Dev Diary 2 - Barons and Settlements

[Galleblære]

Thing is, when we're dealing with sums of 8 for the most developed regions in Europe, like the north Italian city-states, even with a very kind way of measuring the population and development of Scandinavia/the nordic countries, those sums are rather correct. I am not arguing for a completly undevelopable north (because that would be both incorrect and boring) but the north had no way to reach the population of earlier mentioned Netherlands and Italy. There just couldn't be taht amount of babies.

Again, that can very easily be reflected in population numbers in each settlement. I mean, the tax and levy numbers need to come from something right? I doubt each settlement gives some fixed amount. So Stockholm would naturally give you more tax income and manpower, than some brand new settlement in the northern frontiers. Hence my original argument that the number of settlements should rather be limited in areas where clear geographic difficulties make it impossible or very hard to maintain several settlements. An area with lots of mountains might not have practical room for more than a few towns, deep regions in Siberia might be too remote and cold to sustain a large number of settlements, deserts might be too inhospitable and lacking in basic needs such as water to sustain many settlements, and here I agree that the settlement cap could be lowered.

But again, limiting settlements based on historic populations seems like a poor way to go about it, specially when its in the players power to change history. Northern Norway had a rather robust population comparable to many other regions in Norway at the time. Only in the 1600s-1700s did the population start to decline when market prices for fish dropped in Europe. That shows you that they prospered and grew due to trade... and declined due to lack of trade. Like so many other settlements around Europe.

[Järnblomma]

Sure there could be.....it's just that if they stayed at home people would start starving. Enter Lindisfarne.

Combined with the dead from raids, the amount of babies dead before or soon after birth and the relatively small amount of food in Dalaskogen? No, I doubt the Sweden or Norway could have areas with several hundred thousands of inhabitants.

*Is buzzkil*

[Galleblære]

Combined with the dead from raids, the amount of babies dead before or soon after birth and the relatively small amount of food in Dalaskogen? No, I doubt the Sweden or Norway could have areas with several hundred thousands of inhabitants.

*Is buzzkil*

Not a buzzkill, but a person not understanding what a *settlement* is

[Järnblomma]

Not a buzzkill, but a person not understanding what a *settlement* is

Then, by all means, show me a post where the developers tells us what a settlement is.

Also, I don't believe there will be visible demographics, but I might be wrong here.

[Galleblære]

Then, by all means, show me a post where the developers tells us what a settlement is.

Also, I don't believe there will be visible demographics, but I might be wrong here.

How about the first post:

Instead, each province will have between one and eight named settlements. A settlement is either a castle, city or church, and characters can hold the title to a settlement just like they can to counties and duchies.

So according to you, its physically impossible to build a church, castle or city in Dalarna You also seem to be of the erroneous assumption that a CK2 city in 1066 is the equivalent of a modern day city with 100,000+ citizens.

Hamburg for example, had a population of less than 2000 people in 1200. Berlin had a population of 1200 in 1250. Only with advancements in agricultural methods and technologies that really are outside the timeline of CK2 did you see a massive population growth. So really, setting up new settlements in the frontiers shouldn't be impossible if the player is willing to pay and work at it.

[Jasonkp]

Galleblare, I think you are missing the point of this system. Each province has a set number of named settlements representing it's overall population and development. Norway's population and development potential is limited by geography, much more than Hamburg or Berlin. The system isn't meant to show every church, castle, or city established in the province, but to show the overall development and population density.

[Galleblære]

Galleblare, I think you are missing the point of this system. Each province has a set number of named settlements representing it's overall population and development. Norway's population and development potential is limited by geography, much more than Hamburg or Berlin. The system isn't meant to show every church, castle, or city established in the province, but to show the overall development and population density.

If every settlement are exactly the same without any kind of population modifier, you would be right. That would incidentally mean that Rome is just the same as Stockholm. If that is how it works in the game, well, it would be stupid beyond belief. But I don't believe it is, why else would there be open slots for further development? Obviously because it was a time of expansion and conquest of pagan lands and bringing civilization to the frontiers. So a fringe province would take a lot of money and gold to bring up to the same 'standard'.

[Meanmanturbo]

If every settlement are exactly the same without any kind of population modifier, you would be right. That would incidentally mean that Rome is just the same as Stockholm. If that is how it works in the game, well, it would be stupid beyond belief. But I don't believe it is, why else would there be open slots for further development? Obviously because it was a time of expansion and conquest of pagan lands and bringing civilization to the frontiers. So a fringe province would take a lot of money and gold to bring up to the same 'standard'.

Originally Posted by Doomdark

Hi all. As dev diaries have said that you will be able to create new baronies in your counties I was staring to wonder how the tax base (which I assume will be the basic measure of prosperity) of new baronies will be generated.

I can think of four possible ways.

1. It is decided upon a base tax for the entire county. All baronies in the same county have the same base, but is modified by type (city, castle, church).

2. The tax base for every potential barony is defined in the file that defines all baronies.

3. All baronies of the same type have the same tax base, what separates as wealthy Mediterranean county form a poor Scandinavian one is the amount of baronies it has and the scripted maximum number of baronies.

4. All new baronies start at a set tax base (1?) and can increase by buildings and events. Having wealthy baronies nearby could for example trigger events related to trade or lack of arable land by the neighbors leading to immigration leading to tax base increasing.

What do you think is the most probable one? Which one would you prefer to see?

All baronies of the same type have the same base tax. However, this is modified by buildings that improve the barony.

So that is how it will work. It was my question a good while back by the way

link to the thread

edit

so the thing that separates Stockholm from Rome (except for the the fact that Stockholm wasn't founded until the 13th century ) is that there are more baronies in the same county were Rome is situated and that Rome will have many more buildings. I'm also guessing that the Rome county will be much smaller geographically. Hm, if it's small enough it might just represent a medieval greater Rome area, while Stockholm would be a part of the quite large Uppland county. It wouldnt even be that unrealistic.

[KonradRichtmark]

Idk, Rome was really not that big in the Middle Ages. After having lost its status as the capital city of a huge empire, and the Egyptian grain deliveries that came with it, Rome was gradually depopulated. In the Middle Ages, its population counted in tens of thousands, not hundreds of thousands like before.

Letting each settlement represent about the same amount of people is a simple yet functional way to model demographics, I'm perfectly willing to put up with a little bit of weirdness for it. And as Meanmanturbo said, large metropoles can be represented by letting them be counties in their own right, with the "city" actually being several towns in game terms.

[Galleblære]

Thanks Meanmanturbo!

@ Meanmanturbo, KondradRichtmark

That would be an acceptable compromise I suppose, but it doesn't appear to be any real differences in province sizes except for in Russia. I'd rather have each settlement with population numbers, as I think that would open up for more sandbox play where you can to a larger degree fiddle around and develop the land as say, a count while you wait for your plots to come to fruition. But I suppose that could become tedious over time and perhaps too reminiscent of the CK1 province upgrades. I suppose they have gone for a system where province potential base tax = province potential # of settlements

[Nick B II]

So according to you, its physically impossible to build a church, castle or city in Dalarna You also seem to be of the erroneous assumption that a CK2 city in 1066 is the equivalent of a modern day city with 100,000+ citizens.

My interpretation of the devs statements is simple:
A CK2 settlement will represent a hugs group of people organized into multiple settlements. So a "Castle" settlement won't just be a castle, it will be the equivalent of an English "Honor," which consisted of dozens of villages. This is the only interpretation that makes sense, given that provinces like Luxumbourg will include multiple RL counties, but only have room for 8 settlements.

As for your population comments, keep in mind that CK2 has no economic sim to speak of. You cannot manage your realm well because there are no resources for you to buy, and almost every economic decision you make is abstracted into your desmene limit.

In other words the only way to do a population, which grows based on how smart your economic policies are, is to tie the population indirectly to one of your character's stats. Which will massively over-power said stat because somebody who min-maxes his way to 15 Stew (or Int), and marries the commoner with -50 prestige, earned from her numerous affairs with anything that moved, but 18 Stew (or Int) is gonna be able to kick the ass of somebody who actually played the damn game, RPed himself to a normal 7 Int, and married a total ditz for her claims.

Nick