• 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.
do you complain if you can't play indians in EU: Rome?
Or terrorists in Call Of duty????

I don't understand what you mean?

What a generation of people we have, never happy even if it is the only and best game of the genre

I suspect some don't have a problem with the factions, their real issue is that they think PDox is somehow "screwing them" out of money for future DLC.
 
why don't be happy with the ENORMOUS things they improved since CK1, almost all demands of players have been listend by Paradox, see how the suites of licence are going to simplificate game mechanics(Heroes might and magic 6, civilisation 5, Skyrim suite of oblivion) for players who just want to win easily whitout any complexity

I deleted this games within a week

This suite of CK1 is one of the best recently.
 
why don't be happy with the ENORMOUS things they improved since CK1, almost all demands of players have been listend by Paradox, see how the suites of licence are going to simplificate game mechanics(Heroes might and magic 6, civilisation 5, Skyrim suite of oblivion) for players who just want to win easily whitout any complexity

I deleted this games within a week

This suite of CK1 is one of the best recently.

"suits [sic] of license." this basically proves my point. these people aren't butthurt over factions; they simply think PDox is a "greedy corporation" that just wants to screw you out of money by "denying" you something they "promised" (they did not) by making it future DLC. that's all this is.
 
You people keep posting misinformation and spreading confusion. Please stop posting your opinions without reading the whole thread because you are bringing up moot points.

They already said they didn't hardcode religious groups for any reason (it's not because of DLC).

So why aren't religious groups fully modable?
 
You people keep posting misinformation and spreading confusion. Please stop posting your opinions without reading the whole thread because you are bringing up moot points.

They already said they didn't hardcode religious groups for any reason (it's not because of DLC).

So why aren't religious groups fully modable?

because they intend to flesh it out and provide to you in the future maybe? I don't get your comment.
 
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?
This is a strawman. Paradox isn't any more greedy than any other game developer. The game is not "broken." I have never argued otherwise.

As for your suggestion that I boycott Paradox and buy a "competing feudal strategy game"... There are none. That's why I'm here. Nobody else makes the kinds of games Paradox does, so even if I disagree with their decision in this case, there is nowhere else to go.
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.
That's nice, but I and many other people are not. So go be happy and vacate the thread. The rest of us actually have things to discuss.
You are not entitled to more.
Care to justify this statement? Paradox clearly feels differently, or they would not fix bugs and add content through patches.
And this argument that Mods should be allowed... no, not if it relates to the specific area they are planning on expanding, because it will influence sales. It is completely reasonable for them to take precautions. You are not entitled to Mod anything. Modding is there to extend the life span of a game, same as an expansion. Paradox is entirely reasonable to do this if they think it will be better financially for them.
Paradox is not a charity and I am not asking for handouts. They are a business. Everyone here who has the little knight shield icons under their name has given them money. They are all entitled to ask for new features or bug fixes. Whether Paradox delivers on those requests is another matter, of course, and they will do what makes the best financial sense to them; but please don't pretend this is the same thing as what is best for the customer.

And actually, I would suggest that hardcoding playability to one religious group does not make financial sense for Paradox. People buy their games with the expectation that they can be extensively modded, and while certain rules and mechanics are always hardcoded, it is not usually the case that cultures, religions, or types of government are hardcoded to be unplayable. This is part of why CK2 looks so odd in comparison. People keep bringing up CK1 as a precedent here, but CK1 was a much more primitive game made: a) in a much shorter period of time, b) on a completely different engine, and c) on a much smaller budget.
 
So what do people think that playing as a Muslim lord would be like?

I'm not an expert in the period, and hopefully some people here are. (And by 'expert' I don't mean, "I've played Mediaeval Total War!' ;)) But from what I know about the 'iqta system and Fatimid/Abbasid government, the main differences would be:

1. You can't inherit fiefs. You're appointed to them by the king and can be removed from them at his whim.
2. You don't control any troops. (Though the king can put you in charge of his own armies).
3. You aren't responsible for building improvements or infrastructure in your fiefs.
4. Polygamy means that dynastic marriages and succession work completely differently.
5. Plots and assassinations would work the same.

Now to my eyes that looks like it removes 80% of the game content, and would be completely unfun - unless you play at king level, in which case it would be much, much easier, since you control so much more under your direct power than any European monarch of the period did. But maybe I'm missing something?
Well, for one thing iqta were often hereditary in practice, and many iqtadars acted more or less like European feudal lords. You are also ascribing far more control to Muslim princes than they had in reality. The First Crusade was only successful because of the simultaneous collapse of both Seljuk and Fatimid authority in Syria and Palestine. In addition, many of these differences apply to the Byzantines, yet their unique form of government is not modeled; they use the same feudal template (with some cosmetic modifications) as every other country.

I'm not denying there were meaningful differences between medieval Europe and MENA, and I don't think anybody wants playable Muslims in the game if they are just going to be identical to playable Christians. But people in this thread really exaggerate those differences too much. And they also ignore instances where countries are playable even though their governments and societies looked nothing like feudal Western Europe, e.g. the Byzantine Empire, the Rus' principalities, and Ethiopia.
 
Care to justify this statement? Paradox clearly feels differently, or they would not fix bugs and add content through patches.

We don't add new features because we feel the users are entitled to it, but because we want to add new features and because it makes sense from a business perspective to keep supporting your products.
 
We don't add new features because we feel the users are entitled to it, but because we want to add new features and because it makes sense from a business perspective to keep supporting your products.

Thank God for you Captain Gars.

+Infinity
 
"suits [sic] of license." this basically proves my point. these people aren't butthurt over factions; they simply think PDox is a "greedy corporation" that just wants to screw you out of money by "denying" you something they "promised" (they did not) by making it future DLC. that's all this is.

Congratulations. That is what us people actually discussing this said it precisely ISN'T the reason we have a problem with it. I, for one, support it being disabled in vanilla, but not through hard-coding. Paying money to one of the very few corporations that actually makes games that I stick with after the first time playing through should be an indication. You don't spend hundreds of hours with games you grudgingly play.

Also, keep lying. No one has said they promised to have it available. No one anywhere (unless it was an incredibly obscure and uninformed post out of a thousand on the subject), but what they did do was deliberately avoid having the community informed on the matter of Hard-coding it, dodging and ignoring the question repeatedly during development.

They already said they didn't hardcode religious groups for any reason (it's not because of DLC).

Actually the hard-coding is precisely for DLC-reasons, the post was about a guy not being entirely sure that that's an intended side-effect, so hopefully it turns out he's right and that's enabled (otherwise it'd be a disgrace) once it's figured out (I refer back to my suggestion to linking it to the specific norse_pagan/catholic/etc. wording in the files to have the game-mechanics enabled for players, so just changing their names wouldn't also enable the mechanics if you don't have the DLC). But that's by no means a sure thing. It could be very much "Working As Designed".

because they intend to flesh it out and provide to you in the future maybe? I don't get your comment.

That makes absolutely no sense. It only shoots modders in the back. Maybe you would actually be a part of the modding community to understand that rather than just being an opinionated apologist, but could you explain just how exactly disabling a major facet of modding would "help" fantasy mods and so forth that might not even have any use of the (not promised) DLC-mechanics of the future? Also that means these "buy what you like, it's all optional!" remarks are unfounded, since that essentially means anyone that wishes to make or play a mod would need to buy the DLC just to get the privilege of deleting the religions you paid for to re-purpose those two precious Group-tags for your mod.

Calanctus: Paradox is not a charity and I am not asking for handouts. They are a business. Everyone here who has the little knight shield icons under their name has given them money. They are all entitled to ask for new features or bug fixes. Whether Paradox delivers on those requests is another matter, of course, and they will do what makes the best financial sense to them; but please don't pretend this is the same thing as what is best for the customer.

And actually, I would suggest that hardcoding playability to one religious group does not make financial sense for Paradox. People buy their games with the expectation that they can be extensively modded, and while certain rules and mechanics are always hardcoded, it is not usually the case that cultures, religions, or types of government are hardcoded to be unplayable. This is part of why CK2 looks so odd in comparison. People keep bringing up CK1 as a precedent here, but CK1 was a much more primitive game made: a) in a much shorter period of time, b) on a completely different engine, and c) on a much smaller budget.

Captain Gars: We don't add new features because we feel the users are entitled to it, but because we want to add new features and because it makes sense from a business perspective to keep supporting your products.

Well, looks like we're all in agreement on this point, then? What would you call it when people argue against a position their "opponent" doesn't actually adhere to and then proclaim victory in the actual points of discussion again..? Hmmm, I wonder..

(Not actually directed at Gars/Calanctus, just the phrase "Strawman" rearing it's head. :p )
 
Last edited:
Nuril, I'm sorry you feel "shot in the back" but honestly, since when did PDox HAVE to care so much about modders, when they have a staff that they pay salaries to?

And yes this thread should have been over long ago. The question was asked and answered. People need to stop using this as a soapbox to blast PDox.
 
Nuril, I'm sorry you feel "shot in the back" but honestly, since when did PDox HAVE to care so much about modders, when they have a staff that they pay salaries to?

And yes this thread should have been over long ago. The question was asked and answered. People need to stop using this as a soapbox to blast PDox.

So essentially "TL;DR". Good to know, won't be wasting proverbial breath on you, then, since you seem intent only on ignoring responses and repeatedly calling for anyone who disagrees with you on the importance of this to shut up.

Edit: And to note, I'm not using it as "a soapbox to blast Paradox". They are my favourite developer by far and I'm genuinly hoping for an alternative implementation (like locking down a few in-file names for their use) to solve the issue. Then modders could just Search-&-Replace the characters from say "norse_pagan" to a new pagan group as "asatru" or something and be done with it. The DLC is secure and, if you wish to transfer your mod in as a Needs-DLC version you Search-&-Replace "asatru" back to "norse_pagan" again, so it's the Paradox-exclusive one.
 
So essentially "TL;DR". Good to know, won't be wasting proverbial breath on you, then, since you seem intent only on ignoring responses and repeatedly calling for anyone who disagrees with you on the importance of this to shut up.

Nuril, first off, this is not 4chan.

Secondly, I only "TL;DR" when people load up their comments with silly crap and I simply need to center on one or two things they brought up that I think needs addressing. Now, at this point, you're just being combative and petulant. The issue has been asked, it has been answered, and we even had a Paradox programmer weigh in. You're done. Move on.
 
Nuril, first off, this is not 4chan.

Well you sure told me by insinuating I think this is that cesspool-of-occasional-worthwhileness, I guess I'll just concede everything and submit myself to your obviously superior intellect, then? Or how about I don't and you stop being childish?

Secondly, I only "TL;DR" when people load up their comments with silly crap and I simply need to center on one or two things they brought up that I think needs addressing. Now, at this point, you're just being combative and petulant. The issue has been asked, it has been answered, and we even had a Paradox programmer weigh in. You're done. Move on.

Yes, refuting the central point of each quoted section of your posts and then having you refuse to respond with a single word to it is surely merely because "he was full of silly crap". Way to go!

You nitpick some peripheral phrasing used for emphasizing the point that they clearly knew this was going to piss people off, and thus felt the inclination to hide it, but no, that was not the substance of the post that you decided not to address.
 
ChienAboyeur will you get off Dark3lf's back? He's from Indonesia, his english is very good but not 100%, I think the issue is you're getting something out of his words that he isn't intending due to having to use a secondary language. Cut the guy some slack.

By the way people, PDox never "promised" you you could play Muslim and Pagan factions right out of the box. Stop beating that dead horse.

Thanks, I really don't understand how he can get that from my original statement :unsure:
 
This is a strawman. Paradox isn't any more greedy than any other game developer. The game is not "broken." I have never argued otherwise.

As for your suggestion that I boycott Paradox and buy a "competing feudal strategy game"... There are none. That's why I'm here. Nobody else makes the kinds of games Paradox does, so even if I disagree with their decision in this case, there is nowhere else to go.

There are other medieval strategy games, unfortunately most of them are waste of time and money. I'm glad to hear that you think that the game isn't broken, for a moment I was certain that there was something very wrong with it, because there was so loud moaning about a feature which was never promised.

That's nice, but I and many other people are not. So go be happy and vacate the thread. The rest of us actually have things to discuss.

OK, so those who don't share your view should just shut up and go away, because their opinions are worthless. Thanks for your honesty. It's always nice to know when people want honest debate and when they just want to preach.
 
Nuril if you want to troll go right ahead. But stop expecting me to take you seriously from this point.
 
Nuril if you want to troll go right ahead. But stop expecting me to take you seriously from this point.

Yes, actively trying to find a compromise solution that would make both Modders happy and fulfill the exact same needs Paradox has for this policy is surely trolling. You caught me out alright. I'm sure everyone understands that it's me they shouldn't take seriously for discussing this and not the guy actively refusing to respond to anyone with a dissenting opinion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.