If I read "Pagan DLC" one more time...

[Wallain]

Only a tiny bit. And yes, we do. Every fluff/silly/pagan mod we get delays the Republic mod with its trade and naval mechanics, and and playing without these is painful. Thus, suffering

I think they already stated that it did not delay anything, it was done because they had an excess of resources and just decided to turn it into something fun. I do think trade/republics/naval is quite important, and probably something that should be covered in either a very big expansion or in a couple of big ones.

 

[Zhetone]

You know, if you REALLY want to play as pagans, play CK2+.

Yes, and if we had wanted to play as Muslims before SoI, we could have changed a tiny line of code...and not had the massive amount of features Paradox added which made it a completely new experience.
Some of us want a unique flavor for the game. All you get in CK2+ is playing as them and a few tiny new features...and 32193829456 other changes to other things.

 

[cybrxkhan]

You know, if you REALLY want to play as pagans, play CK2+.

Not everyone wants a big mod, wonderfully done as it is.

And most people here realize you could just change a line of code, but that's not the point.

 

[Tempestra]

What would be really cool is a Norse Pagan Viking DLC, with an expansion of the map westwards to Vinland, after all the timeframe fits and it would certainly be more historical than the Aztecs. Sorry if this has been suggested before as I have not read the entire thread.

I don't really want to see the ERE invading Vinland.

 

[Comradebot]

I don't really want to see the ERE invading Vinland.

Let's be honest, it'll be the HRE or Fatimids landing there.

 

[markmid]

If I was a developer i'd love this thread, everyone wanting more from the game!

Still it is a bit silly, there's room on this ship for many DLC's, and provided they each add something to opponents or to the overall game, (retinues for example) something for everyone in each.

 

[Theddude]

I'm continually surprised by how many people don't want there to be a Pagan DLC. I mean it's not like the Mongols or Lithuanians had any bearing on history, right? Or were actually dynastic? No, let's just leave out a fifth of the map area of the game completely and watch them get rolled in 20 years because that's what happened historically.

As it stands right now, the Pagans need it more in game terms, they're really badly represented, while the Republics are just abstracted and kind of passive. At least they survive, though. And no, I'm not at all opposed to a Republic DLC, I just think a Pagan DLC makes more sense with the game and is more badly needed. All that remains to be seen is how they make the Republic theme fit into the dynasty game, or if they just transform it into EU3 1066.

 

[Thure]

As it stands right now, the Pagans need it more in game terms, they're really badly represented, while the Republics are just abstracted and kind of passive. At least they survive, though. And no, I'm not at all opposed to a Republic DLC, I just think a Pagan DLC makes more sense with the game and is more badly needed. All that remains to be seen is how they make the Republic theme fit into the dynasty game, or if they just transform it into EU3 1066.

I have often say it... Republics of this time are really dynastic. Big families, which fight over the power of the Republic. Only a small class had political rights. It's like nobility... Here some big families of Venice: http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriziato_(Venezia)

So... If they make it correct, the game with the republics should still be dynastic. Lowborn rulers are really uncommon. And the system ingame isn't a abstraction. They only make a random ruler... And then they can conquer every coast province in the world and have no council... Not very good represented.

But with the Pagans you are right.

 

[ZhugeKongming]

I'm continually surprised by how many people don't want there to be a Pagan DLC. I mean it's not like the Mongols or Lithuanians had any bearing on history, right? Or were actually dynastic? No, let's just leave out a fifth of the map area of the game completely and watch them get rolled in 20 years because that's what happened historically.

The Mongols don't have a problem with getting "rolled" in 20 years, nor does their historical success have much to do with their paganism.

Framing this discussion as if the options are pagan DLC vs. republican DLC is extremely misleading. There are any number of things the devs can and should make DLC about. Personally, I think an expansion of the game's religious aspects is way more important. For much of the game period, starting very shortly after 1066, the Catholic Church was engaged in a vigorous process of reform that fundamentally altered the relationship between church and state. For Europeans this was probably the single most important development of the time period, but do you see any of hint of it in the game? No.

 

[Grubnessul]

I'm continually surprised by how many people don't want there to be a Pagan DLC. I mean it's not like the Mongols or Lithuanians had any bearing on history, right? Or were actually dynastic? No, let's just leave out a fifth of the map area of the game completely and watch them get rolled in 20 years because that's what happened historically.

As it stands right now, the Pagans need it more in game terms, they're really badly represented, while the Republics are just abstracted and kind of passive. At least they survive, though. And no, I'm not at all opposed to a Republic DLC, I just think a Pagan DLC makes more sense with the game and is more badly needed. All that remains to be seen is how they make the Republic theme fit into the dynasty game, or if they just transform it into EU3 1066.

How would Pagans become actually different from Christians and Muslims? What kind of mechanics would make them unique and fun? I would rather first see a more fleshed out Catholic church than Pagans.

Also: still too many Muslims & Christians I need to play before even more characters become available.

 

[ziamatt]

How would Pagans become actually different from Christians and Muslims? What kind of mechanics would make them unique and fun? I would rather first see a more fleshed out Catholic church than Pagans.

Also: still too many Muslims & Christians I need to play before even more characters become available.

As has been said before, pagans need more peaceful interactions with Christians and Muslims. Historically many pagan rulers allowed missionaries into their lands and converted without being subjugated. This could be modeled much better than Christians steamrolling pagans within half a century (historically there were still strongholds of the pagan faiths in Europe past the end of the game's timeframe).

 

[Comradebot]

How would Pagans become actually different from Christians and Muslims? What kind of mechanics would make them unique and fun? I would rather first see a more fleshed out Catholic church than Pagans.

Also: still too many Muslims & Christians I need to play before even more characters become available.

Myself and several others in this thread have mentioned possible mechanics that'd be Pagan specific.

 

[Jak9090]

the next one is pagan, the title wrath of odin was leaked, if this hasnt already been mentrioned/

 

[Kalderus]

the next one is pagan, the title wrath of odin was leaked, if this hasnt already been mentrioned/

Yes, and that was already confirmed to be fake. The "Wrath of Odin" title was just something the CEO mentioned off the top of his head months ago at the spur of the moment when he wasn't sure what to answer for a press question. I doubt that they will actually use that name.

 

[tuareg109]

I have often say it... Republics of this time are really dynastic. Big families, which fight over the power of the Republic. Only a small class had political rights. It's like nobility... Here some big families of Venice: http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriziato_(Venezia)

Yeah, you're right.

After a few decades in-game I look at most countries' History; for Venice there's often a son of the previous Doge ruling after a few leaders of other dynasties in Venice.

 

[Talq]

I have often say it... Republics of this time are really dynastic. Big families, which fight over the power of the Republic. Only a small class had political rights. It's like nobility... Here some big families of Venice: http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriziato_(Venezia)

So... If they make it correct, the game with the republics should still be dynastic. Lowborn rulers are really uncommon. And the system ingame isn't a abstraction. They only make a random ruler... And then they can conquer every coast province in the world and have no council... Not very good represented.

But with the Pagans you are right.

You may keep saying it, but it doesn't make it true. dynastic. A sequence. Oligarchical =/= dynastic.

But as it stands, any interruption of your dynasty as ruler = game over, and one dynasty being ruler of a republic for 400 years is very odd (leaving aside that if republics are to have any flavour, its internal politics should be represented somehow).

It is true that the enthusiasm for 'lowborn' is unrepresentative, and the entire system for republics is a bit of a mess (note that otherwise they have no method of getting CBs except the chancellor, which is pretty much asking them to be inactive), but thats partly a consequence of them not being the focus of the game so far.

 

[Nuril]

But as it stands, any interruption of your dynasty as ruler = game over, and one dynasty being ruler of a republic for 400 years is very odd

...No? Just because you stop being the Doge doesn't mean you're completely unlanded. Your family could still be a powerful faction within the state even if not top of the heap.

 

[Grubnessul]

Another problem of Republics would be their insane wealth. Either that will need to be capped somehow, or we will see Venice conquer the HRE within a few years.

I think they'd work better overall as unplayable bankers/traders/ship loaners.

 

[Jeltz]

These concerns about republics is why I think Paradox will implement Pagans now and wait with Republics until later, even though I am way more interested in playing a patrician family within a republic than playing Pagan. Pagans will of course be fun but not as fun as properly implemented republics.

 

[Tempestra]

...No? Just because you stop being the Doge doesn't mean you're completely unlanded. Your family could still be a powerful faction within the state even if not top of the heap.

Even if you continue playing when out of power, to alter things so that the player character has some sort of power to act when they're not the ruler would be a pretty stupendous overhaul of the game.