Am I the only crazy person who won't play CK3 this weekend just because I'm waiting for 1.2?

[r3xm0rt1s]

I think I will give a shot for some historical ruler one last time before leaving the scrubs whose empires collapsed to rot. I love playing from "only (living) member of dynasty" starts, but way too many interesting starting realms have historical families.

 

[Karlington]

And then you go feudal and cant raid anymore even tho your still Pagan viking

If you are an unreformed pagan then you can raid if you are feudal.

 

[Adrik Thorsen]

If you are an unreformed pagan then you can raid if you are feudal.

Sometimes. It’s buggy. Wardecs are weird with unreformed feudal pagans too.

 

[Azhcristokos]

I'll probably put in a good-length game or two after 1.2 drops. I told my best friend I'd make her in the game, so I have a playthrough as an inbred red-headed giant to look forward to.

 

[Karlington]

Sometimes. It’s buggy. Wardecs are weird with unreformed feudal pagans too.

Wardecs?

 

[Nitan17]

I love playing from "only (living) member of dynasty" starts, but way too many interesting starting realms have historical families.

Same, I hate starting as a character who has a lot of relatives, it's difficult to keep track of and care about people that supposedly are of your "family" but you don't know them at all. For me, primary use of Ruler Designer was always starting as a one-man dynasty.

Secondary was making the first character have "peasant leader" trait, I like how nicely it explains how this nobody got his titles and makes early game a bit harder.

 

[es333]

So if you click on longships. Then click on Northern Europe(the requirement to have it as non-Norse)it will highlight the region. The region includes Finland’s but not the north Baltic coast.

If by "north Baltic coast" you mean Estonia then yes, that is a bug acknowledged by Paradox. Paradox is completely aware that the Estonians were vikings and Estonians not having longships is a bug, not a design decision.

Which is doubly baffling because iirc you can tag areas for more then one geographical region/tag at a time for the purpose of decision triggers. So why Estonia cant be Scandinavian AND baltic is silly

Estonia being Baltic would be silly. How is Estonia Baltic, especially in the CK timeframe? Estonia is not nor has ever been inhabited by any Baltic tribes nor does it have any other relations to the Balts as the Livonians lived south of the Estonians. Geographically, Estonia is as "Baltic" as Finland but Finnic Estonia and Finland being somehow tied to the Balts would be odd.

 

[Xenrek]

If by "north Baltic coast" you mean Estonia then yes, that is a bug acknowledged by Paradox. Paradox is completely aware that the Estonians were vikings and Estonians not having longships is a bug, not a design decision.



Estonia being Baltic would be silly. How is Estonia Baltic, especially in the CK timeframe? Estonia is not nor has ever been inhabited by any Baltic tribes nor does it have any other relations to the Balts as the Livonians lived south of the Estonians. Geographically, Estonia is as "Baltic" as Finland but Finnic Estonia and Finland being somehow tied to the Balts would be odd.

Culturally it's not baltic, and should remain not-Baltic

But geographically its tight friggin there and should be tagged as being right there

 

[es333]

Culturally it's not baltic, and should remain not-Baltic

But geographically its tight friggin there and should be tagged as being right there

Then Finland is also Baltic? If you don't include Finland then you're using a 20th century geopolitical grouping that came into existence because of Soviet occupation. 99% of people think about that geopolitical grouping so Estonia should not be Baltic in any way as it has little to do with the Balts and a lot to do with the Finns and Scandinavians. Do not project 20th century terms into CK.

Edit: My point is, the moment you call Estonia, Baltic, but do not include Finland then it stops being a geographical term (eastern shore of the Baltic sea) and just leaves an impression of Estonians being Balts as otherwise you'd be using 20th century geopolitical terms which no one would use for CK.

One part from the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact:

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the USSR 1. Secret supplementary protocol on the border of the spheres of interest of Germany and the USSR. Signed by V. M. Molotov and Ribbentrop August 23, 1939 SECRET SUPPLEMENTARY PROTOCOL. In signing the non-aggression pact between Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the undersigned plenipotentiaries of the two sides discussed in strict confidentiality the issue of delimiting the spheres of mutual interest in Eastern Europe. This discussion led to the following result: 1. In the event of territorial-political reorganization of the districts making up the Baltic states (Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania), the northern border of Lithuania is simultaneously the border of the spheres of interest of Germany and the USSR. The interests of Lithuania with respect to the Vilnius district are recognized by both sides.

 

[Karlington]

The majority of the people of Latvia and Lithuania are Baltic.

The majority of the people of Estonia are Finnic.

The term "Baltic states" is commonly used to refer to those three countries as a group.

Molotov-Ribbentrop notwithstanding, it'd be quite unusual to consider Finland a part of the Baltic states. That's more of a historical artifact that was used after WWI, but it is no longer used that way.

 

[es333]

The majority of the people of Latvia and Lithuania are Baltic.

The majority of the people of Estonia are Finnic.

The term "Baltic states" is commonly used to refer to those three countries as a group.

Molotov-Ribbentrop notwithstanding, it'd be quite unusual to consider Finland a part of the Baltic states. That's more of a historical artifact that was used after WWI, but it is no longer used that way.

It is unusual to consider Finland and Estonia a part of the Baltic states because they're not Balts. It is a historical artifact that Estonia is called Baltic and for that reasons 95% of Europeans think that Estonians are Balts and have a culture/language very similar to the Lithuanians.

My point is, we can use geographical terms not some 1991 geopolitical terms. Finland is a Baltic state and was called a Baltic state in all diplomatic documents well into the 1950's. Finland did not move physically away from the eastern shore of the Baltic sea, it just changed the geopolitical grouping. That's why I say that we should solely focus on culture groups in a game like CK III that is heavily culture-focused. You have the Norse, Finnics and Balts, calling Estonians Baltic is just confusing and no archaeologists nor historians use that term when talking about Estonians because it is misleading.

TL;DR We should not use post-WW2 geopolitical terms that are misleading in a historical/culture context like CK III. Geographical terms make sense a bit more but almost nobody uses the geographical definition of "Baltic countries" here.

 

[Adrik Thorsen]

'North Baltic Coast' specifically refers to a region, as in the Northern. Baltic. Coast. Which is, geographically, where the Estonian culture is both in real life and in CK3. - The simplest fix for the issue of their not having longships would be to add that area to the 'Northern Europe' geo-tag for the game.

 

[es333]

'North Baltic Coast' specifically refers to a region, as in the Northern. Baltic. Coast. Which is, geographically, where the Estonian culture is both in real life and in CK3. - The simplest fix for the issue of their not having longships would be to add that area to the 'Northern Europe' geo-tag for the game.

What is "Northern Baltic"? That term doesn't exist in the real world and a google search confirms that. If you take the median of the Baltic sea then Northern Baltic = Sweden, Finland, Estonia,

As I said, Paradox acknowledged the bug and the fix took me 5 minutes for my mod, the thing is that PDX hasn't taken those 5 minutes to fix an entire culture. Estonia is in Scandinavia and in the correct region but somebody at PDX had messed up the code for the geographical regions (I found the precise location of the bug).
Also, Estonians were raiding the Scandinavian coastline already before the viking age started to together with that bug fix, I presume that the Estonian culture will have longships right from the start contrary to the Finns who can research them as the Finns weren't really seafarers and lived mostly inland.

 

[DrYitMat]

Could you explain?

as

Titles with own laws seem to be bypassed in the succession.

replied.

When a title has its own election laws, it is bypassed/resets the inheritance, even if the laws are EXACTLY THE SAME as the top realm title, or the highest title of owner. So IE Male Preference can be added to all titles when you have confederate, and you can get what is basically primogeniture . The AI somehow seems to know this and uses it extensively . It also has a bit of a side effect on county inheritance; normally under primo main heir gets capital duchy + counties in it; 2nd son gets next duchy + counties in it. The bug seems to cause confederate to get very messy, where the 2nd son ends up inheriting quite a bit of counties but no ducal/king title. Its kinda funny to see it happen to AI, happens quite a bit in the Frankish kingdoms. The primary heir that got all the kingdom titles will have 1 or 2 counties and the 2nd heir will have like 8. 2nd Heir forms faction &/or presses claim, viva la revolution, 2nd heir is now undisputed king.

just to make it even clearer what this bug is, take a Frankish king as example. Very often they will get 2 - 4 kingdom titles. Lets say the king of francia has 3 kingdom titles; he has 3 eligible sons as heirs. What SHOULD happen under confederate is that each son gets a kingdom & all lands in it. Instead, with the bug, all the king has to do is add 'Male Preference' - the same as his primary title - to each kingdom for a very affordable (200 prestige? IIRC) cost. Now the 1st in line - the primary heir - gets all 3 kingdom titles. The 2nd and 3rd heir end up getting a bunch of counties. Now if they king went further and added the male preference law to every duchy title that he holds, the 2nd and 3rd heir end up getting the majority of counties. This is because they are no longer bound by ducal inheritance; normally they each get a duchy, then the rest is split evenly. Now each duchy ends up getting split, with the 1st heir usually controlling just the capital county in the duchy. ERGO, the primary heir ends up getting LESS counties than the 2nd OR 3rd brother do.

 

[Xam Enyap]

As I said, Paradox acknowledged the bug and the fix took me 5 minutes for my mod, the thing is that PDX hasn't taken those 5 minutes to fix an entire culture. Estonia is in Scandinavia and in the correct region but somebody at PDX had messed up the code for the geographical regions (I found the precise location of the bug). Also, Estonians were raiding the Scandinavian coastline already before the viking age started to together with that bug fix, I presume that the Estonian culture will have longships right from the start contrary to the Finns who can research them as the Finns weren't really seafarers and lived mostly inland.

I'm not sure Estonians not having longships is or should be a bug. Like it or not this is pop history game and in pop history sea raiders are Swedes, Norwegians and Danes not Estonians. If Estonians get long ships Lattgalian culture should get it too since Curonians too did their fare share of sea raiding. I wager every Baltic Sea culture had some ships at some point which they used for raiding. Not like shipbuilding was some closely guarded technological secret people inhabiting the coastline of Baltic Lake couldn't figure out.

 

[es333]

I'm not sure Estonians not having longships is or should be a bug. Like it or not this is pop history game and in pop history sea raiders are Swedes, Norwegians and Danes not Estonians. If Estonians get long ships Lattgalian culture should get it too since Curonians too did their fare share of sea raiding. I wager every Baltic Sea culture had some ships at some point which they used for raiding. Not like shipbuilding was some closely guarded technological secret people inhabiting the coastline of Baltic Lake couldn't figure out.

Wow... Where did you pull out all of that sensational information? So few sentences but so many things that make a historian grasp his head in disbelief. If you know absolutely nothing about the topic nor have you studied it in university then don't try to troll people.

Firstly, Estonians not having longships is a bug and it is acknowledged by Paradox at 02.09.2020: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...ve-access-to-longships.1414860/#post-26851995

Secondly, the Latgals should not have longships because they didn't even live next to the sea, Livonians (a Finnic people with a strong seafaring background just like the Estonians) inhabited most of the Latvian coastline even after the Baltic tribes expanded. Latgals have never been seafarers, that requires actually having access to the sea.

Thirdly, Curonians started raiding over the sea after they had integrated/assimilated a large amount of Livonians living on the Courland peninsula. Seafaring and ship vocabulary in Curonian and Baltic languages have a Finnic origin, because the Balts were inland people for most of history contrary to the Finnics who lived in Latvia before them and had a strong connection to the sea already before the Balts started pushing northwards.

"Baltic sea culture" is an interesting term, do you mean Northern-European as that seems like synonym. I agree that people living next to the Baltic sea could use ships for different purposes. The thing is that the Baltic tribes didn't live next to the sea in most cases and were inland people. Even after the Baltic expansion in Latvia, the Livonians still controlled the majority of the coastline as the Balts weren't interested in it. The same applies to the Finns, they lived mainly inland during the viking age and the southern Finnish coastline was deserted meanwhile the northern Estonian coast was heavily populated and the "east road" used the Estonian coast as its main route.

TL;DR It is very hard to be a Balt seafarer if you don't even live next to the sea.

 

[Karlington]

It is unusual to consider Finland and Estonia a part of the Baltic states because they're not Balts. It is a historical artifact that Estonia is called Baltic and for that reasons 95% of Europeans think that Estonians are Balts and have a culture/language very similar to the Lithuanians.

My point is, we can use geographical terms not some 1991 geopolitical terms. Finland is a Baltic state and was called a Baltic state in all diplomatic documents well into the 1950's. Finland did not move physically away from the eastern shore of the Baltic sea, it just changed the geopolitical grouping. That's why I say that we should solely focus on culture groups in a game like CK III that is heavily culture-focused. You have the Norse, Finnics and Balts, calling Estonians Baltic is just confusing and no archaeologists nor historians use that term when talking about Estonians because it is misleading.

TL;DR We should not use post-WW2 geopolitical terms that are misleading in a historical/culture context like CK III. Geographical terms make sense a bit more but almost nobody uses the geographical definition of "Baltic countries" here.

The term "Baltic states" including the three and Finland is a post-WWI artifact which focused on the countries in the area that had become newly independent from Russia. Way after the CK3 timespan.

The term including the three but not Finland is a post-WWII artifact. Also way after the CK3 timespan.

If we were to use it in a geographical sense as meaning any country that borders the Baltic Sea as you seem to imply ("Finland did not move physically away from the eastern shore of the Baltic sea") we'd have to include countries like Sweden, Germany, Poland, Russia, Denmark...

-----

I think this is getting a bit too off-topic now, so I'll try to bring it back to the game.

The way the game currently has it set up is that Longships are a regional innovation, tied to the region "Northern Europe," which is currently made up of just Sweden, Norway, and Finland (Denmark is not included). To extend that innovation to the Estonian culture what would need to be done is extend that region to also cover the starting Estonian cultures.

Since it's not a directly culture-linked innovation, the designation of cultures as one thing or another will have no effect on access to the Longships innovation. It's solely tied to the number of counties of a particular culture, and how many of them are in the "Northern Europe" region.

 

[Karlington]

When a title has its own election laws, it is bypassed/resets the inheritance, even if the laws are EXACTLY THE SAME as the top realm title, or the highest title of owner. So IE Male Preference can be added to all titles when you have confederate, and you can get what is basically primogeniture . The AI somehow seems to know this and uses it extensively . It also has a bit of a side effect on county inheritance; normally under primo main heir gets capital duchy + counties in it; 2nd son gets next duchy + counties in it. The bug seems to cause confederate to get very messy, where the 2nd son ends up inheriting quite a bit of counties but no ducal/king title. Its kinda funny to see it happen to AI, happens quite a bit in the Frankish kingdoms. The primary heir that got all the kingdom titles will have 1 or 2 counties and the 2nd heir will have like 8. 2nd Heir forms faction &/or presses claim, viva la revolution, 2nd heir is now undisputed king.

just to make it even clearer what this bug is, take a Frankish king as example. Very often they will get 2 - 4 kingdom titles. Lets say the king of francia has 3 kingdom titles; he has 3 eligible sons as heirs. What SHOULD happen under confederate is that each son gets a kingdom & all lands in it. Instead, with the bug, all the king has to do is add 'Male Preference' - the same as his primary title - to each kingdom for a very affordable (200 prestige? IIRC) cost. Now the 1st in line - the primary heir - gets all 3 kingdom titles. The 2nd and 3rd heir end up getting a bunch of counties. Now if they king went further and added the male preference law to every duchy title that he holds, the 2nd and 3rd heir end up getting the majority of counties. This is because they are no longer bound by ducal inheritance; normally they each get a duchy, then the rest is split evenly. Now each duchy ends up getting split, with the 1st heir usually controlling just the capital county in the duchy. ERGO, the primary heir ends up getting LESS counties than the 2nd OR 3rd brother do.

Thank you for the detailed explanation!

Do you happen to know how this works with heir designation under Absolute Crown Authority? Will titles with separate succession laws respect that, or does it only work on titles with no separate succession law of their own?

 

[Xam Enyap]

TL;DR It is very hard to be a Balt seafarer if you don't even live next to the sea.

I really don't know where you are getting your info about Baltic wood people who learned to make boats when they climbed down trees and visited coastal Livs. Curonians lived on Western Baltic coastline of both present day Latvia and Lithuania down to Curonian (sic!) spit. Even if we accept your argument about everything sea related being loaned from finnic people the diffusion of these innovations into Baltic people (Curonians) should be well within games timeframe, so why exactly Curonians (Lettgalians) cant have longships when Estonians can?

I accept the limitations of the game where Curonians are mixed up with other Baltic tribes and thus lose their claim, so to speak, on sailing, but I still stand by my notion that if Estonian culture gets longship innovation Curonians should too.

 

[es333]

If we were to use it in a geographical sense as meaning any country that borders the Baltic Sea as you seem to imply ("Finland did not move physically away from the eastern shore of the Baltic sea") we'd have to include countries like Sweden, Germany, Poland, Russia, Denmark...

Before the 1950's, the Baltic states was used a geographical term and that it referred to countries on the eastern shore of the Baltic sea, countries on the western shore like Denmark and Sweden were referred to as Scandinavia. Nobody in 2020 even knows about the geographical definition and nowadays Baltic = Balts. Archaeologists and historians never use the term "Baltic" when referring to Estonia because it just creates confusion and leaves an impression of Estonians being Baltic to the inexperienced layman.

That's why "Baltic" and "Estonian" should not be in the same sentence in the CK time frame, this is not 1991.

I really don't know where you are getting your info about Baltic wood people who learned to make boats when they climbed down trees and visited coastal Livs. Curonians lived on Western Baltic coastline of both present day Latvia and Lithuania down to Curonian (sic!) spit. Even if we accept your argument about everything sea related being loaned from finnic people the diffusion of these innovations into Baltic people (Curonians) should be well within games timeframe, so why exactly Curonians (Lettgalians) cant have longships when Estonians can?

I accept the limitations of the game where Curonians are mixed up with other Baltic tribes and thus lose their claim, so to speak, on sailing, but I still stand by my notion that if Estonian culture gets longship innovation Curonians should too.

You are comparing apples and oranges. Estonians as a culture had been seafarers since 2000BC, that's ~3000 years of history when we get to CK start dates.

You are talking about one of the tribes that became Latvia. Also, Balts started pushing northwards around the Great People's Migration at around 500AD, the tribe that became the Curonians assimilated the native Finnic inhabitants around the "Curonian spit" during that movement and from that point, most likely, we see an influx of Finnic seafaring terms into their language.
Still, one Latvian tribe that learnt about seafaring recently compared to a culture that had been seafaring for thousands of years, they're not comparable. Considering that the Curonians and Oeselians worked together in many cases then it is hyopthesized that the Curonian seafarers had a very strong Finnic background and Livonian was used as the lingua franca. Because all Estonian tribes were on hostile terms with the Baltic tribes living southwards, the Curonian seafarers are an odd exception which doesn't make sense at first glance but becomes logical if you account for the conquered Finnics.