Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Next DLC title leaked?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Crusader Kings II 69867 Bug Reports 19707 User Modifications 10588 Suggestions 5969 Tech Support 6361 After Action Reports
Status
Not open for further replies.
Show only dev responses
Was Rome not only an Empire, but also a republic.

Isn't the democracy of Rome one of its legacies?

I would enjoy either, but until its announced, its pointless speculating.
 
Meneth said:
The Orthodox seem like a higher priority to me. There are only a few republics that are county level or above after all: Venice, Genoa, Pisa, Novgorod, one Irish county.
Meanwhile, you've got the entire Byzantine Empire as Orthodox, as well as Georgia, Alania, and Russia.
Click to expand...

Not that I disagree here if you look at the game as it is now, even though you can add bologna and Orvieto to your list, keep in mind that the foundation, rise and prime of the Hanseatic League is during CK2's timeline, it isn't modeled at all right now. Maybe a DLC devoted to Republics could add the Hanse, a mayor power in northern europe the 14th century, to the game as well.
 
Jak9090 said:
Paradox already stated DLC is the new medium of expansion, many times they've said this, so, I look foward to this DLC.
Click to expand...

^This.
 
Merci357 said:
Not that I disagree here if you look at the game as it is now, even though you can add bologna and Orvieto to your list, keep in mind that the foundation, rise and prime of the Hanseatic League is during CK2's timeline, it isn't modeled at all right now. Maybe a DLC devoted to Republics could add the Hanse, a mayor power in northern europe the 14th century, to the game as well.
Click to expand...

There is a mod under development to represent this, but its not finished afaik.

Besides,.... more rumours ! I want more ! CK2-fans cage fights ! CK2-Gladiators ! I will sit on the terrace and keep watching.



Oh..and an early middle ages DLC, expanding the timeline would be awesome.
 
salvettic said:
Perhaps it's a "Early Medieval" DLC, thus Legacy of Rome...
Click to expand...

I would LOVE that!!!

Gedierond said:
Just giving another option for the DLC, if it indeed is called that way. "Legacy of Rome" may refer to a Republics DLC, after all Rome started as a Republic... It´s farfetched, I know, but it just came to my mind.
Click to expand...

Great explanation. :)

And what we all have to keep in mind, is how we would react to a Byzantine DLC rather than just a patch. Many players would be outraged at how cheap that would be (taking away something that should have already been there and selling it). And how would they keep the base game compatible with it unless they disabled Orthodox characters to anybody without the DLC.

Putting a Byzantine/Orthodox overhaul on a patch would be great. An HRE/ERE overhaul would also be great, but in a patch. This DLC has to introduce something not present in the base game.
 
Prime624 said:
And what we all have to keep in mind, is how we would react to a Byzantine DLC rather than just a patch. Many players would be outraged at how cheap that would be (taking away something that should have already been there and selling it). And how would they keep the base game compatible with it unless they disabled Orthodox characters to anybody without the DLC.

Putting a Byzantine/Orthodox overhaul on a patch would be great. An HRE/ERE overhaul would also be great, but in a patch. This DLC has to introduce something not present in the base game.
Click to expand...
Maybe that's how you would react? I find this "I feel cheated if I don't get this and that feature in a free patch" attitude fairly repulsive. At what point did they entitle you to regular content patches for free? If there is Byzantine content then you can be fairly certain that it is stuff that was developed in the past months, since game release, so it cannot conceivably have been part of the base game release. Maybe the concept was already there (the postmortem DD indicated that when they implemented the base game, there were a lot of concepts that had to be left out) but concept and implementation are different things, it takes time and effort to put something into usable and tested code.

Paradox stated that under no circumstances will their DLCs lock anyone out of any country that is playable in the base game. (Johan said so in a recent interview AFAIK) So the Byzantines will remain playable to all players, those who have the DLC and those who don't.
 
It will be funny when this turns out to be music
 
Prime624 said:
I would LOVE that!!!



Great explanation. :)

And what we all have to keep in mind, is how we would react to a Byzantine DLC rather than just a patch. Many players would be outraged at how cheap that would be (taking away something that should have already been there and selling it). And how would they keep the base game compatible with it unless they disabled Orthodox characters to anybody without the DLC.

Putting a Byzantine/Orthodox overhaul on a patch would be great. An HRE/ERE overhaul would also be great, but in a patch. This DLC has to introduce something not present in the base game.
Click to expand...
The real question is what the DLC part unlocks ;)
For example, it might unlock playing as the Patriarch himself, as he's not currently playable. Unlikely, but possible.
Alternatively, it might just be graphics and music.
I find it unlikely that they would make Orthodox characters unplayable without the DLC at least. After all, they doubtlessly saw the moderate backlash with Sword of Islam when Muslims weren't even playable in vanilla, so I doubt they'd give people a good reason to be outraged.
 
Meneth said:
The real question is what the DLC part unlocks ;)
For example, it might unlock playing as the Patriarch himself, as he's not currently playable. Unlikely, but possible.
Alternatively, it might just be graphics and music.
I find it unlikely that they would make Orthodox characters unplayable without the DLC at least. After all, they doubtlessly saw the moderate backlash with Sword of Islam when Muslims weren't even playable in vanilla, so I doubt they'd give people a good reason to be outraged.
Click to expand...
I suppose the different game aspects require some sort of balance, but you could easily have it so that the DLC brings a lot of new features which both the AI and the player can only use when the DLC is bought. If you don't have the DLC, the interface button just isn't there. That could even work for naval combat - when you don't have the DLC, there are no pirates in the game, fleets don't fight each other and can't be assigned commanders. You could also not build any of the new naval unit types that a DLC might implement. So there would still be a game but just not with some of the features. It would feel "vanilla" but you could still play all of the factions. Balance might be a little iffy if the "locked" features were part of game balance, but if the feature was something that all factions can use, then removing it might not upset balance too much.

The decadence system could not have been "kept out" in SoI in that way, though, because it was one of the things that balances the overhauled Muslim world versus the Christian world. If you took it out then the 1.06 non-SoI users would never see the overpowered Muslim empires implode.
 
Leviathan07 said:
I suppose the different game aspects require some sort of balance, but you could easily have it so that the DLC brings a lot of new features which both the AI and the player can only use when the DLC is bought. If you don't have the DLC, the interface button just isn't there.
Click to expand...
That would split the multiplayer community, which Paradox have said they will not do with Crusader Kings II.
 
Voy said:
The main thing is that PI would have to make a bunch of new research in addition to the pagans. Every county, duchy and Kingdom needs to have a titleholder and many new characters and dynasties would have to be created. And as you mentioned, the balance issues, not only with the Muslims, but HRE, and other christians, conquering Denmark, Norway and Sweden in 20 years because they're pagans. I honestly don't think PI consider it worth the effort. If they do, great, some will get their wish fulfilled.
Click to expand...
Well there were crusades against pagans...

Prussian crusade 1230 for instance

Lithuania only became Christian in 1387

Pagans are seriously under represented and way too weak in game and this in it self is causing balancing issues.

So pagan DLC is definitely necessary if not then they need to be seriously beefed up as it's unusual to see them last until 1100 in the baltics
 
Legacy of Rome is obviously nothing to do with pagans and it seems like it will almost definitely be the Byzzies. But I'd say a Byzantine DLC is one of the least necessary as they are already overpowered. It could possibly be Republics but I hope not as that's even less relevant, the only other one could be a papal DLC which is badly needed. The pope can be largely ignored as long as you have papal investiture. But in reality the pope was the most powerful man in Europe, maybe even the world. Politics involving the pope should be one of the main focus for any Christian ruler. Many Houses prospered by backing their candidate for the papacy and were rewarded for their efforts.

Unless..........

They are implementing some of the features from the paradox game EU:Rome. :eek:
 
Leviathan07 said:
Maybe that's how you would react? I find this "I feel cheated if I don't get this and that feature in a free patch" attitude fairly repulsive. At what point did they entitle you to regular content patches for free? If there is Byzantine content then you can be fairly certain that it is stuff that was developed in the past months, since game release, so it cannot conceivably have been part of the base game release. Maybe the concept was already there (the postmortem DD indicated that when they implemented the base game, there were a lot of concepts that had to be left out) but concept and implementation are different things, it takes time and effort to put something into usable and tested code.

Paradox stated that under no circumstances will their DLCs lock anyone out of any country that is playable in the base game. (Johan said so in a recent interview AFAIK) So the Byzantines will remain playable to all players, those who have the DLC and those who don't.
Click to expand...

They entitled me to free content patches when they sold the game to me without being perfect in every way. No game is perfect. That's why there are patches.

Anyways, I don't think they will take away something that is already there, or that they will make the DLC incompatible with the base game.
 
Meneth said:
That would split the multiplayer community, which Paradox have said they will not do with Crusader Kings II.
Click to expand...
No it wouldn't - a DLC-owner could play with a non-DLC-owner and the game would give both the same set of game features (that available to non-DLC owners).

The DLC owner might find this slightly grating if he misses those features, but it would in no way split the community. Both sets of people use the same EXE after all (if they are patched up to date) and have a free choice with whom to play.

Isn't this how it works already?
 
As said, I doubt they'll lock orthodox characters, maybe except for the Basileus himself.

I had suggested some type of parallel code to be at work with multiplayer standards as well but perhaps it would not be a very elegant solution. Perhaps something cosmetic that does not affect gameplay?! On the other hand, I want PI to make good money on this (I want the company to be healty!) and I doubt they would with cosmetic DLCs.leas

So, a piece of additional timeline to play?! With Basilios II and such?! It looks the least intrusive solution but on the other hand, it would be just loosely related to Byzantium itself (and Russia).

Hence, I'm really curious to see what they'll figure out!
 
Leviathan07 said:
Maybe that's how you would react? I find this "I feel cheated if I don't get this and that feature in a free patch" attitude fairly repulsive. At what point did they entitle you to regular content patches for free?
Click to expand...
I always assume that people with the "TAKE MY MONEY!!!11" opinion are those who get mummy or daddy to buy their games for them. One of the reasons I value Paradox as a business and makes them stand out as game developers is their commitment to fixing problems within their games through patches. The first game i bought was Vicky 2 when it was first released. Every patch felt like a new game they fixed a magnitude of problems and introduced many new features. It's concerning that they now seem to want to squeeze the customer for every last penny by releasing features which should have been in the game or included with major DLC. Mongol faces for example.
 
Manic Eskimo said:
I always assume that people with the "TAKE MY MONEY!!!11" opinion are those who get mummy or daddy to buy their games for them. One of the reasons I value Paradox as a business and makes them stand out as game developers is their commitment to fixing problems within their games through patches. The first game i bought was Vicky 2 when it was first released. Every patch felt like a new game they fixed a magnitude of problems and introduced many new features. It's concerning that they now seem to want to squeeze the customer for every last penny by releasing features which should have been in the game or included with major DLC. Mongol faces for example.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but the base CK2 is a great game that lives straight up to its name - Crusader Kings. The fact that Paradox is offering DLC doesn't mean anything negative about them. Now, if they tried to kill the modding community, that would be much different.

They have a right to make money. Honestly, I want them to make tons because I love their games. SoI was a great DLC, even if it makes Muslims a bit scary at times. But so long as the base game is enjoyable and complete, that's great. But if they start working on adding features after the release of the base game, they deserve to be paid for that work. Now, if they have it done and put it out as day-one DLC, that's a different issue altogether.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back