Crusader Kings II: Conclave to be released early 2016!
- Thread starter BjornB
- Start date
-
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.
i think the council laws are on another page, I assume it's got to do with what things upset vassals when you do them? how much power you have vs them or etc?
- 1
I was in academia at one point. Advisor was a medievalist. Close confidant in the department focused on medieval studies. To say that this is the current and dominant idea is ridiculous. It's tenure fishing at its worst, really.
Saying that there were not neat ranks and that some systems functioned differently doesn't mean the feudal system as we know it is totally wrong. It just means that it's sometimes simplified for things like, say, a game.
The idea that our our concept of feudalism derives from a single 12th-century source as stated in that reddit is ridiculous. There is a plethora of literature that attests to the classical concept. Some ofit is very famous and I've mentioned it in this very thread.
N.B. part of why I left academia pursuits is the number of people willing to believe their own bullshit just so that they could get a tenure track position. Social sciences are sadly overpopulated and people will whore themselves out to get a paycheck.
Anyway, the whole thing is a strawman for a semantic argument. It's beyond silly. As another academic once said, it's sometimes hard to see the forest with all those damn trees in the way.
Last edited:
- 6
- 2
- 1
For all the jokes about fantasy
I would buy a DLC where 100% accurate to the literature and folklore of the period, Elves, fairies, demons, magic and trolls, were added in to the game.
- 6
I'm going to dismiss your anecdote out of hand for the reason that it is an anecdote. I'm going to have to ask if you've ever actually read Susan Reynold's Fiefs and Vassals which is the basis for the school of thought that feudalism was not a real thing. If not, I'm entirely willing to send you a copy over email. At the very least, check out Elizabeth Brown's essay on why Feudalism is a word without meaning because everyone was basically using their own private definition.
- 4
- 3
most words are like that though so no worries
To the people who thought feudalism was always an abstract simplification, nothing has changed for them.
100 years ago there were books saying it didnt exist but is an easy way to say it. it's not like it's new. So saying, anything saying feudalism is now bunk and outdated, like most of them were using saying it to mean the exact same thing the new dont say it's mean. Cos you know, words. no worries you know
To the people who thought feudalism was always an abstract simplification, nothing has changed for them.
100 years ago there were books saying it didnt exist but is an easy way to say it. it's not like it's new. So saying, anything saying feudalism is now bunk and outdated, like most of them were using saying it to mean the exact same thing the new dont say it's mean. Cos you know, words. no worries you know
- 3
- 1
How did we get from "new CK2 dlc" to "let's discuss whether feudalism was X or Y"?
- 1
I was waiting for this since a game I played a couple of years ago. Middle Francia was on an expansion spree, and faced three East European kingdoms. While I agree that CKII is not EU4, I found extremely unrealistic that three neighboring kings menaced by a common enemy didn't talk between themselves and form some kind of alliance/unified front. Been waiting for this feature since then.
- 9
- 2
Conclave: so, sadly - very sadly - no distinction between defensive alliances and offensive alliances?
- 3
Well, if I am not mistaken, the defensive concept only applied to coalitions, which is basically an AI thing
I saw no reference to player alliances being differentiated, so I guess there still won't be a difference between being able to call on your allies if you are the victim of an unlawful aggression, or enlisting your allies to do kindly most of the paying and bleeding in your expansionistic undertakings...
Does anything suggest I am wrong in assuming that?
Last edited:
- 2
Feudalism, like a lot of other words, has a broad definition. Here's how Wikipedia (and any other internet source) defines it :
"Feudalism was a combination of legal and military customs in medieval Europe that flourished between the 9th and 15th centuries. Broadly defined, it was a way of structuring society around relationships derived from the holding of land in exchange for service or labour."
So this as you can see is a wide definition offering a lot of possibilities for the details, but the basic concept of vassalage and hierarchy stays. If you disagree with a description this wide, then please give an example of how a state would actually be organised in the Middle Ages.
Last edited by a moderator:
- 4
- 1
In a game that is almost completely 100% scripts and code working off of more script and code, and the player directly influences those scripts and codes, and you have thousands being processed every few seconds... Games like this are 10x more likely to have bugs with every update compared too games like Battlefront, or Dragon Age, etc, due to the massive intensity of the scripting and codes that's being manipulated by the player in virtually unlimited ways.
They could spend 6 months smashing all the bugs, but the moment they release a new DLC after that, there's going to be more bugs.. It's not worth it. WHat they're doing now makes sense, smash bugs as they, and work on the new DLC while making sure the DLC runs well, and limit the amount of bugs it brings to the table. Again, won't be 100% bug free, but smashing old bugs, and minimizing new ones while releasing new content is the best option.
- 2
- 1