New Start Date in Roads to Power (not 769)

  • 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.

CK2Benchmarks

Second Lieutenant
1 Badges
Apr 14, 2018
136
1.036
  • Crusader Kings II
No timeline extensions, but there is a new start date planned for Roads to Power
 

Attachments

  • 2024-03-23_16h26_48.jpg
    2024-03-23_16h26_48.jpg
    52,5 KB · Views: 0
  • 10Like
  • 10
  • 9Love
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
I am glad they aren't extending the timeline. Almost 600 years is plenty.

I wonder what date they'll choose. I am guessing one relevant to Byzantine history since it's a Byzantine-heavy DLC. Maybe 1204/5?
 
  • 12Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Either 1189 or 1204. I just want to play the Plantagenets. Henry II or Richard the Lionheart...
 
  • 3Like
  • 2
Reactions:
You can be sure it's not something between 867 and 1066, it's too much work for them to consider. 1081 is likely, but 1204 is also not something to scoff at. Both options provide the player with what many crave "forming your realm from little or nothing. There appears to be a sentiment among some players that established realms are less fun.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
You can be sure it's not something between 867 and 1066, it's too much work for them to consider. 1081 is likely, but 1204 is also not something to scoff at. Both options provide the player with what many crave "forming your realm from little or nothing. There appears to be a sentiment among some players that established realms are less fun.
they have stated explicitly they are not extending the timeline in either direction. so you can actually be certain it 100% IS something between 867 and 1066. of the options, this is probably the least work if you think about it, bc a lot of the title history is already worked out between 867 and 1066 - thats prob why they opted for this

a lot of people are thinking iron century but idk, iron century isnt particularly relevant to the byzzies. maybe later in the century or something? early 11th, even? actually thinking of it now, a good adventure candidate would be robert guiscard carving out a realm in southern italy, and thats also fairly relevant to the byzzies, so we could be looking at 1038-1040ish. would be kind of a weird choice given how close it is to 1066 but idk, i can see the potential
 
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
they have stated explicitly they are not extending the timeline in either direction. so you can actually be certain it 100% IS something between 867 and 1066. of the options, this is probably the least work if you think about it, bc a lot of the title history is already worked out between 867 and 1066 - thats prob why they opted for this

a lot of people are thinking iron century but idk, iron century isnt particularly relevant to the byzzies. maybe later in the century or something? early 11th, even? actually thinking of it now, a good adventure candidate would be robert guiscard carving out a realm in southern italy, and thats also fairly relevant to the byzzies, so we could be looking at 1038-1040ish. would be kind of a weird choice given how close it is to 1066 but idk, i can see the potential
For me the timeline mean the end of the game, not the actual starts

If the new date is betwen the actuals dates it's disappointing.
 
  • 8Like
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
they have stated explicitly they are not extending the timeline in either direction. so you can actually be certain it 100% IS something between 867 and 1066. of the options, this is probably the least work if you think about it, bc a lot of the title history is already worked out between 867 and 1066 - thats prob why they opted for this

a lot of people are thinking iron century but idk, iron century isnt particularly relevant to the byzzies. maybe later in the century or something? early 11th, even? actually thinking of it now, a good adventure candidate would be robert guiscard carving out a realm in southern italy, and thats also fairly relevant to the byzzies, so we could be looking at 1038-1040ish. would be kind of a weird choice given how close it is to 1066 but idk, i can see the potential
The CK3 timeline is 867 to 1453. A start date after 1066 but before 1453 would not extend the timeline. That comment was made in light of EU5 extending its timeline to 1337.

People underestimate the lack of history in a lot of files between 867 and 1066. It would be a gigantic task, just ask anyone who mod new start dates between those dates. A start date after 1066 makes more sense because we actually have a lot of history already defined aside from the new counties added at initial release between CK2 and CK3. It's the reason why there are more start date mods after 1066.
 
  • 8
  • 3Like
Reactions:
You can be sure it's not something between 867 and 1066, it's too much work for them to consider. 1081 is likely, but 1204 is also not something to scoff at. Both options provide the player with what many crave "forming your realm from little or nothing. There appears to be a sentiment among some players that established realms are less fun.
936 was a startdate on CK2, the hard work is done.
 
Last edited:
  • 4Like
  • 1
Reactions:
The CK3 timeline is 867 to 1453. A start date after 1066 but before 1453 would not extend the timeline. That comment was made in light of EU5 extending its timeline to 1337.
For me the timeline mean the end of the game, not the actual starts
oh, very true. yeah i guess you could read it like that huh, i genuinely thought i was going insane how ppl just didnt seem to notice that part. yeah im less confidant now then suddenly, fair enough

People underestimate the lack of history in a lot of files between 867 and 1066. It would be a gigantic task, just ask anyone who mod new start dates between those dates. A start date after 1066 makes more sense because we actually have a lot of history already defined aside from the new counties added at initial release between CK2 and CK3. It's the reason why there are more start date mods after 1066.
nah man i get that entirely. ive been in those files and theyre pretty bad. my thought process was that, as you alluded, some of the title work had already been touched up, so thats less work total - ive not done a start date though, i have no idea what im doing, so ive p much exclusively futzed with pre-867 and the history between 867 and 1066. from my perspective those are way easier to deal with bc thats just what im used to, hadnt occured to me later starts might be easier for people who actually know how to operate a personal computer
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
CK2 have fewer provinces than CK3 and 936 in CK2 was a hack job by one developer. With the detail that CK3 offers, you'd see counts with 4-5 provinces with the setup that CK2 936 uses.
The research was already in the game before they did the patch for 936, you could access it and see it long before they worked on it. The dev only had to make it playable.
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
Reactions: