Stone Henge doesn't deserve to be a Wonder and it's in the way of Salisbury Cathedral

[Sarog]

Cathedrals are dime a dozen but there is only one Stonehenge.

That's not true. There's other standing stone circles in Britain. They are just even less consequential than Stonehenge.

And "dime a dozen" is a particularly poor cliche to use to describe the most expensive, technically ingenious structures built in the middle ages.

 

[Andrzej I]

Make a mod.

Probably will have to be the course of action! It's a shame we can only have one Great Work per province.

 

[Isinfier]

That's not true. There's other standing stone circles in Britain.

And "dime a dozen" is a particularly poor cliche to use to describe the most expensive, technically ingenious structures built in the middle ages.

I'm being overtly pedantic here, but Stonehenge is more than just the stone circle; it's the external earthworks as well. It's also remarkably disingenuous (and ill-informed) to dismiss Stonehenge as "just another stone circle" when the techniques employed to construct the site over the course of a millennia were just as revolutionary (and costly in man-hours) as those employed to construct Salisbury Cathedral several millennia later, not to mention the importance of the site within Neolithic culture both in Britain and beyond. Context is key, really.

 

[Sarog]

I'm being overtly pedantic here, but Stonehenge is more than just the stone circle; it's the external earthworks as well. It's also remarkably disingenuous (and ill-informed) to dismiss Stonehenge as "just another stone circle" when the techniques employed to construct the site over the course of a millennia were just as revolutionary (and costly in man-hours) as those employed to construct Salisbury Cathedral several millennia later, not to mention the importance of the site within Neolithic culture both in Britain and beyond. Context is key, really.

You are being overly pedantic, and misusing the word disingenuous. I acknowledged that we're not sure exactly how Stonehenge was built, I'm not dismissive of it because I'm dishonestly or ignorantly suggesting it was easy to build. That's a willful mischaracterization of my argument. I'm dismissive of Stonehenge because of 1) its absolute irrelevance to medieval life and thought, 2) how poorly suited it is to gameplay that emulates this time period, and I suppose also 3) the fact that its size and construction were not impressive by the standards of the medieval era.

The construction of Salisbury Cathedral is infinitely more relevant because of its significance to the medieval period, by use of medieval techniques. That's the context here. Silly of you to say "context is key" and then go off about how revolutionary Stonehenge was thousands of years before the period of time we're discussing.

 

[treb]

Cathedrals are dime a dozen but there is only one Stonehenge.

Technically Stonehenge isn't unique there are many "stone henges" in the UK many much larger henges by number of stones and area. Avebury is a lot larger. Henges were pretty common and widespread but often built with wood or smaller more easily robbed stones. Is Stonehenge atypical of british henges? Yes, and strictly speaking isn't even a henge. But its just one of many similar sites showing a continuous culture/tradition. In a way stonehenge is the equivalent of a cathedral.

 

[treb]

I'm being overtly pedantic here, but Stonehenge is more than just the stone circle; it's the external earthworks as well. It's also remarkably disingenuous (and ill-informed) to dismiss Stonehenge as "just another stone circle" when the techniques employed to construct the site over the course of a millennia were just as revolutionary (and costly in man-hours) as those employed to construct Salisbury Cathedral several millennia later, not to mention the importance of the site within Neolithic culture both in Britain and beyond. Context is key, really.

Your right in that its not just another stone circle, but your also missing out the context, Stonehenge is the largest and most unique surviving example of british megalithic works but it doesn't exist in a vacuum, it is the apogee of a tradition that lasted thousands of years the culmination of an evolving tradition at a site that was built and rebuilt over a thousand years and was abandoned over 2 millennia before the games start. Even to this day when we can accurately date when what whats don to the site we still have no idea why it was built what its use was and what significance it played to the people who built it. To put it one way the people who put the Sarcen stones in place lived that long before the birth of Christ that today less time has passed between us and Christ than the time passed between them and Christ.

TL;DR:Stonehenge whist unique is part of a longstanding and such an ancient culture that even by the time of Jesus was older than Jesus is to us today, we know so little about it that were unsure of of its function other than it work as a sort of calendar and we cant even certain of what the significance of that is...

 

[Jamie Roberts]

I agree that ideally the game would allow for multiple Wonders per province. What, so I can have the Lighthouse of Alexandria but no Library? Why? The Ptolemies were able to do that a millennia ago. With advanced modern technology like not killing each other for five minutes in a row, I'd think my Empire should be able to match the feat of building two things kinda-sorta near each other.

However, if I've gotta pick just one for that county, I'd pick the world famous spooky monument that existed for the entire period in question over a semi-obscure Cathedral that didn't exist at all for the first 75% of the game.

Although I do think ranking it as a level three Wonder the same as the Pyramids is a bit much. Level one or maybe two should be fine.

 

[Rags17]

You are being overly pedantic, and misusing the word disingenious. I acknowledged that we're not sure exactly how Stonehenge was built, I'm not dismissive of it because I'm dishonestly or ignorantly suggesting it was easy to build. That's a willful mischaracterization of my argument. I'm dismissive of Stonehenge because of 1) its absolute irrelevance to medieval life and thought, 2) how poorly suited it is to gameplay that emulates this time period, and I suppose also 3) the fact that it's size and construction were not impressive by the standards of the medieval era.

The construction of Salisbury Cathedral is infinitely more relevant because of its significance to the medieval period, by use of medieval techniques. That's the context here. Silly of you to say "context is key" and then go off about how revolutionary Stonehenge was thousands of years before the period of time we're discussing.

What a load of bollocks !

By my reckoning maybe 70% of the Great Wonders that will be introduced will be nothing more than an inert pile of rocks that had absolutely ZERO interaction with the people of the CK2 period. The Great Pyramids ? - apart from tomb robbers shortly after they were built and archaeologists in the 19th and 20th century no one had anything to do with them. The same goes for Petra, the Lighthouse at Alexandria or any of the other "ancient" sites. That doesn't stop them from being fascinating to both the locals and to strangers who interact with that area.

The whole idea of a Great Wonder is just that - some man made structure (that rules out things like the Grand Canyon or Victoria Falls right there) that serves as a focal point for good or ill to the peoples surrounding it. Naturally the bigger and more developed the Wonder the wider its fame (or infamy) - having a pile of 500 human skulls is of interest to the locals, having a mighty tumulus made up of the bones of 50,000 prisoners and sacrificial offerings going back centuries would be of interest to anyone who even had a passing knowledge of the place.

"Itil ? I think I know the place, isn't that were that mountain of bones is kept ?"

I am all in favour of Wonders that predate the current occupants by centuries or millennia, OTOH I am all in favour of the locals obliterating said Wonders and using the materials to create a new Wonder, almost certainly at the risk of some local revolt or other province and or character malus. Sure - clear the pile of bones and grind them up to make mortar for the construction of a mighty cathedral but don't think that the locals will take it lying down (or the souls of the dead if you have Supernatural Events turned on !).

 

[Evangeline]

Some people seem to be laboring under the misconception that we will be able to build stonehenge and the pyramids, which would be ahistorical. That's not the case, these are both among the "historical wonders" that are *already* present at game start and don't have to be built.

The wonders we can build are different. If you'd like to be able to build a Great Cathedral, then you'll just have to choose a province next to Salisbury. Obviously it's a bummer that provinces can only hold one great wonder (just think of the owners of Constantinople, Alexandria, Rome, Athens etc.) But I think it's okay to have a maximum of one per province and to just spread the buildable ones out a bit. You may build the cathedral not in the exact right place, but since you can just build it next door I think it's fine. And since the devs were talking about the historical (meaning pre-769) wonders anyway, it would be totally uncorrect to include the Salisbury Cathedral.

But if you'd like to clamor for more wonder building slots, I'm with you - that would be great.

Edit: please everyone, the last DD was clearly meant to introduce us to the pre-built wonders at game start, not the wonders of the era we will be playing in and changing how we like and where we will be building wonders appropriate to and important for the era.

 

[Sarog]

What a load of bollocks !
By my reckoning maybe 70% of the Great Wonders that will be introduced will be nothing more than an inert pile of rocks that had absolutely ZERO interaction with the people of the CK2 period. The Great Pyramids ? - apart from tomb robbers shortly after they were built and archaeologists in the 19th and 20th century no one had anything to do with them. The same goes for Petra, the Lighthouse at Alexandria or any of the other "ancient" sites. That doesn't stop them from being fascinating to both the locals and to strangers who interact with that area.

Yeah, that's a pity. Medieval people didn't care about those sites. Were they intrigued by them? Sure. They were interesting regional oddities, but not important to the way people lived and thought about the medieval world. Apparently my criticism of these sites in game is upsetting to people, but forget for a moment what you as a modern person think and know about them. Think about what a medieval person would think/know about these sites, and consider the gameplay interactions that could derive from that.

What plausible interactions would a Norman king have with Stonehenge? Go there, look around, muse to himself "oh that's interesting, I wonder where these came from?". What else? The site was of no religious significance to any character that appears in CK2. Are imaginary supernatural events all it has going for it?

And what would be a Fatimid caliph or Ayuubid sultan's interactions with the Great Pyramid? Again, it's nice to look at it, but it holds no meaning for them. Would they credibly want to go to the expense of restoring it with white limestone and gold? This idolotrous pagan tomb? That's absurd. Meanwhile no gameplay interactions that derive from the fact that the Fatimid caliph controls the city which all muslims are obligated to visit?

Compare to the gameplay applications of what should have been historical wonders.

Controlling the Kaaba, to which all muslims are drawn. Objectively the most important place on the planet for a very large portion of the playable characters in the game. The potential interactions there are much more meaningful.

Controlling the Hagia Sophia, the grandest structure in medieval Europe, which is credited with the conversion of Russia to Christianity (with a tremendous butterfly effect throughout history, without which our world might be unrecognizable) because Russian envoys thought it was Heaven on Earth. The potential events, from converting characters through its heavenly majesty, to attracting pilgrims, to references to Justinian... there are so many possibilities.

Controlling, say, the Tower of London. Not an architectural wonder, sure. But a building with a particularly special place in English history, with all its use as a residence, a dungeon, and an execution ground. There are so many potential rooms the player could build, and uses that emulate the tower's history.

But if your English king rides to Stonehenge... what plausible meaning does that hold for anyone? "Oh boy this is spooky, I wonder who built this?" Come on. We all love antiquity. We all love big ancient structures. But for the devs to prioritize things that truly did not matter to the medieval era over much better medieval alternatives is a massive lost opportunity.

 

[DPS]

Some people seem to be laboring under the misconception that we will be able to build stonehenge and the pyramids, which would be ahistorical. That's not the case, these are both among the "historical wonders" that are *already* present at game start and don't have to be built.

The wonders we can build are different. If you'd like to be able to build a Great Cathedral, then you'll just have to choose a province next to Salisbury. Obviously it's a bummer that provinces can only hold one great wonder (just think of the owners of Constantinople, Alexandria, Rome, Athens etc.) But I think it's okay to have a maximum of one per province and to just spread the buildable ones out a bit. You may build the cathedral not in the exact right place, but since you can just build it next door I think it's fine. And since the devs were talking about the historical (meaning pre-769) wonders anyway, it would be totally uncorrect to include the Salisbury Cathedral.

But if you'd like to clamor for more wonder building slots, I'm with you - that would be great.

Edit: please everyone, the last DD was clearly meant to introduce us to the pre-built wonders at game start, not the wonders of the era we will be playing in and changing how we like and where we will be building wonders appropriate to and important for the era.

I have to agree with this.

In addition, the people who don't want Stonehenge there are ignoring the fact that it's one of the most well-known structures in the world, and Salisbury Cathedral isn't. Maybe that wasn't true in 1250, but it certainly is now. I can see an argument for leaving out any structures that were already built at the start of the game, but then you'd be leaving out a lot of structures that people would miss if they aren't there.

 

[Shadoon4]

What a load of bollocks !

By my reckoning maybe 70% of the Great Wonders that will be introduced will be nothing more than an inert pile of rocks that had absolutely ZERO interaction with the people of the CK2 period. The Great Pyramids ? - apart from tomb robbers shortly after they were built and archaeologists in the 19th and 20th century no one had anything to do with them. The same goes for Petra, the Lighthouse at Alexandria or any of the other "ancient" sites. That doesn't stop them from being fascinating to both the locals and to strangers who interact with that area.

The whole idea of a Great Wonder is just that - some man made structure (that rules out things like the Grand Canyon or Victoria Falls right there) that serves as a focal point for good or ill to the peoples surrounding it. Naturally the bigger and more developed the Wonder the wider its fame (or infamy) - having a pile of 500 human skulls is of interest to the locals, having a mighty tumulus made up of the bones of 50,000 prisoners and sacrificial offerings going back centuries would be of interest to anyone who even had a passing knowledge of the place.

"Itil ? I think I know the place, isn't that were that mountain of bones is kept ?"

I am all in favour of Wonders that predate the current occupants by centuries or millennia, OTOH I am all in favour of the locals obliterating said Wonders and using the materials to create a new Wonder, almost certainly at the risk of some local revolt or other province and or character malus. Sure - clear the pile of bones and grind them up to make mortar for the construction of a mighty cathedral but don't think that the locals will take it lying down (or the souls of the dead if you have Supernatural Events turned on !).

WTF are you talking about that the Lighthouse didnt have any interactions with modern people. It was literally in use until its destruction via earthquake in the 15th century

Yeah, that's a pity. Medieval people didn't care about those sites. Were they intrigued by them? Sure. They were interesting regional oddities, but not important to the way people lived and thought about the medieval world. Apparently my criticism of these sites in game is upsetting to people, but forget for a moment what you as a modern person think and know about them. Think about what a medieval person would think/know about these sites, and consider the gameplay interactions that could derive from that.

What plausible interactions would a Norman king have with Stonehenge? Go there, look around, muse to himself "oh that's interesting, I wonder where these came from?". What else? The site was of no religious significance to any character that appears in CK2. Are imaginary supernatural events all it has going for it?

And what would be a Fatimid caliph or Ayuubid sultan's interactions with the Great Pyramid? Again, it's nice to look at it, but it holds no meaning for them. Would they credibly want to go to the expense of restoring it with white limestone and gold? This idolotrous pagan tomb? That's absurd. Meanwhile no gameplay interactions that derive from the fact that the Fatimid caliph controls the city which all muslims are obligated to visit?

Compare to the gameplay applications of what should have been historical wonders.

Controlling the Kaaba, to which all muslims are drawn. Objectively the most important place on the planet for a very large portion of the playable characters in the game. The potential interactions there are much more meaningful.

Controlling the Hagia Sophia, the grandest structure in medieval Europe, which is credited with the conversion of Russia to Christianity (with a tremendous butterfly effect throughout history, without which our world might be unrecognizable) because Russian envoys thought it was Heaven on Earth. The potential events, from converting characters through its heavenly majesty, to attracting pilgrims, to references to Justinian... there are so many possibilities.

Controlling, say, the Tower of London. Not an architectural wonder, sure. But a building with a particularly special place in English history, with all its use as a residence, a dungeon, and an execution ground. There are so many potential rooms the player could build, and uses that emulate the tower's history.

But if your English king rides to Stonehenge... what plausible meaning does that hold for anyone? "Oh boy this is spooky, I wonder who built this?" Come on. We all love antiquity. We all love big ancient structures. But for the devs to prioritize things that truly did not matter to the medieval era over much better medieval alternatives is a massive lost opportunity.

At this point you're comparing apples to oranges.

Salisbury Cathedral HAS NEVER and WILL NEVER be equivalent to the Hagia Sophia or Kaabla. Its not even considered that important in England let alone the rest of Christendom. That these historical wonders are not present is a shame, that Salisbury Cathedral doesn't exist 1250 onward is limitations of gameplay

 

[Sarog]

In addition, the people who don't want Stonehenge there are ignoring the fact that it's one of the most well-known structures in the world, and Salisbury Cathedral isn't.

No one's ignoring it, it just isn't a good argument. Being in the game isn't some award Stonehenge gets for being famous, it's a feature with which characters can interact. How and why would medieval characters interact with a building that held no meaning for them other than mystique? Please, feel free to be specific. Because for all that people insist that I'm wrong about Stonehenge, no one has put forward any suggestions of how the structure holds any meaningful interactions for any character that appears in CK2.

At this point you're comparing apples to oranges.

Salisbury Cathedral HAS NEVER and WILL NEVER be equivalent to the Hagia Sophia or Kaabla. Its not even considered that important in England let alone the rest of Christendom. That these historical wonders are not present is a shame, that Salisbury Cathedral doesn't exist 1250 onward is limitations of gameplay

You're confusing my posts with one another. That post wasn't about Salisbury. That post was specifically in reference to the post it quoted, which was talking about the pyramid and the Pharos in reference to my criticism of Stonehenge. I posted that specifically to say that the other ancient wonders aren't great choices either.

I don't think Salisbury is equivalent to those things I mentioned. But it was absolutely more important than Stonehenge.

 

[treb]

WTF are you talking about that the Lighthouse didnt have any interactions with modern people. It was literally in use until its destruction via earthquake in the 15th century


At this point you're comparing apples to oranges.

Salisbury Cathedral HAS NEVER and WILL NEVER be equivalent to the Hagia Sophia or Kaabla. Its not even considered that important in England let alone the rest of Christendom. That these historical wonders are not present is a shame, that Salisbury Cathedral doesn't exist 1250 onward is limitations of gameplay

Im not to bothered about Salisbury cathedral, but at the same token Stonehenge as a major religious site fell out of use before Indo-Europeans even got to Britain over 4000 years ago. the people who built it and the people ck2 abstracts share only about ~10% of genetics and absolutely nothing culturally. Modern Egyptians share more in common culturally and genetically with the people that built the pyramids than the modern British do with the builders of Stonehenge.

Both are rather bad wonders given the context, especially if Stonehenge is meant to be some way to crowbar in celtic polytheism

 

[jwalche]

That's nice. Your preferences aren't reflective of the medieval mindset though. Stonehenge didn't matter to anyone. Salisbury Cathedral assuredly did.

Those English are known to be very into archaeological stuffs, more so if it is on their own land. Stonehenge seems matter to at least those at Salisbury cathedral.

https://www.salisburycathedral.org.uk/visit-plan-your-visit/salisbury-and-stonehenge

 

[treb]

I think the problem is up until the Norman invasion there really was nothing of any note in Britain that could be a candidate as great work. That being said they should not just add one for the sake of it. Especially a neolithic/bronze age megalith that was little more than a curiosity at the time.

 

[treb]

Those English are known to be very into archaeological stuffs, more so if it is on their own land. Stonehenge seems matter to at least those at Salisbury cathedral.

https://www.salisburycathedral.org.uk/visit-plan-your-visit/salisbury-and-stonehenge

The reverence the British have for their past developed long, long after the end of ck2, were talking more in the timefame of Victoria.

 

[jwalche]

The reverence the British have for their past developed long, long after the end of ck2, were talking more in the timefame of Victoria.

But it existed even in middle ages;

"The earliest example of archaeological work in Britain can, perhaps, be claimed by monks at Glastonbury Abbey in 1194, where the supposed burial place of King Arthur was found during the rebuilding of the great church after a fire (it was most likely the grave of a former Abbott). A more systematic – and less accidental – approach was taken by John Leland, appointed ‘the King’s Antiquary’ by Henry VIII in 1533 and charged with searching England and Wales for antiquities of all kinds."

file:///C:/Users/justin-work/Downloads/9780387094526-c1.pdf

Nonetheless, to us modern gamers, Stonehenge matters as much as Salisbury. To the middle age people, it was less of a history and more of a life. It probably was depends on each one's religion and culture. Paganism was probably, at least somewhat, stronger than what church historians had recorded.

 

[Sarog]

Those English are known to be very into archaeological stuffs, more so if it is on their own land. Stonehenge seems matter to at least those at Salisbury cathedral.

https://www.salisburycathedral.org.uk/visit-plan-your-visit/salisbury-and-stonehenge

Yes yes yes, modern people know about Stonehenge, it's a tourist attraction, it's very famous etc. It was also of no religious or cultural significance to any character that appears in the game, and is therefore a poor choice for this feature.

It probably was depends on each one's religion and culture. Paganism was probably, at least somewhat, stronger than what church historians had recorded.

What does Stonehenge have to do with paganism? Celtic paganism isn't even in the game, and had nothing to do with Stonehenge. Do we need megalithic pagan revivals now too?

I think the problem is up until the Norman invasion there really was nothing of any note in Britain that could be a candidate as great work. That being said they should not just add one for the sake of it. Especially a neolithic/bronze age megalith that was little more than a curiosity at the time.

As I've mentioned, I would have liked to see the Tower of London from the Willian the Conqueror start onwards, though it's also fine to just replicate that yourself with the great fortress (though missing out on flavour specific to the Tower is somewhat of a pity). But I do think it's a shame that Stonehenge blocks you from doing the same in Salisbury, and that Stonehenge's "slot" in the lineup of historical wonders wasn't given to a more deserving candidate.

Obviously at this point the work on Stonehenge is done (though the icon from dev diary does not look great) and it wouldn't make a great deal sense to rip out finished content just because it wasn't the best allocation of resources.

 

[BuddyLove]

Fine- get rid of Stonehenge, but your precious Cathedral can't be built till the late 1200s and only if you have English culture- not Anglo-Saxon or anything else.

And only if you have Catholic religion.

History scolds like you rob the fun of the game

WTF are you talking about that the Lighthouse didnt have any interactions with modern people. It was literally in use until its destruction via earthquake in the 15th century


At this point you're comparing apples to oranges.

Salisbury Cathedral HAS NEVER and WILL NEVER be equivalent to the Hagia Sophia or Kaabla. Its not even considered that important in England let alone the rest of Christendom. That these historical wonders are not present is a shame, that Salisbury Cathedral doesn't exist 1250 onward is limitations of gameplay

Salisbury Cathedral isn't the most important Cathedral within 25 miles of its location, since winchester is just an 8 Hour walk away.