Crusader Kings II - Dev Diary 5 - The map

[X_MasterDave_X]

King, I think you are mistaken on what we are asking for. We're not calling for a reversion to the 2D engine but rather a 3d map that looks more like a historic map rather than a Google Earth map. With an emphasis on simplicity and aesthetics rather than extraneous detail.

Take the amazing success of Minecraft. It is 3d, but its success is perhaps because of its graphical simplicity rather than the complexity a 3d engine could provide. Even die hard FPS players love it.

It doesn't matter what technology you use, but the art direction and the useful display on important information is key for long term playability.

The map doesn't have to look like Google Earth to make sales. The map can look good in 3d and still look like a classical map.

And yes please use the 3d engine because they are way more modable than the old maps and the development costs are not as much as the old 2d games.

+1 Exactly that !!!

But i bet its just that some fans and the designer have different opionions how a map in a medieval game should look like. The designer wants a classical normal looking world. And some fans would like a more minimalistic looking world, somehow closer to the map we see at start of "Lord of Rings".

Maybe there is room for both.....or even better....still planned.

Maybe this world looks like we saw it on this fotos from close, but very different from higher above. Like it is in HoI3 too. There the map from far looks like a old folded map form the old days of WW2.

I bet the fans would smile big to see the CK2 Map in the style of Middle Earth when you zoom out far enough.

[Gwyn ap Nud]

I would hardly call it a 'craze'. I sincerely doubt that anyone's going to go back to 2d maps. It would be like going from detailed models of units to sprites: a step back, that would make the game unsellable.

[Zan Thrax]

I suppose they could shrink the soldier graphics down to about 1/6 the size or so, and have each group of 5,000 soldiers act as 1 soldier icon. So if you have 15,000 soldiers you'll see 3 soldiers grouped, if you have 30,000 you'll see 6 soldiers grouped, and so on. You wouldn't even need to hover over their army to see the size, you could have a solid guess that way, at least within 5k or so.

I hope they shrink them down to 1/6 or so regardless of creating armies instead of single soldier icons. The current size looks rather ridiculous.

I miss the beautiful 2D maps of EU1&2, Vicky 1 and CK1.

Dude, those are some impressive rose tinted glasses you've got there. CK1 is the only pre-Clausewitz Paradox game I'd still play, but the map was ugly as hell and difficult to use because it was so muddy.

I really like this new map.
not map modes, but map layers!
I would love to be able to see the mountains, but it would be good to view country colours on top of them. (not brown-green based on topography, but all black if HRE, all white while zooming onto Portugal, etc.) The same would be with religion layer (not green-brown on topography, but silver with catholic, copper with orthodox, gold with muslim), etc.

This! I've been asking for layers instead of modes since EUIII was still in dev.

[bitmapmedivh]

I'm curious, why so many bones in your meshes? At a glance I can count 16 and judging by the animations it seems like a bit of overkill. Would be interesting to see the edgeflow and the amount of tris in your models, by the way.

Oh, and I'm loving the ocean floors and the smoother borders.

[Barón Rojo]

In Civilization there is the option to use single soldiers as graphics. You can give the option to us to use single soldiers or groups if our computer can handle it. And you are improving the engine to use multithread anyway, right? Well...

[Modestus]

King, I think you are mistaken on what we are asking for. We're not calling for a reversion to the 2D engine but rather a 3d map that looks more like a historic map rather than a Google Earth map. With an emphasis on simplicity and aesthetics rather than extraneous detail.

Take the amazing success of Minecraft. It is 3d, but its success is perhaps because of its graphical simplicity rather than the complexity a 3d engine could provide. Even die hard FPS players love it.

It doesn't matter what technology you use, but the art direction and the useful display on important information is key for long term playability.

The map doesn't have to look like Google Earth to make sales. The map can look good in 3d and still look like a classical map.

And yes please use the 3d engine because they are way more modable than the old maps and the development costs are not as much as the old 2d games.

More eloquently put then me but yes to 3D and at the same time be more imaginative and contribute something to humanity that is more then a forest that looks like a forest from a plane, Jesus!

[thrashing mad]

I'm curious, why so many bones in your meshes? At a glance I can count 16 and judging by the animations it seems like a bit of overkill.

16 seems to be optimal number for proper humanoid model/animation. For example, IIRC in M2TW there are 18 bones per soldier, and there can be thousands of them rendered simultainosly without a problem (even though they have much more polygons/higher res textures, than 3d models in paradox games).

[Hardradi]

Will the units and province names also rotate when you rotate the map?

If this was the case then map rotation would be more useful/appealing

You can see in EUR that it doesn't feel right:

[performer]

To be honest: This map looks awful!
Speaking as a hardcore CK-Fan ...

[vadermath]

To be honest: This map looks awful!
Speaking as a hardcore CK-Fan ...

To be honest: This map is not yet done

[LeeDub]

Alpha screenshots are alpha.

[Galaahd]

I don't care much about the map (I don't like reaistic graphics, though). I want a DD about the Pope!

[Selerz]

Well. The map in CK1 was awful, and this map looks awesome.

[RedRooster81]

Will the units and province names also rotate when you rotate the map?

If this was the case then map rotation would be more useful/appealing

You can see in EUR that it doesn't feel right:

I loaded up Rome to see what you mean (it's been a while since I played). I agree that the names and units should follow the rotation.

I think that some of the complaints about the map will disappear once details like forests and marsh are added (because on the sample screenshot Swabia is looking a bit too bald). If it ends up looking like EU Rome's, I think it will be a great improvement on CK1's comparatively drab terrain map.

Edit: As an aside, can provincial terrain types change by event, say if you drain marshland or expand the number of baronies to the detriment of light forestland? Just an idea born of the late night.

[vadermath]

I remember terrain-changing events in CK (AKA 'draining the marshland'), though they didn't change the actual terrain type, just the province's prosperity.

[RedRooster81]

I remember terrain-changing events in CK (AKA 'draining the marshland'), though they didn't change the actual terrain type, just the province's prosperity.

That's what I was thinking of. While the game is in development, I thought that it would be cool if the devs put in a function like { set_terrain = plains } or something like that.

[Hinco]

I don't know why people are so obsessed how the map looks now.
I am interested how it will look when the game comes out and then I will judge...

But I love it !!

[vadermath]

All I care about is whether there will be a political map; I like my map filled with colours, makes the entire affair much more...immersive. I feel like a King who's looking at a map of Europe whilst making plans, forging ideas, and dealing with intrigue.

[WolfSS]

Map sucks =((((((((( can not make it a semblance of DW or Rome?

[Jesenjin]

Map sucks =((((((((( can not make it a semblance of DW or Rome?

It is alpha screenie, so it lacks some features, and I doubt this will be final version, cause some borders could use a little bit of editing
But nevertheless I like it so far