• 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.

CK2 Dev Diary #69: Another Journey to Tibet

Greetings!

We’ve previously had a DevDiary about Tibet, where we talked about the new provinces, cultures and religions in the area. That was quite some time ago, and we’ve since then improved the area even further! We want to ensure that the area is both interesting and fun to play in, so we’ve put some work into making it just that - with an improved title setup and additional interesting cultures.

Tibet 2.0.png

The province density in the area has been increased - Counties in Tibet are now roughly the same size as those in Persia or Transoxiania, both in order to present a more appealing historical scenario, and to make the area less of a chore to actually play in (with the old Counties, it could take months to move armies between them).

Note that for those who fear that this will decrease performance - we’ve done plenty of work on it, and all our tests show this version of the game to be the fastest yet.

Tibet 2.0 Cultures.png

In the very earliest start dates (769 and 867) there are still going to be remnants of two ancient cultures that existed in western and northern Tibet, the Zhangzhung and the Sumpa. While they are subjugated by the Tibetans (Bödpa) they still retain their traditions. Both of these cultures are known by the Chinese for having ‘Kingdoms ruled by Women’, and thus have access to the Absolute Cognatic inheritance law much like the Basque.

De Jure.png

The setup of De Jure kingdoms has changed as a consequence of the new Counties - now Xia is a De Jure title along with Kham, Ü-Tsang, Guge and Nepal. This gives the Xia more staying power, enhancing their historical role. Note that all titles in the area have plenty of cultural naming options, so the kingdom won’t be named Xia unless ruled by a Tangut-cultured character, for example.

Between Tibet, the new Tarim basin and the enhanced Persia you will now see a lot more movement, trade and conquest between the areas on the eastern half of the map. It will hopefully no longer feel as if the steppes and India are ‘worlds of their own’, but rather parts of a greater whole.
 
Thank Beelzebub's crusty warts, I was hoping Tibet would see some action. It always felt off to me, having that giant blank space on the screen.

Agreed, this is a nice change. It will also be pretty fun to play in, and "fortify" even. So many choke points, and rough terrain for defensive armies. My first game as a European may be to try to take Tibet, and hold it as an Eastern realm of the Catholics or something, would be pretty fun, and make those silly crusades more interesting.
 
Monastic, all Tibeto-Burman Buddhist/Bön rulers have access to it. It's nothing special, but they can hold Temples as primary holdings (VERY useful as Tibet's history is filled with temples) build Gompa buildings in their Castles. Gompa buildings give bonuses similar to a mixture of a University and a keep, which means that they can get the most potent castle holdings in the game


Nice. I'm really looking forward to this expansion.


Will it be out in November?
 
Looks good, but still not even a rough guess as to a release date?

release date please

Any word of a release date?

Will it be out in November?

While I'm CERTAINLY not wanting you guys to rush anything out, and definitely do NOT want a premature release date announcement... I wouldn't cry if there was some hint as to the vague time frame. For example "definitely not October" or "without a doubt 2017" wouldn't displease me at all in terms of time and budgetary planning is concerned.

Also... looks superb. Very, very highly anticipating this! Thanks for all the hard work you guys continually put forth over the years towards the game.
 
As of Reaper's Due, the game is faster than it was in any patch before India was added; 100 years in RIP go by faster than 100 years in any pre-India patch.
As of MnM, it's even faster, though not by quite as drastic amount.
In JD, it is slightly faster than that again. It'll be the fastest it has ever been.
Will you make a Dev Diary talking about these optimisations ? It would be quite interesting to see how you guys did it, and maybe to see how it could be improved even further
 
Please add a game rule that helps diminish "border gore". Maybe make it so that vassals that are relatively far away (rank dependent) break away to become independent or become de jure/facto vassals of whatever high up liege is in the vicinity.

This type of stuff ruins the immersion:

https://i.imgur.com/Tgdk8bD.jpg

http://forumcontent.paradoxplaza.com/public/228559/20170216124220_1.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/KcRX06D.jpg?1


Also a rule to have societies appear as they did historically. You have a lot of Catholic societies existing in game centuries before their creation.
 
Congrats on the upcoming DLC and patch, it looks like you will outdo yourselves yet again.

I am still concerned though about how porous the Himalayas look to be. I mean come in - it's the freakin' HIMALAYAS already ! And please no one tell me that there are passes here or there - the fact is no one could/would/should/ever did send anything more than small merchant caravans or individual travelers over these things (Monkey Madness excepted !).

Please don't let the Himalayas become just a minor inconvenience to a complete intermixing of Tibetan and Indian realms !
 
Please add a game rule that helps diminish "border gore". Maybe make it so that vassals that are relatively far away (rank dependent) break away to become independent or become de jure/facto vassals of whatever high up liege is in the vicinity.

This type of stuff ruins the immersion:

https://i.imgur.com/Tgdk8bD.jpg

http://forumcontent.paradoxplaza.com/public/228559/20170216124220_1.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/KcRX06D.jpg?1


Also a rule to have societies appear as they did historically. You have a lot of Catholic societies existing in game centuries before their creation.
I could see a small chance any vassal could be lost on independence with distance from capital being one of the things which makes it more likely.
 
Please add a game rule that helps diminish "border gore". Maybe make it so that vassals that are relatively far away (rank dependent) break away to become independent or become de jure/facto vassals of whatever high up liege is in the vicinity.
I'd rather go with the local nobility refusing the ruling of a foreing faraway lord. So maybe a higher risk of revolt, or a mechanism to make other claimant more likely to push their claim.
 
Cheers for the DD rageair :D. More great depth added to the East (and I'm particularly a fan of smaller counties to enable shorter traverse times) - but I have to say the most exciting part of the DD was the comment about performance. Like EU4 and Stellaris, CK2 tends to have patches where 'not a lot is going on', in-between patches where it's all happening, and being able to crank the speed for those quiet patches makes the game a lot more enjoyable (oddly enough, Stellaris seems to be the weakest performer on this front at the moment, for whatever arcane coding reason that is).

As of Reaper's Due, the game is faster than it was in any patch before India was added; 100 years in RIP go by faster than 100 years in any pre-India patch.
As of MnM, it's even faster, though not by quite as drastic amount.
In JD, it is slightly faster than that again. It'll be the fastest it has ever been.

Wonderful, wonderful news, big props to all involved :D.
 
I'd rather go with the local nobility refusing the ruling of a foreing faraway lord. So maybe a higher risk of revolt, or a mechanism to make other claimant more likely to push their claim.

A king could lose a far away duchy to independence. A duke could lose a far away county to independence. Directly owning far away counties would give a penalty. Administration distance is increased if your capital has a port (the North Sea Empire's capital was Ribe).
 
Congrats on the upcoming DLC and patch, it looks like you will outdo yourselves yet again.

I am still concerned though about how porous the Himalayas look to be. I mean come in - it's the freakin' HIMALAYAS already ! And please no one tell me that there are passes here or there - the fact is no one could/would/should/ever did send anything more than small merchant caravans or individual travelers over these things (Monkey Madness excepted !).

Please don't let the Himalayas become just a minor inconvenience to a complete intermixing of Tibetan and Indian realms !

Crossing the Himalayas would be on par with crossing the Swiss Alps. Brutal with tremendous attrition. I've always liked playing a Italian lord because it presents me with a easily defended mountain range with distinct chokepoints. It was either sail around the Alps or try to squeeze through defended mountain pass. Defending in mountains is just brutal for attackers - something the Mongols learned the hard way from the Croats.
 
Looks awesome. Only one thing worries me: I think the Monastic Feudalism government type is backwards. I don't recall feudal lords in Tibet being based out of monasteries, but it was common for monastics to get involved in feudal politics (e.g. I don't think Potala was ever a monastery before the Dalai Lamas made it their home base). So, it seems like a Tibet-specific government type should involve theocrats owning castles rather than that feudocrats owning temples.

I figure Tibetan-style monastic primogeniture succession would be pretty easy to implement. It's really just the same as plain old primogeniture, but the ruler is always celibate, so the throne must pass to his nephews, etc. Otherwise, good old Open Elective succession would probably be historically accurate in some cases. Might be a good opportunity for quick little upgrade of how Open Elective works for theocrat and burgher rulers above b_ level.