• 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.

CK3 Dev Diary #04 - Development & Buildings

Greetings!

This week's Dev Diary is all about your holdings on the map - Baronies and counties, what they do for you, and what you can do with them! As seen in the map DD, Baronies are now physically present on the map. A group of Baronies makes up a greater unit, called a County.

DD4CountyView.jpg


While certain things are still on a per-Barony level, such as buildings, two of the most important values you have to deal with are on a per-County basis - Development and Control!

Development is the measurement of technological advancement and general infrastructure in a County. Development directly increases taxes and levies you get out of the holdings, and it also unlocks some other special options. Development increases very slowly across the duration of the game, and radiates outwards from high-development Counties to those nearby. For example, Constantinople (aka the City of the World’s Desire), starts with a very high Development level. This will slowly spread outwards, reaching the most remote areas much slower than their Greek heartland. Naturally, there are other ways to increase your development, such as through the Steward’s ‘Increase Development’ task, although this is a fairly slow process, and usually only worth doing in certain Counties. Having terrain such as Farmland or Floodplains in your Counties make them ideal candidates for development, and when they have gotten some levels of development you can just sit back and enjoy, as it slowly spreads throughout the rest of your realm!

Control, on the other hand, directly represents the power you have over the County. This naturally decreases during sieges and by forcefully seizing territory, taking the place of the ‘new Administration’ modifiers from CK2. If you don’t pace yourself, and use your Marshal to increase Control in newly conquered territories, you might find yourself with a slew of useless land. This also increases the importance of keeping peasant rabble and similar nuisances out of your lands…

Each County also has an opinion of their holder, referred to as the ‘Popular Opinion’. This represents the sentiment of the local peasants, and tends to decrease if you’re not of their culture or faith, promoting the use of ‘local lords’, vassals of the local culture/faith, to handle such territory for you - as converting it will take quite some time. Unhappy Counties tend to cause problems down the line… more on this in another DD.

Now, on to the Holdings themselves! Each County will have a certain amount of slots available for Baronies, with some being constructed at the start, and others not. The three core types of holdings remain unchanged - Castles, Cities and Temples make up the majority of holdings on the map, each with their own main purpose. Castles provide levies and fortifications, cities provide taxes with a secondary focus on Development, and temples provide an even mix of taxes and levies with a secondary focus on increasing Control. This means that if you want a County to develop really fast, building many Cities might be the thing for you. If you want a resilient domain perhaps you’d prefer Castles, etc.

DD4Holding.jpg


Based on the terrain of the province, each Holding has access to a number of buildings. Regular buildings primarily focus on increasing taxes and levies, with some secondary effects such as increasing fortifications or increasing supply. These are usually straight upgrades, and are long-term investments that you should always consider, much like in our other games.

DD4Buildings.jpg


To spice things up, we've also introduced the concept of Duchy Capital Buildings. These buildings can only be built in the capital Barony of any De Jure Duchy, limiting their availability across the map. To build them and have them be active, you need to hold their associated Duchy title personally - this way you can’t simply hoard Counties in which you can build these special buildings, as just like in CK2 you will get severe penalties for holding too many Duchies personally. The buildings themselves are very expensive, but come in many flavors - allowing you to tailor your experience. The Military Academies track of buildings increases the effectiveness of your Knights and allows you to have more of them, establishing marches will make the entire Duchy more defensible, the Siege Workshops will increase the effectiveness of your trebuchets, and so on!

DD4DuchyCapitalBuildings.jpg


We also have the concepts of special buildings. These aim to represent historical buildings, both ancient and those built during the time period. Placed in predetermined baronies on the map, you have the usual suspects such as the Pyramids or Colosseum, along with more fringe or lesser-known constructions such as Offa’s Dyke or the Buddhas of Bamiyan. Some of these will be possible to construct during the course of the game, such as the Tower of London or the Alhambra. All of these constructions provide unique and interesting bonuses, with some of them being represented with 3D models on the map.

That’s it for this time! Stay tuned for the next DD, where we will tell you about the new scheme mechanics!
 
  • 5Like
  • 3Love
  • 2
Reactions:
Imperator may not be a perfect game, but CK3 could really benefit from importing some its provincial mechanics like pops, trade goods, etc.

CK3 may be about human relationships, but it would help the immersion a lot to have a living breathing world of peasants and commerce beyond the walls holding the nobility and their scheming.
 
  • 3Like
  • 3
Reactions:
So what makes up the minority of holdings?

Tribal Holdings definitely. Hospitals and Trade Posts are also possible types. And maybe we get some new stuff as well.

Imperator may not be a perfect game, but CK3 could really benefit from importing some its provincial mechanics like pops, trade goods, etc.

The problem here is that, for instance, Europe and Egypt would require completely different systems because the population structure and numbers were radically different, as was their effect on governing of the said countries. Feudal Model was in part established to make up for the lack of population superiority compared to world outside Europe.

Seeing as the Devs never got around making it so that Feudalism is not essential for a country to be represented in the game, POPs are a huge no-no unless they revamp base systems... which might come with CK4.

Will monastaries and other religous buildings be available as buildings for certain cultures (Like Coptics) in Temples? Or will can Temples become Monastaries if they are in a desert province? Or will their be no monastaries:(

Why would Monastery be a holding? It is a bunch of Monks praying (and being forced to copy books). It works better as Buildings (or as its own system, which would allow for instance Dominican and Franciscan Monasteries having different effects on provinces... but certainly not Holdings that represent population centers).
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
promoting the use of ‘local lords’, vassals of the local culture/faith, to handle such territory for you

I can't believe the ability to recruit nobles of minority cultures wasn't in CK2 before tbh, it made some games with cultures like Vlach a total pain to get up and running, and often ended up in cultures going entirely extinct way too frequently.

It's interesting that the number of building slots is limited, is it only terrain, or will development also have an impact on this.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Will monastaries and other religous buildings be available as buildings for certain cultures (Like Coptics) in Temples? Or will can Temples become Monastaries if they are in a desert province? Or will their be no monastaries:(

Are their going to be any cultural buildings at all?
 
Last edited:
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Imperator may not be a perfect game, but CK3 could really benefit from importing some its provincial mechanics like pops, trade goods, etc.

CK3 may be about human relationships, but it would help the immersion a lot to have a living breathing world of peasants and commerce beyond the walls holding the nobility and their scheming.
I agree, trade is especially important when it comes to the history of Islam. The religion would not have spread as far as it did, or took root in the countries that it conquered, without trade. I also think more in depth trade & resource mechanics would make playing as West Africa more interesting.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Imperator may not be a perfect game, but CK3 could really benefit from importing some its provincial mechanics like pops, trade goods, etc.

CK3 may be about human relationships, but it would help the immersion a lot to have a living breathing world of peasants and commerce beyond the walls holding the nobility and their scheming.

Well, after some free Patches, I:R is now a great game.
But I can agree, that a Pop System in a World like CK2 would be awesome. Especially because of events like the black death.
I wouldn't mind, if they add more things from other paradox games. But with a bit luck, we can easily mod it. Probably my first target, when it gets out.


I can't believe the ability to recruit nobles of minority cultures wasn't in CK2 before tbh, it made some games with cultures like Vlach a total pain to get up and running, and often ended up in cultures going entirely extinct way too frequently.

It's interesting that the number of building slots is limited, is it only terrain, or will development also have an impact on this.

Wasn't this in the base game? You could pay piety or gold to get characters with the same religion and culture, with decisions.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
All considered, I'm disappointed.

Of four DDs the only one I found interesting is the dynasties one, because it was something different. The other things are all so much like CK2 that I don't see the point of not just keep playing CK2.

Of course it still too soon for a final judgement, I have some good hopes for the next DD. For the little they have told the new schemes and 'hooks' system seems intriguing.

Meh, debatable. I’m pretty sure the new barony on maps was pretty new, and personally the new war mechanics are a way different from Ck2 with knights and supply and all that.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
one of the things i always disliked about ck2 was the concept of the "historical capital." i mean, i dont mind the idea of a sort of "proper capital" that rulers would generally prefer to hold and base themselves in for the sake of legitimacy, but i disliked how it wasnt subject to change. saxony could never drift southeast towards dresden, for instance - the ai ruler would spend the whole game desperately trying to get his hands on brunswick long after it had de jure drifted into the duchy of brunswick under the welfs. ai charlie would never be happy basing himself in his historical capital of aachen, hed piss off all his vassals by tyranny-revoking paris instead

sounds like now not only is it going to still be like that, but if saxony does not hold brunswick he will straight up not be able to build or enjoy the effects of this new duchy buildings system. if theres a start date after the formation of the duchy of brunswick, saxony is just shit out of luck

i get it, and i get the thought process behind it, but man some flexibility would have been nice lads

(that said, it feels like i have something negative to say in every dev diary so id like to try and balance it out with SOME positivity. i like the idea of bishoprics helping with control, its nice that they actually have a use now)
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
So if I take muslim territory as a christian, to exert control, will it be easier to get a muslim in my court to hand over the title to him?
I don't think you would ever want to do that, you should just convert them. I could see something like that for culture though, maybe if you conquered a Muslim county with Andalusian culture, you would give it to an Andalusian cultured Catholic. I don't know, a Christian or Muslim lord giving out land to people of a different religion seems ahistorical, and while you shouldn't be restricted from doing so, it should be more trouble than it's worth and the AI definitely shouldn't be giving titles out to characters of a different religion.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Kind of baffles me. They are very aware we enjoy a pop system, but they chose not to include one in CK3.

Gotta Remember they're already simulating much more advanced 'pops', they have thousands of fleshed out characters with traits and opinions, Dynasties, and locations. A pop system would be nice but I can understand why they don't do it.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
This looks... boring and rigid. The fact that the development of a province is represented yet again by a completely arbitrary number is precisely what I need to feel detached from the game an uninterested in province's growth. Actual population numbers would be much more appreciated. And as for the Duchy building, the fact that they are constricted to "Duchy capitals" makes them too game-y to be enjoyable as an option, and worries me that this game will have an exceedingly static in terms of domains, representing counties/duchies/baronies as rigidly hierarchical and unchanging in the centuries, while this couldn't be further from what actually happened in the Middle Ages. So far, not impressed.

Development doesn't just mean population does it? I look at development as two fold. The infrastructure provided by the city e.g. sewers, paved roads etc... Libraries, labs etc... in addition to the population factor of a region. I agree that development to show both population size of an area along with the sophistication of the area to be the wrong approach.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Development doesn't just mean population does it? I look at development as two fold. The infrastructure provided by the city e.g. sewers, paved roads etc... Libraries, labs etc... in addition to the population factor of a region. I agree that development to show both population size of an area along with the sophistication of the area to be the wrong approach.
It basically represent Everything, population is just one factor out of many.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
That´s great, but I would change some things.

Agriculture is a MAYOR thing in this era, FARMS make the mayority of the economy in the era, thus they should bring more money, also levies ( food equals people), also farms should be limited by climate, terrain and technology. ( Nile farmland compared to a middle saharan farmland). Also the farmlands could provide food for troops.

Mines, lumbercamps and farms should be the base economy, greatly affected by climate, terrain and county development (roads, drenages, etc)
Cities would provide the craftmens to eleborate improved goods from its resources, blacksmiths, carpenters, bakers, tanners, they should provide a core bonus to the main production.

Example: Lumbercamp 0.50 gold ( forest zone +25%, development +25%) result: 0.75 gold in wood production
Lumbermill and carpenters guild, ( +25%, +25%,) Merchant guild and local craftment ( +25%, +25%,) from final production in wood related goods of 0.75, totalizing 1.5.

Maybe that could also be the starting point for a regional trade system. I know that CK is first and foremost a roleplaying game (at least you play as a certain person instead of a nation like in Europea Universalis), but it really would benefit from a real economic trade system instead of the simple "trade route" modifier which makes no sense. Now before anyone starts complaining because i mentioned Europa Universalis, it's just an example. In the case of CK it should be the trade republics who interact on the biggest scale and then there should be overlapping trade zones in Europe. The Champagne fairs are an example of this, but that is already a more ambitious form of trade (that maybe could be implemented in a viable way, with chronological limitations of course). At least it would make sense if there was trade between coastal zones and inland zones for fish and salt, .... and trade between forest rich zones (for buildings and ships) and marshy areas and of course there could be progressive changes in the game with the rise of the cities, (merchant)guilds, cloth industry in Flanders, wine from Burgundy (which the dukes of Burgundy had an interest in), ..... Another historical example is the import of grain from northern France and later also from Eastern Germany/eastern Europe to the Low Countries because of the demographical growth. Again I know CK is NOT Europa Universalis, but there are a lot of elements/ideas from that game which could be implemented in CK. Medieval Europe was much more complex and interconnected than some think and especially from about 1200 onwards there was already a significant system of trade present in feudal Europe. Hello there Silk roads => the book of Peter Frankopan is a good (non) academic starting point for (medieval)trade and how bigger trade zones were never just an interaction between player A and player B. Smaller trade systems overlap with each ochter and extend each other.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
+ Will we have the ability to re-purpose holdings from one type to another, such as from castle to city, etc.? At least for the ones we have direct control over. Perhaps there should be a cost associated with such a decision, such as minus to popular opinion, control, tax and levies?

+ Do provinces have a limited number of building slots or are we allowed to build all the buildings available to them according to their respective terrains?

+ Is there a hard cap to province development?

+ Will there be attributes for provinces reflecting their strategic economic positions such as having a good harbour and on major trade routes, or controlling the only trade route through a mountain pass? And will trade routes make a return?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Oh interesting, so Great Works now essentially exist as these special buildings?
 
"The three core types of holdings remain unchanged - Castles, Cities and Temples make up the majority of holdings on the map, each with their own main purpose."

So what makes up the minority of holdings?