Please expand game to 600 AD and to 1600 AD.

[Urzhail64]

This is so it can cover the early Dark Ages as well as the Warring States period in Japan. For instance Charlemagne and the Frankish Empire, the pyrrhic victory by Brian Boru over the Dublin Irish at Clontarf (which ended all dreams of unifying Ireland too) Not to mention the Italian Wars and the Renaissance.

Thanks !

 

[Strompator]

That would have to be a completely new game just for the reason of starting at 600 AD. So many things changed from 600 to 1066.

 

[jordarkelf]

Not to mention the research for the period 600-1066 for all of Europe will be a nightmare if not simply impossible. It's already extremely difficult to find rulers in the current timespan, let alone 400 years earlier.

 

[Grubnessul]

I have already trouble finishing a 1066-1453 game...

 

[Jakalak]

Even if it's almost impossible, this would be so awesome.

 

[unmerged(505019)]

The most I could see is taking it back to 962. That, plus playable pagans in the same expansion/DLC would make sense because you'd have a lot more pagans to play as.

Taking it past 1453 wouldn't be worth it with EU4 coming relatively soon, plus the timespan is already really long.

 

[Strompator]

Even if it's almost impossible, this would be so awesome.

Oh I agree - If they could make a new game to span that time period I'd love it.

 

[Spartanlemur]

That would have to be a completely new game just for the reason of starting at 600 AD. So many things changed from 600 to 1066.

Or just a large expansion. Wait for the pagan DLC then bring in more melting pot/cultural deviation events (away from Roman culture) and it wouldn't be that hard. Not only that, but there are far less recorded characters and dynasties in 600AD than 1066AD, so research should be less.

 

[Jakalak]

Or just a large expansion. Wait for the pagan DLC then bring in more melting pot/cultural deviation events (away from Roman culture) and it wouldn't be that hard. Not only that, but there are far less recorded characters and dynasties in 600AD than 1066AD, so research should be less.

To be honest, I think the succession/whole conception of 'states' would have to change based on what advances the specific characters have made. We already have a fairly unrealistic Russia/Byzantine scheme, and I've heard the same about the Fatimids.

 

[Strompator]

Or just a large expansion. Wait for the pagan DLC then bring in more melting pot/cultural deviation events (away from Roman culture) and it wouldn't be that hard. Not only that, but there are far less recorded characters and dynasties in 600AD than 1066AD, so research should be less.

Maybe, but as Jordarkelf said above the research would be a nightmare. I guess they could make things up, but it might come out half baked. But hey why not! They have Aztecs invading Europe now.

 

[generalolaf]

The period up to 1600 is already covered by EU. I could see them bringing the start date back a bit, maybe to Charlemagne's reign at the most, but IMO the game concept doesn't work so well further back than that. The 400-800ish time period, as others have also said lsewhere on these boards, deserves its own game.

 

[Spartanlemur]

To be honest, I think the succession/whole conception of 'states' would have to change based on what advances the specific characters have made. We already have a fairly unrealistic Russia/Byzantine scheme, and I've heard the same about the Fatimids.

It's about creating something which is acceptable, even if it's not necessarily that accurate. If they want to make it more accurate, they can do so by adding flavour and a couple of new mechanics. The main game will always be 1066-1453, but it would be nice to play as Charlemagne or see early Islamic Rashidun deathstacks destroy the ERE. A large expansion once the rest are done would allow plenty of time to create events, add flavour and polish it up nicely.

Maybe, but as Jordarkelf said above the research would be a nightmare. I guess they could make things up, but it might come out half baked. But hey why not! They have Aztecs invading Europe now.

To be honest, EU:Rome wasn't that historically accurate, and there are many characters in the game at the moment who are ahistorical. Also, the period would be hard to model anyway, and a succession based mechanic like that seen in CK2 would be the only real way to model warlords.
Even if they made it a new game they'd have to make it incredibly similar to CK2, so why not simply make it as a very large, high priced expansion? The benefit here is that we get to continue after we reach 1066 rather than quit and load up CK2.

The period up to 1600 is already covered by EU. I could see them bringing the start date back a bit, maybe to Charlemagne's reign at the most, but IMO the game concept doesn't work so well further back than that. The 400-800ish time period, as others have also said lsewhere on these boards, deserves its own game.

EU and CK are completely different games. We don't currently get to experience the politics involved with anti-monarchist sentiment and the challenge of "will you be the last absolute monarchy in Europe standing?" from the point of view of the king (in EU it can be beneficial to switch to Republic!). I'd very much like to see this in a CK2 expansion or CK3. I like EU, but I'm a much bigger CK fan myself. I prefer playing people to playing countries.

 

[Oriflamme]

I seriously doubt Paradox would push the final date any further. With the huge increase in overseas exploration, they'd have to add the rest of the world to make it realistic. Besides, EU3 already does that, and with EU4 on the way, it wouldn't really make sense.

As for pushing it earlier, as others have said, the research needed would be even more of an obstacle then ever because records were scarce back then. As I keep saying, if they do push back the starting date, it would probably be to 1000 or a little earlier.

 

[unmerged(600321)]

I rarely make it past the 1300s in most games nowadays. By the 1200s, I often have a 1k holding Empire and a 2k+ holding Empire by the 1300s. Finishing a game just involves taking over the entire map and that is boring and tedious. I tend to prefer shorter games and games where I actively try to remain a vassal for as long as possible now because those tend to be more fun for me now. I really don't want to play a 1000 year long game as I would likely control the entire map within 300 years and spend the rest of the 700 years just trying to suppress rebellions and converting every vassal to my culture.

An option to play mini-games within the 600-1600 period could have potential, but it would require a fairly major DLC or a new game to make it worth Paradox's time to do all the research.

 

[cybrxkhan]

As have been said many times on other threads, expanding the timeline back to the 600s or even the time of Charlemagne would be impossible in terms of research. Yes, there are quite a number of shortcuts currently for research, but even then there's still some historical plausibility to them. Before the 900s at earliest, you're looking at least, literally three quarters of titles with rulers who cannot be figured out from normal research - and some might say PI can just have made-up rulers. Fine, but then there's the problem of titles: who gets what titles, who owns what provinces, and not to mention that a large portion of the titles from the current timeframe wouldn't even exist several hundred years previously, meaning somehow not only does PI have to do research for new titles and de jure boundaries, they have to figure out a way to have them change over the course of the game.

This is something that cannot be done with the current CKII. At best it could be a standalone expansion with an entirely new de jure map, titles, among other things, but there's no way the game in its current form can handle anything before the early to mid-900s, and ideally anything before c. 1000.


As for dates past 1453, I think going up to 1492 (i.e. the year of Columbus and the finishing of the REconquista) would be reasonable. The discovery of the Americas *might* be handled by events and decisions (now that we have the Aztec DLC and all), wherein the timeline could be pushed up to c. 1530 at best, but nothing past the Reformatino, which would require EU-style mechanics.

 

[Kalderus]

What I would really enjoy seeing is an additional game for the dark ages period linking EU: Rome, or its successor, to CKII and then an eventual compatibility all the way to Victoria II/III. Wouldn't it be amazing, even if it would be too long to ever finish, to have a multiplayer campaign range from Rome all the way up to the 20th century?

 

[Te. Kenzo]

to much research in my opinion, and after that... why? is crusader kings

 

[Cuthuthulu]

I'd rather they expand the database up to 1453. Even though I know it would take far too much historical research for little gain

 

[Barsoom]

What I would really enjoy seeing is an additional game for the dark ages period linking EU: Rome, or its successor, to CKII and then an eventual compatibility all the way to Victoria II/III. Wouldn't it be amazing, even if it would be too long to ever finish, to have a multiplayer campaign range from Rome all the way up to the 20th century?

This. I would love a megacampaign from Rome to present. And I'm sure there are a few people on these fora who would have the endurance to finish.

 

[Cuthuthulu]

This. I would love a megacampaign from Rome to present. And I'm sure there are a few people on these fora who would have the endurance to finish.

Using non-paradox games i'm exploring the possiblity of having a mega-campagin that starts from 360,000,000BC, however it's only in the theoretical stages at the moment and would need a ton of modding.