• 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.
 
Will you be giving some unique coat of arms for out east? There is a severe lack for everyone outside Europe.
 
So now that Saka is in the game, how do they relate to their very close ethnolinguistic cousins, the Alans? What game things are in place that represent this relationship, the common Scythian descent?

This also might be a good time, if the Middle East (and the East in general) is being redone, to put forth some changes that the Alan fans have been asking for (such as Iranian graphics of some measure, or a non-Tengri religion)
 
So I presume the Tangut Western Xia has Han culture but are ethnically Tangut due to them having the Han Chinese shields. And they should be an empire or at least "Titular Empire"
 
So I presume the Tangut Western Xia has Han culture but are ethnically Tangut due to them having the Han Chinese shields. And they should be an empire or at least "Titular Empire"

Shields are a religious thing, not a cultural one. What you're seeing on that map is the Guiyi Circuit in 867 (hence the Taoist shield). They've already shown the Xi Xia on stream; in 1066, they're Buddhist religion and Tangut culture, as they should be.

The "Xia" title used to be a titular kingdom, but is now an on-map one thanks to these recent map changes.
 
In JD, it is slightly faster than that again. It'll be the fastest it has ever been.
If that's the case, then it's a real shame you didn't use this opportunity to add China.
 
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.

Theocrats owning castles would not be playable... They didn't add Tibet to make it completelly unplayable.

Also the Sakya are basically this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sakya#Feudal_lordship_over_Tibet

Also Sakya didn't had Open Electice. It was a dynasty:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rulers_of_Tibet#Sakya_lamas.5B3.5D

It was the Khön family which were hereditary abbots of Sakya. And they had a feudal government over Tibet. It's exactly what Paradox is implementing with Monastic Feudalism.
 
Now both Alans and Sakas are in-game. I think we need the Scythian portraits for both the cultures which will be also used for Tocharian and Sogdian cultures.
 
Last edited:
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.

Seriously a rule to diminish border gore?

That would be a complete waste of developer time and it comes with the territory both in terms of the game and history.

Besides the fact that it is way too complex a thing to "game rule" away.

And making it so that vassals that are relatively far away (rank dependent) break away, is simply trading one border gore for another.

This isn't a game about pretty nice looking borders.
 
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.
Are any of those not the result of the horribly broken Gavelkind?
 
Seriously a rule to diminish border gore?

That would be a complete waste of developer time and it comes with the territory both in terms of the game and history.

Besides the fact that it is way too complex a thing to "game rule" away.

And making it so that vassals that are relatively far away (rank dependent) break away, is simply trading one border gore for another.

This isn't a game about pretty nice looking borders.

Border gore isn't always sensible.

These examples aren't great because the Carolingian kings inheriting each other's stuff is probably one of the situations where you'd realistically expect border gore the most. But on the other hand I think that distant border provinces and exclaves being so easily defensible often leads to silly situations.
 
I won't elaborate too much, but the new game rules coming with the patch/JD are: Chinese Invasions, Chinese Interactions (range), Border Dispute Wars, Jade Dragon CB's (on/off), Siege Assaults, Siege Events, Multiplayer Assassinations, Multiplayer Invasions, Multiplayer 3rd Party Claims and Childhood Focus Alerts.

Wait, there will be no way to disable the new wastelands? I don't want to see the Terrain map mode invading the Political map mode! :mad:

The other stuff looks good though!
 
Seriously a rule to diminish border gore?

That would be a complete waste of developer time and it comes with the territory both in terms of the game and history.

Besides the fact that it is way too complex a thing to "game rule" away.

And making it so that vassals that are relatively far away (rank dependent) break away, is simply trading one border gore for another.

This isn't a game about pretty nice looking borders.


It's not that hard. Just calculate the distance from the closest province attached to your capital. If the distance is within a certain threshold, the territory will behave differently.
 
It's not that hard. Just calculate the distance from the closest province attached to your capital. If the distance is within a certain threshold, the territory will behave differently.
Plus accounting for sea and river behaviour. Someone based in Sicily should be able to hold on to Tunisia, and holding the entire Nile (if only they would make it navigable) shouldn't be too much of a stretch for an Alexandria-based ruler.
 
Plus accounting for sea and river behaviour. Someone based in Sicily should be able to hold on to Tunisia, and holding the entire Nile (if only they would make it navigable) shouldn't be too much of a stretch for an Alexandria-based ruler.

You would need to nerf coastal capitals hard, in this case. The Byz right now is strong enough as it is. It basically never goes down without player intervention. De stabilizing everyone else while leavijng the most stable realm intact is bad.
 
Plus accounting for sea and river behaviour. Someone based in Sicily should be able to hold on to Tunisia, and holding the entire Nile (if only they would make it navigable) shouldn't be too much of a stretch for an Alexandria-based ruler.

Yes. Calculation of distance is not that complicated. The same mechanism is in place for diplomatic range.
 
Yes. Calculation of distance is not that complicated. The same mechanism is in place for diplomatic range.
Erm, diplomatic range is very computing-heavy I think

In one of the files :
Code:
is_within_diplo_range = ROOT # CPU HEAVY!
 
Erm, diplomatic range is very computing-heavy I think

In one of the files :
Code:
is_within_diplo_range = ROOT # CPU HEAVY!

That means it consumes more processing power than usual. I'd rather play a slower game for a longer time than to get bored with a quick running game that loses immersion after 150 years.