Byzantine

[Joel M Bridge]

"Byzantium is its own beast, and requires a lot of thought to do right. The CK2 solution was not optimal, and we didn't want to repeat what we did there. Just slapping an elective variant on it and renaming its government to 'Imperial' doesn't do it justice, we would want actual mechanics to represent the intricacies of byzantine politics. All I can say at this point is that whenever in the future we choose to deal with Byzantium we will make sure that we do it well"

So this pretty much saying we're getting a DLC?

 

[Aquamancer]

Probably, although there is a chance that the changes to Byzantium's government are part of a free patch. That said, they did say "whenever in the future we choose to deal with Byzantium", meaning that while members of the devteam are interested in making Byzantium's government and internal politics more accurate to real life, it is not guaranteed to be the first thing or among the first things to be focused on after CK3's launch.

 

[Kanaric]

They don't have nomads and republics either.

Nomads are hugely important to this period. The lack of content there affects the entire eastern part of the map, even just the people who have to interact with them.

Byzantines can exist how they are, an afterthought. They are food for the nations around them and the obsession with them is meme status. Should be like a Fallen Empire in stellaris. Tough until a certain point of the game (4th crusade) and then food from then on.

 

[Rush4in]

Probably. I hope won don't have to wait long and they actually do the justice. It's not that hard to model them, I can actually think of a way to give them a far better representation using mechanics only from CK2.

 

[ChaosOnline]

They don't have nomads and republics either.

Nomads are hugely important to this period. The lack of content there affects the entire eastern part of the map, even just the people who have to interact with them.

Byzantines can exist how they are, an afterthought. They are food for the nations around them and the obsession with them is meme status. Should be like a Fallen Empire in stellaris. Tough until a certain point of the game (4th crusade) and then food from then on.

While it's true nomads were important, so were the Romans. People legitimately enjoy their history and culture and playing as them; they're not just a meme. You can wish for more content for the factions you prefer, without denigrating the interests of others.

I'd love to see nomads get more flavor and support, since they dominated the eastern edges of the map for centuries; and even non-nomadic kingdoms were hugely affected by them.

I'd also love to see more content for the Eastern Romans, since they dominated the Mediterranean for centuries, and had a unique and interesting society and history.

They both open up a lot of fun gameplay opportunities for the player. And even if I wasn't personally interested in one or the other, I wouldn't shit on someone who was.

 

[Axis89]

They don't have nomads and republics either.

Nomads are hugely important to this period. The lack of content there affects the entire eastern part of the map, even just the people who have to interact with them.

Byzantines can exist how they are, an afterthought. They are food for the nations around them and the obsession with them is meme status. Should be like a Fallen Empire in stellaris. Tough until a certain point of the game (4th crusade) and then food from then on.

You dont understand medieval history if you still believe that the Byzantines a.k.a Eastern Roman Empire is a mere meme, and has no real impact or importance. For a long time the Byzantines were a subject few studied, and was often neglected, but in recent years there has been a huge rise of interest among historians, making the understanding of that region better. And most historians today would stress that the Byzantine Empire was one of the most important political, military, culturally and religiosly nations of Europe and the middle east.
Some of the reason it isnt that famous or known among most people is because Byzantine is a little known term, and just appears in medieval history books, but few people who's not interested history know that the Byzantines are the continuation of the Roman state in the east.

 

[DassiD]

"The First Crusade (1096–1099) was the first of a number of crusades that attempted to recapture the Holy Land, called for by Pope Urban II at the Council of Clermont in 1095. Urban called for a military expedition to aid the Byzantine Empire, which had recently lost most of Anatolia to the Seljuq Turks."

 

[Axis89]

"The First Crusade (1096–1099) was the first of a number of crusades that attempted to recapture the Holy Land, called for by Pope Urban II at the Council of Clermont in 1095. Urban called for a military expedition to aid the Byzantine Empire, which had recently lost most of Anatolia to the Seljuq Turks."

If DassiD is writing down facts, and only facts, how can you click the disagree button? Do you disagree with the facts? Do you have "alternative" facts? I hope we aren't dealing with alternative facts here, that would make any discussion impossible if we all are going to have our own personal reality and not a common reality and facts.

 

[Bearnest]

If DassiD is writing down facts, and only facts, how can you click the disagree button? Do you disagree with the facts? Do you have "alternative" facts? I hope we aren't dealing with alternative facts here, that would make any discussion impossible if we all are going to have our own personal reality and not a common reality and facts.

They come from the Darkest Timeline

 

[UBERWASP]

"Byzantium is its own beast, and requires a lot of thought to do right. The CK2 solution was not optimal, and we didn't want to repeat what we did there. Just slapping an elective variant on it and renaming its government to 'Imperial' doesn't do it justice, we would want actual mechanics to represent the intricacies of byzantine politics. All I can say at this point is that whenever in the future we choose to deal with Byzantium we will make sure that we do it well"

So this pretty much saying we're getting a DLC?

Yes, things like that are really one of the defining factors for the feeling of a leap forwards in terms of game development from 2 to 3. They said CK2 was like an indie game and now there was a much bigger team working on it... Well then a truly detailed, comprehensive and innovative Byzantium system alongside with everyting else would prove that perfectly.

Really tho in all Paradox games it feels like some games are just feels like the main part of the game and others feel like decoration or you know... "Other Countries"... But I don't have that feeling when playing old Vic2 for instance... If they can manage to make every country at least feel like flavored, if they can find innovative ways of doing that, that would be a good leap forward.

Probably, although there is a chance that the changes to Byzantium's government are part of a free patch. That said, they did say "whenever in the future we choose to deal with Byzantium", meaning that while members of the devteam are interested in making Byzantium's government and internal politics more accurate to real life, it is not guaranteed to be the first thing or among the first things to be focused on after CK3's launch.

Medieval Byzantine is underrated, it was fundamentally influential for the development of slavic cultures, current slavic alphabet was litterally invented by a byzantine monk to spread orthodoxy to slavs, it was also influential to rest of europe as well.

 

[Axis89]

Yes, things like that are really one of the defining factors for the feeling of a leap forwards in terms of game development from 2 to 3. They said CK2 was like an indie game and now there was a much bigger team working on it... Well then a truly detailed, comprehensive and innovative Byzantium system alongside with everyting else would prove that perfectly.

Really tho in all Paradox games it feels like some games are just feels like the main part of the game and others feel like decoration or you know... "Other Countries"... But I don't have that feeling when playing old Vic2 for instance... If they can manage to make every country at least feel like flavored, if they can find innovative ways of doing that, that would be a good leap forward.



Medieval Byzantine is underrated, it was fundamentally influential for the development of slavic cultures, current slavic alphabet was litterally invented by a byzantine monk to spread orthodoxy to slavs, it was also influential to rest of europe as well.

Yeah it was influential to western Europe too, especially if you think about the Renaissance. The Eastern Romans, the Romans who also are Greek are underrated I think because of modern powerhouses and politics. Especially influenced by the Romantics of 1800's Germany, England, France etc etc

 

[Limbojack]

My guess is that a DLC mixing a free patch about orthodoxy and a DLC for the Byzantine Empire would make sense. They pretty much said the same about not implementing merchant republics in the base game, and I'd be surprised if they don't but that behind a paywall as well.

That being said, I don't mind a Byzantine DLC as much as a merchant republic one, as merchant republics were a thing in CK2.

 

[Denkt]

Byzantine may had a more powerful army under Basil II than what France had in hundred years war to get an idea about its military Power and the military Power of its neighbours. With some better luck it would maybe had conquered what the Ottomans did, its powerbase was about the same the Ottomans started with to get an idea.

 

[treb]

They don't have nomads and republics either.

Nomads are hugely important to this period. The lack of content there affects the entire eastern part of the map, even just the people who have to interact with them.

Byzantines can exist how they are, an afterthought. They are food for the nations around them and the obsession with them is meme status. Should be like a Fallen Empire in stellaris. Tough until a certain point of the game (4th crusade) and then food from then on.

You do realize they held huge military and diplomatic influence? they indirectly started the crusades by asking for help from the pope in dealing with the Turks and despite there setbacks still had an army that still could go to to toe with the best armies the west and east had to offer and win a good deal of decisive victories often after getting decisively beat beforehand. They were at 1066 still a huge superpower and a force to be reckoned with.

 

[Kanaric]

While it's true nomads were important, so were the Romans.

Nah, no not really. People here like to exaggerate it to the nth degree.

They should be like china or fallen empire in stellaris and not playable until proper content is made for them.

As they have existed in CK2 and how people want them to be here both is pure fantasy. I'm fine with fantasy and fine with feudal byzantium since it's a game but don't pretend you guys are making more reasonable suggestions at all, ever, when discussing byzantium. They are the mary sue of these forums.

Going back to EU2 it used to be a self aware joke, but it's not self aware anymore.

 

[Axis89]

Nah, no not really. People here like to exaggerate it to the nth degree.

They should be like china or fallen empire in stellaris and not playable until proper content is made for them.

As they have existed in CK2 and how people want them to be here both is pure fantasy. I'm fine with fantasy and fine with feudal byzantium since it's a game but don't pretend you guys are making more reasonable suggestions at all, ever, when discussing byzantium. They are the mary sue of these forums.

Going back to EU2 it used to be a self aware joke, but it's not self aware anymore.

Wow, get off your high horse man.

 

[treb]

Nah, no not really. People here like to exaggerate it to the nth degree.

They should be like china or fallen empire in stellaris and not playable until proper content is made for them.

As they have existed in CK2 and how people want them to be here both is pure fantasy. I'm fine with fantasy and fine with feudal byzantium since it's a game but don't pretend you guys are making more reasonable suggestions at all, ever, when discussing byzantium. They are the mary sue of these forums.

Going back to EU2 it used to be a self aware joke, but it's not self aware anymore.

Wow, I don't think I've ever seen someone be so wrong and so sanctimonious about it at the same time on these forums. If your not trolling I suggest you go read up on the history of Anatolia and Greece at this time period.

 

[Apocal]

If DassiD is writing down facts, and only facts, how can you click the disagree button? Do you disagree with the facts? Do you have "alternative" facts? I hope we aren't dealing with alternative facts here, that would make any discussion impossible if we all are going to have our own personal reality and not a common reality and facts.

Some people just disagree with posts at (what appears to be) complete random.

 

[Joel M Bridge]

The thing is to I'm a practicing member of the orthodox church the only way I can see orthodoxy being interesting. If the emperor can call councils. Which was a big deal but it was one of the powers of the emperor. Two But they would have to have intensive mystical focus on spiritual growth. Something that's underplayed in both is importance of monasteries

 

[fr-rein]

I feel bad because it likely means that Eastern Europe won't get their special Rota succession system either most likely.

In any case, I think there should be a DD to clarify plans for such unique and regional governments.