Crusader Kings II - Dev Diary 5 - The map

[Rhel]

I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask, but will we be able to easily see counties and duchies?
Or rather, who they belong to. CK1 of course showed us the coat of arms on the map, but CK2 seems to have ditched that system. I hope it's not going to be the same as in sengoku, which had a really confusing map imho.

[Maginor]

The map is pretty much set in stone now. Changing maps this late in a project is not something you'd ever want to do.

I understand completely. I have one small request, though, which only requires renaming provinces, not changing the borders. The province called "Naumadal" in Norway is actually the real world province of Trøndelag. In the game, the real world area of "Sogn" and "Møre og Romsdal" is called "Trøndelag", but is not a part of Trøndelag in reality. One big tell is that the Trondheimsfjord does not lie inside Trøndelag in the game. But Trondheim, which is the capital of Trøndelag lies at the Trondheimsfjord in reality.

I suggest renaming Naumadal to Trøndelag and moving Trondheim there, and also renaming what is now called Trøndelag to Sogn or Møre. It would be much appreciated. At least if it could be done in some future patch.

[Pizzaro]

Personally I find 3-d maps distracting. Distracting both in the manner that it adds nothing to my game experience while taxing my less-than-perfect eyesight, and distracting because I'm always left with the thought, "They spent their time on this?!?" I'm a gamer from the old Avalon Hill boardgame era, map is a utilitarian necessity for the game, not a selling point. I'd be interested in why those that like the 3-d map like it so much. What does it do for you?

+1

THIS! is so true. I hate graphics-mania. Every new game (not just paradox or strategies for that matter) seem to focus too much on graphics because they are something that can be easily and measurably improved instead of focusing MOSTLY on things that matter like gameplay.

[Pizzaro]

And just because...

Did I mention how much I dislike sprites? All those little soldiers marching across the map in screen shot #2? Its like CK2 is trying to be a FPS. I really hope there is a option to use counters instead. I literally would be inclined not to buy the game if I have to watch all those little guys marching about the map. If I do buy CK2 it will be in spite of the features in this DD, not because of it.

I must agree once again. In a strategy game an attempt to produce any sort of eye-candy is ultimately lead to a fail.

Counters, 2D ...thank you!

[Pizzaro]

I can't say I'm a fan of the rotating map even though I do like the map itself even if it is a bit featureless (despite topography). The rotation function seems a bit pointless and I never used it in Rome (after trying it). I couldn't see any practical use for it.

Couldn't agree more, it just takes up developer time and slows down the game.
They should be focusing more on PRACTICAL instead of 'cool' stuff.

[Skullheadhq]

I like the new graphics and wouldn't want it to be different, let alone 2d. The 90's are gone, get over it.

[cccino]

Couldn't agree more, it just takes up developer time and slows down the game.
They should be focusing more on PRACTICAL instead of 'cool' stuff.

I think you guys are missing the point. 3D map and sprites doesn't take away developer time because they have a team, not one guy. The sprite artist isn't wasting coding time. I don't hear you complaining that the soundtrack slows down game development. The 3D map allows you to offload some processing power from CPU to GPU.* The 3D map means you can mod the map, and quite easily, which wasn't really possible in EU2. The 3D map means you can run the game in any resolution and not one or two hard coded resolutions. The 3D map means you can run the game at any zoom level and not one or two hard coded zoom levels. The 3D map means you can easily implement new map modes with coloured overlays, stripes, whatever you want, providing yet more information to the player visually. I'm sure there's more advantages other than "it's cool".


* It only slows the game down if you have an ancient computer. What slows Paradox games down these days, compared to say EU2, is the tons and tons of MTTH events.

[Mendeth]

I must agree once again. In a strategy game an attempt to produce any sort of eye-candy is ultimately lead to a fail.

Counters, 2D ...thank you!

Please forgive me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure CKI had 2D sprites, not counters. The sprites in that game 'walked' across the map in a similar way to how 3D sprites do, only in 2D.

Also, Paradox have had 3D sprites in numerous games now (EU3, HOI3, Victoria 2 but to name a few) and those games, at least in my opinion, have been very successful (or at least any negatives have not been attributed to the sprites).

[Aardvark Bellay]

After the last patch the new map is gorgeous. Beautiful.

What i still dont like is the EU series like single man armies, they are too huge compared to the rest of the map.
What i really miss from Knights of Honour was the display of your armies. Besides the big Knight on a horse you could
see small units which showed you the consistency of your army. It looked neat, seeing if it consists only of cavalry or
also some pikemen and arrow units. Ah well, cant be changed for this version anyway, so maybe the future.
So, map great, single man armies bahh. Looks like the game Risk or chess. I will love this game anyway.

EDIT: So while the single man armies were perfect for the first two EU games, as the map looked pretty much like
Risk/chess as well, i dont think the idea of huge single man armies roaming the map fits with the idea of 3d and having
a really beautiful map compared to the EU series. Just my 2 cents....
I know it doesnt matter that much for this game as for KoH but it looked nice.