Far East Expansion?

[vnth]

the people who think the far east doesnt fit in with the game and even those who think improving the current map should come first even in the near term seem to have forgotten one little thing called byzantium? or maybe you guys took byzantine history at the university of ck2 and think that was actually the byzantine 'imperial government'? as much as one type of bureaucratic government differed from another, they still had considerable similarities with each other, and together shared significant differences with land-based feudalism. it's very true that the east doesnt fit in with ck's design style, but so is byzantium. if pdx ever solved the issue with byzantium, the east problem is solved as well. i genuinely hope that pdx had already considered this when building the new game from the ground up. otherwise it'd just be hilarious for the current game regardless of the east.

 

[Torredebelem]

You can't even get to the end of my post:


You guys keep parroting the same thing said in page 1 and 2 as if we need to explain why adding asia wouldn't bog the game down so much that it would be literally uplayable for the 15th page in a row.

Speaking of parrots, your feathers are certainly more colorful than mine and so many others posting in this thread.

 

[Torredebelem]

the people who think the far east doesnt fit in with the game and even those who think improving the current map should come first even in the near term seem to have forgotten one little thing called byzantium? or maybe you guys took byzantine history at the university of ck2 and think that was actually the byzantine 'imperial government'? as much as one type of bureaucratic government differed from another, they still had considerable similarities with each other, and together shared significant differences with land-based feudalism. it's very true that the east doesnt fit in with ck's design style, but so is byzantium. if pdx ever solved the issue with byzantium, the east problem is solved as well. i genuinely hope that pdx had already considered this when building the new game from the ground up. otherwise it'd just be hilarious for the current game regardless of the east.

There's not an "East" problem in designing any content for China & Friends, given the infinite possibilities of coding the engine. The game designer's creativity and knowledge are the unique limits for that to be right.
Also, nobody forgot about Byzantium, quite the contrary. It is an area that should be adressed ASAP (meaning much, much sooner than any expansion to China & Friends) due to its absolute unbalanced design and experience of playing there.

 

[vnth]

There's not an "East" problem in designing any content for China & Friends, given the infinite possibilities of coding the engine. The game designer's creativity and knowledge are the unique limits for that to be right.
Also, nobody forgot about Byzantium, quite the contrary. It is an area that should be adressed ASAP (meaning much, much sooner than any expansion to China & Friends) due to its absolute unbalanced design and experience of playing there.

yeah. the series design's persistent inability to implement bureaucratic government becasue every aspects of it revolving around grabbing lands isnt a problem. byzantium's terrible state in ck2 was only because the devs weren't 'creative' hard enough. at amy rate, if you think some balancing humdrums is significant comparable to the fact that byzantium is nothing as it should conceptually and quite likely would never be, then sure. by all means balancing it away. though one could not actually experienced it properly, at least it's not blobbing. or something.

 

[Rubidium]

the people who think the far east doesnt fit in with the game and even those who think improving the current map should come first even in the near term seem to have forgotten one little thing called byzantium? or maybe you guys took byzantine history at the university of ck2 and think that was actually the byzantine 'imperial government'? as much as one type of bureaucratic government differed from another, they still had considerable similarities with each other, and together shared significant differences with land-based feudalism. it's very true that the east doesnt fit in with ck's design style, but so is byzantium. if pdx ever solved the issue with byzantium, the east problem is solved as well. i genuinely hope that pdx had already considered this when building the new game from the ground up. otherwise it'd just be hilarious for the current game regardless of the east.

The Byzantine governing system had essentially nothing in common with the Chinese governing system other than neither being feudal (although both went through periods that could be described as feudal). The fiction of a common "imperial" government that can be modeled with the same approach for Byzantines, Chinese, etc. needs to die in a fire.

Any DLC that tries to handle both will be unable to handle either.

 

[vnth]

The Byzantine governing system had essentially nothing in common with the Chinese governing system other than neither being feudal (although both went through periods that could be described as feudal). The fiction of a common "imperial" government that can be modeled with the same approach for Byzantines, Chinese, etc. needs to die in a fire.

Any DLC that tries to handle both will be unable to handle either.

figure out how to do bureaucratic government properly is a long way toward everything else. there is no other difference significant to the point where one is implemented the other still mechanically couldnt. on the other hand, it is very much true that if one (obviously it would be byz first) cannot be truly implemented, the other will never be, aka ck2.

 

[Foreign Alien]

When you look at the map in game, its torn off on the right side. I think they will eventually find the missing piece at Paradox and include it in a future DLC... ;-)

Ya, this is basically why I don't participate in these kinds of discussions that much anymore. They already did one "China" DLC with wildly inaccurate mechanics that don't represent China, yet they did it anyway, so there's no reason why they won't do another one for CK3. And this time they've already provided a bunch of hints of adding China: ripped map in the eastern edge of the map, datamined files that leave a conspicuous space for China to the east, events that reference Chinese battles. Like at this point, people are just venting about why they do or don't want China regardless of what the devs will do. It's already pretty much confirmed that China is on the devs' minds if it isn't already planned as a future DLC.

 

[Wu of Wei]

Ya, this is basically why I don't participate in these kinds of discussions that much anymore. They already did one "China" DLC with wildly inaccurate mechanics that don't represent China, yet they did it anyway, so there's no reason why they won't do another one for CK3. And this time they've already provided a bunch of hints of adding China: ripped map in the eastern edge of the map, datamined files that leave a conspicuous space for China to the east, events that reference Chinese battles. Like at this point, people are just venting about why they do or don't want China regardless of what the devs will do. It's already pretty much confirmed that China is on the devs' minds if it isn't already planned as a future DLC.

Exactly, in every playthrough I run into some reference, like red hare, the battle of gaixia, and the battle of chibi, and more. Not sure if that's cause I play in the steppes though. It's really just a matter of waiting a few years. It's like a open secret at this point.