Because 1453 is the end of the big crusades,that is why the game ends there.Expanding the timeline to the past or past 1453 doesn't make sense and beats the purpose of the game to be part of the crusades and all the socio-economic changes they brought.It is not "Viking raiders"neither "Ostrogoths vs Byzantines" game.
Actually, the game is about Medieval politics, the crusades are just a fun sideshow to this. That is why the game starts in 1066 and not 1095. (Also I do not understand where the Ostrogoths come into this?)
However, I do broadly agree that after 1453, some socioeconomic trends start to develop beyond the CK model. Albeit slowly. But the idea that the world in 1454 was unrecognisable from the world in 1452, or unplayable in CK terms, is silly.
We still need a cut-off date, of course - but we also need a way of encouraging players to start at non-1066 dates without feeling disadvantaged by the timeline. So I suggest
dynamic end dates.
The 1066 start gives you 387 years. Let’s assume that that is apparently the ideal amount of gameplay time. Thus, players who start in 1077, without overpowered Fatimids, should be allowed to play until 1464. People who want crusader states can start in 1100, and play until 1487. There would still need to be a final cut-off for dynamic end dates, I suggest the 1105 start taking you up to 1492 (so starting after 1105 would eat into your gameplay time).
I realise this idea sounds faintly ludicrous, but it would solve all the problems people are complaining about.
