dynastic engine such that it really precludes this at all? I like having the freedom of a less simulation-based approach, but having events for things like the Synod at Clermont or a bunch of Christian countries all declaring war on whomever controls Jerusalem in 1095 seems like it would make the same dynastic events feel like they're taking place in less of a vacuum. But I can't address that for a while yet, so maybe those of you who have spent some time on the game would care to.
vicariously,
Aq
I'm also very interested to see how Paradox's implementation of the 'game not simulation' dynasty-based event system works. One of the things that got me into Paradox games in the first place was the immersion created by the historical events. That said, I absolutely respect the gameplay value of the decision they made and I'm not interested in arguing with it -- I'm sure they've had that debate to death internally. And I recall a number of 'that's too deterministic!' arguments on the other boards.
But still, it seems to me that you don't necessarily have to scrap the entire 'historical flow' just because it's no longer the same cornerstone of design that it used to be. Perhaps it might work on a more simple level -- allowing you a smaller penalty for some action that would otherwise be difficult if it actually happened, or even some 'flavor' events to provide a bit of context as you go marauding through the Holy Land.
I guess my first question is: is this still technically feasible? Obviously, if you start in 1066, the likelyhood of having the historical Tancred character inherit the Principality of Antioch is probably fairly low, so you'd have to have a philosophy behind event-writing to figure out what's important enough that it would happen 'to the province' or 'to anybody ruling that place' and where you might actually say 'if you are descended from such-and-such de Hauteville and control Antioch, x happens in 1109.'
And after that: is it worth it? Is the dynamic/dynastic engine such that it really precludes this at all? I like having the freedom of a less simulation-based approach, but having events for things like the Synod at Clermont or a bunch of Christian countries all declaring war on whomever controls Jerusalem in 1095 seems like it would make the same dynastic events feel like they're taking place in less of a vacuum. But I can't address that for a while yet, so maybe those of you who have spent some time on the game would care to.
vicariously,
Aq
