• 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.

olvirki

Lt. General
88 Badges
Jan 25, 2010
1.215
39
  • Rome Gold
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Semper Fi
  • Sengoku
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • War of the Vikings
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Cities in Motion
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • War of the Roses
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Darkest Hour
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
First of all, I am not really asking for anything. It is very easy to make Iceland stronger through modding and I I f.e. just gave Iceland extra holdings. So I don't really need anything. And I understand that this game is not meant to be a perfect history simulator. But if Iceland is truly underpowered it would be nice if Iceland would be better represented in vanilla, by having maybe 3 provinces instead of 2 or adding a few extra holdings.

Now, Iceland has always had a low population compared to many other nations and has never been densely populated. But Iceland had a higher population compared to other countries during the middle ages than it has compared to other countries today and I think Iceland may be underpowered in Crusader kings 2. By that I mean that the max levy and tax that Iceland has may be to low compared to the population that Iceland historically had.

So I compared estimates about the populations of medieval countries such as Norway and Iceland that I found in an Icelandic history book to how Iceland stands in Ck2. Much of the information in this posts comes from a book called "Íslenskur söguatlas, frá öndverðu til 18. aldar" In the spoiler tag I talk about in more detail why Iceland may be underpowered

The population of Iceland when it was independent has often said to have been around 70 000 but recently this number has been getting a little smaller. These estimations are f.e. based on 2 polls and they were made in 1100 and 1311 (Iceland lost it's independence in 1262/1264 (different areas became part of Norway at different times)).

Iceland's population compared to other countries (if f.e. a 50 % is written next to a country in at a specific time then that country had two times Iceland's population at that time):

.............1100...................1200.....................1300....................1400
Norway: 28 %...............27,90 %....................27,75 %..............7,5 %
Scotland: 23,75 %.............21 %.......................19 %................16 %
Scandinavia: 7,75 %..........7,70 %..................7,5 %.................7, 75 %
England: 4 %....................3,50 %...................3,25 %................3 %
Europe: 0,16 %.................0,12 %...................0,08 %................0,10 %

But I checked how the situation is in the game at three specific dates, 1066, 1200 and 1337 and compared Norway's max levys and income to Iceland's max levy's and income.

(And by Norway I mean mainland Norway, the duchies of Jamtland, Trondalag, Vestlandet and Ostelandet plus the county Viken, I did not include the islands such as the faroe islands and Orkney Islands).

1066

Norway:..........................................Iceland:
max levy: 5671................................max levy: 567
max income: 225,2...........................max income: 21

1200
Norway:.................................Iceland:
max levy: 35 860.....................max levy: 3520
max income: 626,1..................max income: 65, 9

1337

Norway:.................................Iceland:
max levy: 45 840....................max levy: 3670
max income: 801,1..................max income: 81


So Norway has roughly 10 times more manpower and income at each time but Norway had historicly only about 4 times more people. So if Iceland historically had as many soldiers per 1000 inhabitants as Norway had and the income from Iceland was in correlation with its population Iceland could be made stronger. If Iceland's manpower and income would be doubled this game would be closer to history.

Or is Norway maybe overpowered ? Or are there other estimates that say that Norway had a larger population Since I know of no easy way to find out how large the maximum levy of countries are I only checked Norway. Maybe Iceland's levy's and income make sense compared to f.e. Scotland. But on the other hand 6000-7000 in max levy might not be to much, in the year 1121 2300 men from an area that had about 55 % of Iceland's population were about to fight because 2 goðar with 2 goðorðs were fighting and they each had many allied goðar of their side. If that battled had not been avoided at the last moment I believe that would have been the largest battle in Icelandic history. So maybe Iceland's max levy in the later start dates should be about 6000 men.

And again, Iceland could be done by adding another province, maybe Suðurland or Norðurland, or by giving Iceland more holdings.

Btw, if Iceland is given more provinces it maybe good to keep in mind that Iceland was split into quarters like this and the size of their populations was broad. About 15 % of Iceland's population lived in Austurland, maybe 35 % lived in Norðurland, about 25 % lived in Vesturland and about 25 % lived in Suðurland.
 
Last edited:
O_O the forgotten duchy.


Seriously lol Iceland?


seriously?




Ill be honest , i first thought this was a troll post. But i think you are legit in trying to get Iceland buffs. And you might be right , but i wanna know , does Norway's historical statistics match the In game de jures it holds? the other thing is , could people freely and readily trade with Iceland. Seems like it was isolated , which might cause (in theory) said population to be less effective in joining wars throughout Europe. Like who will or could send 10 galley's all the way up there for a few levies?


Anyway i don't really know much about Iceland. It was the first Duchy i tried to play as when i first started this game , and i found it was quite a snooze. So i guess history aside , maybe for gameplay it would make sense to have Iceland a little stronger , since i totally forget its even there most the time.
 

I think Iceland may be weaker in Ck2 than it was in real life. Sorry for the long post but I thought I should throw it in when a patch that adds new provinces is on the way. And I apologize if the first post was confusing.
 
Ah, so you did go through the rest as well beyond what was discussed.

O_O the forgotten duchy.


Seriously lol Iceland?


seriously?


Ill be honest , i first thought this was a troll post.

Well, that's rude. He's obviously put in effort beforehand.
 
I got your post and you raise some valid points.

The population comparison isn't perfect however. You also need to take into account population density, wealth, trading links, urbanization and the make up of the population. These as much as anything in CK2 contribute to holding density.

Obviously it is difficult to abstract all this. Do you have any sources that say how many troops iceland could raise or contribute taxwise?

Given its isolation and lack of need for an army in the CK2 period I would imagine it would have a lack of arms manufacturing but I don't know. War was also considered a noble's game in christendom and I think Iceland was very egalitarian. You would probably be better able to say than I though.

Given that alot of really miniscule places have one holding I think you could make the case for a few more in iceland, but I don't think you should buff it to 1/4 of Norways level. That would actually make Iceland very powerfull for such a small territory.
 
Obviously it is difficult to abstract all this. Do you have any sources that say how many troops iceland could raise or contribute taxwise?

Well, something worth noting is that two opposing clans in 1238, during the Sturlung era, were able to raise over two thousand men for a battle in Iceland. Can't say how many of the uninvolved clans could raise in addition to that, however.
 
I did say at first =/ and i did try to take the post as seriously as i could. Nothing against Iceland l0l........ but yeah i usually forget its even in the game. Surprised , thats all.
I'm surprised that you have ~350 posts and not even a single game registered.


Anyway, I agree with OP. Iceland needs moar power.
 
I'll agree with Gogog - 1/4 of Norway's power concentrated in such a small area would be extreme. However, I could see a case being made for raising the max levees. Adding in another province would even be fine.

Of course, I'm not the guy you need to convince.
 
Given its isolation and lack of need for an army in the CK2 period I would imagine it would have a lack of arms manufacturing but I don't know. War was also considered a noble's game in christendom and I think Iceland was very egalitarian. You would probably be better able to say than I though.

I don't know a huge deal about Icelandic history but I think you're correct. I seem to remember in CK1 Iceland was a Republic. While it was obviously pretty different to the Mediterannean Noble Republics I think that might be a better representation than having it as noble. (Ditto Jamtland, but that's another story)
 
Well, I'm not sure the parallel between population and power is something taken into for game, but I agree some little buff and improvments can be made in Iceland.

The best reason for this : make it a bit more playable.
1 additional province and a few holdings can be great. Maybe a formable titular kingdom too. I'll maybe try to add it in my ongoing mapmod.
 
Well, I'm not sure the parallel between population and power is something taken into for game, but I agree some little buff and improvments can be made in Iceland.

The best reason for this : make it a bit more playable.
1 additional province and a few holdings can be great. Maybe a formable titular kingdom too. I'll maybe try to add it in my ongoing mapmod.

I'd suggest the opposite: Make it non-playable. To be more precise, make it into a republic, like it should be until the middle of the 13th century.
 
The population comparison isn't perfect however. You also need to take into account population density, wealth, trading links, urbanization and the make up of the population. These as much as anything in CK2 contribute to holding density.

This is an extremely important point. To use a relevant RL example. Iceland's entire active duty military is 210, and they're all Coast Guards. Denmark's population slightly less then 16.7 times Iceland's, so the entire Danish Active Military should be only 3,499 but the Danish Army alone includes 10,000 Active troops.

In CK's time period Iceland never invaded anyone. It was a rural, decentralized society. It was rich country in the sense that everyone had more then enough to eat, but without centralization there's no way to turn extra food into troops.

Note that the 3,5000 or so troops Iceland can raise after 1200 represent 5% of it's population. Which means something like one in five Icelandic men of military age are quite willing to get on boats and go raiding for their Jarl. This seems high to me, so I'd have to say you're proving that Iceland should lose holdings not gain them.

Nick
 
I'd suggest the opposite: Make it non-playable. To be more precise, make it into a republic, like it should be until the middle of the 13th century.

I'm basically against removing choices to players. so, until republics aren't playable (yet) I don't find it good to remove it. that's my opinion on it.
Having a republic or feudal lord doing nothing in the left corner of the map don't really bring something to the game.
 
I'm surprised that you have ~350 posts and not even a single game registered.


Anyway, I agree with OP. Iceland needs moar power.

I hate to go off topic, but this crap has been seriously irking me lately. This isn't directed at you per say, but I've seen far too often posts like this, and others looking down on others, making accusations of piracy, and even ostracizing users for not registering their games; on a forum where in almost all cases, is ENTIRELY optional. This community seems to have such an ego, that if a user hasn't registered his games to access certain forums, or to merely raise his e-peen, the rest are simply HOSTILE towards them. I, for one, own several Paradox games, and yet only one is registered. Why is that? Because only ONE of the games requires me to have it registered to access the mod forum. The concept of registering them all to be spared of this overzealous behavior has never once crossed my mind, and I honestly think this paranoia and elitism is shameful, and childish. I'd be thrilled to see comments centering around whether or not someone has a little cosmetic emblem, be made against forum rules.
 
I hate to go off topic, but this crap has been seriously irking me lately. This isn't directed at you per say, but I've seen far too often posts like this, and others looking down on others, making accusations of piracy, and even ostracizing users for not registering their games; on a forum where in almost all cases, is ENTIRELY optional. This community seems to have such an ego, that if a user hasn't registered his games to access certain forums, or to merely raise his e-peen, the rest are simply HOSTILE towards them. I, for one, own several Paradox games, and yet only one is registered. Why is that? Because only ONE of the games requires me to have it registered to access the mod forum. The concept of registering them all to be spared of this overzealous behavior has never once crossed my mind, and I honestly think this paranoia and elitism is shameful, and childish. I'd be thrilled to see comments centering around whether or not someone has a little cosmetic emblem, be made against forum rules.

Just a theory. It might be because we'd rather not help someone who'd pirated the game, thus allowing support for those who've not bought it.
The addition of emblems are the only legitimate way of seeing wether someone has the game or not. This mindset may come of all the help, support and mods you get as you register your game, thus people might wonder as for 'why' one would choose not to register one's games. I don't consider it a case of overzealous behaviour, but rather prejudice. I do not support it, but neither do I condemn it. It's all preference, shouldn't have to be mentioned, though.
 
I hate to go off topic, but this crap has been seriously irking me lately. This isn't directed at you per say, but I've seen far too often posts like this, and others looking down on others, making accusations of piracy, and even ostracizing users for not registering their games; on a forum where in almost all cases, is ENTIRELY optional. This community seems to have such an ego, that if a user hasn't registered his games to access certain forums, or to merely raise his e-peen, the rest are simply HOSTILE towards them. I, for one, own several Paradox games, and yet only one is registered. Why is that? Because only ONE of the games requires me to have it registered to access the mod forum. The concept of registering them all to be spared of this overzealous behavior has never once crossed my mind, and I honestly think this paranoia and elitism is shameful, and childish. I'd be thrilled to see comments centering around whether or not someone has a little cosmetic emblem, be made against forum rules.

I'll just directly quote Tobears signature:

A question by a forum user during the 200k event:
"With 200,000 accounts, you must have a fair amount of data to mine. What was the most surprising thing you learned about us, the forumites?"
Johan's answer:
"That if someone has not registered a game, he's extremely likely to not have bought it."