• 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 #2- The Medieval Map

Hello everyone!

I would like to take a moment to talk about the map of Crusader Kings 3, what the vision for the map is, and how it is different from Crusader Kings 2.

Let’s start with our ambitions. CK2 had several parts of the map that was outdated, and to be frank, a bit underdeveloped. When we started to update the map for CK3, we knew that we wanted to take a pass at everything, do additional research, and update the different areas accordingly. This goes for the entire De Jure title hierarchy, so there are several new kingdoms and duchies present. In terms of scope, the map will roughly match that of CK2. I know I will disappoint those of you hoping for China, but, sadly, it will not be on the map. We will however, have a few new additions: the entirety of Tibet will be present, unlike CK2 where the most eastern parts were excluded, and sub-Saharan Africa is also extended, where we’ve gone all the way to the Nigerian coast.

When setting the map visuals, province layout, rivers, and more, the focus has always been on clarity. The map should be easy to read and get information from. For example, you should be able to read most of the terrain simply by looking at the map, without the need to click on the province, or tooltip it, in order to find that out, while rivers should be easy to see and let you know if you will cross one when moving armies around.

We represent the map on three different zoom levels. When zoomed far out, the map will turn into an actual paper map, allowing for an easy overview and stylish screenshots. Zoom in a bit and you will have the 3D map, with the typical political overlay, great for interacting with your vassals and other realms. Zoom in even further and you’ll see the names of all the counties along with the terrain, as we strip away the realm colors. Perfect for moving armies around and knowing where to pick your battles, without the need to switch around to different map modes (but don’t worry, we still have several map modes for easily accessing different information).

One of the most notable changes is how we handle Baronies. In CK2, Counties were the smallest entity we had on the map, a province if you will, with several Baronies represented through the interface of the County view. In CK3, we took the next logical step and made Baronies into their own provinces. We have been able to create a map with much more granularity and better accuracy. Most Counties will normally consist of two to five Baronies, with some exceptions. The amount of provinces will be noticeable when waging war, as it offers a larger degree of movement for you armies (more on that in the future).

dd_02_baronies.png


To give you a good idea of the increased province density, here is a comparison of the British Islands in CK2 and CK3, being on the left and right side, respectively:

dd_02_ck2_ck3_comparison.png


Before you all go nuts about playable baronies: No. You cannot play as a Baron. The lowest playable rank will still be that of a Count. The emphasis will therefore be on the Counties rather than the individual Baronies. As such, Baronies exist with a few things in mind. For example, they can never leave a county. This means Counties stay the same over time, avoiding weird splits where a single barony goes independent or to another realm (reducing that hideous border-gore ever-so-slightly). The number of Baronies within a County is one factor that represents its wealth and how “good” it is. Another important factor is the terrain. A County with a lot of Desert will not be as beneficial as one with a lot of Farmlands for example.

Speaking of terrain, we have several different terrain types spread out across the map. Instead of having a single terrain spread out across large areas of the map, we differentiate between similar terrain types by separating them, such as Forest and Taiga, or Plains and Drylands. Not only does it make the map look and feel distinct in different parts of the world, they also have a different impact on gameplay.

dd_02_england.png


dd_02_maghreb.png


Then we have Impassable Terrain. These are far more frequent, and in many cases much larger, than you will be used to from CK2. We’ve essentially used these for any area that we consider uninhabited enough to warrant it not being part of an existing County. Some areas have plenty of smaller impassable provinces, such as the mountains surrounding Bohemia, while others have fewer and far larger pieces of inhospitable land, such as the deserts of Arabia and Syria. Impassable Terrain cannot be traversed by armies, often creating bottlenecks that you’ll have to pass through or perhaps even choose to go around, should it be heavily fortified.

dd_02_impassable.png


That’s it for now. I hope you enjoyed this early sneak peak of the map and I'll be sure to show more to you in the future!
 
  • 6Like
  • 2
Reactions:
The map and new system look good for strategic gameplay. I am excited by the changes. I have three simple questions with regards to the new way baronies and counties are handled.

1) Are county titles still tied to one of the baronies of the county, in the way that county titles are tied to the capital barony of a county in CK2?

It would be nice if county titles are no longer tied to an actual barony itself, as this would allow realistic things like a count holding a county title but no baronies in the county itself. For example, suppose the count of York also holds the county of Leicester, but his only barony is in York. A benefit of this system is that it would make it possible to have county level vice-royalties in bureaucratic realms.

2) If county titles are still tied to the capital barony, can capital baronies be changed, or are we stuck with whatever the capital is at the beginning of the game.

3) Since baron titles are always held by vassals of the count whose county they are in, what happens if you grant a county to one of your barons? Does his barony title return to you?
 
I don't care about playing baronies (and I think that people who do greatly overestimate the fun they would have with it. In any case you probably could pick a poor county with only one barony which you own, and you are set), but the restrictions on that feel too arbitrary and really unnecessary.

Playing vassal-less single barony ruler would be an edge use case for sure, but it seems like trying to restrict that (and making baronies being tied to counties) creates more awkwardness than it solves.

I bet it will be one of the things that will get redesigned in the first 2 years after the launch.
 
Last edited:
To add a few things to the barony discussion. As stated already, baronies will always be considered to be a part of a county. However, we do have a concept of leasing baronies to other rulers, such as Holy Orders. This effectively gives them control of the holding along with the income it generates, without it "leaving" your realm.
We'll go into further details in the future.
 
It looks amazing but I got an issue with the fixed number of holdings.
As a fan of Holy Fury and random worlds this seems very restrictive.

Also, I don't like that the empty holdings are seemingly owned by no one in the county.
I don't know if the game will have the same holding types but a city holding so much land in a holding seems so weird.
 
To add a few things to the barony discussion. As stated already, baronies will always be considered to be a part of a county. However, we do have a concept of leasing baronies to other rulers, such as Holy Orders. This effectively gives them control of the holding along with the income it generates, without it "leaving" your realm.
We'll go into further details in the future.

Please give us later (as in, among planned early DDs) a dedicated DD about changes to barony system, it is really quite confusing.
Thank you for further clarification about "leasing".
 
To add a few things to the barony discussion. As stated already, baronies will always be considered to be a part of a county. However, we do have a concept of leasing baronies to other rulers, such as Holy Orders. This effectively gives them control of the holding along with the income it generates, without it "leaving" your realm.
We'll go into further details in the future.

Problem solved from my perspective!
 
In that case, can a Barony end up in permanent lease status? @Servancour

Edit: if this is going to be a dedicated topic of a future dev diary, I shall patiently await that for a proper good look at the new system and adjust my opinion then. Still not a fan of the idea that baronies cannot be owned by another count, but since technically "onwership" is essentially equal to "permanent lease", I guess it can be worked around at least.
 
Interesting Dev blog!

I really like that baronies are now visible on the map, especially now that major Rivers have fords. It will make raiding provinces more historical, since we can simply ignore the fortifications and go for the juicy cities/temples themselves. Seems like terrain will play a more tactical role than in CK2 which is great too.

However, as has been said plenty of times in this thread already, I don't think tying baronies to counties is a good idea. It takes away a lot of cool features this new province granularity could bring: Free Cities and Imperial immediacy of certain castles and temples in the HRE; border conflicts between neighbouring Counts vying for control over a particularly rich city or a strategic castle on a river ford; marrying the last daughter of a baron to your second or third born son in order to consolidate swathes of land; etc

To add a few things to the barony discussion. As stated already, baronies will always be considered to be a part of a county. However, we do have a concept of leasing baronies to other rulers, such as Holy Orders. This effectively gives them control of the holding along with the income it generates, without it "leaving" your realm.
We'll go into further details in the future.
Well now that might solve the issue of Holy Orders but it still seems like an unnecessarily limiting concept in comparison to CK2. Hopefully the feature will not always be bound to "voluntary leasing" of land so temporary conquest of land can turn into a more permanent affair.
 
I'm really liking the sound of different views at different zoom levels, the need to cross a river at a ford, and just how easy it is to see if terrain 8s wooded, farm, mountain, rtc just by zooming in instead of changing map mode.

BUT,
I wish the map was spherical.
And the current identical castles, towns and churches look ugly. There needs to be variety within an area, and MASSIVE differences to those in a completely different region. Please dont just brush that off as a "well we'll make a content pack DLC for that one day".

Also, please dont hardcode it that you cant change the terrain of a place from, for example, forest to farmland. A "through the ages" DLC later might include that, where you can take decisions to chop down forests (maybe even impassable terrain before) and then build a prosperous hamlet there.
 
To add a few things to the barony discussion. As stated already, baronies will always be considered to be a part of a county. However, we do have a concept of leasing baronies to other rulers, such as Holy Orders. This effectively gives them control of the holding along with the income it generates, without it "leaving" your realm.
We'll go into further details in the future.
what about historical instances where characters/dynasties had minor holdings within other reams, or baronies separate to their primary powerbase

is the plan to just not represent that at all for the sake of simplicity

(this sounds more mad than i mean it but i cant figure out how to word this in a way that doesnt sound like "so youre dumbing it down")
 
I'm not a fan of Barons not being able to be under control of non-dejure Counts. With them being present on the map, I was hoping to see more granularity on the map, but admittedly it would bring incredible border gore.
Yeah, it was annoying in CK2 to hunt down rogue Baronies, but it still feels weird to completely remove this element.
 
Servancour

Could you show a GB with just the provinces showing like in CK2, as the map is completely confusing having the holdings showing, & doesn't tell you at all how it compares with present game. Are their similar amounts of provinces for GB in both games or are there more. Looking at the map I have no idea.
 
Correct. Not all holdings will be constructed at game start, so you'll have to build them later on in the game.


Ah yes. I seem to have forgotten to mentioned that in the DD. We are also extending the map to include more of Mongolia as well!

Is there not any way to increase the number of holdings in a county any more, like you can with the high flourishing event in CK2? That's disappointing. I like building up a more minor county to be a major hub. This looks like "well, this is a two slot province, it's always going to be garbage, no matter what you do."
 
The former. You cannot transfer barony vassals out of a given county, and the county holder will always be that baron's liege.
This is a huge shame, in my view, since it renders the whole scheme of William I of England to control his vassals and bind the kingdom under him impossible. His splitting of the land vassals held around the kingdom, both to force them to keep itinerant courts and to divide their military forces in the event of an uprising, was crucial to his success in holding a newly conquered "empire". This, together with the shifts in inheritance rules that were happening in the 11th century, marked a seismic change in medieval English society, just for one example.
 
As a theorycraft, you could have de jure counties that shift as you conquer baronies. There could be a cap on the amount of baronies in a county, or simply a chance for a county of large size to split on ruler death as added inheritance interest. If a county were fully conquered, it would be possible to have it disappear as de jure if it didn’t exist for a century. If you were a baron who managed to expand their realm, could declare war on your county liege(s) to carve out your own county. This would emphasize areas shifting in importance as time passes, as different baronies are lavished interest upon by different counts.

Just a thought. Certainly a lot of room to think. Mod support for this sort of expanded gameplay would be nice if implemented somewhere down the line.