The realm rejoices as Paradox Interactive announces the launch of Crusader Kings III, the latest entry in the publisher’s grand strategy role-playing game franchise. Advisors may now jockey for positions of influence and adversaries should save their schemes for another day, because on this day Crusader Kings III can be purchased on Steam, the Paradox Store, and other major online retailers.
I hope this means the fix is in for when you cannot launch an invasion after destroying the enemy's navy and seeing your overwhelming naval supremacy count down to zero.- naval supremacy is now scaled to a percentage depending on enemy intel level instead of getting reduced to 0% at low intel
|1930||5,548,363||57.8%||24.4%||9.8%||-||Romanian population census|
I complained about the same thing in that dev diary yet nothing has changed...I have one concern about the upcoming rework of Yugoslavia, it's not about mechanics but about "lore", if you could call it that.
The 4th dev diary had an "Autonomy for Slavic Transylvania" focus and the 5th an achievement "Dracula’s Revenge". This is meant to be the reverse of "Divide Yugoslavia" in terms of alternative history, using the Slavs in Transylvania like Hitler used the Germans in Sudetenland. The problem is, that there were hardly any Slavs in Transylvania at that time. Accoding to the last census, all of Transylvania wasn't even 10% Slavic. It was about 58% Romanian, 24% Hungarian and 10% German. That leaves only 8% other ethnicites, that included Jews.
If that focus tree makes Transylvania a puppet of Romania or an independent country, it's way too far fetched. I don't mind alternative history where Japan is going communist, but this is the equivalent of an alternative history like "Autonomy for Korean Nagasaki". Alternative history, however unrealistic it is, has to diverge from real history at some point. And in 1936 there were >8% Slavs in Transylvania.
While I'm a big fan of alternative history scenarios, there is a difference between unrealistic scenarios such as a 2nd American civil war or UK going communist, and logically impossible scenarios, such as demanding autonomy for a region that only has >8% slavs. It breaks immersion.
That being said, I'm not against the idea of the focus, it's just that the excuse for it is too far fetched.
I would like to see a focus that's the opposite of "Divide Yugoslavia", breaking Romania into the 3 old principalities. But I would like it to happen under a reasonable pretext. The pretext "We need autonomy for the slavs in Transylvania" when there were less than 8% Slavs in Transylvania is laughably unrealistic. It's not unrealistic like Japan goes communist, but unrealistic like "France demands autonomy for French in Catalonia".
Transylvania's population censuses:
Year Total Romanians Hungarians Germans Székelys[a] Notes
1920 5,114,214 58.3% 26.7% 9.7% - Romanian statistics 1930 5,548,363 57.8% 24.4% 9.8% - Romanian population census 1948 5,761,127 65.1% 25.7% 5.8%
According to the last censuses, Transylvania was about 58% Romanian, 24% Hungarian and 10% German. That leaves only 8% other ethnicites, including Jews. Granting autonomy to all of Transylvania for >8% of the population breaks immersion. Because it's not an unlikely scenario, it's logically impossible.
Yugoslavia could have the same focus, but rename it "Break the Great Union" or "Divide Greater Romania". Something that doesn't imply Transylvania got separated from the rest of Romania to grant autonomy for >8% of its population.
Isn't that kind of how Tyrol gos stuck with Italy, despite being predominantly German?Yugoslavia could have the same focus, but rename it "Break the Great Union" or "Divide Greater Romania". Something that doesn't imply Transylvania got separated from the rest of Romania to grant autonomy for >8% of its population.
We probably missed a bunch of stuff that got baked into the "new countries" line. We summarize at the end based on lots of lines of changes from our versioning tool and often stuff like this gets done together with focus trees and we miss writing it separatelyNo mention in the patchnotes of the new regions created?