• 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.
Hello again folks! Stay a while, and listen. The highlights of today's third and last Sword of Islam developer diary are Muslim Casus Bellis, revised combat mechanics and cultural buildings. You know the drill by now; I'll talk about both some unique Sword of Islam features and some free stuff that comes with patch 1.06.

THE SWORD OF ISLAM

Our direction with the Sword of Islam expansion is that Muslims should have an easier time expanding, but have an additional layer of internal strife in the form of the Open Succession Law and the Decadence system.

Muslim Casus Bellis

Muslim rulers have three new options for conquest:
  • They can declare Holy Wars on anyone not of their own exact brand of Islam
  • They can use a form of the Invasion CB for the cost of 500 Piety
  • They can conquer any province bordering one of their own for 50 Piety (vassalizing the current count if possible)

Pious Muslim rulers can thus easily expand, although they lose 2 Piety per month while attacking a brother of the faith (same exact religion.) The councillor job to fabricate a claim is thus less useful for Muslims, but can still be handy versus islands or juicy coastal counties.

SoI_InvasionCB.jpg

Revokation of Duchies

Duchies (emirates) are not considered to be intrinsically hereditary, so Muslims are allowed to revoke duchy titles at no opinion penalty from other vassals. This is also a good way of properly landing your sons to avoid gaining Decadence. (Incidentally, the Byzantine Empire is now allowed to do the same thing, though it does not have the Decadence mechanics.)

Dynastic Imprisonment and Execution

Another Muslim exception to the normal rules is that they are allowed to freely imprison and execute men of their own dynasty, except for their own sons. Brothers and uncles are the usual targets for these Decadence reducing purges...

Temple Holdings

In the Muslim world, there is no proper equivalent to Bishoprics, so Temple Holdings are treated exactly like Castles, except for their different set of buildings. You gain Piety for having a Temple Holding in your demesne, but they are slightly poorer and provide smaller levies than their Catholic equivalents (in order to balance them against the investiture mechanics.)

Passing Laws

Muslims do not need to bother with a voting process when passing laws; they just spend an amount of Piety. However, there is still a cooldown and Crown Laws can only be changed once per ruler. The vassals will also still get upset in the same way as Christians.

Jizya Tax

To represent the Jizya tax (a special tax that should, according to Sharia law, be levied on infidels), Muslims gain a 25% tax bonus from infidel counties and a 10% tax penalty in Muslim counties. This creates an interesting dynamic where it's not always obvious that you would want to convert an infidel province to Islam. However, there is a special event where this happens anyway, even if you don't send in your Court Imam to convert the populace.

SoI_Jizya.jpg

That's pretty much it for the Sword of Islam expansion, although I'm sure to have forgotten about many minor little changes and tweaks.

THE 1.06 PATCH

Alright, so here are a few more freebies coming your way soon with the 1.06 patch...

Expanded Combat Tactics

We have added a bunch of more (and more decisive) combat tactics, to make combat less predictable and to tie in with the new Commander traits...

Commander Traits

We have added a special type of trait called Commander traits. These are only available to characters with a Martial education, and give more specific bonuses to the character's ability to lead various troop types, and the choice of combat tactics. Characters gain one or two Commander traits when they finish their education. The effects of the Commander traits directly scale with the Martial skill of the character.

SoI_Commander.jpg

More Culture Specific Buildings

One thing that many people have requested is a broader range of culture specific buildings, and who are we to argue? We have added loads of these to give more variety and flavor.

Destruction of Titles

You are now allowed to destroy ducal tier titles and above, at a hefty Prestige cost. This will greatly upset (-50 opinion) all vassals who are de jure part of the destroyed title. You cannot destroy your current primary title.

SoI_TitleDestruction.jpg

AI Improvements

Apart from some minor improvements, the AI is now better at jumping on rulers who are already embroiled in dangerous wars (though it's still not excessively aggressive about this.) I've also spent a bit of time on attrition avoidance for AI armies, and the AI will now assault besieged holdings when appropriate.

That's it for dev diaries for now. Next week, we'll post a short AAR by a member of the dev team!
 
Thank you for being rude! It was just the kind of attitude that I was looking for in the discussion.
I do have a clue as to what I am talking about. I am not an expert on medieval history but I am not clueless. I did look into the subject before posting.
I did some further reading and have found several instances of temporal leaders proclaiming them Emperor of this place or that, not Emperor of the Romans or of Rome but of whatever area they ruled. None of them kept the titles for very long, but that's not the point. Just because Translatio imperii allowed for the transfer of the old Roman Emperor title does not mean that they were the only people to have the title of Emporer. Convention =/= hard law. And the Papacy, while incredibly powerful, was not ALL powerful and could not control everything every christian king did. Sometimes they had to adapt.

Empire is a tier of titles in the game. The Golden Horde is an Empire. The Caliphates are Empires. In the game anyway, it is what a ruler who can have king tier title holders as vassals are called.

Now you are just mincing words. What is alternative history? It is fiction. History is the record of what happened in the past. Alternative history is ahistorical, in that it did not happen.

But when you get right down too it all comes down how the changes affect your gameplay. Do you want to form a new empire? Go for it! Do you not want to? Then don't. If the AI does it then either it is a once in a long while fluke, or the changes are not working as intended and you can submit a bug report. It is a single player game, and the multiplayer aspect already has unofficial 'rules' to prevent things like this. I have a sneaking suspicion that most multiplayer games will ban the formation of new empires.
 
Im curious those on the it should be accurate on day 1, can you activate any of the 'fantasy' kingdom/empires on day 1?

France might be, depends what the creation criteria are.

does anybody know the release date and time?

This Friday is a dev AAR. Release has been slated for this month. Previous builds have come out on a tuesday, so 26th is the current bet.

@Nuril untill they have an empire DLC that introduces interesting mechanics to become an empire they are just going to roll out the current ones. Enjoy dealing with that.
 
If one does not want to make ahistoric empires, one does not have to. I don't understand why people are getting upset about something that, if they don't want to be a part of their game, has very little to no chance of affecting their game at all. The AI has almost no chance of being able to form any of these Empires, and their being De Jure doesn't matter at all if they don't exist.
 
IIRC yes and you need to have at least one other kingdom outside of Francia
Specifically, I believe it needs to be bordering Francia -- for example Aragon or Lotharingia, otherwise you could be king of Ireland or Syria and still form Francia. I'm not sure if you need to be king of one of the HRE realms but I'm sure I remember one of the devs saying it had to be a realm bordering Francia. I did ask a similar question myself.
 
I don't think you know what you're talking about. It's not just "The Pope", it's "The Pope via the Donation of Constantine". There is only his ability to give away "The Western Empire", not "You can be Emperor of Spain, and you Britain, and you Germany, and you France, and you Scandinavia!". In order for him to crown a new True Successor he would have to decisively refuse the claim of the HRE, which they wouldn't take for a second, so the new claimant would have to assert it by successfully defending the Pope from being ousted.

Fan-suggestions != Fact. Paradox called them Empires themselves when naming them in the thread, so they'd need to state otherwise.

No, it's "Alternative history" after the game starts, not absurdly non-Medieval nonsense. The mechanics are supposed to be true to the period, otherwise there's not point in calling it a Medieval game at all.

You keep stating your narrow opinion of only the HRE and ERE being allowed to exist as if its fact. A Spanish Empire within this timeframe is not fantasy / "alternative history":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperator_totius_Hispaniae

Your didactic ranting and statement that for an Empire of Spain to exist HRE must be refused is facile.

WIKI: Imperator totius Hispaniae is a Latin title meaning "Emperor of all Spain". In Spain in the Middle Ages, the title "emperor" (from Latin imperator) was used under a variety of circumstances from the ninth century onwards, but its usage peaked, as a formal and practical title, between 1086 and 1157. It was primarily used by the Kings of León and Castile, but it also found currency in the Kingdom of Navarre and was employed by the Counts of Castile and at least one Duke of Galicia. It signalled at various points the king's equality with the Byzantine Emperor and Holy Roman Emperor"

Excuse me if I dont take your word for it Nuril
 
This Friday is a dev AAR. Release has been slated for this month. Previous builds have come out on a tuesday, so 26th is the current bet.

@Nuril untill they have an empire DLC that introduces interesting mechanics to become an empire they are just going to roll out the current ones. Enjoy dealing with that.
Enjoy is totally wrong; again IMHO both camps are telling the other what is supposed to be fun. Yeah we don't really like the current direction, but IMHO we have been positive critical fans; only giving applause without comment isn't helpful either. Anyway my point is that people give comments, because they give about the game.
In this debate we all do, calling names for any group in this thread is rather foolish; we disagree on the direction, but we both love the game.

Anyway in vanilla we have to, but any of you wouldn't like any change disliked by you and if it feels like, it was forced, upon (even if it really isn't), you wouldn't like it either. This is what we in the Netherlands would call 'rubbing salt in the wounds'
 
Last edited:
You keep stating your narrow opinion of only the HRE and ERE being allowed to exist as if its fact. A Spanish Empire within this timeframe is not fantasy / "alternative history":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperator_totius_Hispaniae

Your didactic ranting and statement that for an Empire of Spain to exist HRE must be refused is facile.

WIKI: Imperator totius Hispaniae is a Latin title meaning "Emperor of all Spain". In Spain in the Middle Ages, the title "emperor" (from Latin imperator) was used under a variety of circumstances from the ninth century onwards, but its usage peaked, as a formal and practical title, between 1086 and 1157. It was primarily used by the Kings of León and Castile, but it also found currency in the Kingdom of Navarre and was employed by the Counts of Castile and at least one Duke of Galicia. It signalled at various points the king's equality with the Byzantine Emperor and Holy Roman Emperor"

Excuse me if I dont take your word for it Nuril

Well the Ottomans were Muslims and they were recognized as an Empire.



But also , at this time period , China was an Empire and considered such (though knowledge of China was fairly limited).






In all honesty it seems like it will be rare to see Empires and the haters can very EASILY remove them from the game. You simply go to landed_titles in your common folder of you ck 2 instal and delete all the E_ titles you think are non historical. I don't feel like this is an immersion killer , nor is it historically non viable. The pope was given the ability to crown the West Roman Empire... why couldn't he have had the ability at some other point in history to Anoint other empires that exist at the same time as the HRE. The HRE itself is a false successor in terms of land. Burgundy , France , Iberia , Africa all have equally if not stronger claims to its historical de jure. If HRE can be given an Empire title , i just can't see how its so impossible for others to do so themselves. Maybe the ERE and HRE should have some form of specialization to differentiation their empirical titles from the others. But given there were many other empires around in those times and prior , whom were not appointed by the Pope as the WRE successor , its entirely viable for them to exist in some form.
 
This Friday is a dev AAR. Release has been slated for this month. Previous builds have come out on a tuesday, so 26th is the current bet.

Today is tuesday. Who says an AAR has to come out before a product? If its next tuesday then thatd surely have another DD day for a DD and there isnt another DD so that almost proves without proving it at all.

also empires are boring. especially after all these endless pages of empires and nothing but empires, if youre not adding anything new towards a compromise or solution then theres no point in bringing it up even just to say nothing that hasnt already been said ahundred times
 
Last edited:
Today is tuesday. Who says an AAR has to come out before a product? If its next tuesday then thatd surely have another day for a DD and there isnt another.

also empires are boring. especially after all these endless pages of empires and nothing but empires, if youre not adding anything new towards a compromise or solution then theres no point in bringing it up even just to say nothing that hasnt already been said ahundred times

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...ev-Diary-3&p=13964540&viewfull=1#post13964540
 
That title had just as much legitimate weight and recognition by his peer as title Emperor of Central Africa.

Where did you pull that info out of? Central Africa is hardly the same gameplay focus of CK2 as Iberia is. Its true the Emperor of Spain title fizzled out around 1350s, but for most of the game period it seems like something the Spanish rulers were very involved in maintaining. Moreover it has historical basis and assists gameplay in making the very numerous Kingoms Titles in the region managebale
 
You are the ones making a fool out of yourselves for telling other people how you think they should play their games. Some players like to conquer lands and form empires and for those who dont they can skip the entire feature. There are times when i feel that history helps alot with the setting but in this case i couldnt care less about historical reasons since it doesnt the break immersion at all.



Eh ok? Im happy that you find my eduacation legit, im not sure what you expect me to reply to that.

Actually, you're the one telling the rest of us how to play the game, not the other way around. We were playing it as originally designed, until people like you complained until you got your way. Then, somehow we're the "whiny babies".


Where did you pull that info out of? Central Africa is hardly the same gameplay focus of CK2 as Iberia is. Its true the Emperor of Spain title fizzled out around 1350s, but for most of the game period it seems like something the Spanish rulers were very involved in maintaining. Moreover it has historical basis and assists gameplay in making the very numerous Kingoms Titles in the region managebale

He's absolutely correct. Some jerk calling himself Emperor doesn't mean anyone else takes him seriously.
 
Last edited:
He's absolutely correct. Some jerk calling himself Emperor doesn't mean anyone else takes him seriously.

His own subjects did, if you bothered to read the link, instead of making an inane comment you would have seen mention of response from the HRE and Pope:

"In the fourteenth century a story appeared in various chronicles according to which the Pope, the Holy Roman Emperor, and the King of France demanded a tribute from Ferdinand I. According to this late account, the king was prepared to pay, but the Cid (who in reality was a young and very minor figure during Ferdinand's reign) declared war on Pope, Emperor and Frenchman, who rescinded their demand. For this reason "Don Ferdinand was afterwards called ‘the Great’: the peer of an emperor".... He wrote that in 1055 at the Council of Florence, the Emperor Henry III urged Victor II to prohibit under severe penalties the use of the imperial title by Ferdinand of León"

While this isnt undisputed "fact" its certainly an awesome series of events the like of which should be included in CK2, rather than flatly excluded as a lot of posts seem to vehemently argue. Its in-game wrangling with historical basis like this which makes CK2 so enjoyable. More of it I say.
 
His own subjects did, if you bothered to read the link, instead of making an inane comment you would have seen mention of response from the HRE and Pope:

"In the fourteenth century a story appeared in various chronicles according to which the Pope, the Holy Roman Emperor, and the King of France demanded a tribute from Ferdinand I. According to this late account, the king was prepared to pay, but the Cid (who in reality was a young and very minor figure during Ferdinand's reign) declared war on Pope, Emperor and Frenchman, who rescinded their demand. For this reason "Don Ferdinand was afterwards called ‘the Great’: the peer of an emperor".... He wrote that in 1055 at the Council of Florence, the Emperor Henry III urged Victor II to prohibit under severe penalties the use of the imperial title by Ferdinand of León"

While this isnt undisputed "fact" its certainly an awesome series of events the like of which should be included in CK2, rather than flatly excluded as a lot of posts seem to vehemently argue. Its in-game wrangling with historical basis like this which makes CK2 so enjoyable. More of it I say.

My friend this is why we have mods, what your asking for can done through events.
 
My friend this is why we have mods, what your asking for can done through events.

I am not asking for anything. Im just supporting Paradox's decision to include more Empires in 1.06. And voicing an opinion contrary to the vocal anti-Empires lobby who are a bit to eager to throw around "historical fact" to support their view and belittle those who dont agree.
 
Last edited:
His own subjects did, if you bothered to read the link, instead of making an inane comment you would have seen mention of response from the HRE and Pope:

"In the fourteenth century a story appeared in various chronicles according to which the Pope, the Holy Roman Emperor, and the King of France demanded a tribute from Ferdinand I. According to this late account, the king was prepared to pay, but the Cid (who in reality was a young and very minor figure during Ferdinand's reign) declared war on Pope, Emperor and Frenchman, who rescinded their demand. For this reason "Don Ferdinand was afterwards called ‘the Great’: the peer of an emperor".... He wrote that in 1055 at the Council of Florence, the Emperor Henry III urged Victor II to prohibit under severe penalties the use of the imperial title by Ferdinand of León"

While this isnt undisputed "fact" its certainly an awesome series of events the like of which should be included in CK2, rather than flatly excluded as a lot of posts seem to vehemently argue. Its in-game wrangling with historical basis like this which makes CK2 so enjoyable. More of it I say.

Do you really have to be so condescending when you respond? I made a joking comment and you got personally insulting. There was no call for that.