• 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.
A new patch which fixes the Holy War CB bug is up: Tianxia Open Alpha 7.1.0
@Silversweeeper was able to find what was causing the problem and fixed it as well as adding other things.

I have another contribution.
I finished off the coat of arms within de jure china (184 replace white COAs.zip).
While I was at it I "redid" all other china coat of arms (118 replace existing COAs.zip). Some of the existing ones are quite nice, so these are only meant as a fallback, maybe if the existing are using the wrong type of character.
And speaking of characters, you can see which hanzi I used for each county/duchy/kingdom in the attached spreadsheet (trad chinese.xlsx).

Here are samples:
Dingxi 定西
View attachment 517586

Guixian 貴縣
View attachment 517590

If this was useful, then next I could also knock out Korea and Dali. I think using Hanzi is still appropriate for those places.

Yo, that's awesome! Thanks heaps for this, these will definitely go into the next update/patch/hotfix. Of course, credit will be given.
 
I've given custom COAs to all baronies in de jure China, all 1610 of them.
Example:
Untitled.png
And here they are laid out side by side:
pattern3_china.png
There are probably several mistakes, but those should be on the lesser known ones. Some of the hanzi was tricky to track down.

This required editing the China landed_title.txt, so to avoid distributing your files without permission I've locked the attached zip file and have PM'd the password.

Annam, Dali, Korea, and Japan are still on the table.
 

Attachments

  • china barony coas.zip
    1,5 MB · Views: 31
I've given custom COAs to all baronies in de jure China, all 1610 of them.
Example:
View attachment 518900
And here they are laid out side by side:
View attachment 518901
There are probably several mistakes, but those should be on the lesser known ones. Some of the hanzi was tricky to track down.

This required editing the China landed_title.txt, so to avoid distributing your files without permission I've locked the attached zip file and have PM'd the password.

Annam, Dali, Korea, and Japan are still on the table.

The coats of arms are very appreciated, since we don't really have active devs that are good at graphical stuff, and we'll definitely credit you for contributing them when we release a version that has them, and if you feel like doing more we'd certainly appreciate that, too. However, you don't need to do barony CoAs unless you really want to, as vanilla goes with a random one in nearly all cases and we don't really aim to top vanilla in that area.

Regarding Japan, keep in mind that the Shinto religion uses dynastic CoAs (or random ones, for secondary titles or titles held by rulers whose dynasty's culture doesn't use dynasty names for titles), which means you'll have to convert people's religion when testing to see a difference. I also suggest you hold off on working on CoAs for Japan for a while, since I'm unsure exactly what we want there (we might prefer some appropriate mon over the province name in kanji, for example). I'll be checking with another person on the the team who knows a bit more about the area than me and get back to you.

As for the password, I assume you sent that to LumberKing, as I don't have it? It is no problem if he has it, but I'm just checking to make sure that you didn't pick some random person on the Tianxia team that might not be active.
 
Really excellent mod guys! Out of curiosity, what mods/submods is this compatible with?

Purely graphical mods are likely to be compatible (though we can't guarantee it), while anything else is unlikely to be compatible unless it is entirely self-contained (and even then there might be unexpected behaviour). For mods that are not compatible, the amount of work you'd need to do to make things work could differ a lot; a tiny mod that changes the location of a couple of holy sites would be trivial to make compatible, for example, while something like CK2+ would be a massive undertaking.
 
Purely graphical mods are likely to be compatible (though we can't guarantee it), while anything else is unlikely to be compatible unless it is entirely self-contained (and even then there might be unexpected behaviour). For mods that are not compatible, the amount of work you'd need to do to make things work could differ a lot; a tiny mod that changes the location of a couple of holy sites would be trivial to make compatible, for example, while something like CK2+ would be a massive undertaking.

I was mostly talking about 天下 specific submods.

The Darkest Age works really well with it though.
 
The Darkest Age works really well with it though.

I'd say that depends on your definition of "works well". It might "work well" in the sense that there are no crashes, but chances are that mod adds something that for consistency reasons (or other reasaons) should interact with the Grace system or the Mandate of Heaven but that wouldn't interact with them unless you did some compatibility work, so in that sense I'd not characterize it as "working well" unless you've done that compatibility work.
 
I'd say that depends on your definition of "works well". It might "work well" in the sense that there are no crashes, but chances are that mod adds something that for consistency reasons (or other reasaons) should interact with the Grace system or the Mandate of Heaven but that wouldn't interact with them unless you did some compatibility work, so in that sense I'd not characterize it as "working well" unless you've done that compatibility work.

I mean, it does not crash and adds a ton of flavor. But yeah, to anyone reading this, Tianxia's creators don't endorse this sort of behavior!
 
Tianxia's creators don't endorse this sort of behavior!

That's... not entirely accurate...

We don't particularly care whether you're running some other mod at the same time as Tianxia (except if you're bug reporting something, as we need to know if you're using other mods in that case), and we don't particularly care whether you tweak other mods to make them compatible with Tianxia, tweak Tianxia to make it compatible with other mods, or simply don't bother with compatibility (unless you intend to make something using any of our stuff public, in which case you need to ask us first). However, we still want to avoid confusion between "This mod doesn't crash when used at the same time as Tianxia" and "All mechanics in this mod work well with all mechanics in Tianxia" (i.e. the mods are fully compatible) because we'd rather not have to deal with bug reports that boil down to "I'm using an incompatible mod".
 
Last edited:
Yes, we've seen the announcement.

No, we can't say what it means for Tianxia yet.
 
I mean, on the plus side, no more updates breaking the mod every couple of months xD
 
I mean, on the plus side, no more updates breaking the mod every couple of months xD

Yeah, but on the flip side we're probably not getting more modding functionality in CK2...
 
I'm not sure if it is work in progress but numerous kingdoms have a white shield crest while the duchies don't, this being in china, is there a fix or do i have to be the ruler of a white kingdom
 
I'm not sure if it is work in progress but numerous kingdoms have a white shield crest while the duchies don't, this being in china, is there a fix or do i have to be the ruler of a white kingdom

We've not been able to add appropriate CoAs everywhere yet (partially because it is hard to find sources and partially because we don't currently have someone active on the team that actually is good at graphical stuff), so we're forced to use placeholders for the rest. @Brightgalrs posted some better CoAs for China at the top of this page (that we might add in a future update; I've not yet had the time to check them out in detail, so I can't say for sure if we like them all, but they look promising) that you could download and use (just paste the new CoAs in the Tianxia flag directory and overwrite the files with the same names) if you wish to do so.
 
(This post contains my personal thoughts and opinions, and might not reflect the official stance of the Tianxia team as a whole)

As you probably know, CK3 has been announced and will (assuming no major delays) be released at some point next year. I suspect at least some of you are wondering what this means for Tianxia's future development, so I thought I'd share some thoughts about that.


Until CK3 has been released, I expect Tianxia's development to continue roughly as planned. How much we'll get done will obviously depend on how much time different members of the team can dedicate to working on Tianxia and whether we run into any problems, but hopefully we'll get some of our current short-term goals done at least. I'll personally be looking into information about CK3 as it comes out -- and might ask the devs questions regarding moddability when it comes to certain mechanics -- to try to get an idea of whether the game might be something I'd like or not (at this point, there are both things that sound very interesting and things that I don't like the sound of, but so far nothing sounds like an immediate deal-breaker for me), and I suspect that that also might be the case for others on the team.

Unless something turns out to be a deal-breaker (or the system requirements are too high for my computer) I'll probably not have made up my mind about CK3 until I have had the chance to try it, meaning I won't be able to say if I'd be open to working on a CK3 version of Tianxia until after the game is out and I've been able to play it for a while, which I also suspect holds true for others on the team. Chances are we'd also need to spend a good number of hours trying different things in the game (and more hours going over the files to see how things work behind the scenes) before deciding how we feel about it, so I doubt we'd be able to make a decision immediately on release.


Once CK3 is out and everyone that's interested in it have had the chance to test it, chances are there will be some internal discussion about how to proceed, with LumberKing being the final arbitrator (as Tianxia is his project). I can see four possible options, and I'm prepared to say we'll not be holding some kind of public vote about it (because -- let's face it -- everyone probably would pick "Continue to develop Tianxia for [the game I prefer/both games]"):

- Transfer Tianxia over to CK3 and continue development there, ending the development of CK2 Tianxia. I'd expect this option to be picked if everyone that wants to continue working on Tianxia decides that CK3 is better than CK2 and we determine that we can make CK3 Tianxia happen.

- Keep developing CK2 Tianxia, and don't do anything with Tianxia in CK3. I'd expect this to be the case if everyone that wants to continue working on Tianxia doesn't like CK3.

- Transfer Tianxia over to CK3 and keep developing CK2 Tianxia. I think this is rather unlikely to be what happens, since everyone probably will be rather uninterested in modding for the game they don't prefer and since it won't be possible to copy-paste stuff from one game to the other, and considering that we don't have a very big active team it might not be viable to split the team.

- End development of Tianxia. I'd expect this to be the case if too few people want to keep working on the mod for either game, if everyone wants to move over to CK3 but doing Tianxia there isn't feasible (e.g. due to some critical functionality being missing or due to the team lacking the ability to do something that needs to be done (considering we'd probably need new map files (as CK3's map supposedly extends further south) and that we don't have any graphical modders on the team, that's a real possibility...)), or if we realize that there's not sufficient interest in the mod for the game (or games) we would be prepared to continue development for.


Aside from individual questions like "Do I want to play/mod CK3, CK2, or both?" (I will probably not be prepared to work on both) and "Do I want to continue working on Tianxia at all?" (I might be prepared to do that, but I can't say for sure I won't have changed my mind by the time CK3 has been released), I expect the following to be some of the factors that will go into deciding what we'll do:

- Has any base game functionality we consider critical been removed from CK3? If so, can we work around the problem without running into issues (e.g. a massive performance drop)?

- Has the removal of something made things better for us, because something was a problem? For example, it seems like there will be fewer start dates in CK3, which would mean less work is needed when it comes to the history files.

- Does any new base game functionality cause trouble for us? If so, can we work around it without messing up the rest of the game (as we'll probably stick to our "Vanilla takes precedence" policy)?

- Has any modding feature we consider critical been removed? If so, can we work around the problem?

- What are the problems with transforming Tianxia into a CK3 mod? Can we work around those problems?

- Which parts of the mod (if any) would we lose by transforming Tianxia into a CK3 mod? How important do we consider those parts?

- How big is the general interest for Tianxia for the game (or games) we're interested developing Tianxia for? If there's very little interest, it might impact how much work we're prepared to do, which could mean anything from reducing the scope to stopping development entirely.

- How much work is it to add the same thing in both games? If it is trivial, then it becomes more likely that we'd consider having both CK2 and CK3 Tianxia, while if it is a lot of work it becomes less likely.

- How many people are actually prepared to continue (or to start) working on Tianxia (for either game)? We have very few active devs as it is, and losing even one person could potentially be enough to render further development unfeasible.


If we make the decision to stop developing Tianxia for CK2 (regardless of whether we decide to work on a CK3 version or not), I would expect that the most recent CK2 version at that point would remain available (though as it isn't my call I can't guarantee anything), but chances are we'd not fix any further bugs in that case.

(This post contains my personal thoughts and opinions, and might not reflect the official stance of the Tianxia team as a whole)
 
Last edited:
Thanks for having shared your thoughts this openly, Silversweeper. Though being more a silent observer, I still rejoiced, once you released Tianxia's alpha and played a little bit, which I enjoyed tremendously.
I guess another factor in your decision would be whether CK3 takes on East Asia in a DLC to come, right? As I followed the news-coverage around CK3 it seems to me that an expansion covering East Asia is likely to happen at some point.
 
Thanks for having shared your thoughts this openly, Silversweeper. Though being more a silent observer, I still rejoiced, once you released Tianxia's alpha and played a little bit, which I enjoyed tremendously.
I guess another factor in your decision would be whether CK3 takes on East Asia in a DLC to come, right? As I followed the news-coverage around CK3 it seems to me that an expansion covering East Asia is likely to happen at some point.

It is possible that CK3 will expand further east down the line, but I'd say everything that's been mentioned about it so far is pure speculation based around 1) Offmap China being removed, 2) East Asia being the best choice for a future map expansion if more than a handful of provinces are to be added, and 3) most people familiar with CK2 knowing that China has been requested (and empathically not requested) since around the time that we got RoI. Until such a point that the CK3 devs make it clear that they are adding more land in the east in CK3 (in addition to the tiny sliver of Tibet we're supposed to be getting), we have to assume that they aren't, since we can't create a CK3 Tianxia without first expanding the map, and based on how things have worked for other PDS games, it is unlikely we'd know the content of future patches/DLCs for certain before they're ready to be announced (at most, I think we'd get a vague "Maybe we'll do this" list similar to the one that existed for Stellaris).

I'd say there's a small chance that the CK3 devs might get in touch with Tianxia if they're expanding the map further east, as modders have been consulted on things in the past (elvain was consulted for the Middle East map rework (and possibly also the Africa one), and I believe Snow Crystal got in touch with the Iranian Intermezzo team to check some stuff for IC), in which case one or more people on the Tianxia team might know about it sooner than the general public, but I doubt it would happen close enough to release that it would impact the decision about whether we want to do CK3 Tianxia or not. Even if it was something we learned about early enough to be able to decide against CK3 Tianxia from the start, I'd assume there would be an NDA involved, meaning we couldn't tell you if it was a factor until after everything had been revealed.

If the CK3 map was expanded far enough to the east that everything we consider important was on it (regardless of whether we knew about it beforehand or not), it would probably mean that we'd have to reduce the scope of a hypothetical CK3 Tianxia significantly (probably to a flavour pack, unless the vanilla approach to something was bad enough that we decided to throw out "Vanilla takes precedence" as far as that was concerned). However, since that situation only comes up if CK3 expands further east and CK3 Tianxia is a thing and the way we handled it would depend on both the hypothetical CK3 addition and the state of a hypothetical CK3 Tianxia, it is impossible to say anything for sure.
 
I've finished all Empire/Kingdom/Duchy/County flags in China, Korea, Annam, and Dali. Some of them I had to be a bit creative with, especially in Dali, but it should all be reasonable. I've redid the China ones to be a bit more visually interesting.

Barony coat of arms are also complete for those regions, but annoyingly they are tied to the holder's religion. Instead of cluttering coats_of_arms.txt and landed_titles.txt I've set them to only show up for Taoism.
The China-held counties in Annam and the hanzi coa showing up, but the other baronies have randomly generated Buddhist coas.
 
Last edited:
I've finished all Empire/Kingdom/Duchy/County flags in China, Korea, Annam, and Dali. Some of them I had to be a bit creative with, especially in Dali, but it should all be reasonable. I've redid the China ones to be a bit more visually interesting.

Barony coat of arms are also complete for those regions, but annoyingly they are tied to the holder's religion. Instead of cluttering coats_of_arms.txt and landed_titles.txt I've set them to only show up for Taoism.
Here you can see one of the China-held counties in Annam and the hanzi coa showing up:
View attachment 521919
But the other baronies in Annam have randomly generated Buddhist coas.

Password locked once again.

Both of the files refuse to load for me. Unsure if it is broken on my end or not (though other files appear to work as expected), but you might need to re-upload them. Also, assuming you've only edited basically the same files as in the past (a landed_titles file and coats_of_arms.txt), I'm prepared to say you don't need to password-protect them.

I think we'll be swapping CoAs for baronies in Korea to show up for Buddhists rather than Taoists, as the region was predominantly Buddhist. Not sure what we'll do with Annam and Dali, since those regions also had a significant Buddhist presence (and Buddhist rulers, if I remember correctly). I'm fairly sure we can tweak that on our own (unless I misremember how it is done), but just a heads up.

Regarding the Japanese CoAs you mentioned a while back, we're interested in "Kanji + colour"-style CoAs for duchies (and, if we end up splitting k_japan in the future, kingdoms) and baronies if you feel like making those (if so, the barony CoA should be assigned to the Buddhist religion, as the Shinto religion is intended to use dynastic CoAs). For the counties, we're planning to go with a mon instead of the other approach, which is a bit more work. If you want to help with those (you're obviously free to decline), I can provide you with a reference picture for each county by PM.

Also, if you want to help out with it, various titles in de jure Balhae could use new CoAs. While the region was ruled by several different cultures and religions during the era, I'd say we'd prefer the Korean (i.e. default) name over other names, and that we'd prefer for the barony CoAs to be assigned to the Buddhist religion since the rulers of Balhae were Buddhists.