Crusader Kings 2 @Pdxconvention!
- Thread starter Davisx3m
- Start date
-
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.
I thought this might be a better line to advertise the Crusader Kings 2: Reformation expansion
So far I am pleasantly surprised with the content of the videos, with the obvious exception of the small number of counties (hopefully moddable)...
I understood the bit about towns, castles and bishoprics to mean that castles provide most troops and little money, towns the opposite with few troops and a lot of money, bishoprics something in between. But of course I agree that historically towns provided the largest contingents (except for some regions where semy trained peasant levies were available) but of limited military worth, so hopefully these issues will be looked at and made more realistic...
Actually I'm also a bit worried about the very limited number of troop types seen in the videos. Just knights, heavy infantry, light infantry and archers iirc. That means the importance of other types of cavalry seems to be ignored (the majority of heavy cavalry by the early 13th century was formed by squires and sergeants). Professional foot sergeants (which should be available in castles and bishoprics) seem to be merged with untrained militia (towns) and semy trained peasants (spearmen like the Swiss or Welsh) which could all be considered heavy infantry depending on definition. Also no distinction between archers and crossbowmen. And I'm not even delving into unit types not native to my own region of Europe (technically we did not have archers as formed bodies in regular warfare here, but it could have been attempted as the failed/abortive attempts in Scotland and France show)...
I understood the bit about towns, castles and bishoprics to mean that castles provide most troops and little money, towns the opposite with few troops and a lot of money, bishoprics something in between. But of course I agree that historically towns provided the largest contingents (except for some regions where semy trained peasant levies were available) but of limited military worth, so hopefully these issues will be looked at and made more realistic...
Actually I'm also a bit worried about the very limited number of troop types seen in the videos. Just knights, heavy infantry, light infantry and archers iirc. That means the importance of other types of cavalry seems to be ignored (the majority of heavy cavalry by the early 13th century was formed by squires and sergeants). Professional foot sergeants (which should be available in castles and bishoprics) seem to be merged with untrained militia (towns) and semy trained peasants (spearmen like the Swiss or Welsh) which could all be considered heavy infantry depending on definition. Also no distinction between archers and crossbowmen. And I'm not even delving into unit types not native to my own region of Europe (technically we did not have archers as formed bodies in regular warfare here, but it could have been attempted as the failed/abortive attempts in Scotland and France show)...
I think you should go take a look at the CK1 map. If there are slightly fewer counties in CK2 so that the rest of the middle east and africa are better populated, it's a tiny, tiny reduction.
It depends on one's favourite region, doesn't it. What might be tiny for some, could be large reduction for someone else, if you like to play your game in those regions, which ends up with less provinces in a new set up.
Last edited:
Wow, I like the multiple-pope and incentive to keep just one or heresies will appear idea! They also seems to have finally get ride of what made CK1 the messier, because now you can own a duchy while keeping liege to another king, even if you are a king. I like the legalism behind this. I also found that if England king have 54 vassals, it seems that the map is detailed enought to simulate many things. Map is also pretty, more than CK1, at least.
Another thing I saw is they are finally going to give us some overview at the end of a game, with prestige of our characters.
Frankly, I never even thought that they were going to implant some timeline in this game. This is not wrong, but like for Rome, I have the impression that there is too much blank areas in medieval story.
This game really seems to be very interesting. I think I will make the mistake to buy it at it release (and it will be uncomplete, like all the others...)
Another thing I saw is they are finally going to give us some overview at the end of a game, with prestige of our characters.
Frankly, I never even thought that they were going to implant some timeline in this game. This is not wrong, but like for Rome, I have the impression that there is too much blank areas in medieval story.
This game really seems to be very interesting. I think I will make the mistake to buy it at it release (and it will be uncomplete, like all the others...)
Okay, maybe not the finger. But look what Charlemagne found in the Holy Land from the Messiah. Check this out. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Prepuce
Securing relics could indeed be a violent business. Nighttime raids and all that. But not always. One of the gifts that the Emir of Sevilla presented his overlord the King of Leon in the XI century were the relics of Isidore of Seville, which were buried with much ceremony in the royal mausoleum.
IIRC, in Eco's "In the name of the Rose" there were theological debates on whether or not those relics (including baby teeth, hair, finger nails etc...) could be real, because surely, they should also have gone to heaven with Jesus himself during Ascension.
Overall there might be more than in CK-I, but province density in the heart of feudal Europe (the Kingdoms of France and Germans) has been reduced. That despite the fact that the CK-I map already had some serious realism issues in those areas as it was lacking not just some random duchies and counties, but actually some quite important ones. And baronies from the look of these videos won't make up for those problems in CK-II (as towns and bishoprics seem to be much too common (particularly towns and that on a 1066 map, that is before the rebirth of cities in Europe), therefore making it impossible to model missing counties as baronies)...
Anyhow, for me the expansion of the map in the Middle East and Africa is okay as some players obviously wanted to see that. But the reduction, even if slight, of provinces in Europe is very problematic to me...
You seem to capture the gist of some of the comments that I've read about the map as it currently is. I wonder if baronies will have names attached to them or not? IIRC, one of the recent videos show mayors and bishops with the names of their respective holdings.
What I would like (and I have no map editing experience, although some folks do in the community) is to see the creation of smaller maps that would allow the level of detail that larger maps tend to eclipse. E.g., a map of the Holy Roman Empire, or just of Italy or Ireland or the Kingdom of Jerusalem. I also request that the devs release some sort of modders' toolkit to help along the creation or editing of scenarios, maps, etc.
Even less provinces in that part of Europe?Anyway I agree with your comment on the provinces, although the map in general (maybe not the provice setup
) looks nice.
Where does it say that the provinces in Europe have been reduced ? If I look at the video, I count the same amount of provinces in those areas (and which are visible) that you mention.
Last edited:
As far as I could tell, they roughly used the same map as in CK 1. However when they re-use the old map, then there will be the same issues regarding provinces as in CK 1. And a lot of people (and to be honest I'm one of them) hoped to have some improvements with the map; so even with the great improvement of the baronies, there will remain wishes regarding the representation of certain territories (duchies, counties, margraviates etc.) as provinces.
Wow just watched the 2 videos of KING and i am totally blown away, he mentions about every nice idea i saw on the forums and had miyself is in the game. He basically also announced the first expansion by saying they have core ideas and some they are gonna scratch if necessary. The good thing is the core which is probably what will remain at release sounds a lot more finished than the horrible first installment of recent Paradox games was. I had great expectations, but told myself relax and stay realistic, but those videos actually say CK II will excced my expectations if it really has all those things KING mentions working and balanced. Still need some more ugly noses in there. ;-)
I was the one who made the map with all the provinces or counties as we call them now. NONE of the old provinces have been removed.
Can we sticky this in the forum??? ... so we can call off this discussion once and for all??
Can we sticky this in the forum??? ... so we can call off this discussion once and for all??
You'd wish.
This probably shifts the discussion to extra provinces in certain areas for better representation of the situation of that particular area during the era.Wishes which also existed in CK 1.
