Agreed, being the Byzantine empire and having the possibility to apply a strategy similar to what they did would be cool (paying pagans to stay away, using tribes to fight other tribes and so on).
If I read "Pagan DLC" one more time...
- Thread starter Sam L
- 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 bet you a healthy chicken that they'll never touch the start date.
Agree 100%. Lots more interactions would really flesh out the game.
On a side note, what would be the point of playing a republic? Once you're current ruler dies a different family takes over. Surely it's a pointless way to play a dynasty simulator. I may be wrong, though. My knowledge of republics isn't great.
What other would fit the description? Read my post again, I said "only the pagans hold enough land for it to be COMPARABLE to that''
Pagans included the mongols
They did not fall as nearly fast as they did in the game as they do currently.
Pagan has been requested by fans for a very very long time. (Johan said the dlc has been requested for a very long time)
Johan said it will make something playable that has not been playable (pagans fit that description)
Here is what you said your opinion was:
Well, I must say my opinion has nothing to do with the aztecs because I never bought that dlc and never will. But anyway, I am curious as to what you think the dlc will be then. I agree that the pagan dlc might not be as needed as some others, but it is very clear that it has been the most requested ever since the Muslim dlc.
The only other options for what the dlc could be (to fit the description of the devs) is:
Theocracies
and
Republics.
Republics is obviously not because they have hardly any land or power compared to the other options, and the uproar to have them playable is fairly recent.
Theocracies has much more power (as it includes all the land of the church) but it unlikely because again requests to have them playable is fairly recent and also it would require many changes to the game as it is not dynastic. The republics suffer this same problem.
There are no arrows pointing against it being the pagan dlc (and besides, what do you think the swedish would most enjoy doing!?)
So again, what do you think the next dlc will be?
I will bet 10 healthy chickens as well that they will not touch it!
Unlikely, but it would still be great. The thing with a pagan dlc is that I think they would have t o be made to play much differently to your standard centralised Christian state.
I just have to say this, becuse I'm so tired of threads yelling "there are 2 or 3 more DLCs coming, I want my idea and/or suggestion first!!11!1"
After the release of Sword of Islam, an interview with p'dox stated that they had 4 more DLCs planned, seen here:
You know what that means? They had IDEAS for 4 DLCs. They aren't just gonna stop making DLC just becuse they didn't have inspiration for more then 4 (now 5) DLCs. As stated by Doomdark:
So can we please stop screaming "REPUBLICS BEFORE PAGANS", "HOLY ORDERS BEFORE REPUBLICS" or "PAGANS TOO WEAK DON'T PRIORITIZE THEM", becuse as long as we're asking for them, Paradox is gonna make all of them. After all, they are a company, and companies need to make money.
And can people pleaaase stop suggesting playable pope? It has been confirmed that pope will most likely NEVER be playable. Deal with it.
Here's one hoping that we'll have Pagans, republics AND theocracies, aswell as more fantasy scenarios
I also sereously doubt the timeline of CK2 will be extended backwards, as it would demand the resources of an expansion like let's say In Nomine for EU3 (HoI3 expansion Their Finest Hour was the last expansion Paradox would make), and would take the focus away from the crusades that happened during the timeframe and is one of the primary focus of the game (wich, I might add, are terribly implemented).
Links to the threads: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?615652-Next-4-DLC-Planned-for-CK2 , "4 more expansions planned"
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?643376-Crusader-Kings-II-Sunset-Invasion-Announced!/page2&highlight=sunset+invasion+announced , Doomdark's quote
After the release of Sword of Islam, an interview with p'dox stated that they had 4 more DLCs planned, seen here:
You know what that means? They had IDEAS for 4 DLCs. They aren't just gonna stop making DLC just becuse they didn't have inspiration for more then 4 (now 5) DLCs. As stated by Doomdark:
So can we please stop screaming "REPUBLICS BEFORE PAGANS", "HOLY ORDERS BEFORE REPUBLICS" or "PAGANS TOO WEAK DON'T PRIORITIZE THEM", becuse as long as we're asking for them, Paradox is gonna make all of them. After all, they are a company, and companies need to make money.
And can people pleaaase stop suggesting playable pope? It has been confirmed that pope will most likely NEVER be playable. Deal with it.
Here's one hoping that we'll have Pagans, republics AND theocracies, aswell as more fantasy scenarios
I also sereously doubt the timeline of CK2 will be extended backwards, as it would demand the resources of an expansion like let's say In Nomine for EU3 (HoI3 expansion Their Finest Hour was the last expansion Paradox would make), and would take the focus away from the crusades that happened during the timeframe and is one of the primary focus of the game (wich, I might add, are terribly implemented).
Links to the threads: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?615652-Next-4-DLC-Planned-for-CK2 , "4 more expansions planned"
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?643376-Crusader-Kings-II-Sunset-Invasion-Announced!/page2&highlight=sunset+invasion+announced , Doomdark's quote
Last edited:
I'm sure it could be pagans in the next DLC, but I see no reason to think it will be, or even that it's any more likely than any of the other possibilities.
Though I have to disagree with you on at least two accounts.
1) To suggest that the republics lack power because they lack the size of their neighbors is absurd. Republics during this period were building up their power and it is in this era that they build great wealthy, forge huge navies and armies, and carve out economic empires. Even minor republics not related to the mighty merchant republics started appearing during this time. It was in this era that the freemen of Europe began challenging their feudal lords. I'd call that as significant as the rise of Islam. Unless you think "significant" is defined purely by who can field the largest doomstacks.
2) You are correct, Paradox would have to make changes to the gameplay to make republics and theocracies playable. I don't see why this make pagans more likely than either republics or theocracies as the next DLC.
I hope they will
, would like to be able to form Rus(ssia), but not christianise it and also conquering and raiding the crap out of Britain, creating kingdom of Jorvik (York) ). For all that to be possible the date would need to be set around 800, I bet you 100 chickens that even if paradox doesn't do it, the epic modding community of Paradox forums will handle that for us .
I perhaps should say that when I am talking about these things, I am not talking about how they were in history or in real life. I am talking about how they are in this game.
I meant about republics, having them as playable would not be nearly as much expansion of possible gameplay as pagans would. I do not see republics being playable as possibly "as big as sword of islam". I am not sure how you can believe that. Again, I am not talking about how they were in real life, i am not talking about how they were in history. I am talking about how they are in this game.
About "significance", my definition is how many titles, dynasties, characters will be allowed to be playable. Republics is a very very very small part of CKII if you base significance on those things (which is what this game is based about, dynasties and characters). You seem to be ignoring those things as irreverent. How about just make a guess at how many titles, dynasties, and characters will be made available if you can play as pagans. A very large amount. Now, imagine if it was for republics. A VERY SMALL AMOUNT. (when i say titles i mean barony/count/duke/king of X provence/region)
about your second point:
Dynasties is the focal point of this game. They are not going to change dynasties without ever hinting about it. Pagans is the only one that does not require changing dynasties.
I agree that the modders will do it if paradox does not
and I will bet 10 healthy cows and 1 bull. and 8 goats
and I will bet 10 healthy cows and 1 bull. and 8 goats
I don't think we should automatically assume a Pagan DLC will focus on "lolpaganz cool let's spread Paganism around the world lolz". In fact, I think a good Pagan DLC will focus on their conversion to religions (i.e. Christianity, Islam, etc.), and how difficult it was historically for this to happen. The DLC could provide some mechanic where pagan states and dynasties slowly convert - while still retaining traditional beliefs, and other mechanics for accepting this turn of fate, or trying to (futilely) resist them. Should Pagan rulers appease their own local nobles and populace by continuing to honor the old gods but risk the wrath of religious attacks by other religions, or should they slowly convert to gain new political power but risk upsetting their people?
Furthermore, if the pagan DLC had a steppe/nomad/Mongol/Cuman focus, then it could simply be introducing new nomad mechanics somewhat not related to paganism per se (only since the steppe people are tengrii pagans), only because the steppe people are unplayable.
Furthermore, if the pagan DLC had a steppe/nomad/Mongol/Cuman focus, then it could simply be introducing new nomad mechanics somewhat not related to paganism per se (only since the steppe people are tengrii pagans), only because the steppe people are unplayable.
They're not going to push back the date, however cool it would be, it just doesn't seem like it will happen (I'd say just back to 1000 wouldn't change too much, but still).
Yes, that's the problem, it seems like a lot of the people opposed to it just think it's some sort of Neopagan revival or something. Then again a lot of people are buying into the traditional Western Christian-biased historiography, i.e. Julian "the Apostate" and Erik "the Pagan/Heathen" vs. Saint Constantine and Saint Theodosius (who was as oppressive to pagans as Diocletian was to Christians) and assuming that Pagans "were doomed" to be annihilated utterly within 100 years of the game start. They certainly had a disadvantage owing to the nature of their beliefs, lacking proselytism, dogma, holy wars, etc. The Mongols could have very well never chosen to convert to Islam and Tengri Paganism would have continued to rule the steppes. They were in decline, but it wasn't some inevitable thing because Christianity was so righteous that it crushed the satan-worshipers with God's mighty fury. :laugh: Earlier in time, who knows what would have happened if Julian had not died in war? Sometimes a powerful ruler can make all the difference.
Yes, that's the problem, it seems like a lot of the people opposed to it just think it's some sort of Neopagan revival or something. Then again a lot of people are buying into the traditional Western Christian-biased historiography, i.e. Julian "the Apostate" and Erik "the Pagan/Heathen" vs. Saint Constantine and Saint Theodosius (who was as oppressive to pagans as Diocletian was to Christians) and assuming that Pagans "were doomed" to be annihilated utterly within 100 years of the game start. They certainly had a disadvantage owing to the nature of their beliefs, lacking proselytism, dogma, holy wars, etc. The Mongols could have very well never chosen to convert to Islam and Tengri Paganism would have continued to rule the steppes. They were in decline, but it wasn't some inevitable thing because Christianity was so righteous that it crushed the satan-worshipers with God's mighty fury. :laugh: Earlier in time, who knows what would have happened if Julian had not died in war? Sometimes a powerful ruler can make all the difference.
This only works if you think a republic DLC would only make republics playable and would add no other features or mechanics. That's ridiculous considering that SoI didn't just make Muslims playable; Muslims now have decadence, polygamy, etc.
Judging significance based solely on how much more of the map is made playable is only logical if you believe that a republic DLC would only make republics playable without changing any mechanics or adding any other features to make republics deeper and more distinct. Considering Paradox's handling of SoI I'm not sure why you would think this.
I think changing dynasties would be at least as big of a change as what SoI gave us. Maybe that was our "hint"?
The impression I've got was that traditional paganism (or a kind of synthesis of paganism and Christianity) was actually quite active among the peasantry right through the middle ages. After all many clergy could neither read nor write and would have relied upon word of mouth to know what to teach. The nobility were almost all christians in the west during the middle ages, but many seemed apathetic or hostile to the church.
I suppose an example of this would be the Finns or the Hungarians, the leaders became Christians but no one really knows about how fast the population did.
I suppose an example of this would be the Finns or the Hungarians, the leaders became Christians but no one really knows about how fast the population did.
I'll be bringing all of Europe under Odin's rule, and I don't care how historically inaccurate it is!
A lot of players seem to have brought into the concept, mostly promoted by modern day Wiccans and Asatru, that Norse and Celtic pagans generally lived a life more free of restrictions and obligations than Christians.
There is no evidence of this, it seems quite clear that the various European pagan religions placed equally onerous (albeit different) obligations on believers to what Christianity did. But players love the idea of SMASHING the WEAK CHRISTIANS with their PAGAN WARRIORS in the name of MIGHTY THOR, so pagan DLCs have always been a hugely popular idea.
There is no evidence of this, it seems quite clear that the various European pagan religions placed equally onerous (albeit different) obligations on believers to what Christianity did. But players love the idea of SMASHING the WEAK CHRISTIANS with their PAGAN WARRIORS in the name of MIGHTY THOR, so pagan DLCs have always been a hugely popular idea.
Well, Grand Duchy of Lithuania, the second biggest independent country in Europe (only after HRE) was officially Pagan until 1389. Is it possible in CK2? No
Don't forget the Teutonic Order which failed christianize the GDL by force for 160 years and was eventually decisively defeated in 1410 after which the Diocese of Samogitia was established on 23 October 1417 ending the christianization of Lithuania just 40 years before the end of the game period.
Last edited: