Well put. I'll be interested to hear what others have to say. As with most things, a compromise will likely be in order.
Mod Idea: North America
- Thread starter VenetianPriest
- Start date
-
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.
Well put. I'll be interested to hear what others have to say. As with most things, a compromise will likely be in order.
My opinion on the starting setup:
As for the islands and coasts: In CK1 there wasn't much of a naval game. You could not build navies, nor were there seasons that had any influence on the possibility of travelling by sea. You could send armies across the North Sea in January, cross the black sea any time of the year, and the Atlantic was friendly to Muslim armies all the time.
Until it becomes more clear what sort of naval system there will be in CK2, it makes (IMHO) no sense to debate about islands and such. CK1 was a very much land-focused game, its game mechanics made the most sense on land and that's IMO where the action should be in this scenario. Having Moors in the Caribbean is nice as an abstract idea, but what are they supposed to do? They will be weak pushovers if the CK1 mechanics are applied (difficult to concentrate troops for the defender), plus, there's no room for natives and their fight against the medievals there which is -to me- the major attraction of a north America scenario.
The naval system also poses some problems on the rest of the scenario: Are the medievals supposed to ferry their troops up and down the coast? Viking raids from Newfoundland could be a fun idea but how do you model that... What's the role of navies supposed to be? Should there be something like the Fourth Crusade, i.e. one of the medieval groups loading their armies on a navy and sailing off to conquer another medieval group's metropolis?
- There should be a sharp antagonism between natives and medievals. Natives at game start should be partially united in tribal federations akin to the pagan Wends, Lithuanians or Mordvians in the 1066 CK scenario. Europeans should be squabbling amongst each other and not united. Leaving more room for free-wheeling game play.
- The medievals would have three or four disconnected "clusters", each one being its own sort of society. Norse in the north, Anglo-Saxons in New England/New Jersey, some sort of mediterranean offshoot in the Lousiana area, and if there's room and creativity, perhaps a fourth one in Virginia.
- Assume that there was no die-off from diseases amongst the native Americans. Just take the names of historical 17th/18th century tribes along the coasts and the Great Lakes, and have them be the opponents of the Euros at first. it may not make too much sense historically (17th century =/= 11th century), but players will want to have recognizable features. I.e. Iroquis, Lenape, Micmac, and whatnot.
- For gameplay fun, there should be Indians entrenched between the medieval clusters. Likely victims to a first expansion.
- The badass Indians should be in the interior of the continent. There's AFAIK very little to go by in history, so you could just sort of wave your hand and say, f.ex. the mound builders of the Mississippi have harnessed iron and horses, and have founded a strong confederation of rabidly expansionist tribes. If the scenario is set up well, they would initially not be in contact with the medievals, but their expansion would make them crash headlong into the medievals' expansion at some point. Maybe some snippets of how the Mongols threatened Europe in CK1?
- Ideally, each of the medieval clusters at game start would be the size of France or Britain in CK1, both in terms of number of provinces as well as in terms of internal struggle.
- Assume that the natives close to the coast are weak, the ones a bit further inland are stronger, and the ones in the interior are the strongest. That means the medievals would at first expand rapidly, then run into troubles.
- Perhaps a good defining moment for the start of the game (in terms of backstory) would be that in 1066, bishops arrived in north america, who start to preach aggressive crusading against the natives. The medievals could be in much the same situation at this point as many of the european societies at the time... too many young knights without land, brewing internal discontent, making it very attractive to direct all that destructive energy outwards.
As for the islands and coasts: In CK1 there wasn't much of a naval game. You could not build navies, nor were there seasons that had any influence on the possibility of travelling by sea. You could send armies across the North Sea in January, cross the black sea any time of the year, and the Atlantic was friendly to Muslim armies all the time.
Until it becomes more clear what sort of naval system there will be in CK2, it makes (IMHO) no sense to debate about islands and such. CK1 was a very much land-focused game, its game mechanics made the most sense on land and that's IMO where the action should be in this scenario. Having Moors in the Caribbean is nice as an abstract idea, but what are they supposed to do? They will be weak pushovers if the CK1 mechanics are applied (difficult to concentrate troops for the defender), plus, there's no room for natives and their fight against the medievals there which is -to me- the major attraction of a north America scenario.
The naval system also poses some problems on the rest of the scenario: Are the medievals supposed to ferry their troops up and down the coast? Viking raids from Newfoundland could be a fun idea but how do you model that... What's the role of navies supposed to be? Should there be something like the Fourth Crusade, i.e. one of the medieval groups loading their armies on a navy and sailing off to conquer another medieval group's metropolis?
If I'm not mistaken, the OP mentioned another scenario possibility- in which a post-apocalyptic North America suffers central government collapse and a reversion to "feudal" local warlords. It's unfortunate that this was shot down so quickly- mainly because it is intriguing as a historic analogue. Much of what the real-life Middle Ages was (especially the Early Middle Ages) was a result of a pseudo "post-apocalyptic" society in which former central imperial governments (namely the Roman Empire) and Kings had lost most of their power and in which people grouped together under local lords for protection in what was essentially a glorified gang-system. Having some kind of near-future scenario in which nuclear war between China and the West (let's say, over the DPRK) causes total societal and governmental collapse, leading to abandonment of the cities and a rural society with no central government, which thus begins (rather naturally in a case of "convergent evolution") to resemble so-called "feudal" Europe after about a hundred years. As well, like in historical Europe, powerful lords could in theory try and "re-form" the "old empires" (IE, Canada, US, Mexico etc as creatable King titles, the various states and provinces as creatable Duke titles).
People will probably flame this, as tends to happen on Paradox forums, but let me state that I am a stickler against anachronisms and hollywoodisms...which is exactly why this sort of scenario would appeal to me. Mainly because the player wouldn't have to worry about things going wonky or ahistorical...it's in the future and not historical at all. However, as it seems that you have already decided to do a 1066 alt-history, I maybe (yeah, maybe) could do a total-conversion sub-mod on the same or similar map which takes your 1066 alt-history and makes it a 2200 alt-history. Again, don't flame me (people WILL), nobody'd be forcing you to play it if theoretically it was made.
People will probably flame this, as tends to happen on Paradox forums, but let me state that I am a stickler against anachronisms and hollywoodisms...which is exactly why this sort of scenario would appeal to me. Mainly because the player wouldn't have to worry about things going wonky or ahistorical...it's in the future and not historical at all. However, as it seems that you have already decided to do a 1066 alt-history, I maybe (yeah, maybe) could do a total-conversion sub-mod on the same or similar map which takes your 1066 alt-history and makes it a 2200 alt-history. Again, don't flame me (people WILL), nobody'd be forcing you to play it if theoretically it was made.
For my part, I favored this route when I began this thread. I could see the mod taking either path; we have quite some time before the game is released. However, I see the following issues or concerns that would need to be addressed while exploring this option:
1.) Backstory:
a.) What caused the societal collapse/decline?
b.) What implications, if any, does the original cause have for the present world? In other words, if nuclear war is the reason, what would this mean for agriculture?
2.) Modern Technologiesb.) What implications, if any, does the original cause have for the present world? In other words, if nuclear war is the reason, what would this mean for agriculture?
a.) How would we treat modern technologies?
b.) Would they vanish somehow? Would people slowly forget how to repair or maintain them?
c.) Would we adapt them to the CKII game in terms of warfare?
3.) The Worldb.) Would they vanish somehow? Would people slowly forget how to repair or maintain them?
c.) Would we adapt them to the CKII game in terms of warfare?
a.) Would you simulate interaction with others off the map, i.e. Europe or South America? How?
b.) How would you treat major game features like the Papacy or the HRE, assuming its in this time?
c.) How would the political systems of the past be analagous to the future? In other words, would it be reasonable to think we would regress into inheritance of title/land? Would republics vanish on a sufficient scale to make this a workable CKII mod?
I could go on, but I'm getting tired. All these issues are intriguing to think about, and there are several advantages to this type of mod. For me, an obvious is there will be little need to rename places; we could simply adapt the current names with different spellings. Another advantage: we all certainly have a firmer grasp on our own time than the past.b.) How would you treat major game features like the Papacy or the HRE, assuming its in this time?
c.) How would the political systems of the past be analagous to the future? In other words, would it be reasonable to think we would regress into inheritance of title/land? Would republics vanish on a sufficient scale to make this a workable CKII mod?
On the other hand, over the past week or so I think I have identified the chief issue with the present scenario we have been thinking about, and it would largely be a non-issue in a post-apocalyptic NA. We have been exploring the issue of location for likely/probable settlements in NA for European transplants. This issue is nearly moot with this scenario; you would still likely see population migrations to warmer climates depending on the nature of the decline/collapse.
In the end, both ideas are worth exploring. I would be willing to support whichever you, the CKII community, believe would be the most fun to develop.
Essentially, since the map you seem to want to make is of eastern NA, I'd say that we could say that the west was much more heavily devastated due to proximity to the enemy and that the east lost all contact with it due to the death of the internet/radio/modern technology. Basically, agriculture is still feasible in the east due to less fallout- the west is an empty depopulated wasteland.
I would suggest dropping modern tech altogether and having technology revert to the Middle Ages. If you think about it, much modern tech is difficult or impossible to maintain without a very complicated industrialized society and economy. Say maybe that people no longer have the industrial capacity (let alone the know-how) to make things like guns, cars, etc. Look at Somalia for example- any technology they get is essentially imported...this theoretical world would on the contrary have nowhere to import from. Also remember that much of our knowledge database is very ethereal- the Internet and digital sources are (literally) not set in stone. With their demise, so would die much technological knowledge we take for granted. Hey, what do you think happened in the Middle Ages? A lot of technology did in fact go backwards.
Hence yeah, fashioning crude "swords" and armour from heaps of sharp scrap metal would be the military tactic of the day. Isolated anarchic areas with little education and limited access to imported weapons from more industrialised societies tend to do exactly that in real life. The Rwanadan Interhamwe militias were mainly armed with blades and spears in 1994 AD. Medieval technology, scarily, is not as far away from us as you'd think.
How do we communicate today with Europe and SA? Radio, Internet, postal service. That would be dead essentially, certainly the first two. As for political systems- yeah, the death of democracy and republics would be pretty much what would happen. There's a reason that the Middle Ages was as it was- local warlords (rather than Republics) tend to be what arise in an anarchy (look at Somalia for example). Even if they initially don't think of themselves or call themselves "lords" or "monarchs", they would naturally try to ensure that their children take over (classic example: North Korea, whose leader is a hereditary monarch all but in name), see what I'm saying?
Anyway, I'm tired and sort of drunk, I'll think about this tomorrow.
Last edited:
In a post-apocalyptic scenario, we wouldn't have to limit ourselves to the east coast.
I believe most knowledge can still be found in books, but people would gradually stop teaching their children how to read if it wasn't important to survival.
With a collapse of the global economy, a great deal of our world would collapse in terms of technology in a matter of weeks. Petroleum for transportation would be make a quick exit from life and with it nearly our entire economy. The essential workforce to maintain a modern society would slowly or possibly abruptly stop showing up to work; power plants, water treatment facilities, firefighters, and the municipal law enforcement would all cease to function without a large workforce. I have little doubt that local and rural law enforcement, such as sheriffs, would continue to function maintaining order and providing protection for the community. It would take a while, but eventually we would run out of ammunition, and our ability to produce gunpowder and bullets would be severally limited.
The issue of political systems is slightly more complex, IMO. In large part, medieval peoples transitioned from one form of government, autocracy for those who lived under the Roman Empire, to another form of government, monarchy, in a short course of time. Why would one expect the systems of government we presently use to completely vanish. Voting and certain freedoms are a part of our collective identitiy now. I am not saying that a warlord or other power broker would not be granted emergency powers that would never go away, which would probably turn into a hereditary position. I am saying that we may wish to adapt some of the sucession laws, if possible, to simulate a more nuanced political system.
At any rate, I will wait to hear from others on this.
VenetianPriest
I think a lot of the problems you've outlined can be solved by copying the beginning of S.M. Stirling's Emberverse books; something (not important what exactly) causes anything more energetic than open flame to stop working. (No guns, explosives, steam power, electricity) Naturally, millions die, society and government collapses, and a few survivors set up small neo-fuedal societies.
I think a lot of the problems you've outlined can be solved by copying the beginning of S.M. Stirling's Emberverse books; something (not important what exactly) causes anything more energetic than open flame to stop working. (No guns, explosives, steam power, electricity) Naturally, millions die, society and government collapses, and a few survivors set up small neo-fuedal societies.
I suppose you are correct, the reason doesn't matter so much. After enough time, no one would remember exactly what happened; it would be legend.
The real question is which mod scenario do we pursue?
Now that I think about it I lean more towards the post-apocalyptic scenario, because we can use a more diverse set of lands and peoples. We could make up cultures that came out of the american melting pot in different regions, and just make up which regions will be fertile, populated, rich, etc. We can include as far as the north pole and all the way down to the falklands if we wanted (not that we should, just a possibility.
I agree. I felt somewhat stifled in terms of creativity with the other scenario. If we end up switching, that does not mean we have to give up castles in the Appalachians or long boats sailing up the Hudson; we can do all these things and more.
As far as a map, that will be up for debate, but with the disappearance of modern medicine I believe you would find the tropical regions of Central and South America unable to support large populations. I believe the temperate regions of NA and even SA would flourish instead of tropical climates. This doesn't mean we don't include these areas, it is something to think about.
Here a question for someone, will any map we mod have to match the CKII map in terms of pixels and shape?
Well I would personally prefer to have as much as the americas as possible. I agree about the temperate regions flourishing more, but with the large populations that already are in some of those places, we could always say that they just continued to clear rainforests for agriculture and whatnot... or really go in any direction with it. We could also say that the climate shifted, changing which areas are arid, hospitable, or freezing. We could even have a new ice age where a large portion of the continent is an impassable glacier.
What you guys want, is just a clean slate on which you can project anything you like. Fine. But why North America then? You might just as well draw a map of a fantasy continent, pick names for fantasy peoples, arrange them at random and have the same sort of scenario...
I'm not interested in that. I liked the idea of having historical European peoples from the middle ages transplanted into a recognizable North American continent, and have them fight recognizable Indian nations the way fighting was done in the European middle ages. What I have in mind is something like the Civ2 scenarios where you pick a North America map, and have Incas/Aztecs/Babylonians/Russians/French fight each other there. Recognizable people doing stuff that you know and understand, in an unusual setting. I think that would be the most fun, not something with a postapocalyptic backstory or glaciers.
I'm not interested in that. I liked the idea of having historical European peoples from the middle ages transplanted into a recognizable North American continent, and have them fight recognizable Indian nations the way fighting was done in the European middle ages. What I have in mind is something like the Civ2 scenarios where you pick a North America map, and have Incas/Aztecs/Babylonians/Russians/French fight each other there. Recognizable people doing stuff that you know and understand, in an unusual setting. I think that would be the most fun, not something with a postapocalyptic backstory or glaciers.
True, but with CK2 being a game about the European middle ages, it would be easier to make a scenario about medieval north america with it.
if you go for the post-apocalyptic scenario you have to address all sorts of questions that maybe CK2 won't be fit to handle... how do you handle territories which until 19th century were remote and barely accessible? What happens to deserts that are not at the fringe of the map, like North America or Arabia in CK, but in the middle, like the deserts of the US southwest, or the arid great plains? Modeling a whole continent coast to coast for a fantasy/postapocalyptical scenario would require answers to that sort of question. While doing a medieval scenario only on the east coast up to the mississippi would let you ignore this and concentrate on things that are easier to answer.
I am still interested to hear what others have to say, but Leviathan07 makes some good points above. Let's continue this discussion.
I just discovered this thread. Sounds like an interesting mod. Pity I have no time to participate further than my comments.
I'd like to point out that many of our dangerous diseases are thought to have originated from domesticated animals. If your alternate Native Americans have access to large domesticable animals that didn't disappear millennia ago, then they will also have been exposed to the diseases these animals carry, so your Native Americans won't be such a virgin population to many European diseases. If they explore Europe before Europe explores America, they might even introduce to Europe a few epidemics of their own.
I remember reading somewhere about a great Chinese fleet sent to explore across the Pacific, and there was an account of an explored place that sounded a lot like the west coast of North America. There was a change of rulers, and the fleet was burned and China returned to isolation. In your alternate North America, China could send colonists to the west coast, and California could be a rich but isolated "Middle Kingdom" with the Rockies serving the purpose of the Himalayas. (Maybe even build a "Great Wall" in Nevada!)
The Great Plains are definitely going to teem with mounted tribes, and they will use such metals and tech from the civilized people as they care to acquire, so they will live a lot like Huns/Mongols/Turks etc. The Bison will still be almost disappeared.
I assume your "Medieval America" will basically focus on the world from the Antlantic to the Mississippi, and the Feudal cultures there will naturally have little knowledge or influence from the trans-Mississippi world, except as a source of exotic trade goods.
I can see the Salt Lake region being like a Holy Land home to indigenous religions that spread far and wide, even among some transoceanic settlers. I hope religion can be modded, because many indigenous faiths can survive into "Medieval America" and be too important to simply be grouped as "Pagan." Beyond introducing some tech, plants and animals, some of your settlers could be totally assimilated into the Native cultures they invade, like the Ptolemies in Egypt.
I'd like to point out that many of our dangerous diseases are thought to have originated from domesticated animals. If your alternate Native Americans have access to large domesticable animals that didn't disappear millennia ago, then they will also have been exposed to the diseases these animals carry, so your Native Americans won't be such a virgin population to many European diseases. If they explore Europe before Europe explores America, they might even introduce to Europe a few epidemics of their own.
I remember reading somewhere about a great Chinese fleet sent to explore across the Pacific, and there was an account of an explored place that sounded a lot like the west coast of North America. There was a change of rulers, and the fleet was burned and China returned to isolation. In your alternate North America, China could send colonists to the west coast, and California could be a rich but isolated "Middle Kingdom" with the Rockies serving the purpose of the Himalayas. (Maybe even build a "Great Wall" in Nevada!)
The Great Plains are definitely going to teem with mounted tribes, and they will use such metals and tech from the civilized people as they care to acquire, so they will live a lot like Huns/Mongols/Turks etc. The Bison will still be almost disappeared.
I assume your "Medieval America" will basically focus on the world from the Antlantic to the Mississippi, and the Feudal cultures there will naturally have little knowledge or influence from the trans-Mississippi world, except as a source of exotic trade goods.I can see the Salt Lake region being like a Holy Land home to indigenous religions that spread far and wide, even among some transoceanic settlers. I hope religion can be modded, because many indigenous faiths can survive into "Medieval America" and be too important to simply be grouped as "Pagan." Beyond introducing some tech, plants and animals, some of your settlers could be totally assimilated into the Native cultures they invade, like the Ptolemies in Egypt.
If you are going with the various groups settling, could there be a holy city a la Jerusalem, maybe one initially settled by the Arians then taken by the Umayyads?
I think that it would also make more sense for the northern Carribean islands to be settled initially by the Arians and maybe contested by the Arians like Sicily between the Byzantines and the Normanni, but if Christianity is split into Arianism and a more Catholicised version (perhaps even a 'Celtic' Church) then I guess it could be useful to have the 2 Arian groups split, though it may make Catholicism too powerful, rather than a more balanced relationship a la Orthodox/ Catholic Christianity.
If the idea of the Celtic Christians settling in the Great Lakes Area is not chosen, then it would likely be better if they were put somewhere where they could have buffer areas against early land raiding by Catholics if both the Franks and Vikings are Catholic (Maybe New England if the Franks Moved further south). If they were Catholic, then they would not have as much a problem as if they were Celtic Christian if they bordered the Franks or Vikings.
Finally, Are the Natives going to have options to Convert to one of the new religions? and are the Vikings going to start out Pagan or will individual leaders have the option to convert to the religion of their choice (definately any Christianity but maybe even Islam)?
I think that it would also make more sense for the northern Carribean islands to be settled initially by the Arians and maybe contested by the Arians like Sicily between the Byzantines and the Normanni, but if Christianity is split into Arianism and a more Catholicised version (perhaps even a 'Celtic' Church) then I guess it could be useful to have the 2 Arian groups split, though it may make Catholicism too powerful, rather than a more balanced relationship a la Orthodox/ Catholic Christianity.
If the idea of the Celtic Christians settling in the Great Lakes Area is not chosen, then it would likely be better if they were put somewhere where they could have buffer areas against early land raiding by Catholics if both the Franks and Vikings are Catholic (Maybe New England if the Franks Moved further south). If they were Catholic, then they would not have as much a problem as if they were Celtic Christian if they bordered the Franks or Vikings.
Finally, Are the Natives going to have options to Convert to one of the new religions? and are the Vikings going to start out Pagan or will individual leaders have the option to convert to the religion of their choice (definately any Christianity but maybe even Islam)?