Why do they use the flag of the house of normandy (plus the 3 leopard one from Richard Lion Heart) ?
Small Historical Tweak Reconmendations for the Devs
- Thread starter HMAS-Nameless
- 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.
.png){kind=avatar}
Like CK1, you can probably only have one COA per title. So you could probably drop in a more Saxon-y COA if you wanted, unless there is a function (like in Vicky or EU) to swap COAs by event.
I agree. In the case of the Czech lands it should be: rychtář for Bohemia, fojt for Moravia and šoltys for Silesia and Lusatia
or they could make it so that depending on the Ruler's culture+religion, the CoA of a title may change. That way there would be a CoA for a Saxon King of England, and a different one for an English King, etc.
You wouldn't have to make alternative CoAs for every title of the game, but you could for the special cases.
Alternatively, there could be in-game decisions to alter heraldry for an appropriate fee in gold/prestige perhaps. This would expand the players' feeling of hands-on dynastic/realm molding.
Yet, Harold Godwinsson Godwinsson doesn't look to pretty either
Actually it should look like Harold Godwinsson of Godwin
Actually it should be Harold Godwinsson of house Godwin, which on the other hand is just unnecessary and stupid, as this is already made clear by the "Godwinsson".
As such, Paradox's solution is not perfect, but quite good, and overall probably the best solution for a game that has to generalize nomenclature somehow. Maybe they should add Harefoot, to turn the I into a II, but the rest of the discussion appear to be rather futile - at least to me.
As such, Paradox's solution is not perfect, but quite good, and overall probably the best solution for a game that has to generalize nomenclature somehow. Maybe they should add Harefoot, to turn the I into a II, but the rest of the discussion appear to be rather futile - at least to me.
Oh, and I like your idea. As personal CoA's are planned be dynastic variations, why not just create the option to A) leave a CoA as it is, when you usurp the title, B) combine the realms CoA with that of your dynasty, or C) replace the realm's CoA by your dynasty's CoA. This could cost gold, but should improve prestige and increase the revolt risk of vassals.
It's not grounds enough for me. There are still actual members of the House of Wessex running around at game start. Acting like Harold and Edgar Atheling are just distantly related members of the same dynastic house sort of makes the events of 1066 incoherent. I mean, if Harold was regarded as a member of the House of Wessex, why would the Normans make such a huge deal out of their relationship to Edward the Confessor and Harold's "usurpation"?
Even today it remains disputed whether the Godwinsons were a distant cadet branch of the house of Wessex and thus related to the (royal) Cerdicsons. OTOH the Normans will have to justify their action to seize the English crown; both Edward and Harold at one point according to the Normans seem to have supported the claim of William (although Harold would later claim that this was under duress).
That is exactly the point. I don't care if it looks awkward or anything the thing is that the Godwinsons and the House of Wessex were two SEPERATE houses. Both of which at the time of the Norman invasions were prominent. That's why there was a bit of conflict in England about whether Edgar the Atheling of Wessex or Harold Godwinson would rule. In actuality Edward the Confessor nominated Edgar of Wessex as his successor and Harold as regent but then Harold usurped the throne from the adolescent Edgar.
Actually it was Edward the Exile he proclaimed heir. I'm unaware of any evidence that he passed that on to Edgar when the former died. As for Harold, he didn't usurp anything. As a proven administrator and general with dynastic ties to near every senior earl, he didn't need to. Took the throne on the witenagemot's say-so. Who probable said-so on his say-so.
I guess you could call the house of Godwin "-of Sussex" instead, given the concentration of their personal estates there, and possible descent. I'm not so keen on Godwinson or Godwin as surnames. Not only are they incorrect, but they'd throw up some odd situations such as; Godwin Godwinson Godwinson, or Godwin Godwinson Godwin. Godwining's the correct term. It just looks odd.
I guess you could call the house of Godwin "-of Sussex" instead, given the concentration of their personal estates there, and possible descent. I'm not so keen on Godwinson or Godwin as surnames. Not only are they incorrect, but they'd throw up some odd situations such as; Godwin Godwinson Godwinson, or Godwin Godwinson Godwin. Godwining's the correct term. It just looks odd.
I just want to be clear, I never said he did. That's why I used the scare quotes. It was a usurpation from the perspective of Norman propaganda.
I agree that using derivatives of "Godwin" is non-ideal, though I could get on board with "Godwining." (And perhaps Cerdicing for the House of Wessex?) It looks odd but it also looks very Anglo-Saxon, and I'm all for more flavor in CK2. But "of Sussex" also sounds like a good alternative.
Edgar is possibly the personal heir of choice Edward the Confessor from what I've read and it's not an absurd conclusion to draw on, but it doesn't much matter when the leading nobles select Harold, of course. While I agree with yours and others remarks on Godwinsson versus of Wessex, it's also true that Edgar the Aetheling is not only alive and well, but very much a viable candidate for the throne if Harold can repel the invasions he faces.
At the very least, they must call Edgar and his clan Cerdicing or something along those lines. We can't have two very important House of Wessex dynasty's running around in England, especially when they should be fighting very soon after the bastards death at Hastings.
On a side note, I have a few historical things to propose as to not create a new thread.
Edgar the Aetheling should be the heir of Harold in the case of a Saxon victory, though it should of course be possible to change this if you're playing as Harold, with the knowledge a civil war should follow.
Robert and Odo, the half brothers of William, should be given very important positions in Williams court and also more land than they were given in the first. They were extremely important men in his reign, even if the former was rather quiet, so to say.
The Great
England needs elective monarchy, then, with Edward the Confessor supporting his candidate but ultimately the electors choosing their favorite. If Harold dies, then the earls should elect whomever they like, historically Edgar the Aetheling, who carried his claims to the throne to Scotland. If the Normans prevail, playing as Scotland could be a lot of fun, as you get to assume the role of Malcolm III Canmore attempting to put his brother-in-law on the throne of England. But plots and intrigues are the next DD, so we'll see what the possibilities are.
In the video developer diary I (2' 04'') culture of the Serbian king is Russian, that is clearly a mistake, he was one of the greatest Serbian rulers and his full name was not Stefan I Dusan, his full name was Stefan Uros IV Dusan.
Things like that will most definitely be corrected, most of them already have I'd wager.
say Harold godwinson of Wessex has a kid called Edward, will he be called Edward Haroldson of Wessex?, also will the three lions be addressed for pre-norman england, makes me cringe to look at it with saxon rulers.
Don't get your hopes up about Serbian culture. The way they avoided stupid cultural bitching about the map in CK1 was by making everyone in the Balkans Southslavic. Including Albanians and Romanians. To get Serbs, Croats, Bosniaks, Bulgars, Albanians, and Vlach (Romanians) you had to use the Improvement Packs.
I'll be stunned if they don't repeat the decision for CK2.
Nick
There is also the matter of intercultural Dynasties. That was particularly noticeable in the second scenario of CK 1, when the House of Bourgogne/Burgundy was split off into different Dynastic families when they weren't. For instance there was the Borgonha Dynasty (Portuguese Bourgogne), Borgoña (Spanish Bourgogne) and Bourgogne (French ones). It was silly seeing Portuguese Bourgogne as Kings of Portugal, Spanish Bourgognes as Castillian Kings and French Bourgognes as Kings of Burgundy, yet they were not in the same family, even though all kings descended from the same people.