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

[jwalche]

I Play Ck2 because its the closest abstraction to medieval history in a game currently, I play it to Larp as a byzantine emperor or a viking king altering history in some cool way, if I wanted to pretend to be at the helm of some hypothetical neolithic British civilization id play civ on a world map.

A commercial game cannot be tailored to only a small group of people. While what you have said is true, we must make a peace with features for other buyers or we are asking the venture to not succeed.

 

[Sarog]

I will simply disagree with your premises that "Stonehenge doesn't matter, historically, to this period at all."

And I will add that it can be included if Stonehenge historically matters to us the player. Commercially, It would not make sense to not capitalize on well known historical keywords. For average buyers outside of U.K., or non-Christian inside U.K., Stonehenge has far heavier weight than Salisbury.

How did Stonehenge matter to medieval people? Can you be specific? Or is this just willful disagreement?

And let's be real, no one believes that sales of CK2 will live or die by Stonehenge. You're just looking for something to justify disagreement. I'm guessing you were caught off guard to learn that celtic pagans didn't actually build/worship at Stonehenge? Let's not pretend we're all suddenly super concerned with the marketing of a seven year old game.

 

[jwalche]

How did Stonehenge matter to medieval people? Can you be specific? Or is this just willful disagreement?

And let's be real, no one believes that sales of CK2 will live or die by Stonehenge. You're just looking for something to justify disagreement. I'm guessing you were caught off guard to learn that celtic pagans didn't actually build/worship at Stonehenge? Let's not pretend we're all suddenly super concerned with the marketing of a seven year old game.

It seems is more logical that the proposer of the idea that Stonehenge did not matter to the game period at all should prove it. Until then, my reasoning can be simple. I disagree with that idea for lack of evidence provided by the arguer.

I am not saying that I am super concerned. What I am saying is that I see logic in Paradox including Stonehenge instead of Salisbury, and I would do the same if I was in that position, while I don't see much sense arguing against for historical inaccuracy of intended design features in a game where there are magic, immorality, and Cosmopolitan and Gender Equality pagan warrior empire.

 

[Rubidium]

I'd like to quote the Dev DIary here: "The rule is that every Great Work that has completed its final stage will be represented by a permanent province modifier in a converted EU4 game. By default we also ignore any historical Great Works that were present at the start of the campaign of CK2 but that rule is easily changed by modifying a value in the defines file before converting."
So Stone Henge will have ZERO effect on your provinces. ZERO religious importance is implied, the province gets no modifier from it. It's just for flavor, nothing else.

Note that this is just for converting games to EU4; if you use the EU4 Converter option to load up a CK2 save in EU4, it won't include a bonus from the Pyramids or the Great Lighthouse or whatever.

Stonehenge will presumably have an effect in CK2, as otherwise no one would build Stone Circle wonders.

 

[treb]

It seems is more logical that the proposer of the idea that Stonehenge did not matter to the game period at all should prove it. Until then, my reasoning can be simple. I disagree with that idea for lack of evidence provided by the arguer.

I am not saying that I am super concerned. What I am saying is that I see logic in Paradox including Stonehenge instead of Salisbury, and I would do the same if I was in that position, while I don't see much sense arguing against for historical inaccuracy of intended design features in a game where there are magic, immorality, and Cosmopolitan and Gender Equality pagan warrior empire.

Except we do have the evidence that it didnt matter. The entire medieval phase of Stonehenge from the 5th century to the 14th is a single Saxon burial and a handful of medieval artifacts. That is absolutely dwarfed my the amount of neolithic and early bronze age artifacts from the site. It was a long abandoned curiosity that a few people came to gawk at and move on, occasionally dropping the odd item there.

 

[Jamie Roberts]

Question to both of you - Stonehenge doesn't matter, historically, to this period at all. According to PDX they didn't include Hagia Sophia because it "wasn't significant". With is in mind, how can you defend the inclusion of Stonehenge, it is orders of magnitude more important but has been omitted.

I'd defend my position that Stonehenge should be included by saying that Paradox's stated position is insane. If the Hagia Sophia isn't an important enough Wonder to include, than nothing is. If that's the standard then there should be no Pyramids, no Lighthouse, nothing.

As with many things I advocate for in this game, I do think Stonehenge deserves to be included, but I also think that other things are more important. I think the Great Schism is more important to add than, say, Basque Pagans, but that doesn't mean that I think Basque pagans should be excluded. I think the Hagia Sophia is more important then Stonehenge, but that doesn't mean I don't think Stonehenge is important.

 

[Evangeline]

Note that this is just for converting games to EU4; if you use the EU4 Converter option to load up a CK2 save in EU4, it won't include a bonus from the Pyramids or the Great Lighthouse or whatever.

Stonehenge will presumably have an effect in CK2, as otherwise no one would build Stone Circle wonders.

Since they explicitly say that they will "also" exlude historical wonders from having any effect in EU4, I had assumed that this was already a given in CK2.

 

[DPS]

Question to both of you - Stonehenge doesn't matter, historically, to this period at all. According to PDX they didn't include Hagia Sophia because it "wasn't significant". With is in mind, how can you defend the inclusion of Stonehenge, it is orders of magnitude more important but has been omitted. I think you're both probably over-estimating how "spooky" or impressive the monument is. It's worth seeing, to be sure, but it's no Petra or Pyramid. Modern fascination with it stems primarily from its great antiquity and the very primitive technology used to create it coupled with what was apparently very advanced astronomical observation.

Medieval people though the Devil (or Merlin) built it.

By Contrast Salisbury Cathedral originated the Sarum Rite (it actually originated in Old Sarum but developed in Salisbury) which came to dominate English, Welsh, Irish and Scottish usage.

So, you see, Salisbury Cathedral is more historically important that Stonehenge. That's not to say it should be a unique Great Work, but as things stand you CAN'T build the Great Cathedral most English medievalists would want to.
.

Bringing Hagia Sophia into the discussion doesn't mean much, since I agree that it should be in. If it shouldn't be a wonder, I'm not sure what should be.

 

[SigurdStormhand]

It seems is more logical that the proposer of the idea that Stonehenge did not matter to the game period at all should prove it. Until then, my reasoning can be simple. I disagree with that idea for lack of evidence provided by the arguer.

I am not saying that I am super concerned. What I am saying is that I see logic in Paradox including Stonehenge instead of Salisbury, and I would do the same if I was in that position, while I don't see much sense arguing against for historical inaccuracy of intended design features in a game where there are magic, immorality, and Cosmopolitan and Gender Equality pagan warrior empire.

You have made an error of logic here. I did not say that Stonehenge, in principle, should not be included, I said that it does not deserve to be a Wonder/Great Work primarily because it blocks the far more important Great Cathedral in Salisbury from being built.

I have explained the importance of Salisbury to English liturgical practice, I have yet to see any practical argument that anybody cared half as much about Stonehenge. In fact, the best argument in favour of it so far has been given by me when I pointed out that some among the English and Welsh believed Merlin placed the Stones (it's in Geoffrey of Monmouth).

If Arthurian Romance is your standard, though, Glastonbury Tor should be included - the Abbey was present in the earliest start dates, was the supposed resting place of King Arthur and was believed to have been founded by Joseph of Arimathea!

Now, explain to me why this fairly impressive pile of rocks is blocking my gigantic, liturgical essential Cathedral from being built again?

 

[afrodius]

I've been to stonehenge, the ruins of old sarum, and the cathedral. They are all impressive. If I remember right, most of the stone for the cathedral was looted from old sarum. I don't know if old sarum is represented by a barony already or what, but you should be able to destroy it and create your cathedral. (In the mod I assume you're making)

 

[Jamie Roberts]

In fact, the best argument in favour of it so far has been given by me

Who died and made you referee? I'm pretty sure the ref was my dynasty.

 

[SigurdStormhand]

(In the mod I assume you're making)

I could make a really snarky comment, but I won't. I mod other games, I might end up modding CKII one day but what I'm hearing from the Devs is that, at present, Great works aren't destroy-able.

Who died and made you referee? I'm pretty sure the ref was my dynasty.

Someone has made a better historical argument? The fact medieval people believed "Merlin did it" is the best argument I've heard. The other argument I've heard amounts to "it's for the memes, and it makes financial sense."

I don't consider that a good argument, I'm sorry.

 

[Rags17]

You have made an error of logic here. I did not say that Stonehenge, in principle, should not be included, I said that it does not deserve to be a Wonder/Great Work primarily because it blocks the far more important Great Cathedral in Salisbury from being built.

I have explained the importance of Salisbury to English liturgical practice, I have yet to see any practical argument that anybody cared half as much about Stonehenge. In fact, the best argument in favour of it so far has been given by me when I pointed out that some among the English and Welsh believed Merlin placed the Stones (it's in Geoffrey of Monmouth).

If Arthurian Romance is your standard, though, Glastonbury Tor should be included - the Abbey was present in the earliest start dates, was the supposed resting place of King Arthur and was believed to have been founded by Joseph of Arimathea!

Now, explain to me why this fairly impressive pile of rocks is blocking my gigantic, liturgical essential Cathedral from being built again?

I think that you're the one that has made the error of logic here - you are confusing importance to history with "Great Wonder". By your rule places like Strasbourg (where Gutenberg perfected his printing press), Faversham (home of the first gunpowder mill in England) and Herault (site of the first paper mill in Europe) would all be Great Wonders because of their importance to later technological developments. In my book these places might be important or significant, but I don't think any medieval traveler (apart from hermeticists) would have gone out of their way to visit them.

A "Great Wonder" is just that - a Wonder that is great, unusual or out of the ordinary. Some place that fills you with awe (or maybe dread) and which has, or which will soon go down through the ages as a place of high importance. Stonehenge may have been well past its prime (and well before its second prime) but the locals would still have known of it much more than they would have known of the origin site of the Sarum Rites. The same goes for Strasbourg, Faversham or Herault - I'm going to guess that very few people thought to travel to Herault to see the paper mill in operation, but even at the height of the Age of Faith there would still have been people visiting Stonehenge to commune with God/Jesus/nature.

 

[Rubidium]

Since they explicitly say that they will "also" exlude historical wonders from having any effect in EU4, I had assumed that this was already a given in CK2.

The two sentences you quoted come from a section explicitly entitled "Great Works in EU4":

Great Works in EU4
The thousands of ducats that the rulers invest in the foundations of the Great Works are investments that will have effects for ages. To make sure this characterizes your realm even more, we’ve made sure to transfer these feats when we’re converting save games from CK2 to EU4.

The rule is that every Great Work that has completed its final stage will be represented by a permanent province modifier in a converted EU4 game. By default we also ignore any historical Great Works that were present at the start of the campaign of CK2 but that rule is easily changed by modifying a value in the defines file before converting.

Different types of province modifier will apply depending on the type of Great Work it originated from. The following list will define the effects of the fully completed Great Works in converted EU4 games: [long list of modifiers]

In context (given that it's in a section explicitly about EU4 conversions), the "also" implies that it connects to the previous sentence; i.e. by default *in a converted EU4 game*, we ignore wonders that either haven't been completed to tier 4, or that were "historical." Hence the bit about "that rule is easily changed by modifying a value in the defines file before converting," where *converting* is something you only do when you are converting it to an EU4 game with the converter.

If they meant that historical wonders had no effect *in CK2*, they would have said it explicitly (as it means that all those pretty wonders they spent the dev diary showing off had no effect, and in fact make the provinces they are in *worse*, as they would then block them from building useful wonders there instead). They wouldn't have left it to a strained implication of one sentence in a section that was explicitly about EU4 converter games.

 

[Nyrael]

Stonehenge doesn't even need to be a wonder: just having it as a provincial modifier and having it appear on map is enough. Though I am not sure what the modifier would be seeing as nobody in the period cared about it. Other than some Pagan fanboys drolling over it, I have to agree that there is no purpose to it.

 

[Patriarch of Bub]

I think that you're the one that has made the error of logic here - you are confusing importance to history with "Great Wonder". By your rule places like Strasbourg (where Gutenberg perfected his printing press), Faversham (home of the first gunpowder mill in England) and Herault (site of the first paper mill in Europe) would all be Great Wonders because of their importance to later technological developments. In my book these places might be important or significant, but I don't think any medieval traveler (apart from hermeticists) would have gone out of their way to visit them.

A "Great Wonder" is just that - a Wonder that is great, unusual or out of the ordinary. Some place that fills you with awe (or maybe dread) and which has, or which will soon go down through the ages as a place of high importance. Stonehenge may have been well past its prime (and well before its second prime) but the locals would still have known of it much more than they would have known of the origin site of the Sarum Rites. The same goes for Strasbourg, Faversham or Herault - I'm going to guess that very few people thought to travel to Herault to see the paper mill in operation, but even at the height of the Age of Faith there would still have been people visiting Stonehenge to commune with God/Jesus/nature.

What exactly do you mean by "Age of Faith"?

 

[Rags17]

What exactly do you mean by "Age of Faith"?

A poor choice of words maybe, but I was struggling to come up with a word or phrase that referred to the period of peak Catholic hegemony in Europe. Prior to the start of the CK2 period (ie up to the start f the 700s) Catholicism was still trying to work out just what it in fact was all about (the nature of Christ, liturgical practices, etc), after the middle of the 11th century it was struggling to keep hold of what it had and make sure that everyone read from the same playbook, local heresies (eg Cathars and Waldensians etc), local political issues (eg the Great Schism, the Road to Canossa, the Investiture Controversy etc) acted to slowly but surely tear the fabric of the faith apart.

In actual fact I think it would be very hard to point to a period of "peak faith", especially since this period would have and dis in fat occur at different times at different places in Europe. In my example I was referring to the period from around the 8th to 11th centuries.

 

[Patriarch of Bub]

A poor choice of words maybe, but I was struggling to come up with a word or phrase that referred to the period of peak Catholic hegemony in Europe. Prior to the start of the CK2 period (ie up to the start f the 700s) Catholicism was still trying to work out just what it in fact was all about (the nature of Christ, liturgical practices, etc), after the middle of the 11th century it was struggling to keep hold of what it had and make sure that everyone read from the same playbook, local heresies (eg Cathars and Waldensians etc), local political issues (eg the Great Schism, the Road to Canossa, the Investiture Controversy etc) acted to slowly but surely tear the fabric of the faith apart.

In actual fact I think it would be very hard to point to a period of "peak faith", especially since this period would have and dis in fat occur at different times at different places in Europe. In my example I was referring to the period from around the 8th to 11th centuries.

Thanks for clarifying, because yes i did interpret it as "age when people where most religious". And i already wanted to write and quote articles on the effect pluralism and secularism have on society and blah blah
Phew this was a close one

 

[BuddyLove]

We're not talking about "what if the norse/zoroastrian/zunist religion hadn't died out?" here. Those are implausible scenarios that are at least within the scope of imagination.

For Stonehenge to have religious significance, you would need the resurrection of actual pre Indo-European cavemen. Even for a game with Sunset Invasion, that seems like a stretch.

This, and everyone saying it had no significance whatsoever, is just straight up not true.

According to Geoffrey of Monmouth Merlin moved Stonehenge to its current location from Ireland at the behest of Ambrosious and Uthor and Constantine III is buried there.

That story isn't true, but it's from the 12th century referencing back to the 6th and illustrative of the fact that people of the erra didn't just Glace at it, go 'huh?' And move along without a second thought.

 

[Aotrs Commander]

My mistake. Clearly Stonehenge is an excellent place for your Fylkir to summon Cthulu to fight the Power Rangers.

Plus it's an excellent location for a holy site when the devs finally add Reformed Neanderthallism, which still had a thriving community in the caves of Gibraltar.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I Play Ck2 because its the closest abstraction to medieval history in a game currently, I play it to Larp as a byzantine emperor or a viking king altering history in some cool way, if I wanted to pretend to be at the helm of some hypothetical neolithic British civilization id play civ on a world map.

Absolutely! Some of the people round here treat this game like it's a fantasy game, not a history simulator!

Filthy casuals! The worst one of 'em? Well, I probably shouldn't name names, but there's the one, this "Aotrs Commander" - oh, he don't half get twitching if you spell his screen name as "Ators," the special little snowflake. Shifty bugger, one of those freaks who uses a skeleton avatar instead of a proper historical one like he should. He's has this coming, he has. He thinks his money is as good as ours, can you believe it!

Came swanning in here a few years ago - bought everything on sale, the cheapskate - because he wanted to get a proper run up for world conquest in EUIV (yeah, he's one of THOSE, but he can't even be arsed to get good enough to do it properly, because he doens't want it to be "too difficult") and he'd heard of that Norse to Horse thing. I mean, come on. He was positively over the moon about all the fantasy aspects - Reaper's Due and having immortality, oh, it was painful to watch.

First game (which he's still playing, the casual loser) he play Bazantuium to Restore the Roman Emperor. And he named all the male kids with names ending with -us like in Asterix the Gaul (that's rubbish by-the-by, not at all historically accurate, it's like some kind of parody) and named all the girls after types of Undead; and THEN he named all the bastards he had after the names of his Pokémon! I don't even know what a Pokeman is! It's horrible! Can you imagine what he's going to do in his first game of Imperator? I shudder to think!

Especially as he won't ever play on ironman, the little b... egger. No, he plays everything on easy and save-scams. He doesn't even like too much RNG! And he has the audacity - the AUDACITY to have fun doing that! Not even close to histrocially correct! And he won't sod off and play some other fantasy crap, no matter how much I want him to; no, he whines "but the other games aren't as good as GSGs!" Of course not, you little ratbag, they're fantasy and fantasy players don't deserve to have nice things! He won't even play that one Game of Thrones mod, because - and can you believe this - he doesn't give two craps about Game of Thrones! (I reckon he'd rather watch My Little Pony, gods. He shouldn't be watching cartoons as his age! He's forty this year, for Herodotus' sake!)

He thinks we should all compromise! COMPROMISE! On the INTERNET! As if there's enough room for doing that to strike a middle ground between the history enthusiasts and the people that just want to play a good game and aren't quite as bothered about the history! Unbelievable! Thinks we should "share our toys!" Who does he think he is!

Says he's even interested in history - but he's not even close to an expert like the rest of us! Just some lay pillock! I bet you if you'd ask him this morning, he wouldn't even have remembered Salisbury Catherdral existed if you'd asked him to name seven cathedrals. (He'd probably have mentioned the on in his home town first...) I mean, this one time, I caught him going onto the history boards and actually ask for recommendations for reading up on the history of China! Can you believe it! Didn't know anything about it all, he said! Such a casual! I bet he never lectured his class twice when he was a teenager on military history!

He ought to sod off with his fantasy crap and go play Beyond Earth (he doesn't deserve Alpha Centauri) or something.

He's thinks he's so funny, with his silly British self-deprecating humour, unsufferable prat.



Sorry, got to go, I've just got to go shout at my four-year old nephew for playing with my Transformers toys wrong - he's having a tea party where Optimus Prime and Megatron are best friends. I can't EVEN.