China in CK - an open answer and thought on the potential advantages and issues

[loup99]

I dont even understand why you quote me when im arguing with another person when in my very first post i pointed out that they either should make it its own game, to avoid said performance issue, or wait until they have a improved and better engine, hence CK3 or the like to do it because they cant just swap engines out mid-cycle. That is the equivalent of asking them to remake all of CK2 and that is too costly, takes too long and for little benefit compared to the time and cost attached to that solution.

Well, I disagreed with that starting point of a new game, I already answered to all of that in the opening post, and what you said in your first post was basically exactly what I had said, or that is how I understood it, minus the answers I had given to it. The thing is that it is not my task to judge how much the game needs to be optimized in order to add these new provinces, Doomdark would be much better off doing it! If Doomdark is wrong and it is unfeasible, I also think it should in CK3, as I said in the opening post.

 

[Hector of Troy]

I have nothing against China in CK2, though I would much prefer if the developers would dedicate their time and resources from now on to improving, reviewing and fine tuning the features already belonging to the game. There's plenty of stuff already.

 

[sreckom92]

Right, because Asia isnt the biggest continental landmass. Granted we already have a bit but you know what part of Asia so far is missing? East Asia, Southeast Asia, Northeast Asia and a large chunk of central Asia while we're at it. Lets consider that we dont have a big mediterranean sea in Asia, or that big North Sea and Atlantic. So we dont exactly have large bodies of water made up of nothing but empty provinces. Wasteland? There isnt all that much either unless you want to be entirely ahistorical about the whole thing. The only water we have would be around Japan and Korea, and thats arguing we arent extending the map until we hit the bering strait end of Russia. Or Not further south to include Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam and quite a few islands extra, but then we also extend Africa south so that has to be kinda filled in a bit too.

So no, its going to hit 1000 provinces quickly to add all that and probably exceed it because people will bitch about historical accuracy anyway. Look at Thure's argument "we can abstract all that, but if you add too much its ahistorical"..and abstraction is somehow historical. Its the perfect example of "having your cake and eating it too". So i honestly dont get your argument that somehow it could easily be added, which is what im arguing against, or that it wouldnt at least almost double the size and scope of the current game, if not outright exceeding it.

Seriously, what in gods name is actually your argument? Because so far i have seen only contradictions to everything and im arguing in circles about shit we talked about 4 pages ago.

China (Tang dynasty) could go with 500-700 provinces

Spoiler

Tibet, Mongolia, Korea and other smaller realms in the north-east would require some 150-200 provinces.
Japan can probably go with ~100 provinces.
And South-East Asia (notably Khmer and Srivijaya empires) would most likely need around 200 provinces.

Spoiler

Plus, add quite a bit of sea provinces and wastelands.
Also, I assume the map of Africa would expand a bit to the south (unless they decide to tilt the map even further)

In total, this expansion would add more than 1000 provinces. Probably as much as the current map is having. So yeah, total number of provinces would double.
As for any proper representation, I see 3-4 major expansions needed here.

To be honest, and I may sound selfish, I would prefer if a year-worth of expansions is spent on polishing the current map and making it better.
Don't take me wrong, I would still love to see this content.
But I would like to see how good the game is optimized, as well as to see the current map fleshed out a bit more first.

 

[IvanGroznyIV]

To be honest, and I may sound selfish, I would prefer if a year-worth of expansions is spent on polishing the current map and making it better.
Don't take me wrong, I would still love to see this content.
But I would like to see how good the game is optimized, as well as to see the current map fleshed out a bit more first.

I agree. At some point, development on CK2 and its expansions is inevitably going to wind down. By the time that happens, what I really, really want isn't a game with tons of new content that is cool looking but bugged, unbalanced and generally broken as all hell. I want a game that has taken all the content it already added and worked it over with a fine tooth comb to make it all work together, with bugs fixed and gameplay optimized, leaving us with a highly entertaining and challenging game.

I'm uneasy about any DLCs that push us farther from that goal by adding still more features that need balancing and bug fixing.

 

[toroltao]

They should release China just so you guys can stop arguing. lolz

Or maybe aliens dlc.

 

[Karakoran]

They should instead release Sunset Invasion 2: Set Faster. The Chinese can invade you from Morocco or something.

 

[Montem]

China (Tang dynasty) could go with 500-700 provinces

Spoiler

Tibet, Mongolia, Korea and other smaller realms in the north-east would require some 150-200 provinces.
Japan can probably go with ~100 provinces.
And South-East Asia (notably Khmer and Srivijaya empires) would most likely need around 200 provinces.

Spoiler

Plus, add quite a bit of sea provinces and wastelands.
Also, I assume the map of Africa would expand a bit to the south (unless they decide to tilt the map even further)

In total, this expansion would add more than 1000 provinces. Probably as much as the current map is having. So yeah, total number of provinces would double.
As for any proper representation, I see 3-4 major expansions needed here.

To be honest, and I may sound selfish, I would prefer if a year-worth of expansions is spent on polishing the current map and making it better.
Don't take me wrong, I would still love to see this content.
But I would like to see how good the game is optimized, as well as to see the current map fleshed out a bit more first.

Not quite sure how you got those numbers. While Chine would have to have probably several hundred, even a hundred for Japan is unreasonable and tine. 50ish sounds more right while 3-400 for China is probably more realiztic, with another 50 for the other areas and another 50-100 for SE Asia so that's about 600-700 Provinces give or take, while we currently have 2000. If the game is vastly improbed in this next update as Groogy has suggested there's no reason that's unreasonable.

 

[superkamiguru]

Of course we all want more content, however CK2 really needs to prove with the next patch that there is a significant improvement with performance and that it's realistic to start in the 700s and play through the whole game without the mind numbing slowdown. Also, more than anything else crusader kings needs to improve its base and core of the game, and it's inevitable that this will necessitate CK3. CK2 has no shortage of brilliant ideas and mechanics. However it is lacking in depth with combat, and the math doesn't feel quite right. There's also gimmicky cultural tactics, which are lackluster in terms of having to make important choices. If you've got the archers, you're best bet is to stick with those retinue bowmen. I would greatly welcome a China DLC, but it would be a disservice to everyone if it was lacking in depth. Also, CK in general should reevaluate this obsessive need to have men marching around on the map. It's actually the most annoying part of the game, because of feeling obligated to slow everything down just so you can get to the province 1 day before. Or chase away raiders. Or raid perfectly, you get the idea. It's a race that doesn't let you move freely and breaks the flow. Paradox can do better, the concept is already abstract so do whatever you can to make this core feature smoother with more depth. That and really reevaluating the pop ups relating for dynasties. Specifically the gimmicky nature of child education, changing education 1 day before the 16th birthday... It's not a fun exploit, it's just a loophole that if you want to play the game well you take. Again, taking this kind of action breaks the depth of the game. We shouldn't be heavily rewarded by pausing all the time, but that's how people achieve world domination. Brings up another issues as far as goals, but won't get into that. In summary a China DLC is exciting and has the potential to offer more depth, however there needs to be a good deal of thought about how the whole game works together and flows smoothly.

 

[MishaTX]

My summary here, as one of the "anti-China raycisssssts" (and no, that was not directed at you, Loup, I think your post is the most intelligent one I've ever seen in this forum on that subject, both pro and con):

Great post. It pretty much sums it up for me. I have absolutely zero interest in playing China, I'll say that up front, but that DOESN'T mean that I think that anybody who wants it are twits. If they want it, and if PDox wants to make it, then I'm happy for them, even if it does nothing for me. I am not the ultimate judge of what CKII should be. Or any other game, for that matter. I'm just one guy with an opinion.

My concerns are these, and only these:

1) I am looking forward immensely to the optimization of the code that has been overburdened with DLC after DLC without an apparent thought to how it might work with the rest of the code. I am positively ecstatic to know that the next patch/DLC will be focused on making all of the great additions to my favorite game work together, finally, without dragging the overall experience down. I really don't want to see this leap forward rendered meaningless by every step forward being dragged back down because of additional thousands of characters.

2) I would like for future map expansions, and I may be unrealistic here, to be OPTIONAL. And I don't mean "optional" as in "you don't have to buy it." I didn't have to buy Rajas of India, which I care less about than I do toe fungus, but I did NOT have the option to disable that entire region and play like the map expansion never happened. My only option was to not play as a Raja. The game, the resource hogging, the strategy options were still the same, whether I gave a fig about medieval India or not. I don't want people who would love for China to be added to never have that option, I think it would be wonderful if they DID, I just don't want to be forced to either play a game that has been changed and draggged down performance wise due to something that I don't care about or to roll back my game to a state that existed years ago and be denied every single patch update going forward.

I don't give two rats' farts about the Maharajahs of Punjab, but I respect that some people do. By MY options are limited to rolling back to a patch version pre-RoI and never ever again see a patch update to non-India related issues or to keep the game I paid for up to date AND drag it down with stuff I never wanted.

Why can't we have both?

 

[Thure]

My summary here, as one of the "anti-China raycisssssts" (and no, that was not directed at you, Loup, I think your post is the most intelligent one I've ever seen in this forum on that subject, both pro and con):

Great post. It pretty much sums it up for me. I have absolutely zero interest in playing China, I'll say that up front, but that DOESN'T mean that I think that anybody who wants it are twits. If they want it, and if PDox wants to make it, then I'm happy for them, even if it does nothing for me. I am not the ultimate judge of what CKII should be. Or any other game, for that matter. I'm just one guy with an opinion.

My concerns are these, and only these:

1) I am looking forward immensely to the optimization of the code that has been overburdened with DLC after DLC without an apparent thought to how it might work with the rest of the code. I am positively ecstatic to know that the next patch/DLC will be focused on making all of the great additions to my favorite game work together, finally, without dragging the overall experience down. I really don't want to see this leap forward rendered meaningless by every step forward being dragged back down because of additional thousands of characters.

2) I would like for future map expansions, and I may be unrealistic here, to be OPTIONAL. And I don't mean "optional" as in "you don't have to buy it." I didn't have to buy Rajas of India, which I care less about than I do toe fungus, but I did NOT have the option to disable that entire region and play like the map expansion never happened. My only option was to not play as a Raja. The game, the resource hogging, the strategy options were still the same, whether I gave a fig about medieval India or not. I don't want people who would love for China to be added to never have that option, I think it would be wonderful if they DID, I just don't want to be forced to either play a game that has been changed and draggged down performance wise due to something that I don't care about or to roll back my game to a state that existed years ago and be denied every single patch update going forward.

I don't give two rats' farts about the Maharajahs of Punjab, but I respect that some people do. By MY options are limited to rolling back to a patch version pre-RoI and never ever again see a patch update to non-India related issues or to keep the game I paid for up to date AND drag it down with stuff I never wanted.

Why can't we have both?

You have also the option to download a No-India-Mod which removes India from the game Very easy.
BUt I think the problem is, that this isn't really how the engine works. You can't have two maps for the game (yes it works with mods, but that's a different case). Maybe it's possible to change this but I don't think it's very likely. Especially since this would mean you have to test the game more after every patch, because you have to test the version without India too. YOu can't just remove India from the map and be happy. You must also change the landed_title file to remove all the Indian titles. And at best you also have to remove all the Characters in India (not only INdian cultured). This would finally mean you have to test both versions of the game. With and without India. Otherwise it would be possible that a bug just appeares in one of the versions of the map.

And with optional CHina it would be harder... You would need even more maps: Vanilla without India and China, Vanilla+India without China, Vanilla+China without India and Vanilla+India+China. That's not easy, really. Especially if they want to test balancing on all four maps.

 

[Zolotaya]

... 2) I would like for future map expansions, and I may be unrealistic here, to be OPTIONAL. And I don't mean "optional" as in "you don't have to buy it." I didn't have to buy Rajas of India, which I care less about than I do toe fungus, but I did NOT have the option to disable that entire region and play like the map expansion never happened. My only option was to not play as a Raja. The game, the resource hogging, the strategy options were still the same, whether I gave a fig about medieval India or not. I don't want people who would love for China to be added to never have that option, I think it would be wonderful if they DID, I just don't want to be forced to either play a game that has been changed and draggged down performance wise due to something that I don't care about or to roll back my game to a state that existed years ago and be denied every single patch update going forward. ... Why can't we have both?

As Thure says: You have both via Mod. People complain now that developmental effort is being taken from "x" to develop "y". Doing "optional" map upgrades will only increase the demands on the developmental resources - as Thure wrote, everything from patching to testing would require a redundancy.

New mechanics would be impossible to introduce and improvements made much harder. These separated branches of development would require more than you can reasonably expect out of the engine, the scripting language, the developmental team, the Quality Assurance testers, the betas and the post-purchase support for technical issues.

 

[Orctavius]

You have also the option to download a No-India-Mod which removes India from the game Very easy.

Or you could keep playing with a China mod.

 

[sreckom92]

Not quite sure how you got those numbers. While Chine would have to have probably several hundred, even a hundred for Japan is unreasonable and tine. 50ish sounds more right while 3-400 for China is probably more realiztic, with another 50 for the other areas and another 50-100 for SE Asia so that's about 600-700 Provinces give or take, while we currently have 2000. If the game is vastly improbed in this next update as Groogy has suggested there's no reason that's unreasonable.

Europe in CK2 has around 600 provinces, so I approximated somewhat around that number, since China had similar population and was more developed.
As for nearby realms, I know that Tibet and Mongolia would have around 50 provinces at most. But in my estimate of 150 provinces for that area I also accounted for more developed regions such as Manchuria and Korea.
You are right about Japan. I compared it to de-jure Empire of Britannia (which has around 60 provinces) and assumed that it should have a bit more since it was a more developed region during that period of history. Still, it should have less than 100 provinces, I agree.
South-East Asia is not a small region, and it wasn't really undeveloped. You have modern countries of Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Malaysia and Indonesia in that area. Although you would have impassable terrains in many places (jungles in Laos and Borneo), that area still had thriving realms such as Khmer Empire and Srivijaya. Maybe I was too generous by giving them 200 provinces, but I believe that it absolutely shouldn't have below 100.

With addition of some new African provinces, I honestly believe the number would easily climb over 1000.

I thought that current map has slightly less than 1400 land and around 300 sea provinces (?).

Don't take me wrong, if they can make the engine handle all those characters, and a map addition 3 times the size of RoI addition, then by all means you have a thumbs-up from me.

 

[Talq]

Reasons why I'm not particularly keen on China
1. Large cities were fairly important as strategic points in China, and the current holding model doesn't handle these well, as outside of tribals, merchant republics (bad) and Constantinople the whole map is equally fortified. So Chinese wars are going to be destroy army, take random provinces go home.
2. Court intrigue mattered a lot in china (given frequently very large poities)- this isn't a focus in the series thus far.
3. China is frequently one or two mega-blobs. Blobs are easy, and they are boring.
4. Massive armies walking across the steppe (because the AI tends not to think about distance) is going to look ridiculous, as are massive naval invasions between China and India (unless that path is blocked, but there's less case for that than Africa (which wasn't navigable)
5. Not clear the games emphasis on religion meshes well with China (and to some extent thats already a variation handled by india)
6. I would prefer to increase the interactions among the existing characters instead of simply doubling them and keeping it all basic.
6a you can add provinces to europe as well - Germany is pretty freeform, as to some extent is the middle east (see the map CrackedToothGrin came up with mapping the holdings to where they were in the real world)

 

[loup99]

@Talq, good comments, most of these should of course be treated in a Chinese extension. And also, nothing prevents the team from looking at the existing map, characters and features before continuing on with China once everything around that permitting it is fixed. In fact, I think that should be done before looking into China.

 

[War_lord]

You'd end up with a map two times larger, consisting of 3 sections (Europe, India, China) that don't interact with each other at all. A waste of resources and time. The pro-China side has this attitude that all the problems people point out with doubling the size of the map for no reason are things that'll magically fix themselves.

Issues in the current content that should be fixed? They'll fix themselves! The performance impact of asking such an old engine to run far beyond its expected perimeters? They'll work something out! It's such an absurd attitude, taking the "Steppe Wolfe" approach to game design.

 

[loup99]

You'd end up with a map two times larger, consisting of 3 sections (Europe, India, China) that don't interact with each other at all. A waste of resources and time. The pro-China side has this attitude that all the problems people point out with doubling the size of the map for no reason are things that'll magically fix themselves.

Issues in the current content that should be fixed? They'll fix themselves! The performance impact of asking such an old engine to run far beyond its expected perimeters? They'll work something out! It's such an absurd attitude, taking the "Steppe Wolfe" approach to game design.

I disagree. India interacted with Persia, and China and the rest of Euro-Asia famously interacted through the Mongol, and also earlier before the game start with the Muslims. Where did anyone in favour of China say they thought problems would magically fix themselves? I believe that I said quiet the contrary in the opening post, openly stating that if the issues with performance and etc are not fixed or impossible to fix, the map should not be extended. Also, if I believe these issues can be fixed, it is not based on personal claims, it is based on what Doomdark said. And I also said that any current issues should be fixed before China is even considered. I think that is quiet explicitly the opposite of what you are claiming, but if I was unclear about it, I will of course make it even more clear in the opening post if you point me towards what I missed and where.

 

[War_lord]

Everywhere interacted with somewhere else at some point. Should we add Greenland because of the Viking presence there? It's a game, games have a certain level of abstraction to them.

 

[loup99]

Everywhere interacted with somewhere else at some point. Should we add Greenland because of the Viking presence there? It's a game, games have a certain level of abstraction to them.

True, but while I would not be against including Greenland with one province on the border of the map if a proper mechanic for it was included and the rest of the game was in a good state, China and India with the rest of the map are very clear examples of true, mutual, and multiple interactions, with sources pointing towards it. Other areas, like the Americas for instance, have no clear interaction. The Old World, yes, interacted. But Pacific-Atlantic (including Japan and some islands) are the limits for that interaction with clear sources. Certain areas in Africa too might be pushing too far due to the lack of inhabitants, climate conditions and sources (like I mentioned earlier while quoting Thure).

 

[War_lord]

If you add China, you need to add Indo-China and Korea, if you add Indo-China you need to add the Spice Islands, if you add Korea you need to add Japan. This is what I mean by the need for abstraction. You need to stop somewhere, and the current borders are a good stopping point.