Well, it's Friday and high time to spill the beans on the new expansion for Crusader Kings II; the Sword of Islam. Judging by the forum, playable Muslims is the most requested feature for CKII, and who are we to disagree? We always wanted to do it, provided we could do the Muslim world justice. That time is now (or, well, soon ). As with the Ruler Designer DLC, the Sword of Islam will be released together with a major content patch. What you get with the Sword of Islam is simply the ability to play as the Muslim rulers, but all the new mechanics will be there and running for the AI (or other players in multiplayer) even if you don't have the expansion.

I'll be doing three dev diaries on the Sword of Islam, each one dealing with some unique features for the Muslims as well as some free features that everyone will have access to simply by patching to 1.06.

THE SWORD OF ISLAM

One of the major hassles with making Muslims playable was the prevalence of text with obviously Christian or Western terminology. Therefore, we had to go through all text to make it fit the setting if you are playing a Muslim. Often, this required writing whole new events and decisions. For example, Muslims don't hold tournaments, they have the Furusiyya instead, which is an exhibition of martial arts and horsemanship. They don't hold Grand Feasts, they observe the Ramadan, etc. We also added some completely new decisions, like going on the Hajj (the pilgrimage to Mecca), which will initiate a cool little event driven story of what happens on the way to and from the holy city. Of course, there is also a whole slew of events dealing with various new gameplay features (more on that in later dev diaries.)

Another issue we needed to solve was the Gothic looking graphical interface of Crusader Kings II, which we felt did not really work when playing as a Muslim ruler. So we did a complete reskin with sand tones and green symbols and patterns instead of the church window graphics of Christian rulers. Yet another problem was that many event pictures looked distinctly Western/Christian, so we've added about 25 new ones to serve as Muslim equivalents. Then there are all the little things, like trait icons with crosses, the Crusade banner, etc. All of that has been changed to provide the right atmosphere. We've even changed the five councillor models for Muslims when they're out in the provinces performing jobs. It's all been a lot of work, but I think it turned out really well.

Muslims get a slightly different set of character traits; they don't get the Kinslayer, Crusader, Celibate and Chaste Traits. Instead, they get the Mujahid, Hajjaj, Faqih (Islamic law expert), Hafiz (has memorized the Koran), Sayyid (agnatic descendent of Fatima or one of Muhammad's uncles) and Mirza (child of a Sayyida mother) traits.

Lastly, Muslims get another set of honorary titles to hand out to their vassals. They all get a few special flavour events - especially the Chief Qadi - a position requiring an ecclesiastical education.



That's it for the Sword of Islam in this dev diary; next time I will go into the core dynamics of playing as a Muslim ruler.

THE 1.06 PATCH

Now then, here's some of the free stuff we're giving ya'll in the 1.06 patch...

First off, we thought the southwest corner of the map looked a bit dull, so we added a bunch of new provinces down there, representing the flourishing civilizations of the Manden people; Ghana, Mali and Songhay. The area comes with historical rulers (of course) and a new West African culture group. The region is rich but hard to reach.



For flavour, we have also made it so that duchy tier and above titles held by rulers of Iranian, Arabic and Turkish cultures are named after the ruling dynasty. For example, the Kingdom of Egypt automatically becomes the Fatimid Sultanate while the Fatimids are in power (though the original name is also used where appropriate.) In case the same dynasty holds several high rank titles, only the highest is named after the dynasty. Thus, we can have both a Seljuk Sultanate and a Sultanate of Rum, both ruled by the Seljuk dynasty. Randomly generated characters of these cultures automatically get a dynasty name suitable to name states after (ending with -id or -n, etc).



Lastly (for this dev diary), there are seven new creatable empires (the Arabian Empire, the Empire of Persia, Britannia, Scandinavia, Francia, Spain and Russia) and a whole slew of new de jure kingdoms, mostly to break up the old kingdom of Khazaria. Now, I know the addition of the new empires is controversial, but the creation conditions are designed to be fairly difficult to achieve, so the AI will very rarely do it. We want players to have the imperial option to strive for if they so desire - the Unions turned out to be a popular feature in Europa Universalis III.



Oh, and before anyone asks, patch 1.06 will be semi-compatible with old save games: you will be able to keep playing, but we're making no guarantees that the balance will not be completely upset, or that any added new provinces will be active and working.

That's it for now. Next week I'll talk about polygamy, decadence, and strong and weak claims!

 

[Poddster]

You can twist and turn it anyway you want but Paradox has never in any way advertised that the game has playable Muslims as a feature. Plus if you don't like this change than simply do not apply the upcoming patch. It's not like you paid for any of the new content in it anyway, as it's being paid for by those who buy the new DLC.

Can't modders simply change "muslim" into "muslim2", and then they're playable in exactly the way they are now because the DLC targets the "muslim" religion, rather than the "muslim2" religion? (i.e. using the christendom game mechanics?). That'll take all of 2 minutes to do using your favourite text editor's search and replace tool.

 

[Keanon]

In the religions file where you enable them now they could just put "Is muslim = yes" and if that is on it uses the new mechanics but can't be played without the DLC.

Why can't you do this, Paradox?

No reason not to both have and eat the cake in this case, truly.

 

[Captain Gars]

Can't modders simply change "muslim" into "muslim2", and then they're playable in exactly the way they are now because the DLC targets the "muslim" religion, rather than the "muslim2" religion? (i.e. using the christendom game mechanics?). That'll take all of 2 minutes to do using your favourite text editor's search and replace tool.

That might be possible but I'll leave that up to the development team to answer as I'm no longer directly involved in the day-to-day development of CKII.

 

[unmerged(5822)]

Would it be possible to change the interface slightly, to make non-existing but achievable titular titles visible somewhere?
As a list - or perhaps as a new mapmode?
Then the new empires would not have to be "de iure" empires from the beginning, for the sake of new player friendliness, but could rather start out as titular.

 

[Meneth]

Why can't you do this, Paradox?

No reason not to both have and eat the cake in this case, truly.

That sounds like the best way of doing it, as that doesn't hinder modding (to any major degree), while still limiting the muslim features to only those who've purchased the DLC.

Would it be possible to change the interface slightly, to make non-existing but achievable titular titles visible somewhere?
As a list - or perhaps as a new mapmode?
Then the new empires would not have to be "de iure" empires from the beginning, for the sake of new player friendliness, but could rather start out as titular.

You can see them by searching for them in the title-finder.

 

[King]

Would it be possible to change the interface slightly, to make non-existing but achievable titular titles visible somewhere?
As a list - or perhaps as a new mapmode?
Then the new empires would not have to be "de iure" empires from the beginning, for the sake of new player friendliness, but could rather start out as titular.

That is not a slight interface change that is a pretty major overhaul, because it would require a lot of work to match the clarity of the De Jure map mode. So basically no.

 

[Graspiloot]

It's funny how people feel so entitled.

 

[Meneth]

It's funny how people feel so entitled.

Please don't generalize.

 

[Pyoro]

I strongly doubt a few empires on the de jure map will change anything fundamental for new players. Now a decent ingame help system that lists what otherwise is only available through searching the files or the wiki, that might change something ... ^^

 

[Poddster]

You can see them by searching for them in the title-finder.

You need to know the name of them first In HCI there's a concept of 'discoverability' -- titular tiles don't have any discoverability to them. The game will only tell you they exist if you stumble blindly into the right conditions.

 

[Graspiloot]

Please don't generalize.

I think its fairly clear which people I am talking about.

 

[NewbieOne]

Quite specifically we dislike creatable titular titles. Our dynamic system requires it so that if for example I remove the last duchy for a starting de Jure Kingdom then the titular creation mechanics mean that the title can be recreated. In the case of a pure titular title you do not know you are able to create it until you reach the conditions and receive the alert. Unless of course you have had a look through the game files.

Thank you for a clear answer. I kinda suspected that reason. Well, you could highlight the locations (scripted capitals) that allow you to create a titular kingdom. You could also put the empire creation in a king's decisions, just above the Great Tournament. Perhaps similar to where it would be for a double-emperor's vassal king who would be able to initiate the plot to gain one of the empires (if this works with empires too). Your you could put it in the starting tips or on the loading screens. Even the not so inquisitive players would know in a short order.

This is bad for learning curve and for game play. If you look at from a learning curve perspective we denying players knowledge of cool game play elements unless you have played the game before or poked around the files. If we want to bring more players to the strategy genre (and I do) we need to move away from that mentality. People should know about really cool things they can do (like creating an empire) from the get go.

I think they would also know if you told them using some other means of passing the information noticeably enough.

The game play perspective the de jure titles are very powerful means for players to determine what the hell to do in the game. The completion of existing dejure titles and the acquisition of new ones is a key part of game play. The de Jure mapmode is integral to the game play expierence.

Yes, and that's why I'd prefer for the de iure titles to remain historical (particularly from the point of view of 'integral to the game play experience'). As in not pedantically accurate in every detail (which is impossible anyway), but at least no countries that never existed. There is a reason why you wouldn't go as far as putting a King of Finland Or Brittany or Khazaria in the game for balance reasons or just to make it playable, right? I see a de iure empire of Scandinavia or Francia or something else in much the same way. As I said, the problem is because of the meaning of 'de iure', which implies a pre-existing but lost kingdom or empire (or duchy). In fact, de iure implies something more legal than the current shape of the map. An Empire of Francia just doesn't have what it takes to pretend to be such an old, rightful empire.

Just one thing more. You guys can't act surprised when people comment plentifully and also negatively on something you yourselves recognise from the beginning as controversial. Controversies can't be reduced to, 'we disagree but we still love you and it's your right to do whatever you want with the game.' Which is actually a true statement in the abstract but anyway.

It's funny how people feel so entitled.

It works both ways. Fans can't expect artists to implement whatever the fans want but artists can't expect fans to like whatever the artists decide to do. So neither are players entitled to expect changes they want, nor are developers entitled to hear only positive feedback (or heart the negative feedback in the form of a mild 'we disagree but still love you and the game' without going into the reasons or even describing how things are making them feel). We've both got to live with it and somehow come to terms.

That is not a slight interface change that is a pretty major overhaul, because it would require a lot of work to match the clarity of the De Jure map mode. So basically no.

Could you then make the 'empires' high kingdoms (which IMHO would be a more natural name in Celtic or Viking or pure Frankish world) and possibly upgradable to a real empire after fulfilling certain conditions (as in title change from 'high king' to 'emperor' and full prestige/marriage benefits upon receiving confirmation by the Pope and/or HRE and/or ERE for a Catholic, ERE alone when Orthodox)? This would still achieve the purpose you guys have, i.e. enabling larger political organisms where they are somewhat plausible (mostly by the option to hold kings as vassals), but without telling the more historically pedantic people totally to love it or leave it?

The way this could work:
The map button says 'empires' but the actual Scandinavian/Francian/Spanish 'empire' is referred to as a 'high kingdom'. Upon formation the ruler climbs one tier up but is referred to as the 'high king' only. He is somewhere halfway with the benefits, in the middle of the road between king and emperor when it comes to prestige, 'difference in rank' modifiers in marriage or vassalage negotiations. Perhaps King vassals of the High King could get an opinion malus or slightly increased revolt risk due to not believing themselves to be a full one category below the new high king. Upon confirmation from the Pope or existing Emperor, these problems would disappear (the character would become a standard emperor).

Don't forget the actual game-play elements behind empires though -- for example if you have a de jure empire of Scandinavia then all Norse dukes and kings will be able to vote for elected emperors and have their say on crown laws, etc. This is a fundamental aspect of de jure realms, so something to take into account. The same would apply in the British Isles for the empire of Britannia. Whilst I like titular realms and feel they have their uses (and indeed I've added plenty of my own in my mod) you have to remember that it's easier to exploit crown law issues in them (but I'm guessing this may have been tweaked in 1.06).

EDIT: Ahh it seems King has expanded on what I was trying to say.

Correct me if I'm wrong but a titular title that's your primary title becomes a de iure title with de iure vassals after 100 years, doesn't it? 100 years without the benefits of being de iure would be a fine transition period for a new empire. Also, I wouldn't even mind those empires being de iure right from formation. Just don't want to seem them on the de iure empires map as real empires on par with the ERE or HRE because the ahistoricity of this is just too far gone, too hard to take, this is not a trivial balance/gameplay tweak at the cost of unimportant historical details.

 

[van Helsing]

Quite specifically we dislike creatable titular titles. Our dynamic system requires it so that if for example I remove the last duchy for a starting de Jure Kingdom then the titular creation mechanics mean that the title can be recreated. In the case of a pure titular title you do not know you are able to create it until you reach the conditions and receive the alert. Unless of course you have had a look through the game files.

This is bad for learning curve and for game play. If you look at from a learning curve perspective we denying players knowledge of cool game play elements unless you have played the game before or poked around the files. If we want to bring more players to the strategy genre (and I do) we need to move away from that mentality. People should know about really cool things they can do (like creating an empire) from the get go. The game play perspective the de jure titles are very powerful means for players to determine what the hell to do in the game. The completion of existing dejure titles and the acquisition of new ones is a key part of game play. The de Jure mapmode is integral to the game play expierence.

I get what you're saying, but I think de jure kingdoms "guide" the player just fine - unless you think that most players have been stumbling around for the last four months or however long it's been since release since they don't have a creatable Scandinavian empire? I don't understand the rationale behind the decision to make fantasy empires a part of vanilla when they're very easy to mod in, but they're also very easy to mod out so it's not nearly as huge a concern as people are making it.

 

[unmerged(1823)]

Can't modders simply change "muslim" into "muslim2", and then they're playable in exactly the way they are now because the DLC targets the "muslim" religion, rather than the "muslim2" religion? (i.e. using the christendom game mechanics?). That'll take all of 2 minutes to do using your favourite text editor's search and replace tool.

Yes, thats how it would work.

 

[Meneth]

Yes, thats how it would work.

Thank you for confirming that. It won't be an issue to total conversions, then.
Will it still be possible to make pagans playable (until the inevitable pagan DLC)?

 

[King]

I get what you're saying, but I think de jure kingdoms "guide" the player just fine - unless you think that most players have been stumbling around for the last four months or however long it's been since release since they don't have a creatable Scandinavian empire? I don't understand the rationale behind the decision to make fantasy empires a part of vanilla when they're very easy to mod in, but they're also very easy to mod out so it's not nearly as huge a concern as people are making it.

Because we hope that more people buy the game, not just current players. Thus we conitnue to develope with on eye on these people.

 

[Nitrousoxide]

Nitrousoxide: get your facts straight. Playing Muslims were never part of the game that you paid for - hence no one is removing anything you paid for. The switch in a txt file was added later on to help out modders. Now that no longer work as it causes a conflict with the DLC system. Ideal? No. But the option would have been to never add it for mods to use at all.

Not true. The switch to enable Muslims is in the game right now. It's just like having an .ini file with various game settings that you don't want to build a GUI specifically for. You may not want to provide technical support for people who enable that function (which is fair enough) but you can't pretend that it isn't a feature of the game that everyone has *right now*.

When you are doing is developing the precedent that you're are willing to take away existing content in order to sell it back to the customer in the form of DLC, which, from a consumer's prospective, reduces the value of any base game because they can expect that features will be actively *removed* for reasons besides them being "broken" or causing technical glitches.

As I see it, you had three ways to handle this properly.

1. Never release the ability to play as other factions, so you would not be taking away existing content in order to sell it a second time to the player. (The cat's out of the bag on this, and you can't do that now)

2. Release a full-fledged expansion for all of the other religions so that you can continue supporting one line of code, while still not removing the ability to enable the other religions for play, even though they have somewhat less content than Christians. (Could still do this, but you'd need to expand this DLC into a full-fledged expansion which covers a great deal more, and it's probably too soon for an expansion for the game.)

3. Treat content expansions for various religions like "mods" where they merely plug in to enable additional content, without affecting the ability to play as any religion if the player ticks that flag. This creates the issue of needing to support multiple code lines however, and may be more prone to piracy given how you don't have a special notch for your dlc to plug in as a mod using encryption keys only you have access to.

The way you are handling it, however, is arguably deceptive as a business practice and certainly harmful to the value of your product.

Edit: Jonan posted after I wrote this. His response alleviates my issues. I would like to remind, Gars, however, that just because a function is in a text file doesn't mean it's not game content, and you shouldn't pretend as such.

 

[unmerged(1823)]

Thank you for confirming that. It won't be an issue to total conversions, then.
Will it still be possible to make pagans playable (until the inevitable pagan DLC)?

Of course. Its just any religion actually named muslim needs to have the dlc.

 

[Meneth]

Of course. Its just any religion actually named muslim needs to have the dlc.

Thank you. That's all my concerns about playable muslims addressed.

I guess I can get back to empires, then
Like mentioned before, I think the best solution would simply be to name them something other than "empire". Make Russia a Grand Duchy for example, Scandinavia a High Kingdom, and so on. It'd be exactly the same for gameplay purposes, but without misusing the word Empire. I don't think anyone would mind the Arabian and Persian Empires being named empires though.

 

[Nitrousoxide]

Yes, thats how it would work.

Then you aren't actually removing game content for the sake of DLC. I'm satisfied and thank you for your clarification.