• 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually I participated into more than one discussion which were merged into this thread. Original posts had the same general agenda, which was: "OMG I feel cheated. Why can't I play as Muslim or Pagan!" And while I agree with you that it's unfair to demand what was never promised, I don't consider that the discussion about the topic should vanilla CKII have playable Muslims is improper.

Fair enough; I just feel like we have come to an end on any meaningful discussion about the inclusion of playable Muslims/Pagans.

If someone has a good point to bring up on that subject that hasn't already been stated I would like to hear it but I feel like we have exhausted all options for debate. Most of the posts now are just copies of ones made early in the thread.

Maybe I should just stop posting in here because I feel like the Devs have heard enough on the subject to make their own judgement.
 
Because they are interested about those tribes and nations. I believe some of my countrymen wish that they could play as Finnish tribes and recently in another thread there was a Lithuanian person who wished he could play as pagan Lithuanians. Personally I would play as pagans to get some challenge, I would love to create great Samoyedic empire, but luckily there are obscure and difficult Christian nations to play. One of the best things in CKII is that I can try to create great Abyssinian empire (I expect it to be more challenging than playing as Nubia in CK1).

Personally I think that it would be easier to make pagans playable than muslims and naturally I would wish that pagan rulers could convert to other religion, like many did historically either to Christianity or to Islam.

I'm an Egyptian who'd love to play as... well... Egypt... I don't care if it would be a 100% accurate representation of medieval Islamic society, just give me the option. The cultures were different, but they weren't THAT different... If Byzantium is playable, I don't see why Muslims and Pagans aren't.
 
That is the problem now days with the way gaming is going. Once you would have downloaded a major patch getting them or they would have been released with the game. Now many features are purposely left out for DLC like the crap they released on the first day.

I can tell you without a doubt that this would never have been free in the 'good old days', you most likely never would've seen it. Paradox's new DLC policy allows them to focus on one game mechanic at a time making playable muslims/pagans/Mongols a definite possibility.
 
I'm an Egyptian who'd love to play as... well... Egypt... I don't care if it would be a 100% accurate representation of medieval Islamic society, just give me the option. The cultures were different, but they weren't THAT different... If Byzantium is playable, I don't see why Muslims and Pagans aren't.
There's an option to consider: start as one of the Ethiopian kingdoms and then swear fealty to the Shia Caliph. You'll be able to convert your culture and religion in no time, and can then busily try and take over Egypt from within the Caliphate, possibly throwing him off when it's convenient. Remember, you can play as a muslim just fine, you just can't start as one.
 
I'm an Egyptian who'd love to play as... well... Egypt... I don't care if it would be a 100% accurate representation of medieval Islamic society, just give me the option. The cultures were different, but they weren't THAT different... If Byzantium is playable, I don't see why Muslims and Pagans aren't.


as someone stated before, the game is called "Crusader Kings." There's a tip-off as to why. And, as has been stated numerous times, we will be able to play Muslim and pagan factions very soon with a new update. I don't see reason for all this angst.
 
Well since there are 13 pages . . . dude, you snapped? Wow, just wow. That's not something to snap over. Sorry about a bad V-day; those suck. I'd love to play the other side of the Crusade era, but as a base game I'm glad they focused on making the Crusader side of things well-made. This is still probably the best, most solid Paradox release in a long time, if not ever. If they were working to make both Christians/Crusaders well balanced and interesting AND muslims/Jihadists equally so AND Pagans . . . it'd be a game where you could play anyone, but nowhere near as good as it is. Thank you for that. I would pay for a well-done DLC that allowed you to play one of the other religious groups, though, and I hate the DLC model.
 
as someone stated before, the game is called "Crusader Kings." There's a tip-off as to why. And, as has been stated numerous times, we will be able to play Muslim and pagan factions very soon with a new update. I don't see reason for all this angst.

And as everyone always states in response to that nonsense: That has never been true of their other games. You can't only play as the UK in Victoria, you can't only play as the Roman Republic in EU:Rome, you aren't prevented from playing an archer on foot in Mount&Blade, etc. It's such an idiotic apologist argument that it is hard for me to believe how it's repeated AD NAUSEAM.

Now what -is- valid is that the description of the game when purchasing it explicitly says that in it's original state you'll only get to play Christian Lords. That's perfectly valid and I agree there's no problem in doing so, but apart from new people who just happened to not read the description the biggest real complaint is how the new policy is out-right hard-coding deliberate restrictions against modding (which Paradox has always had a reputation for being friendly towards) for business reasons. It isn't about our money, it isn't about everyone but you being too stupid to understand that Crusades are Christian (Hint: Sarcasm), do you know what actually is a very real concern? Hard-coding things that are incredibly easy to mod in the other Clausewitz-engine Paradox games for absolutely no engine-limitation reason (As with CK1, where the original engine was more limited), but rather just to implement a new DLC policy.

It's a shock* because there wasn't any form of alternative implementation, such as mechanic-changes of the DLC themselves containing the lock so you just aren't allowed to use the specific "norse_pagan / finnish_pagan / etc." phrases in modded files and expect it to work and that those are required in the Hardcode to use the religion-specific mechanics unless you own the DLC, it just shut it down. I don't even see how it could combat piracy anyway, since it's not like it (or anything else) would keep pirates out, they'd just have cracked Exes to use it and the paying customers end up with the locked game.

* And despite what gets repeated by a few people, without a single link or quote, it was something deliberately avoided by Paradox to comment upon. Not a single response to anyone during development, just "have faith". That's literally all I've seen on it. Faith is humbug.

I'm an Egyptian who'd love to play as... well... Egypt... I don't care if it would be a 100% accurate representation of medieval Islamic society, just give me the option. The cultures were different, but they weren't THAT different... If Byzantium is playable, I don't see why Muslims and Pagans aren't.

At least you can take solace in knowing that your DLC will, with utmost certainty, come long before what I care about (Fleshed out Pagans, or, more precisely, Fleshed out Baltic-pagans (Norse, Suomenusko, Romuva)), since the Northern Crusades don't really count since they aren't killing scary Arabs! :p

(Copt or Maṣr, out of interest? Guessing Maṣr from calling yourself Mameluke. :) )
 
Last edited:
I'm an Egyptian who'd love to play as... well... Egypt... I don't care if it would be a 100% accurate representation of medieval Islamic society, just give me the option. The cultures were different, but they weren't THAT different... If Byzantium is playable, I don't see why Muslims and Pagans aren't.

Well to be honest; if we had the ability to mess with religious groups we could have modded in some sort of half working Muslim play at least. I feel arguing for this is more realistic than asking Paradox to make Muslims playable in vanilla.
 
Open the console, type "play (character ID)".

The only way I know to find character ID is to open the save file and find it. The easiest way is to search the savefile for "birth_date="1066.1.18"" That's year, month, day. You can find the birthdate of any character by mousing over their age.
 
[ wall of text]

who cares what they have done in OTHER games? This is CKII, it is not "other games." You're going to be able to play Pagan and Muslim factions in an upcoming patch. Again, no reason to get angsty. Seems people just want to preach.
 
who cares what they have done in OTHER games? This is CKII, it is not "other games." You're going to be able to play Pagan and Muslim factions in an upcoming patch. Again, no reason to get angsty. Seems people just want to preach.

If you're just going to "TL;DR" other people, why don't you just go ahead and leave, since you don't seem to grasp what forums are for?

Also that is blatantly false, the hard-coding is there expressly for the purpose of protecting their DLC from being used without paying, so obviously they aren't going to remove it when it's time to start selling it. It won't work, since DRM never does, but that's just wrong.
 
And as everyone always states in response to that nonsense: That has never been true of their other games. You can't only play as the UK in Victoria, you can't only play as the Roman Republic in EU:Rome, you aren't prevented from playing an archer on foot in Mount&Blade, etc. It's such an idiotic apologist argument that it is hard for me to believe how it's repeated AD NAUSEAM.

Now what -is- valid is that the description of the game when purchasing it explicitly says that in it's original state you'll only get to play Christian Lords. That's perfectly valid and I agree there's no problem in doing so, but apart from new people who just happened to not read the description the biggest real complaint is how the new policy is out-right hard-coding deliberate restrictions against modding (which Paradox has always had a reputation for being friendly towards) for business reasons. It isn't about our money, it isn't about everyone but you being too stupid to understand that Crusades are Christian (Hint: Sarcasm), do you know what actually is a very real concern? Hard-coding things that are incredibly easy to mod in the other Clausewitz-engine Paradox games for absolutely no engine-limitation reason (As with CK1, where the original engine was more limited), but rather just to implement a new DLC policy.

It's a shock* because there wasn't any form of alternative implementation, such as mechanic-changes of the DLC themselves containing the lock so you just aren't allowed to use the specific "norse_pagan / finnish_pagan / etc." phrases in modded files and expect it to work and that those are required in the Hardcode to use the religion-specific mechanics unless you own the DLC, it just shut it down. I don't even see how it could combat piracy anyway, since it's not like it (or anything else) would keep pirates out, they'd just have cracked Exes to use it and the paying customers end up with the locked game.

* And despite what gets repeated by a few people, without a single link or quote, it was something deliberately avoided by Paradox to comment upon. Not a single response to anyone during development, just "have faith". That's literally all I've seen on it. Faith is humbug.



At least you can take solace in knowing that your DLC will, with utmost certainty, come long before what I care about (Fleshed out Pagans, or, more precisely, Fleshed out Baltic-pagans (Norse, Suomenusko, Romuva)), since the Northern Crusades don't really count since they aren't killing scary Arabs! :p

(Copt or Maṣr, out of interest? Guessing Maṣr from calling yourself Mameluke. :) )

Technically Masri, but I'm also an atheist Canadian, I just like to remember my roots. I just want to crush Crusaders, am I asking too much? I'm trying the save game thing as we speak.

As for the guy telling me I should have noticed that it's called Crusader Kings, I can play Egypt in Europa Universalis, Rome, and Victoria. It's not like what I'm asking is for is in the realm of fantasy.
 
If you're just going to "TL;DR" other people, why don't you just go ahead and leave, since you don't seem to grasp what forums are for?

I actually appreciate it when people don't repaste long messages in quotes, it makes it much easier to read the forums on mobile devices. So I don't understand why you want him to leave, because he didn't quote your whole rant? I think he actually did a good job of paraphrasing your argument too.

Also that is blatantly false, the hard-coding is there expressly for the purpose of protecting their DLC from being used without paying, so obviously they aren't going to remove it when it's time to start selling it. It won't work, since DRM never does, but that's just wrong.

And you have a problem with this why exactly? Paradox has a right to their income and they didn't promise that you would be able to play as pagan/muslim rulers as you have pointed out. They delivered what was promised - so its not a case of omitting features from a finished product to monetize customers later.

I can't really see why you are upset about this, except that in OTHER Paradox games you could. This game is not those games.

IIRC You couldn't play as non-christians in the original CK too, so its not without precedent.
 
And you have a problem with this why exactly? Paradox has a right to their income and they didn't promise that you would be able to play as pagan/muslim rulers as you have pointed out.
"Paradox has a right to their income" is a meaningless truism. Yes, Paradox Interactive indeed owns and controls the intellectual property they created. Brilliant insight.

Why would we have a problem with it? ... Why don't you read the thread? People have been wanting to play Muslims and pagans since shortly after CK1 came out in 2004. It was by far the most commonly posted thing in the feature request threads. It's not some secret that was finally revealed in this thread. Paradox knew about this years before they started working on CK2.
They delivered what was promised - so its not a case of omitting features from a finished product to monetize customers later.
Paradox is not my friend. They are a company. They make products for me to buy. I don't care that they lived up to their "promise"; I care about getting a product with the features I want. It just so happens that this game comes without a specific feature that I and many other people wanted. Paradox runs these forums in part to get customer feedback. I am, with other likeminded customers, sharing feedback.

As for the latter part... Do you have any proof that they didn't deliberately leave this feature out so they could make some extra cash on DLC? I mean, they have clearly been planning to do this Muslim DLC for quite a while, so it seems self-evidently true to me.
IIRC You couldn't play as non-christians in the original CK too, so its not without precedent.
They hardcoded playability to one religious group. This was in CK1, but CK1 was also a much more primitive game. This kind of hardcoding has no precedent in any other Paradox series. It's certainly not part of any other Clausewitz game. And that's way above and beyond a simple "we don't support playing Muslims and pagans." That's "we don't want you to play Muslims and pagans, until you've paid us another $10."
 
imagine what will happen if paradox release crusader king with playable muslim as it is now, more people will protest that they are eurocentric, can't give justice to muslim, racist, etc2.

At least now paradox have a time to do event for muslim faction, reducing future complaint from muslim customer.

Your comment is quite thick and off reality. I dont read every thread but so far, I cant see that much complaint that the game is eurocentric. Taking a look at Nubia and Axum faces or Mongol faces in vanilla shows the way it is though.

It is also quite stupid to claim that a customer has to be a muslim to question certain sides of the game, like the possibility that the game locks certain content of the game so it can be sold a second time later. Or that people who want to enjoy the game and playing as such muslims factions or heathens have not to be muslim or pagan. By the way, do you have to be a muslim to skip the fact that the thread title reads "why cant we play Muslims or pagans?


Beyond the events and stuff like that(they can be added through mods?), I wonder if the Muslims factions would be playable as such. I have now holdings in former muslim land (Alexandria, Egypt, Axum, Ascalon, Jerusalem, Antiochea and two or three more counties)

Incredible army potential which beats the holdings in Europe(Wales, Ireland, Scotland, half of England, Brittany, half of North France)

Middle east holding must be something like 30K soldiers.

To move around that number of soldiers, you need 300 galleys, hence 30 coastal counties. Which the muslims do not have. So it limits mechanically the AI.

But you can acquire five coastal counties then 50 galleys and then be along to move around 5k soldier chunk.

A human player can easily play the restriction of landing, landing 5k at a time, buying time and once a foothold of 15K soldiers, reinforcing along the way. This before the human player targets specifically coastal provinces to increase the navy capacity before moving inland. At this moment, the navy issue is only a matter of money.

I feel that the current demographics power (due to the technological gap) in middle east counties is too much to allow a human player to play muslim factions. It suits the current gameplay, with muslims having to defend against crusades, calling waves after waves to repell crusaders to the seas but I dont see a human player be limited by the low projection capacity muslims have.

Landing a 15k army in Europe is a game changer in the current version.

What is the experience of players who played muslims from the start? What prevents you from taking advantage of the formidable gap that exists to get easy land in Europe?

I feel that if there is a DLC to play muslims, it will change the current balance of the game deeply. Current mechanics do not look as if they can accomodate muslims.

It might be the same for Pagans who probably have the opposite issue, lagging behind in the technology side so much, it makes it difficult to develop a gameplay of the same base as the game offers.
 
You can play with the Muslims and pagans, only playing on the conversion.

For example if you play Barcelona and you request to be a vassal of Caliphate Shiite, the Caliph will ask you after a while to convert to his religion.

That's what I did in one of my parties and it works very well.
By cons then you must convert all your subjects.

Good game!
 
allso in crusader kings and crusader kings deus vult you werent able to play as muslim nor pagan so i think its understandable that those cultures arent yet available to play but i really do want to try eigther caliphate out :) they seem to be easy to convert into superpower (as if they allready werent)
 
"Paradox has a right to their income" is a meaningless truism. Yes, Paradox Interactive indeed owns and controls the intellectual property they created. Brilliant insight.

Why would we have a problem with it? ... Why don't you read the thread? People have been wanting to play Muslims and pagans since shortly after CK1 came out in 2004. It was by far the most commonly posted thing in the feature request threads. It's not some secret that was finally revealed in this thread. Paradox knew about this years before they started working on CK2.

Paradox is not my friend. They are a company. They make products for me to buy. I don't care that they lived up to their "promise"; I care about getting a product with the features I want. It just so happens that this game comes without a specific feature that I and many other people wanted. Paradox runs these forums in part to get customer feedback. I am, with other likeminded customers, sharing feedback.

As for the latter part... Do you have any proof that they didn't deliberately leave this feature out so they could make some extra cash on DLC? I mean, they have clearly been planning to do this Muslim DLC for quite a while, so it seems self-evidently true to me.

They hardcoded playability to one religious group. This was in CK1, but CK1 was also a much more primitive game. This kind of hardcoding has no precedent in any other Paradox series. It's certainly not part of any other Clausewitz game. And that's way above and beyond a simple "we don't support playing Muslims and pagans." That's "we don't want you to play Muslims and pagans, until you've paid us another $10."

So? Why did you even buy the game, if it is so horribly broken and greedy Paradox is just screwing it's customers with their expensive DLCs? Boycotting CKII and buying competing feudal strategy game instead of CKII would have been more efficient way to combat against the evil ways of Paradox.

Almost no one here disagrees that playable Muslims would be nice addition, but some of us are perfectly happy with the product which we already have. If Paradox is willing to make the extra work and change the game, so that Muslims will be also playable (which requires changes to game mechanics and balance) then we don't have any issues to pay them for their work. If base game is good enough and future expansions offer something worth paying for then why complain? I don't really see any problem here, but then again I'm a person who often buys all kinds of expansions to his favourite computer, board and roleplaying games (although only if they offer something worth buying). I'm content with CKII and consider that it's one of the best games I have ever played. I'm glad they focused their efforts to get the feudal system work better than in CKI.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.