• 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.

Breton_Lord

First Lieutenant
Aug 11, 2019
246
662
Do you guys think that it's a good idea for the devs to add China , Japan and korea ?

and do you think that the game/engine can handle more input and more characters ?
 
Last edited:
  • 49
  • 22
  • 5Like
  • 5Love
Reactions:
Yes, and I don't know, respectively. I rather see a DLC add China and the Far East in general over say, the obligatory Aztec Superpower Invasion or something.
 
  • 56
  • 17Like
  • 12
Reactions:
Yes, very good idea. Many Chinese players look forward to it every day and night.
If it does, I will definitely support it and call on my friends to join the game.
Price is not a problem, and PC configuration is not a problem.
 
  • 29
  • 11
  • 7Like
  • 2
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Yes, and I don't know, respectively. I rather see a DLC add China and the Far East in general over say, the obligatory Aztec Superpower Invasion or something.
It was never obligatory? If I remember correctly a group of devs made Sunset Invasion in their spare time. Sorry if you were being completely sarcastic, it's hard to tell over the internet.

Moving past that, there are a lot more priorities for the game to focus on before we include East Asia. I'd prefer it more if they flesh out the parts of the map that we have now. We also need some more internal mechanics as well to stop China from either conquering half of the world, or having them be so stagnant that they're boring to play as.

How the Byzantines and empires in general work right now makes it look like a bad idea to include china anytime soon.
 
  • 48
  • 10Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Yes, very good idea. Many Chinese players look forward to it every day and night.
If it does, I will definitely support it and call on my friends to join the game.
Price is not a problem, and PC configuration is not a problem.
I hope the do add China , personally I would love it play in that area of the world even tho I'm not Chinese , but do you think the game engine can handle it properly , given that it struggles with what we have today.

my pc is top notch but it struggle with the late game for some reason , and after removing India via a mod , the problem went away.
But with China I think it will get worse in late game , unless the devs do a massive job to reduce lag and improve performance.
 
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
It was never obligatory? If I remember correctly a group of devs made Sunset Invasion in their spare time. Sorry if you were being completely sarcastic, it's hard to tell over the internet.

Moving past that, there are a lot more priorities for the game to focus on before we include East Asia. I'd prefer it more if they flesh out the parts of the map that we have now. We also need some more internal mechanics as well to stop China from either conquering half of the world, or having them be so stagnant that they're boring to play as.

How the Byzantines and empires in general work right now makes it look like a bad idea to include china anytime soon.
I fully agree with you.
 
Um, I'm going to say no. That's not to say those areas weren't interesting at the time, the opposite. But I already think India is a mostly superfluous addition, and one that doesn't help the game run smoothly. I understand you have to have the Mongols though, and it would look weird if only the Northeast part of the map was filled in and not the Southeast.

The game has enough trouble as is modelling non-feudal systems: adding the extremely different East Asian societies in would just make that so much worse.
 
  • 20Like
  • 18
  • 17
Reactions:
Um, I'm going to say no. That's not to say those areas weren't interesting at the time, the opposite. But I already think India is a mostly superfluous addition, and one that doesn't help the game run smoothly. I understand you have to have the Mongols though, and it would look weird if only the Northeast part of the map was filled in and not the Southeast.

The game has enough trouble as is modelling non-feudal systems: adding the extremely different East Asian societies in would just make that so much worse.
I fully agree , but maybe they can make an independent map for east asia as a sepirate start date in the game , but IDK how that might work so yeah.
 
  • 10
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
they would have designed the game from the ground up with the intent of the map being expandable so i see no problem there.

do we need it? no, but it would be very nice to see.

i wouldn't hold my breath. it's probably a couple of years away.
 
  • 16
  • 8Like
  • 1
Reactions:
In my opinion no. Whenever I think about possible DLCs for cultures I always think “yes, that’s nice, more content”, but it’s Crusader Kings and apart from the Silk Road playing a major part for trade at this time China was not really that involved with the west. The only real reason for adding the mongols was because of being able to link them through their invasion of eastern Europe.

While I love the idea of more map, characters and cultures I really don’t want to see a Chinese emperor suddenly forming an alliance with France and helping the Pope to try and fail to take over Jerusalem.

Then there’s the performance issue all the added armies/counties/characters/dead character files will cause. My PC is mid-range but comfortably inside the specs for CK3 and it still struggles to reach endgame. Everytime a battle starts with 10k+ troops my PC starts sounding more like a jet engine than a computer. Unless Paradox can somehow figure out how to lighten the load I think adding anymore geography to the map would only make the game unplayable for some players.
 
Last edited:
  • 11Like
  • 7
  • 7
Reactions:
china seems way to consuming, you can litteraly make a game about china korea and japan by itself. its way more complex than a dlc could give it credit for. and i would like it to be optional from a game features perspective so if they do add china, please make it entirely optional. the performance impact also can be debated in this regard. Overall if they do this, do it late and make it optional. my opinions
 
  • 13
  • 8Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Nah not in a long time, the lesson learned from CK2 is that depth is more important than width. Once the current areas of the map are established, however, we could talk about adding East Asia.
 
  • 26Like
  • 3
Reactions:
Do you guys thing that it's a good idea for the devs to add China , Japan and korea ?

and do you think that the game/engine can handle more input and more characters ?
Well define "good idea".

I do not think "we" need it... just like all the subsaharan lands and "russian steppes in the east", that lands are totaly irrelevant for the "crusader conflict". It should all be just DLC for those who want it.

The "engine" can handle it, the question is, the computer you run CK3 on too? If they add this to the base game, then minimum reqs have to be raised.
 
  • 8
  • 5
Reactions:
Well I wouldn't say places like India or Russia or Africa aren't really needed in a game made around the Crusades. It's an odd, mostly forgotten but valid part of strategic game design. Point of Interest then their Neighbors. So that way you don't have the game set up necessarily so it's nothing but an all or nothing slugfest between two sides necessarily. Islamic nations can't just wholly ignore everything to focus on the Christian World because there is a potential threat in the "Backwater" as it were. Same deal with Christians unable to drop everything to deal with Islam. Orthodoxy throws everything at reclaiming Antioch which gives an opportunity for the likes of opportunistic pagan slavs to take a slice out of Orthodoxy during the war, etc.

Though China does have a point of being a bit too far removed. As China would influence the likes of parts of the map that mostly already serve just as fodder for Mongolians or a potential spoiler themselves.

Though I did from day 1 wonder if they would expand the map eastward because of how the kind of drew it. The Eastern edge looks like it was something they were planning on tack on extra to compared to the West or Southern.

Now all this said? In particular I could see a good reason to add a sort of Far East area to the map. And that would be the far older than the time frame of the game, and still used throughout the entire point of the game's time frame, silk road trading network which was key towards a lot of cultural and technological development in both regions.

But that's the thing. It would (and probably should) be part of something quite major. Including trade as something other than a Harbor building in a coastal province providing some development growth (which is basically the only presence of "trade" and economics as a concept I see in game outside of just taxation of the land ala Manor Houses and Fortification Tolls). Perhaps even including more diplomatic means between the courts of characters as during that period you had things like Byzantium establishing embassies in China, and Chinese figures who were trying to secure alliances with nations as far away as England and France.

It could develop into something of an interesting set up of having basically four big power centers dominating the map in the early game of Byzantium, the Caliphate, Scandinavia (due to its impact with Viking Adventures and such dominating a lot of Western European play early on), and China, with the areas between and around as interesting levers. And those four areas would have interesting knock on effects that could be involved in the game. From the evolution of Baghdad to its importance as the dominant city on the Silk Road in the game's time frame (and making some of the otherwise less desirable areas there into strategic and prestigious assets).

But it's also be a big overhaul rather than just something really easily added without much thought or care. Not that I can't see it happening. But I imagine kind of has some comments here have posted there'd be riots over such a work compared to things most would list as higher priority like more development of Byzantium. Which is a very fair priority and makes a lot of sense.

In terms however of what I'm getting from developer messages however their biggest concerns design wise seem to be two things. One is kneecapping players from rapid expansion, and the other is trying to make internal conflict and realm management more interesting. Which are kind of related but it does seem to be two different impulses. Now adding more map isn't going to really kneecap expansionism in the game. But I could see how adding the concept of trade with such a distant, but relevant power, the economic, cultural, and scientific gains from it, the impact it had on societies at the time, as an interesting part of that "Make internal management more interesting" side of life. Because in practical terms they don't want a situation where the Seljuks can just go march to China and take it over. But they might want a reason why China is relevant to the Seljuks and their own story over the generations as it was part of the history at the time and is something else to do but World Conquest.
 
  • 8Like
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Do we need them? No. Would many of us like them? Absolutely.

In terms of the engine handling it, I believe it can. And here's the thing... if they plan to add China and potentially Japan/etc., then when they designed the engine, they'd have accounted for that extra size, so it should definitely handle it.
 
  • 10
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I’d want them to release Expansions that add imperial government types and some kind of trade system otherwise China wouldn’t make much sense but after we get those sure why not
 
  • 10
  • 7Like
Reactions: