CK2 - Dev Diary #128 - The Iron Century Finale

[persianfan247]

Probably around 12pm pst if the past is a guide

Noooo, that us a whole 11 hours away. I got home hoping to play the new DLC and what do I find. NO DLC AND comments like this.

 

[MonzUn]

So the bug for libraries and universities not being buildable by pagans will not be in this patch, from the looks of things?

Can reformed pagans build library or university great works now?

Apologies, we failed it include this change in the patch notes.
In 3.2.0, reformed pagans should be able to build universities and libraries.

 

[benjaseth]

@MonzUn Do you know when today the update is released?

 

[Karlington]

Still does not justify the lack of provinces in Iberia, compared to Western Europe.
If we are trying to make the reconquista accurate and according to historical progress then more provinces are a must, since historically the reconquista was 700 years of very slow, indecisive and gradual territorial gains, going back and forth, the only time when there were fast and decisive territorial gains was in 1220-1260 when the Catholics took around 1/3 of Iberia, leaving Islam barely surviving in Granada.
Right now, the reconquista is decided in 2-3 decisive wars of huge gains, 50 years are enough for any Catholic to finish its reconquista, or for Islam to dominate Iberia. It should be a very slow and gradual process with small gains in every war. This can only be achieved by smaller duchies, and more counties with fewer holdings.

Reconquista aside, the wars between Iberians themselves also always resulted in very tiny territorial changes, like border towns of the likes of Tuy, Badajoz, Alicante, Biscay, Albarracin, Algeciras, Tarifa, Gibraltar, Xiquena, Huelma, Atenquera, Ciudad Rodrigo, Olivenza etc... Right now, the huge provinces always result in any war causing complete bordergore.

I don't think they are trying to make the Reconquista that historically accurate, though. As you said, it lasted almost 800 years. Whether we add move provinces to Iberia or not, making it even half as long as that on average would make it so slow that just fabricating claims would be faster, heh. And if the real historical leaders managed to seize "1/3 of Iberia" in 40 years, it's not too unreasonable for the player to finish all of it in 50 years.

That being said, I thought each ruler could do only one Reconquista war?

 

[MonzUn]

@MonzUn Do you know when today the update is released?

It should be out at about 15:30 CEST and there will be a release stream at 15:00 CEST =)

 

[Juord]

Awesome !
Thanks !

 

[Bandua_of_Gallaecia]

As you said, it lasted almost 800 years. Whether we add move provinces to Iberia or not, making it even half as long as that on average would make it so slow that just fabricating claims would be faster, heh.

I have no idea what you mean by this. I agree making the Reconquista last as long as it historically did would be unfeasible, expecially in the earlier startdates, but making it "half as long", would make it end in 1100, which is only 34 years after the 1066 start, which is by no means "too slow".
The Reconquista de facto ended by ~1260, Granada lasted for another 200 years because of lack of incentive to take it, not lack of capability, so i agree the Catholics should realistically be able to take all of it before 1300, but currently its easy to do it way before 1200.

And if the real historical leaders managed to seize "1/3 of Iberia" in 40 years, it's not too unreasonable for the player to finish all of it in 50 years.

I grossely exaggerated, it was not even 1/5 of it, still it's very unfair to take in consideration the peak of Catholic expansion which only lasted 40-50 years and took the combined efforts of all Catholic Iberians which was a clear outlier in the larger conflict and extrapolate that it's a good representation for the whole conflict for a single player to be able to take all of it just as fast.

 

[SinnerWings]

Not gonna lie, was hoping we could play as a custom ruler and form the Habsburgs, but apparently not.

 

[Heiliges Thüringens Reich]

A missed opportunity: a button for inviting all your vassals and relatives to private carousing. Hope you guys add it in the next patch!

 

[panparba]

I want to thank you all for your great work and keeping this game still alive, but since my first play of Holy Fury I'm waiting when you repair some major problems with early bookmarks k_bohemia and k_moravia. And those problems seems to me (amateur historian interested in early slavic states) more significant now with 936 bookmark.

1. Duke Václav of Bohemia (brother of duke Boleslav the Cruel) and his grandma St. Ludmila are one of first slavic saints (they were probably saint before end of 10th century). He is saint patron of today Czech Republic for more than 1000 years and all slavic languages know him as "Saint" Václav. I think he deserves at least nickname Saint. (more on wikipedia Wenceslaus I)
2. Acording to point 1. all rulers of Bohemia (even emperor Charles IV. de Luxembourg - also playable in CK II as young duke Wenzel de Luxembourg) called themself "Descendants of St. Václav" and not "Descendants of Boleslav Cruel", so it would make more sence to change the Premyslid bloodline to St. Václav, if possible.
3. There is no reason and no explanation to use red lion coat of arms it in early bookmarks k_bohemia. It will be better to use Premyslid black eagle as coat of arms of k_bohemia before "The Third Crusade" bookmark. Bohemian coat of arms with white lion on red field was probably used for first time by king Premysl I and is supposed to have origin in Holy Land during third crusade, since then the lion is coat of arms of all house Premyslid, so it may be good to change house Premyslid and k_bohemia CoA to white lion since "The Third Crusade" bookmark.
4. It would make more sence to change d_bohemia, d_silesia, d_nyitra and maybe d_esztergom and d_meissen to be de jure parts of k_moravia, not only d_moravia in "Early Middle Ages " and "Viking Age" bookmarks. Moravia (specialy South Moravia along rivers Morava and Dyje(Thaya)) was center of power of Sámo's Empire (first known slavic state) and Great Moravia is wieved as succesor of it. So it seems wrong to make d_moravia part of k_bohemia, when d_bohemia should be part of k_moravia during that period. Bohemia become major power only becouse Great Moravia was weakened and destroyed by constant raids of Magyars from Panonia.
5. Early slavic tribes were so similar it would make more sence to change them all in three groups (west, east and south) and split them later (like Norse splits to Danish, Swedish, Norwegian). For example - before "Iron Century" there is only culture slovieni in area of west slavs and around year 1000 you gain option to "embrace culture" and create Bohemians, Poles, etc.
Slavic languages were last to split, during polish war against Teutonic Order (15th century) were polish and czech languages still similar like today american and australian english. There were almost no differences between old slavs, they spoke same language and had simillar cultre from Germany to Russia to Greece. It helped to Saints Cyril and Methodius to create first slavic alphabet.
I dont understand what culture slovieni is anyway, becouse Great Moravia was founded when moravian ruler Mojmír conqured Nitra and moravians were never assimilated by bohemians. So if you don't want to use the one-slavic-culture idea, then you should create separate moravian culture as part of west slavic group.
6. Unless you unite christians before Great schis, Great Moravia should be orthodox, becouse king Rostislav Mojmírid asked for priests from Constantinople, after death of Methodius king Svatopluk banished them (year 886), but it took two centuries before Moravia and Bohemia fully abandoned slavic liturgy.

English isn't my native language, so I hope there aren't many mistakes in my text and I hope you answer soon. Thank you.

 

[Ksiendzu]

I want to thank you all for your great work and keeping this game still alive, but since my first play of Holy Fury I'm waiting when you repair some major problems with early bookmarks k_bohemia and k_moravia. And those problems seems to me (amateur historian interested in early slavic states) more significant now with 936 bookmark.

1. Duke Václav of Bohemia (brother of duke Boleslav the Cruel) and his grandma St. Ludmila are one of first slavic saints (they were probably saint before end of 10th century). He is saint patron of today Czech Republic for more than 1000 years and all slavic languages know him as "Saint" Václav. I think he deserves at least nickname Saint. (more on wikipedia Wenceslaus I)
2. Acording to point 1. all rulers of Bohemia (even emperor Charles IV. de Luxembourg - also playable in CK II as young duke Wenzel de Luxembourg) called themself "Descendants of St. Václav" and not "Descendants of Boleslav Cruel", so it would make more sence to change the Premyslid bloodline to St. Václav, if possible.
3. There is no reason and no explanation to use red lion coat of arms it in early bookmarks k_bohemia. It will be better to use Premyslid black eagle as coat of arms of k_bohemia before "The Third Crusade" bookmark. Bohemian coat of arms with white lion on red field was probably used for first time by king Premysl I and is supposed to have origin in Holy Land during third crusade, since then the lion is coat of arms of all house Premyslid, so it may be good to change house Premyslid and k_bohemia CoA to white lion since "The Third Crusade" bookmark.
4. It would make more sence to change d_bohemia, d_silesia, d_nyitra and maybe d_esztergom and d_meissen to be de jure parts of k_moravia, not only d_moravia in "Early Middle Ages " and "Viking Age" bookmarks. Moravia (specialy South Moravia along rivers Morava and Dyje(Thaya)) was center of power of Sámo's Empire (first known slavic state) and Great Moravia is wieved as succesor of it. So it seems wrong to make d_moravia part of k_bohemia, when d_bohemia should be part of k_moravia during that period. Bohemia become major power only becouse Great Moravia was weakened and destroyed by constant raids of Magyars from Panonia.
5. Early slavic tribes were so similar it would make more sence to change them all in three groups (west, east and south) and split them later (like Norse splits to Danish, Swedish, Norwegian). For example - before "Iron Century" there is only culture slovieni in area of west slavs and around year 1000 you gain option to "embrace culture" and create Bohemians, Poles, etc.
Slavic languages were last to split, during polish war against Teutonic Order (15th century) were polish and czech languages still similar like today american and australian english. There were almost no differences between old slavs, they spoke same language and had simillar cultre from Germany to Russia to Greece. It helped to Saints Cyril and Methodius to create first slavic alphabet.
I dont understand what culture slovieni is anyway, becouse Great Moravia was founded when moravian ruler Mojmír conqured Nitra and moravians were never assimilated by bohemians. So if you don't want to use the one-slavic-culture idea, then you should create separate moravian culture as part of west slavic group.
6. Unless you unite christians before Great schis, Great Moravia should be orthodox, becouse king Rostislav Mojmírid asked for priests from Constantinople, after death of Methodius king Svatopluk banished them (year 886), but it took two centuries before Moravia and Bohemia fully abandoned slavic liturgy.

English isn't my native language, so I hope there aren't many mistakes in my text and I hope you answer soon. Thank you.

I think you should post it in subforum for suggestions. Developers are reading suggestions there.

 

[Granty]

Gonna post this again, as it probably didn't caught enough attention. Can there be a unique event for Igor (the ruler of Kievan Rus' at the 936 start date) and Olga (Igor's wife) to give birth to Sviatoslav the Brave?

What is so special about him you ask? Well, here's his story summary if anyone's interested:

Spoiler: history

'Svyatoslav was a Grand Prince of Kiev[2][3] famous for his persistent campaigns in the east and south, which precipitated the collapse of two great powers of Eastern Europe, Khazaria and the First Bulgarian Empire. He also conquered numerous East Slavic tribes, defeated the Alans and attacked the Volga Bulgars,[4][5] and at times was allied with the Pechenegs and Magyars...
...His decade-long reign over the Kievan Rus' was marked by rapid expansion into the Volga River valley, the Pontic steppe, and the Balkans. By the end of his short life, Sviatoslav carved out for himself the largest state in Europe...'

This dude united the Kievan Rus', annhilated the Khazars (aka the strongest power in Eastern Europe and the Steppe for over 3 centuries which also dominated the silk road. If you don't think that's impressive, here's another fact - Khazars defeated the armies of Ummayad and Abbasid caliphates multiple times!), weakened Bulgaria (aka the state from which the Byzantines were repeatedly getting their ass tossed for 4 centuries. The Byzantines were barely coping from Bulgarian incursions.) so much that Basil the Slayer was able to conquer Bulgaria 4 decades later. Svyatoslav the Brave was renowned throughout Europe for his military conquests and never losing his battles. Because of this, he thought he was invincible (which is probably the reason of the King's downfall). Svyatoslav eventually invaded Byzantium and besieged Adrianople, which caused massive panic on the streets of Constantinople due to his fearsome reputation. Eventually, however, his luck ran out when he invaded Byzantium and was defeated in the March of 970 at the battle of Arcadiopolis by Bardas Skleros. Sviatoslav then retreated to Dorostolon, where he was besieged for sixty-five days by the Byzantines. Cut off and surrounded, Sviatoslav agreed to the terms of the Byzantine emperor. Eventually the King of Rus' died, because the Byzantine emperor feared that peace would not last, so John Tzimiskes, the then Roman Emperor bribed the Pechenegs to kill Svyatoslav before he could reach Kiev. Unfortunately, the Pechenegs were successful in killing the great king of Rus'.'

Svyatoslav's story is pretty interesting. If the game ever had a start date of 958 then he definately should be the major interesting character there.
Here's his wiki article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sviatoslav_I_of_Kiev

So, my suggestion is to either:

Option 1: Since his EXACT birth date is unknown, he could already start as the heir of Igor and a child of destiny with the age of 0. (According to wikipedia, he is born at approximately ~942 AD, but that could be a speculation.)
Option 2: There can be a unique event for Igor from which he will gain a Child of Destiny heir named Svyatoslav.

You're somewhat overstating the power of the Khazars - they'd been pushed back by successive kings of Rus since the 880s, and were pretty decrepit by the mid-tenth century. Even so, while he he had a notable career, his life isn't anymore special or noteworthy than that of dozens of other figures in the span of CK2. I don't really see why he should have special treatment in being a 'child of destiny', particularly since you don't also seem to be suggesting the same for any other famous or noteworthy figures from across Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and India.

 

[panparba]

I think you should post it in subforum for suggestions. Developers are reading suggestions there.

Thank you, but I visit this forum just for Dev Diary so I don't know where is suggestion subforum or how to get there. I saw Snow Crystal ansvering in these diaries so I hoped he will read it here. So if you can link me there, I would be grateful.

 

[Tomaster]

Thank you, but I visit this forum just for Dev Diary so I don't know where is suggestion subforum or how to get there. I saw Snow Crystal ansvering in these diaries so I hoped he will read it here. So if you can link me there, I would be grateful.

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?forums/crusader-kings-ii-suggestions.875/
You have to register your ck2 copy on your forum account to go there, though.

 

[Wenceslaus II.]

Is there will be a DD today?
Cordially

 

[Duthiam]

Chronicle fix when?

 

[Dragatus]

What's wrong with the chronicle?