Agreed. Paradox should do a Rome sequel at some point, and maybe they should do so before going on to do something new like the Dark Ages. But once they do it, and somebody re-suggests doing the Dark Ages, somebody will say 'no, do Victoria III first'. Furthermore, in the near future Paradox would be mad to make a Rome-based game, seeing as it would just be drowned out by the hype for Rome 2: Total War. Paradox fills a niche spot in strategy games, and there's few historical periods more 'niche' in popular media than the European Dark Ages.
Petition for a 395AD Early Middle Ages expansion
- Thread starter Spartanlemur
- 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.
Agreed. Paradox should do a Rome sequel at some point, and maybe they should do so before going on to do something new like the Dark Ages. But once they do it, and somebody re-suggests doing the Dark Ages, somebody will say 'no, do Victoria III first'. Furthermore, in the near future Paradox would be mad to make a Rome-based game, seeing as it would just be drowned out by the hype for Rome 2: Total War. Paradox fills a niche spot in strategy games, and there's few historical periods more 'niche' in popular media than the European Dark Ages.
Hmm not convinced going that far back would work well. Considering a lot of players don't even make it to 1453 I doubt that many would play 1,000 years (would must likely end up with a massive empire and constant rebellions).
You could go back to 800 perhaps but one problem with that would be even more powerful blobs (Charlemagne's empire and the Caliphate)
My suggestion would be to extend a little at either end, from 1000 (foundation of the Christian Kingdom of Hungary) to 1483 (conclusion of the English Wars of the Roses
You could go back to 800 perhaps but one problem with that would be even more powerful blobs (Charlemagne's empire and the Caliphate)
My suggestion would be to extend a little at either end, from 1000 (foundation of the Christian Kingdom of Hungary) to 1483 (conclusion of the English Wars of the Roses
The current game isn't suited to it anyway, with separate Military Generals / Governors , imperial Bureaucracy and the fact that governors were switched round every so often.
Better to have a new game, Ashes of Rome?
Better to have a new game, Ashes of Rome?
Uh what? Have you looked at the mod forum at all? Some of the mods like Project Balance & SWMH 2.0 are fixing the base game to a level far above what PDS release. Then there are mods like CK2+ which completely overhaul the faction system (so it's actually useful) and the Song of Ice and Fire mod creating a dueling engine as an completely new feature.
The original post reads pretty much like "I want this but rather than make it myself like everyone else, I want someone else to do it for me".
no thanks, if anything they should make it as a standalone game. Should have posted it to the forum for the dev team in general
other than that if you insist it being with this game, have it as a mod (they are probably out there in the mod forum)
it would take too much work to be a dlc/expansion and it would be too far from the timeline
other than that if you insist it being with this game, have it as a mod (they are probably out there in the mod forum)
it would take too much work to be a dlc/expansion and it would be too far from the timeline
Yeah. Asides from the obvious migration problem, CKII is built on the de jure Kingdoms system, which only really formed in Europe after the Treaty of Verdun.
A separate game with a converter to CKII would be nice though. If the gameplay were quick enough to get you through several centuries without blobbing, you get to experience a lot of fun events - Imperial Collapse, mass migrations, Hunnic Invasions, Rise of Islam, Viking Raids etc.
Would it even be plausible to use Dynasty-based gameplay for such a thing? It's not necessarily a useful way of looking at the dark ages.
A separate game with a converter to CKII would be nice though. If the gameplay were quick enough to get you through several centuries without blobbing, you get to experience a lot of fun events - Imperial Collapse, mass migrations, Hunnic Invasions, Rise of Islam, Viking Raids etc.
Would it even be plausible to use Dynasty-based gameplay for such a thing? It's not necessarily a useful way of looking at the dark ages.
Personally I think it would be better to focus the game around culture rather than characters. I want to see a game where I can have the franks hold total dominion over the British Isles.
I also think this wouldn't work... At this time there weren't dynastic or here hereditary things so common. In germany we have the Gaus, which weren't hereditary. And wihtout dynasties it wouldn't be CK anymore. I also think a own Game would be nice.
I know Great Invasions which work similiar to EU. It's similar to the Paradox games (and I think it use the same engine).
I know Great Invasions which work similiar to EU. It's similar to the Paradox games (and I think it use the same engine).
While I agree or am neutral about your other statements afterwards, I have to disagree somewhat with these points, particularly as a modder-in-training, and I feel it is necessary to defend my fellow modders here. Yes, it is true we are not paid and doing this only as a hobby, but this does not necessarily mean we can't work with bugs and accuracy - if anything, a good number of mods are even better at bugs and accuracy than the vanilla game is. Modders have much more time to think about and apply historical accuracy - look at mods like SWMH or Lords and Lands, for instance, that meticulously rework the map and dynasties of Europe to fit medieval reality better, without trying to make things "balanced" for the player; as for bugs and other sort of issues, mods like Project Balance have been fixing balance issues and the like with the vanilla game - such as the infamous overpowered Muslims/Fatimids issue that PI only got around to somewhat fixing in 1.08 (but not really) - way before PI got to it. Another example of bug fixing would be the Elder Scroll's unofficial patches (I know it's not CKII, but it demonstrates my point admirably) - these modders managed to fix way more bugs and glitches in the Elder Scrolls game than the devs could ever hope for. Precisely because mods are hobby projects where modders aren't paid and do it in their free time because we want to, we have much more leeway when it comes to accuracy, bug and issue fixing, and so on. Even though PI has the entire community to help them with bugs and accuracy - will they really take in everything that is reported, requested, and so on? No, especially considering that 1) they have, oftentimes, worst time constraints than modders, and 2) they simply can't add anything thus because they have to work on other aspects of, well, their job. Do other things, see. Modders, if they're dedicated, can focus on a few things at once.
Certainly we cannot market ourselves as well as the vanilla game, but this doesn't mean the mods are of any less quality. I do not claim that the devs are useless, or that modders are superior or even equal - otherwise we wouldn't have CKII in the first place, of course. But remember the devs can't make everything that everyone asks for. Modders can't either, but they can come a bit closer to that.
This would be ideal, but game developers seem to have so little interest in the Dark Ages that it's probably easier to sell them on one game covering the whole period.
Well first off let's start with anything can be done, its just a time - money ratio that we are discussing.
Because they already have the engine in place and can charge a fair whack for it. I agree however that it'd be a lot of work, but the dark ages would be an interesting time to play in, not as much work as you'd think though as record keeping for accurate family lines is likely to be fantasy as much as accurate, so many dynasties are going to have to be generated anyway.
Personally I think smaller steps make sense, so just rolling back or forward a few hundred years would be more intelligent.
Agree, and it is more likely. I would probably switch to playing the minority christian faiths in this case
, for once to get a harder game! Though it is more likely if this happens it'll be a few years either way as someone mentioned, just to find a balance as to a point where the non christian faiths held more sway in europe, even if they didn't hold land.
Could throw in a few alternative scenarios of course that would work, rather than recoding everything from scratch, I often do. With the addition of heresies getting religious heads perhaps, you could do a religious uprisings kind of DLC, where these events happen more often, this would of course include pagan's in the earlier game dates.
Because they already have the engine in place and can charge a fair whack for it. I agree however that it'd be a lot of work, but the dark ages would be an interesting time to play in, not as much work as you'd think though as record keeping for accurate family lines is likely to be fantasy as much as accurate, so many dynasties are going to have to be generated anyway.
Personally I think smaller steps make sense, so just rolling back or forward a few hundred years would be more intelligent.
600 years is pushing the timeline a bit too far for my taste. But, as others have mentioned, a pagan focused DLC that push back the timeline a few hundred years (maybe starting in about year 800 when Charlemagne started his reign), would be pretty great imo.
Agree, and it is more likely. I would probably switch to playing the minority christian faiths in this case
, for once to get a harder game! Though it is more likely if this happens it'll be a few years either way as someone mentioned, just to find a balance as to a point where the non christian faiths held more sway in europe, even if they didn't hold land.Could throw in a few alternative scenarios of course that would work, rather than recoding everything from scratch, I often do. With the addition of heresies getting religious heads perhaps, you could do a religious uprisings kind of DLC, where these events happen more often, this would of course include pagan's in the earlier game dates.
But why would you manage the migration? Or the Gaus in Germany, which weren't hereditary? The Emperor can pick up any County title? That would be not good in this game. The game is about dynasties... And the old times are not really dynastic.
Yup, tribes operated on the succession principle of "Guy with the Biggest stick inherits" which isn't really part of the legalistic framework of CK2.
I'd probably go the easy option for migration - events.
For titles: Lower crown law options before kingdoms etc become more established, so they start lower than 0 and have to form over time to get to 0, 1, 2 etc.
I'd generally agree, but there are few major obstacles
there were few processes in the period between 395 and 1066, which I can hardly imagine to be simulated with CK2 engine.
1) mixing cultures - while in 1066 the european (and other) cultures were already formed, the 395-1066 is the era which was formative for these cultures. Just make a list of cultures, which existed in 395, 1066 and 1453. the lists of 1066 and 1453 would be pretty similar, while the 395 list would be totally different. I can't see a functioninng tool in CK2 to simulate such a significant change with so many new cultures created other than via events. I think this deserves special tool.
2) technology stagnation and decline - the great invasions brought economic processes, which were the oposite to those from the period after 800 A.D. You cannot take the world of 395 and add positive technologic evolution to get to realistic world of 1066. Can you imagine how it could be done with the tech development of CK2, even if largely tweaked? There would either have to be inevitable decline all across the map (which did not happen) or the technologic design of CK2 would have to be completely redone.
3) the latter point could be somehow simulated, the decline of technologies happened due to invasions and decline of mid- and long- distance trade with products of daily consumption of the late Roman Mediterranean. The problem is that there is no such thing as trade in CK2. There also is no population in CK2, which is one of the factors, which influenced both economic and cultural changes in the period between 395 and 1066.
Yes, it would be nice to take the hordes, tribes and empires of 395 and play with them and blob up to 1453, but, frankly, I can't imagine how the game could get even close to the image of world in 1066 or 1453 unless CK2 is drastically changed. EU:Rome would IMO need far fewer system tweaks than CK2 - it already has trade system, it already has population.
I think it would be much better to prolongue EU:Rome to, say 800, and push CK2 back to 756, if we want to have direct the dream sequence Rome -> CK2 -> EU3/4 -> Vicki2 -> HoI3
there were few processes in the period between 395 and 1066, which I can hardly imagine to be simulated with CK2 engine.
1) mixing cultures - while in 1066 the european (and other) cultures were already formed, the 395-1066 is the era which was formative for these cultures. Just make a list of cultures, which existed in 395, 1066 and 1453. the lists of 1066 and 1453 would be pretty similar, while the 395 list would be totally different. I can't see a functioninng tool in CK2 to simulate such a significant change with so many new cultures created other than via events. I think this deserves special tool.
2) technology stagnation and decline - the great invasions brought economic processes, which were the oposite to those from the period after 800 A.D. You cannot take the world of 395 and add positive technologic evolution to get to realistic world of 1066. Can you imagine how it could be done with the tech development of CK2, even if largely tweaked? There would either have to be inevitable decline all across the map (which did not happen) or the technologic design of CK2 would have to be completely redone.
3) the latter point could be somehow simulated, the decline of technologies happened due to invasions and decline of mid- and long- distance trade with products of daily consumption of the late Roman Mediterranean. The problem is that there is no such thing as trade in CK2. There also is no population in CK2, which is one of the factors, which influenced both economic and cultural changes in the period between 395 and 1066.
Yes, it would be nice to take the hordes, tribes and empires of 395 and play with them and blob up to 1453, but, frankly, I can't imagine how the game could get even close to the image of world in 1066 or 1453 unless CK2 is drastically changed. EU:Rome would IMO need far fewer system tweaks than CK2 - it already has trade system, it already has population.
I think it would be much better to prolongue EU:Rome to, say 800, and push CK2 back to 756, if we want to have direct the dream sequence Rome -> CK2 -> EU3/4 -> Vicki2 -> HoI3
Last edited:
Sounds like a job for the modding community. Oh wait there are mods coming out like this.
Can you point me to one? I've been waiting to play a dark ages scenario forever, the only one i've seen covers Britain.
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?583530-Carolingian-Mod
It covers from the Treaty of Verdun.