• 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.
Hello everyone, I'm Tegus, one of the programmers working on Crusader
Kings II. Welcome to the fifth dev diary for CK2 and the first one written
by me. In today's dev diary I'm going to talk a bit about the map and why
we've chosen to implement a new one in CK2.

As you all know, in our games the map is an important tool for both
displaying information and setting the mood of the game. In HoI3 we had a
grayish map that we felt was appropriate for a war game. We took this map
and altered it slightly when making Victoria 2, but this time the map was
drawn with vivid colors to portray the progress of the era. The next game to
use the map was Divine Wind because we all felt that EU3 was in need of a
graphical face lift. While this map technology looked good in the
mentioned games, there were certain technological limitations which we
wanted to improve upon or get rid of.

With CK2, we have devoted time to rewrite the graphics code for the map
from scratch. We are back to a pure 3D map similar to the one used in EU3:
Rome. We have visible topology and you will be able to rotate the world
around the way you please. While neither the technology nor the art assets
are in any way final, we do feel that the new map already has great
potential and is a big step in the right direction towards our visual
goals. Hopefully this new tech will also span multiple games, so we
can steadily improve it.

crusader_kings_2_devdiary_5_ss1.jpg

To be fair, if I would describe what we have done with the map so far, it
would just be sentence after sentence of technical mumbo-jumbo, so I'll
spare you the details. Let's instead focus on what visual details that
have been improved and what we want to add before the game is shipped.

We've improved the looks of the water significantly and added refraction
so you can actually see topology under the ocean surface. Aerie has taken
the time to find real-world topology data(although we've exaggerated it
somewhat), it definitely gives a cool feel to the terrain. Borders have
also gotten some love and now use a new system which enables us to make
them much smoother. Much of the previous jaggedness is gone. We've also
begun to implement and test a more detailed lighting model, which we will
continue to improve upon until we release the game. Another cool
feature(which isn't really part of the map) are the units, whose tabards
now show the heraldic flag of the unit leader.

crusader_kings_2_devdiary_5_ss2.jpg

But there are still some things which we're missing. We need trees and
rivers. We need to add province names and realm names, which exist in all
our latest games. I'd like to add more information to borders, so borders
between two realms are colored by the realms' respective colors. There are
of course lots of more things we want to do, but I won't spill the beans
just yet.

crusader_kings_2_devdiary_5_ss3.jpg

All in all, we are very happy with the way the new map is coming along.
Hopefully you will enjoy it as well once you get to play the game!

Fredrik Zetterman, Deluxe programmer, currently working on Crusader Kings
II
 
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. :D
 
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.
 
Last edited:
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. :)
 
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...
 
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!
 
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).
 
Alpha screenshots are alpha.
 
I don't care much about the map (I don't like reaistic graphics, though). I want a DD about the Pope!
 
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:

rome_72.jpg

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.
 
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.
 
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.