Omg! Many were called, few were chosen!
An analogy for the Beta perhaps?
Omg! Many were called, few were chosen!
An analogy for the Beta perhaps?
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.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 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.
An analogy for the Beta perhaps?
So far I am pleasantly surprised with the content of the videos, with the obvious exception of the small number of counties (hopefully moddable)...
There are some more provinces, but few changes in the area covered by CK1. As Veld said, the addition of baronies should be enough to keep people busy.
The "Finger of Christ," huh, Mr. King? That'd be an awfully heretical relic, I must admit!
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.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
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.
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...
Even less provinces in that part of Europe?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...
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...
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.
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...
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??