It ocurred to me that, since CK will represent mostly a medieval environment and intends to make it quite hard to try for world conquest, then the game should reflect one of the most particular characteristics of the european continent - deep regionalism.
Indeed, this is the characteristic, above all others, that made it so hard for medieval lords to held sway over vast amounts of land.
To sum it up, people at the time [and quite often still today] of isolated communities have a very cold and suspicious attitude towards the «outsider», regardless of ethnic or religious affinities...
I'll give you an example: in my country, we have to regions - Ribatejo (lit. 'Above the Tagus') and Alentejo ('Beyond the Tagus') that are contiguous, even though the Tagus river separates them.
Ethnically and religiously, they are all the same - roman catholic portuguese, are physically separated by just a few miles and have been part of our country for many centuries.
Ribatejo, however, is mainly a cattle-raising region, whereas Alentejo - even though it has cattle of its own - also places some emphasis on agriculture.
Thus, people from the two regions believe that they have «separate identities»: when our government wanted (in order to get more EU subsidies) to join the two regions into one, it faced massive opposition.
«Ribatejans with ribatejans, alentejans with alentejans» was the main motto.
Fact is, many communities - and even more so in miedeaval times - considered themselves to be quite apart from all others, and highly resented «outside» interference. And this was a major problem for mideaval lords, on top of all other ethnic/religious/linguistic/etc problems that might also exist...
[i.e. the prime loyalty is towards the village, not the fief]
Will there be an added «revolt» or tax penalty risk if a players' possessions differ a lot in geography/economy from their main one (i.e. the one where their family was from originally)?
Regards,
Keoland
Indeed, this is the characteristic, above all others, that made it so hard for medieval lords to held sway over vast amounts of land.
To sum it up, people at the time [and quite often still today] of isolated communities have a very cold and suspicious attitude towards the «outsider», regardless of ethnic or religious affinities...
I'll give you an example: in my country, we have to regions - Ribatejo (lit. 'Above the Tagus') and Alentejo ('Beyond the Tagus') that are contiguous, even though the Tagus river separates them.
Ethnically and religiously, they are all the same - roman catholic portuguese, are physically separated by just a few miles and have been part of our country for many centuries.
Ribatejo, however, is mainly a cattle-raising region, whereas Alentejo - even though it has cattle of its own - also places some emphasis on agriculture.
Thus, people from the two regions believe that they have «separate identities»: when our government wanted (in order to get more EU subsidies) to join the two regions into one, it faced massive opposition.
«Ribatejans with ribatejans, alentejans with alentejans» was the main motto.
Fact is, many communities - and even more so in miedeaval times - considered themselves to be quite apart from all others, and highly resented «outside» interference. And this was a major problem for mideaval lords, on top of all other ethnic/religious/linguistic/etc problems that might also exist...
[i.e. the prime loyalty is towards the village, not the fief]
Will there be an added «revolt» or tax penalty risk if a players' possessions differ a lot in geography/economy from their main one (i.e. the one where their family was from originally)?
Regards,
Keoland
