• 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.

Dev Diary #115 - Monumental Foundations

Hello and welcome to this dev diary where we will be looking into some new map visuals that’ll be added in the future. As the team grows, we’ve had the opportunity for our new artists to warm up by sprucing up the map a little. Among the things we’ll show off today, chief is the Canterbury Cathedral and its evolution over time: made by our new Environment artist Joel, who’s written about his process and the research involved.

Building a Monument – Canterbury Cathedral​

The Original Church - Tier 1​

When creating the first tier of the Canterbury Cathedral, which references the Anglo-Saxon church extant in the 867 & 1066 start dates, it was important to acknowledge the lack of available visual reference material. Historically speaking, the Anglo-Saxon church was burnt down in 1067, but we do have some conceptual renditions and blueprints of the estimated building layout to work from, courtesy of the archeologists (our heroes).

blueprint1.png
blueprint2.png

Sometimes luck strikes and blueprints or estimated ones can be found.

From this, I created a fairly basic interpretation of the church that serves well as the first/starting stage for the Canterbury Cathedral. Additional geometry, like pillars and an external house, was added to the building to create a more compelling in-game silhouette.

tier1.png

The original Anglo-Saxon church - Tier 1

The Norman Cathedral - Tier 2​

After the first fire, a second church was built in its place, distinctively making use of the Romanesque style. As we move forward in history, more references become available, and fortunately the church foundations are described as rather similar to the church of today. The more significant differences to modern Canterbury Cathedral are, for example, the front and main towers: they are still Romanesque.

tier2.png

Canterbury Cathedral - Tier 2

Romanesque and Gothic
If this happens to be your first time coming across these terms, some explaining might be in order. Romanesque and Gothic are two styles of architecture which defined buildings and churches throughout the Medieval era. Romanesque, the older of the two, emerged sometime around the year 1000 and lasted until around 1150. It’s a style arising from and defined by Germanic, Byzantine and old Roman influences, favoring circular Roman arches and a more solid-looking facade compared to later churches.

lessay.png

Romanesque Abbaye de Lessay

From the Romanesque emerged the Gothic in the 12th-13th centuries. In Gothic architecture, Roman arches find themselves replaced by Gothic ones; we also see elaborate ribbed vaults, towering flying buttresses, and church interiors brightened by large stained glass windows.

chartres.png

Chartres Gothic Cathedral

Modeling
I technically started with the third tier of the structure of the Canterbury Cathedral, rather than the second tier. Because we work with modular pieces and texture atlases, I find it easier to work from the complete cathedral, then remove any additional geometry. It also meant that the last tier would have most of the same layout as the modern cathedral, minus some of the later additions.

modular.png

Modular pieces used for building the Cathedral

With the modular pieces ready, it was then just a question of assembling the cathedral.


The Gothic Cathedral - Tier 3​

We could see in the final version of the Cathedral that a lot of areas had been raised since the time of the second, so I simply made minor tweaks to the height of some walls and roofs, while preserving the original UV. The back of the cathedral had also been extended and rebuilt, with the addition of two new structures. The south-west tower was rebuilt, but not the north-west tower as of yet: that happened later historically.


cathedral.jpg

The cathedral with the towers in the front. The main tower however was a new construction past CK3’s timeline.

tier3.png

Canterbury Cathedral - Tier 3

The third tier takes on a Gothic style, with flying buttresses along the length of the cathedral, and it also puts a golden angel on the pinnacle of the main tower.


Basing and Decal
In order for us to be certain that our holdings will be placed correctly on the map, we extend the ‘basement’ of the mesh into the ground to accommodate for the map’s height differences.
This ensures we have no areas free flying in the air. Usually this is a bigger issue for holdings than monuments, as monuments have a single specific place on the map where they exist.

decal-texture.png

Decal texture in Substance Painter

We also create decals that show a more interesting ground variation around the structure. In my case, I painted out some roads to give life to the area. Some color variation to the grass to better blend in with the rest of the map, and darker areas where the cathedral would be located. The decal plane is on average twice the size of our building.

tiers1-3.png

Anglo-Saxon church , Romanesque Cathedral, Gothic Cathedral T1 - T2 - T3

After all the buildings were done and I was happy with the progression from tier 1 to tier 2 and tier 3, I could finalize the UV’s. We use two UV maps to layout the textures: one is for the ambient occlusion that we bake in, and the other for the texture atlas. The texture atlas lets us reuse textures to save on performance. I did the baking in marmoset with a low poly to low poly set up. Normally you have a high poly to bake down to the low poly mesh, but I was only after the ambient occlusion.

Bonus Bridge Update​

A new set of cultural stone bridges will be added over the world, replacing some of the old wooden bridges and overall making it a bit clearer where the safer river crossings are. We will be adding a total of four standard bridge types, for Western Europe, the Mediterranean, the Middle East, and Indian regions.


bridges.png

These bridges have been based on historical examples sampled from these regions. The Western and Mediterranean bridges are based on arched bridges from Europe, with the appropriate local flairs. The Middle Eastern bridge is based upon Sassanid designs like the Marnan and Kohneh bridge, among others, and are mostly found in the regions around modern Iran and Iraq. The Indian bridges take their inspiration from the Athernala bridge in eastern India.
 
  • 155Like
  • 48
  • 42Love
  • 12
  • 4
  • 2Haha
Reactions:
Why did you omit in your comparison of releases between the two games that together with 1.7 F&Fs CK3 received a major AI update (among other things like the memories system)?
You're right. I made a mistake. But even so, Stellaris received a lot more gameplay content in the same period than CK3.
 
  • 8
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
There was a whole thread with people complaining about no dev diary last week (hey, I get it, I too was disappointed and want to know where the game is heading). The devs said filler dev diaries had been poorly received by the CK community in the past, hence why they were wary of doing any. Posters said filler dev diaries are fine, actually, just give us something. And of course, most early responses to this thread are people complaining that this dev diary doesn't have more information.

I'm really glad I don't work on this game right now, is what I'm saying.
I feel like what people wanted were more meaningful dev diaries and not no dev diaries
 
  • 11
  • 4Like
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
You say that passive-aggressive messages are bad. Possibly bad. But didn't you think that this behavior is a natural reaction of the players to the fact that the game is clearly stagnating in terms of gameplay? You give the example of the Stellaris community and how Stellaris benefits from interacting with the community. Unfortunately, I can’t say almost anything objective here, because I don’t follow him. But let's compare what the developers of Stellaris and the developers of Crusader Kings 3 have done over the past year.
Stellaris:
2022-02-23: Patch 3.3, which radically changed the role of unity in the game, as a result of which the gameplay has changed significantly.
2022-05-12: Patch 3.4 and Overlord expansion. AI improvement. And an expansion of the vassalage mechanic.
2022-09-20: Patch 3.5 and Toxoids expansion. Not so big patch. Few new gameplay.
2022-12-06: Patch 3.6. Large-scale rebalancing of the combat system.
The First Contact DLC is on the way, which should be released, as far as I know, at the end of the first quarter, and which will expand interactions with primitive civilizations. Really, they add new gameplay again.

Crusader Kings 3:
2022-02-08: Patch 1.5 and Royal Court expansion. Changing cultures, which I liked. The mechanics of the royal court is good. But the artifact mechanics are boring.
2022-05-31: Patch 1.6 and Iberian Struggle flavor pack. Struggle mechanics, not bad, but based on gameplay features that already existed at that time.
2022-09-08: Patch 1.7 Friends and Foes event pack.
2022-12-01: Patch 1.8. "Technical" update. But I'm glad that the developers are fixing bugs.

What do we end up with? Stellaris has changed a lot over the year, unlike Crusader Kings 3. It is also worth noting that Stellaris updates are released more regularly (there was a break of more than six months before the release of the Royal Court dlc, while Stellaris came out during this time: a small patch 3.1 and the Aquatics dlc.
Let's get back to your statement. I don't think the Stellaris and Crusader Kings 3 communities are very different. It's just that the Stellaris community simply has no reason to get bored, because there is always something new in Stellaris, something that refreshes the gameplay. What's in Crusader Kings 3? The core mechanics of governments has not been changed or added since the release of the game, and no new form of government has been added. Crusader Kings 3 doesn't even have a basic population based economy, no trade. In more than two years since its release, the game has changed little. Unlike Stellaris, which has changed beyond recognition in a year (largely due to major revisions of the main gameplay by the developers). And it's good that the developers want to interact more closely with the community, but I think they should be prepared for the fact that bored players will complain. And I am more than sure that if Stellaris also starts to stagnate, then the Stellaris community will become the same as the CK3 community and vice versa.

P.S. I am not a native English speaker, so I can make mistakes, if you do not understand something, please excuse me and ask questions, I will try to find time to answer everything.

Your observations are correct, but you're comparing these two unfairly given the situation. (Only that you accidentally omitted the CK3 major ai update we got)
The reason why Stellaris is as good now and running that well is to a significant extent the increased communication and the resulting boldness of the developers in their changes. This was a process there, too.
They can be so bold in their changes, because they incorporate feedback (and even run betas to test out their concepts with the community). That didn't come overnight, though.

You are comparing the end result of the process of one with the start of it at the other.
The Stellaris community was also very unhappy at the beginning of the improvement efforts. There were many old mechanics that didn't properly fit anymore, the endgame lag was a massive issue and overall discontent was high. Then the devs launched their plans for the 3.0 update, majorly revamped core mechanics, made lots of people unhappy and then the forums blew up in discussion. The devs listened, improved their concept massively, added new game rules so people can adapt these new mechanics to their liking and now the vast majority consensus is that the game got improved significantly by this update.

Forum climate in april of 2021 (3.0 update + nemesis launch) is not comparable to now. It was mayhem. So many threads of people openly insulting the devs and so on. (Seriously, it was nuts)
That is the start of the process that we are having now in CK3 for Stellaris. Very discontent community, controversial changes (event packs, pricing policy changes), massive blow up of discussion in the forums (after the announcements). This is exactly where we were at just a while ago here.
Since then we had significantly more dev comments, rough roadmaps and long-term plans and priorities presented, community polls on desired flavor content and the devs clearly making an effort to improve communication, as well as a promise of (attempted) increased content delivery speed.

I want this process to work similarly to Stellaris for CK3, because we'll all benefit from this if we participate in making it so. Disincentivising the devs now is clearly counter-productive. They are obviously in the same step as the Stellaris devs were at the time of the 3.0 update.
They made the community very discontent and are now listening a lot more and engaging a lot more. That is the early blossoming of a healthy dev-community interaction. But again, communication is a two-way street. If we continue only voicing discontent and not acknowledging their efforts, they will drop this attempt, because it will seem futile to them and only induce further stress among them.

If by - let's say - early next year, nothing has improved and they didn't deliver on their promises of increased communication and content frequency, the situation is different from Stellaris and i won't be advocating as strongly as i am at the moment. Because Stellaris did improve, but it took time. It will take time here, too. Change doesn't come overnight.

If we cooperate instead of antagonise, we're a lot more likely to get something akin to Stellaris' amazing Custodian Initiative (a part of the dev team designated to free patches, updates and fixes instead of new content), which is the main source of why the game keeps consistently improving as much as it does. (Seriously, i consider it the best decision in the entirety of Stellaris' development history. I want this here, too.)
 
Last edited:
  • 22
  • 3Like
  • 3
  • 1Love
Reactions:
But didn't you think that this behavior is a natural reaction of the players to the fact that the game is clearly stagnating in terms of gameplay?
Nobody is saying the behaviour isn't a natural reaction.

What is being said is that the behaviour is counterproductive.

When someone complains about a lack of communication, then responds to a genuine attempt at communication with sarcasm, hostile parody, and/or passive aggression, it discourages communication.
 
  • 28
  • 4
  • 2Love
Reactions:
All these comments assuming the next DLC is monuments.

Come on people, Monuments were done in CK2, and we *know* the next DLC is something that's never been done before. https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...-diary-109-floor-plan-for-the-future.1546534/

"As I’ve mentioned before, it’s too early to reveal the theme. However, the next Expansion is leaning towards the roleplaying side of the game. Without revealing too much we’re focusing in large parts on reinforcing the connection between map and character. The theme is not one that has been the subject of an expansion in previous iterations of CK - to make things extra clear; we’re not doing trade, imperial/byzantine mechanics, nomads, or similar this time."

Monuments do reinforce the connection between map and character; however, we already have special buildings that function as monuments, and Canterbury is another of them. However, I don't think you can really say they lean into the roleplaying side of the game, so it doesn't fit.

What they've done here is let one of their rookies have a pet project that they can present to build the rookie's confidence and give us something to fill in the gap before the next sneak preview.
 
  • 15
  • 7
  • 4Like
Reactions:
All these comments assuming the next DLC is monuments.

Come on people, Monuments were done in CK2, and we *know* the next DLC is something that's never been done before. https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...-diary-109-floor-plan-for-the-future.1546534/

"As I’ve mentioned before, it’s too early to reveal the theme. However, the next Expansion is leaning towards the roleplaying side of the game. Without revealing too much we’re focusing in large parts on reinforcing the connection between map and character. The theme is not one that has been the subject of an expansion in previous iterations of CK - to make things extra clear; we’re not doing trade, imperial/byzantine mechanics, nomads, or similar this time."

Monuments do reinforce the connection between map and character; however, we already have special buildings that function as monuments, and Canterbury is another of them. However, I don't think you can really say they lean into the roleplaying side of the game, so it doesn't fit.

What they've done here is let one of their rookies have a pet project that they can present to build the rookie's confidence and give us something to fill in the gap before the next sneak preview.
I'm well aware of the plan. I'm just not confident about the timeline of fulfilling this plan, as we have seen little progress from dev diaries in planned direction.
 
  • 4
  • 2Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
All these comments assuming the next DLC is monuments.

Come on people, Monuments were done in CK2, and we *know* the next DLC is something that's never been done before. https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...-diary-109-floor-plan-for-the-future.1546534/

"As I’ve mentioned before, it’s too early to reveal the theme. However, the next Expansion is leaning towards the roleplaying side of the game. Without revealing too much we’re focusing in large parts on reinforcing the connection between map and character. The theme is not one that has been the subject of an expansion in previous iterations of CK - to make things extra clear; we’re not doing trade, imperial/byzantine mechanics, nomads, or similar this time."

Monuments do reinforce the connection between map and character; however, we already have special buildings that function as monuments, and Canterbury is another of them. However, I don't think you can really say they lean into the roleplaying side of the game, so it doesn't fit.

What they've done here is let one of their rookies have a pet project that they can present to build the rookie's confidence and give us something to fill in the gap before the next sneak preview.

One thing to point out. While we know that "the next Expansion is leaning towards the roleplaying side of the game" and "the theme is not one that has been the subject of an expansion in previous iterations of CK", we've got much less steer about the free patch that'll release alongside the expansion.

The free patch that accompanied Royal Court included a massive overhaul of culture mechanics and it's certainly possible that the free patch we get with the next expansion will contain similar huge overhauls to systems. After all, the devs have repeatedly said that they'd like to keep big mechanical changes in the free patches - since they can then be further tweaked down the line and hooked up to future changes to the game.

It's not out of the realms of possibility that we get coronations or regencies or the black death or somesuch as part of the free patch - since none of that would contradict the dev comments which only talk about the expansion.
 
Last edited:
  • 5
  • 4Like
  • 4
Reactions:
Looks very impressive those images of the Cathedral. Hope to see more of them. And while Romanesque and Gothic were Western European styles, the layout (place of the main tower etc.) is clearly Anglo-Norman and later English.
So even when this might evolve into something more generic (a own monument), various culture groups would need their own templates, a (random) French cathedral should look more like the Notre Dames of Chartes, Reims or Paris for instance (not like Canterbury).
Nonetheless this looks very impressive and promising.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
The Stellaris team released 4 patches and 2 dlc last years. What do you think?
I think the Stellaris team has been far and away the most productive of Paradox's GSG teams over the past two years, both in terms of quality and quantity, and if we have to go comparing the teams then the CK3 team should be compared to the EU4 or HoI4 teams instead – a comparison which I happen to think cuts in CK3's favour.

I don't regard any of CK3's DLCs as making the game worse, unlike quite a few EU4 DLCs, and I'm going to pick the game up again when the next DLC comes out, unlike HOI4.
 
  • 9Like
  • 5
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Your observations are correct, but you're comparing these two unfairly given the situation. (Only that you accidentally omitted the CK3 major ai update we got)
The reason why Stellaris is as good now and running that well is to a significant extent the increased communication and the resulting boldness of the developers in their changes. This was a process there, too.
They can be so bold in their changes, because they incorporate feedback (and even run betas to test out their concepts with the community). That didn't come overnight, though.

You are comparing the end result of the process of one with the start of it at the other.
The Stellaris community was also very unhappy at the beginning of the improvement efforts. There were many old mechanics that didn't properly fit anymore, the endgame lag was a massive issue and overall discontent was high. Then the devs launched their plans for the 3.0 update, majorly revamped core mechanics, made lots of people unhappy and then the forums blew up in discussion. The devs listened, improved their concept massively, added new game rules so people can adapt these new mechanics to their liking and now the vast majority consensus is that the game got improved significantly by this update.

Forum climate in april of 2021 (3.0 update + nemesis launch) is not comparable to now. It was mayhem. So many threads of people openly insulting the devs and so on. (Seriously, it was nuts)
That is the start of the process that we are having now in CK3 for Stellaris. Very discontent community, controversial changes (event packs, pricing policy changes), massive blow up of discussion in the forums (after the announcements). This is exactly where we were at just a while ago here.
Since then we had significantly more dev comments, rough roadmaps and long-term plans and priorities presented, community polls on desired flavor content and the devs clearly making an effort to improve communication, as well as a promise of (attempted) increased content delivery speed.

I want this process to work similarly to Stellaris for CK3, because we'll all benefit from this if we participate in making it so. Disincentivising the devs now is clearly counter-productive. They are obviously in the same step as the Stellaris devs were at the time of the 3.0 update.
They made the community very discontent and are now listening a lot more and engaging a lot more. That is the early blossoming of a healthy dev-community interaction. But again, communication is a two-way street. If we continue only voicing discontent and not acknowledging their efforts, they will drop this attempt, because it will seem futile to them and only induce further stress among them.

If by - let's say - early next year, nothing has improved and they didn't deliver on their promises of increased communication and content frequency, the situation is different from Stellaris and i won't be advocating as strongly as i am at the moment. Because Stellaris did improve, but it took time. It will take time here, too. Change doesn't come overnight.

If we cooperate instead of antagonise, we're a lot more likely to get something akin to Stellaris' amazing Custodian Initiative (a part of the dev team designated to free patches, updates and fixes instead of new content), which is the main source of why the game keeps consistently improving as much as it does. (Seriously, i consider it the best decision in the entirety of Stellaris' development history. I want this here, too.)

I've been complaining about the current state of the game for a while, but after reading your post, I've decided to trust the development team for one more year.
 
  • 5
  • 3Like
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
Nobody is saying the behaviour isn't a natural reaction.

What is being said is that the behaviour is counterproductive.

When someone complains about a lack of communication, then responds to a genuine attempt at communication with sarcasm, hostile parody, and/or passive aggression, it discourages communication.
I think it shows that the fundamental problem was never communication. But rather an apprehension on the types of DLCs we are getting. The Dev Diaries left me with the impression that government mechanics and flavor are far into the backburner and I really wish they weren't. There's this ongoing false dichotomy between 'roleplaying' dlcs and making stuff outside of feudal france unique. And I fear it's really killing the game. When are we gonna get caliphal or byzantine imperial governments? Republics and nomads? Maybe something entirely new for West Africa and India? Next year maybe.

This DLC is about making our relationship with the map stronger than before. If someone told me this DLC was something bonkers like playing unlanded characters and working ourselves up to landlord I'd be interested. But now I'm wondering if it will be about anything but more events.
 
  • 10
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
I think it shows that the fundamental problem was never communication. But rather an apprehension on the types of DLCs we are getting. The Dev Diaries left me with the impression that government mechanics and flavor are far into the backburner and I really wish they weren't. There's this ongoing false dichotomy between 'roleplaying' dlcs and making stuff outside of feudal france unique. And I fear it's really killing the game. When are we gonna get caliphal or byzantine imperial governments? Republics and nomads? Maybe something entirely new for West Africa and India? Next year maybe.

This DLC is about making our relationship with the map stronger than before. If someone told me this DLC was something bonkers like playing unlanded characters and working ourselves up to landlord I'd be interested. But now I'm wondering if it will be about anything but more events.

Despite being a rather impatient Person, I am not that worried. While I agree, that governments, cultural additions (Altaic Split Gang assemble) and Religion should be overhauled as they all add more depth for Roleplaying too. And the Dev Team mentioned that they still want to tackle these mechanics. But they don't want to burn themselves with overpromising stuff again like with Royal Court and prefer to keep the lid closed to some degree.

Also we don't have any info on the DLC aside that they will fix the Nicknames and update Monuments and the rest is in the open. So I will await the announcement impatiently.
 
Last edited:
  • 5Like
  • 3
Reactions:
Also we don't have any info on the DLC aside that they will fix the Nicknames and update Monuments and the rest is in the open. So I will await the announcement impatiently.
Well, I consider myself rather patient, only I was of your mindset during the covid pandemic. Now I'm more afraid of the devs' priorities than anything. I was happy when they posted the roadmap. I'm just afraid that if we get one mechanics based DLC a year or so we'll end up with a second government type only years from now.
 
  • 4
  • 2
Reactions:
If we get monuments how about more clothes? No plate armor in a medieval game... Hmm.
I think it could be interesting as well to have a more detailed map since it seems sort of basic.
I believe plate armor was not in existence until the very end of CKIII's timeframe and was not popularized until decades later.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I truly can't understand how good CK2 post-release development was and how bad CK3 post-release development is being.

In a few months the game will turn 3 years old and the game experience is pretty much the same as it was at release.
If you modded both, it becomes easy to understand. CK3 is much bigger, with regards to necessary features and capabilities. It's built in such a way that there is a lot of content, not so much engine. This is great in theory, since it's possible to do much more, but the downside is that it's necessary to do more to achieve anything.

They also have a bigger team now, which means much less agile.
 
  • 4
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
I think the Stellaris team has been far and away the most productive of Paradox's GSG teams over the past two years, both in terms of quality and quantity, and if we have to go comparing the teams then the CK3 team should be compared to the EU4 or HoI4 teams instead – a comparison which I happen to think cuts in CK3's favour.

I don't regard any of CK3's DLCs as making the game worse, unlike quite a few EU4 DLCs, and I'm going to pick the game up again when the next DLC comes out, unlike HOI4.
What DLC's do you believe make EU4 worse? The only bad example I can think of is Leviathan, but that wasn't really the Expansion's fault but the fact they released the update with literally no playtesting.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
What DLC's do you believe make EU4 worse?
The ones I would refuse to turn on if someone gave them to me for free are: Mare Nostrum, Mandate of Heaven, Rule Britannia, Leviathan, Lions of the North, and probably the upcoming DLC they've been showcasing mission trees for as well. I wouldn't buy Emperor, and I'm not in any hurry to buy Origins, but if I was given them I'd use them. And in every case, I am talking about the DLC independently of the accompanying free patch.
 
  • 2
Reactions: