CK2 Dev Diary#27: Continued Converter Capabilities

[Zhetone]

Rome is the One True Capital

Regardless maybe there should be a one time decision in game to move the capital to Constantinople, or maybe it makes an event pop up with "Where do you want the capital?" with the two cities as choices

 

[TheDungen]

How about you not insult the Devs, K?

Disrespectful posts like yours do not add to the conversation.

You are right, I phrased it poorly their decision was stupid they are obviously not stupid themselves. That said I do nt belive a decision that makes things worse can be called anything but stupid, though you may prefer foolish, or dumb instead.
The changes to the converter was one of the best things about conclave I am just sad and dissappointed to see them removed again, and it is a pattern I see way to often here, they do somehting great and then because it inconveniences people WC they are soon forced to go back on what was originally a great decision of game design. No I don't blame the devs I blame the whining childen to cry and cry until they get their way despite paradox's devs knowing better.

 

[Atlantians]

Rome is the One True Capital

Regardless maybe there should be a one time decision in game to move the capital to Constantinople, or maybe it makes an event pop up with "Where do you want the capital?" with the two cities as choices

It should convert the game with your capital from CKII, and give you the option of 'repopulating and expanding Rome' by moving the capital there, resulting in a large loss in Development in the old province and a small gain in development in Rome, with a net development loss overall, but a modifier that temporarily reduces development cost in Roma.

 

[Atlantians]

You are right, I phrased it poorly their decision was stupid they are obviously not stupid themselves.

Well, that is better, lol.

But they had good reasons for their decision, and have left it open for mods.

I think they found a good balance, personally.

 

[Zhetone]

It should convert the game with your capital from CKII, and give you the option of 'repopulating and expanding Rome' by moving the capital there, resulting in a large loss in Development in the old province and a small gain in development in Rome, with a net development loss overall, but a modifier that temporarily reduces development cost in Roma.

Yeah maybe! A bit of a mix of our original ideas.

 

[TheDungen]

There's no good way of giving a nation more than 3 vassals in EU4, each vassal takes up a diplomatic slot, and starting a nation off with more diplo slots than they have would just make the game boring. In any case, it's super easy to mod if you want to increase the number of vassals for your game.

Is that so? How do you mod the converter?
Also yes there is the reformed HRE can have more vassals without them costing any relationship slot. Which proves that such mechanics exist you just need to use them.

Only if they're a massive monocultural/monoreligious blob in CK2. Hordes aren't as powerful in EU4 as in CK2 (especially as time passes), when we experimented with giving them lots of vassals they immediately imploded without a chance of recovery. With the added direct vassal cores they still have a fairly big chance of breaking up, though it's not as deterministic.

They're nomads! They are always massive monocultural blobs in ck2! Yeah I know that is the root of the problem but still.
And them imploding beyond hope of recovery is pretty much what happened in reality, not just with the mongol but with every steppe people who for a short while held dominion over the steppes. While it should not be unavoidable it should be hard to keep it from happening not something that happens in 1/10 games. And what does vassal cores even matter it's not like the EU4 AI ever release things in peacedeals. And rebels very rarely destroy big blobs. The only way a blob dies in EU4 is by being eaten by another bigger blob which makes the blobbiness of the map worse not better. The converter is a great way to reduce that. It's not like the map won't be horribly blobby at the end of eu4 anyway. At least that way you'd still have enough powers left in the world to get a full set up powerful and secondary nations when converting on to vic.

In any case, we had some ideas on having options to break up massive nations/cultures/etc, but we're saving that for the future.

Sorry if i'm not doign any cartwheels, I know what will happen you will implement them and it will be great for a month until the whining makes you remove or nerf those measures again.

On the issue of giant mono-religious mono-cultural blobs, my current 2.4.5 Roman Empire game has a Greek Roman Empire and has its capital in Constantinople as the 'new Rome'.

It is there for all sorts of flavor, strategic, tactical, and economic reasons.

In the opening post, you stated that Rome will be the Capital of a Converted Rome.

Is that definitive? Will I have to edit the converted game in order to relocate my capital from Roma and back to Constaninople where it belongs?

Just move it when you start your EU4 game? You're not playing ironman anyway you you can just pay for the cost by console.

But they had good reasons for their decision, and have left it open for mods.

Not really and we'll see about that.

I think they found a good balance, personally.

No they didn't. Not even close. Let's at least hope they smack estates on most of you provinces and super high autonomy (perhaps based on your centralization law). Maybe then we'll actually see something beyond the super big blobs getting even bigger. Otherwise I feat that the only converted game that will be meaningful will continue to b the HRE.

 

[Xinkc]

Generally, the idea is the following:
If you qualify for a set of special ideas, like Byzantine ideas, you will always get those. Cause those are usually fun to get.
Most EU4 ideas are no longer set to a specific tag. Instead, it will trigger according to your culture instead. So if you play as a Sunni Spain, you won't get Spanish ideas, yet if you are a big enough England with English culture, you'll get English ideas. We also disabled a set of several very specific ideas in the converter, like Burgundian ideas for example.
Everyone else will more or less get randomized ideas. The existing ideas are all weighted, so the ideas you'll get will depend on the nation itself. You won't be getting any naval ideas if you don't have any ports for example.

I hope that answers your question.

What ideas would an Empire of Scandinavia with Sweden as the Emperor's personal kingdom get? Would they get the not overpowered Swedish ideas? The same goes for other ideas for the region.

Would you separate the Norse from Germanic religions so that it is easier to reform for the Saxons and other north German peoples? It's kind of strange having needing to expand deep into Scandinavia to be able to reform. Being close to the Franks, the Saxons should be able to learn how to organize their religion quicker and should do so by having provinces nearby. This way Norse can reform using Scandinavian only provinces as well without expanding into the rest of the continent.

Conquer Zeeland and that Danish island. Then raid the heck out of the Irish and Scottish/Pictish tribal. Get piety then you can reform. No need to venture into Sweden or Norway.

No I don't blame the devs I blame the whining childen to cry and cry until they get their way despite paradox's devs knowing better.

The developers are, presumably, fully realized adults that can make tgeir own decisions. The decision is theirs and theirs alone. You don't blame children for parents giving into them. You blame the parents for being weak.

 

[Caspoi]

Will more information arrive regarding the new features for the heretics (such as which get the reformed mechanics)?

 

[TheDungen]

What ideas would an Empire of Scandinavia with Sweden as their personal kingdom get? Would they get the not overpowered Swedish ideas? The same goes for other ideas for the region.



Conquer Zeeland and that Danish island. Then raid the heck out of the Irish and Scottish/Pictish tribal. Get piety then you can reform. No need to venture into Sweden or Norway.



The developers are, presumably, fully realized adults that can make tgeir own decisions. The decision is theirs and theirs alone. You don't blame children for parents giving into them. You blame the parents for being weak.

Well this isn't a parent-child relationship but a customer-service one, and contrary to what some people advocate the customer is not always right. Sometimes a business has to make unpopular choices to improve their product. The fact that Paradox keeps trying to make them shows that they realize this.

 

[Caspoi]

Sorry if i'm not doign any cartwheels, I know what will happen you will implement them and it will be great for a month until the whining makes you remove or nerf those measures again.

Isn't the current setup more of a side effect rather than a concious desicion? That would be rather different than if they make some deliberate changes.

 

[TheDungen]

Isn't the current setup more of a side effect rather than a concious desicion? That would be rather different than if they make some deliberate changes.

What current setup is "a side effect rather than a conscious decision"? And I was referring to things in general. defensive pacts in CK2 coalitions and corruption in eu4, all these things started out awesomely and then got nerfed to oblivion so that people could have their totally unrealistic world conquests.

 

[Caspoi]

What current setup is "a side effect rather than a conscious decision"? And I was referring to things in general. defensive pacts in CK2 coalitions and corruption in eu4, all these things started out awesomely and then got nerfed to oblivion so that people could have their totally unrealistic world conquests.

The one where realms can get an extremely high amount of vassals.

 

[Donelloth]

There's no good way of giving a nation more than 3 vassals in EU4, each vassal takes up a diplomatic slot, and starting a nation off with more diplo slots than they have would just make the game boring. In any case, it's super easy to mod if you want to increase the number of vassals for your game.

Only two feasible ways to simulate more vassals in EU4. Besides filling up their relationship slots with vassals, you would have to give away a crippling amount of land to estates to mechanically represent a decentralized nation that needs to rip territory away from nobility to get stronger. If you were feeling particularly harsh, a state with complete adherence to the will of the council would start with the Aristocratic Coup disaster already active with the government set to noble republic.

The other way to represent what this person is asking for is beyond EU4's current technical limitations. It would require the existence of mulitple HREs with each large uncentralized feudal state converting into one and having to reform in the same way the HRE does in EU4 because Vassal's in CK2 actually kind of function like the HRE does in EU4 which I'm sure is the point.

 

[TheDungen]

The one where realms can get an extremely high amount of vassals.

Why would that be a side effect rather than a conscious decision? They obviously made it so that realms don't get vassals if they are absolute.

Only two feasible ways to simulate more vassals in EU4. Besides filling up their relationship slots with vassals, you would have to give away a crippling amount of land to estates to mechanically represent a decentralized nation that needs to rip territory away from nobility to get stronger. If you were feeling particularly harsh, a state with complete adherence to the will of the council would start with the Aristocratic Coup disaster already active with the government set to noble republic.

The other way to represent what this person is asking for is beyond EU4's current technical limitations. It would require the existence of mulitple HREs with each large uncentralized feudal state converting into one and having to reform in the same way the HRE does in EU4 because Vassal's in CK2 actually kind of function like the HRE does in EU4 which I'm sure is the point.

I can get behind that, EU4 need a mechanic beyond the HRE one to simulate the strive towards centralisation in it's era.
But in the interi they could make them special vassals that do not take a relationship sot like the HRE ones after removing the priviligia. In the long term it may be worth considering if vassals staking up diplo slots is really the best way to make sure people eventually annex them.

 

[Caspoi]

Why would that be a side effect rather than a conscious decision? They obviously made it so that realms don't get vassals if they are absolute.



I can get behind that, EU4 need a mechanic beyond the HRE one to simulate the strive towards centralisation in it's era.

Not that they get vassals, but the amount of vassals that they get. I can understand why they did not desire that as the only country in standard EUIV that has a very high amount of vassals is Japan, which has a special government form just for that purpose.

 

[TheDungen]

Not that they get vassals, but the amount of vassals that they get. I can understand why they did not desire that as the only country in standard EUIV that has a very high amount of vassals is Japan, which has a special government form just for that purpose.

France used to have vassals like that Poland still has a few. Russia has some, Spain and Russia start divided. most countries in the vanilla set up are slightly fractured.

 

[BFKelleher]

Can you guys list the religions depicted in these icons going left to right? I know we got a few of them answered, but I'd just like to know all of them for sure.

 

[Rationalsanity]

There is a misconception that there was an issue here, it's just that with Conclave you got more vassals by design. With the mentioned Direct Vassal Cores we thought this was no longer necessary though, so after this patch you'll get way fewer vassals than you used to. 3 at most, 0 at the least.

Thanks for the reply. That sounds more manageable, especially for the AI (which has always been my main concern).

 

[Pringles VII]

Can you guys list the religions depicted in these icons going left to right? I know we got a few of them answered, but I'd just like to know all of them for sure.

 

[TheDungen]

Can you guys list the religions depicted in these icons going left to right? I know we got a few of them answered, but I'd just like to know all of them for sure.

Spoiler: List

Nestorian (Could be Messalian)
Manichean
Messalian (Could be nestorian)
Cathar
Fractelli
Waldesian
Lollard
Monophysite
Paulican
Monthelite
Iconoclasm
Bogolomist
Zunism
No idea (Some muslim heresy)
Druze
No idea (Some muslim heresy)
Mazdaki
Yazidism
Hurufi
Samaritan (Could be Karite)
Karaite (Could be Samaritan)

We're still missing Zikri and Kharijite.
One of these (assuming we are right on the current list) is the moon and star over a mountain and one is a red sunni symbol. It's the two only symbols with the crescent moon.