We're all set for a China DLC

[Me_]

With the introduction of the new Viceroys system for king and duke level titles in C, it would seem that centralized states can now (well, a week from now) be represented sensibly in CK2.

It would therefore appear to me that the last hurdle on the way for the China DLC has been removed.

What do you think? Is there anything left, that we're still missing? The new tribal system will make it possible to populate the steppe more sensibly, so that's out of the way as well.

 

[Hades66]

I played over 500 hours in ck1 and had very little issues with bugs. That is with their last patch. Played a game for 10 hours straight with no crash.

Now Sword of Stars 2....that had bugs.

 

[loup99]

If this is going to be EU like, I want a goverment system, laws, decisions and economy

Nobody said that the Chinna DLc should be the next one (i'm of the opinion that i should be in a sequel, so what you are suggesting would be great as DLc matyerial in the meantime.

 

[Tabris01]

This thread is getting derailed (again.)

To bring this back to a point of contention. People were arguing about whether or not this game is about medieval Europe. Some people said it is others said it isn't. My question to pro-China supporters is this: if this game isn't about medieval Europe then what is it about, in your opinion?

After all, Catholics were the first playable characters. And Republics, Pagans (except Africans), and The Byzantines are all European. You could also argue that societies outside of Europe (Muslims and India) aren't represented well in-game (which is the big issue Muslim player are having right now) because the whole game is built around feudal society, which doesn't represent those cultures well. Just think about how claims, holdings, and laws work --it's all feudal. So how can you not say CK2 is about medieval Europe?

It was about medieval Europe, at the beginning. Now, with all the DLC material that has been released? Not so much anymore. From my PoV the question is: Can you really have a plausible "simulation" of Europe without having at least the rest of Eurasia? Things like the Mongols and Black Death (even if both are endgame, from a CK PoV) didn't happen out of thin air - the whole continent is one giant, communicating system, it always was. Even if the Chinese or Indians never got out of their respective regions, what happend there still had its influence on all of the landmass, even if that influence was small on most of the European rulers, even if, at some points, this influence only concludes out of hypothetical possibilities - after all, what would have happened if Seljuk went east, into India? Those hypothetical things though is what this game is about, at its core, how history might have played out.

 

[Monphat]

This thread may go on forever until PI intervenes. People just repeat the same arguments others have already stated.

In ideal world China would be present in game, but we have CK2 which objectively can't implement that region properly, like it or not: limited developer team, huge amount of work, lot's of small details, inevitable severe PC functionality problems and lot's of other areas of the base game in need of polish.

 

[anomanderus]

Wasn't Iberia the only significant case of Europeans taking "large swathes of land" from Muslims? The Crusader States lasted for only about two hundred years, compared to the game's running-time of almost seven hundred years (with Charlemagne.) The nomadic conquerors, on the other hand (and later, the empire ruled by the House of Osman,) managed to conquer a significant amount of the Eastern Roman Empire.

Just not sure India was added as a place for the Muslims to "retreat" to.



Let's just hope the future games stear away from the railroading. Some of the things added in Europa Universalis IV were a bit worrying.

This has nothing to do with history and everything to do with gameplay. Expanding Iran and Central Asia gives Islam more depth to retreat into, thus when Christians push them back in Jerusalem the Muslims have more land to strike back from.

This thread may go on forever until PI intervenes. People just repeat the same arguments others have already stated.

In ideal world China would be present in game, but we have CK2 which objectively can't implement that region properly, like it or not: limited developer team, huge amount of work, lot's of small details, inevitable severe PC functionality problems and lot's of other areas of the base game in need of polish.

And of course the part where CK2 isn't about the entire world from 769 to 1453 but about a specific area of the world where there was massive conflict between major religions. China can't be in CK2 because China didn't have any significant interaction with the rest of the CK2 world that can be modeled, and even if trade were modeled the Chinese would still be militarily and diplomatically isolated from most of the world. This isn't EU4 or V2 where the point of the game is interacting with the entire world.

It was about medieval Europe, at the beginning. Now, with all the DLC material that has been released? Not so much anymore. From my PoV the question is: Can you really have a plausible "simulation" of Europe without having at least the rest of Eurasia? Things like the Mongols and Black Death (even if both are endgame, from a CK PoV) didn't happen out of thin air - the whole continent is one giant, communicating system, it always was. Even if the Chinese or Indians never got out of their respective regions, what happend there still had its influence on all of the landmass, even if that influence was small on most of the European rulers, even if, at some points, this influence only concludes out of hypothetical possibilities - after all, what would have happened if Seljuk went east, into India? Those hypothetical things though is what this game is about, at its core, how history might have played out.

We already have the mongols. We don't need to see where they came from, only the fact that they came is what matters. The Indians cannot be equated to the Chinese, the Indians were a major conflict zone between Islam and the Dharmic faiths. China was not in contention with any real power to the west of them, China was in their own world. Your arguments failed every other time you made them, get new ones.

 

[Thure]

And of course the part where CK2 isn't about the entire world from 769 to 1453 but about a specific area of the world where there was massive conflict between major religions. China can't be in CK2 because China didn't have any significant interaction with the rest of the CK2 world that can be modeled, and even if trade were modeled the Chinese would still be militarily and diplomatically isolated from most of the world. This isn't EU4 or V2 where the point of the game is interacting with the entire world.

We already have the mongols. We don't need to see where they came from, only the fact that they came is what matters. The Indians cannot be equated to the Chinese, the Indians were a major conflict zone between Islam and the Dharmic faiths. China was not in contention with any real power to the west of them, China was in their own world. Your arguments failed every other time you made them, get new ones.

Mongols... Tibet in India. Tarim Basin. Kara Khitai... CK should be about the whole old world.
And you really like the event troups for the Mongols? If we want to represent the Steppes well we need China.

 

[Ozamu]

Mongols... Tibet in India. Tarim Basin. Kara Khitai... CK should be about the whole old world.
And you really like the event troups for the Mongols? If we want to represent the Steppes well we need China.

I'm with Thure in this one. CK2 isn't anymore just about Europe, it's about the whole known world of the time period.

 

[Carmilla]

I'm with Thure in this one. CK2 isn't anymore just about Europe, it's about the whole known world of the time period.

I'm with Thure and Ozamu on this for the many reasons people have mentioned in this thread already. The whole of the old world would be nice to see.

 

[Tabris01]

I'm with Thure and Ozamu on this for the many reasons people have mentioned in this thread already.

Me aswell. Too much work has been put into things outside of Europe

 

[unmerged(765978)]

Mongols... Tibet in India. Tarim Basin. Kara Khitai... CK should be about the whole old world.
And you really like the event troups for the Mongols? If we want to represent the Steppes well we need China.

Why limit yourself to the old world? With Polynesians in Southamerica and Vikings in Northamerica there is no valid reason to limit yourself to the old wold if you want to represent all possibilities correctly!

 

[unmerged(765978)]

Me aswell. Too much work has been put into things outside of Europe

So because the scope is already to wide, one has to make it even wider? Let's forget about depth, we have to add more regions please...

 

[Sebor13]

So because the scope is already to wide, one has to make it even wider? Let's forget about depth, we have to add more regions please...

No, the argument is that depth cannot be properly simulated without including all major factors.

Crying for "more depth" is meaningless unless you include all major factors in the events.

For those saying that China was mainly isolated, you are so terrible wrong.

In this time period we had dynasties like the Tang who ruled over much of Central Asia. That's not isolation, that's interacting more with the outside world than Estonia did, and everybody was all for showing that properly.

 

[unmerged(765978)]

No, the argument is that depth cannot be properly simulated without including all major factors.

Crying for "more depth" is meaningless unless you include all major factors in the events.

For those saying that China was mainly isolated, you are so terrible wrong.

In this time period we had dynasties like the Tang who ruled over much of Central Asia. That's not isolation, that's interacting more with the outside world than Estonia did, and everybody was all for showing that properly.

I'm all for giving China as much work as Estonia received, which brings us back to the point that the chinese influence deserves an event chain not a DLC. To simulate the depth of a feudal court there is certainly no need for anything chinese related.

 

[hferguson]

Not sure if this has been pointed out yet, but 1.3 billion potential buyers is enough of a reason for Paradox to make a China DLC, the rest of us and our passionate arguments be damned.

 

[DesNibelungen]

Not sure if this has been pointed out yet, but 1.3 billion potential buyers is enough of a reason for Paradox to make a China DLC, the rest of us and our passionate arguments be damned.

I'm sure that a China DLC would sell very well just among the current million-plus userbase. We forget that those of us on this forum are only a tiny minority of players. I bet that the average CK2 player would see China on Steam, think "cool, China" and click "Buy" without feeling they had to fret over exactly how much the Chinese dynamic influenced Scotland.

 

[daniloy]

Not sure if this has been pointed out yet, but 1.3 billion potential buyers is enough of a reason for Paradox to make a China DLC, the rest of us and our passionate arguments be damned.

Is there a sizeable number of chinese players who bought CK 2? Will a China DLC simply draw players ,if yes, was the same effect observed with ROI and Indians?

 

[killerbee256]

Is there a sizeable number of chinese players who bought CK 2? Will a China DLC simply draw players ,if yes, was the same effect observed with ROI and Indians?

You're implying that only Chinese people would buy the dlc, what on earth makes you think that?

 

[daniloy]

You're implying that only Chinese people would buy the dlc, what on earth makes you think that?

That was not my intention.OP said that due to the large market of in china, a china dlc would draw the chinese players in to and would be a reason to
make this dlc.Of course other nationalities might buy it too.

 

[killerbee256]

That was not my intention.OP said that due to the large market of in china, a china dlc would draw the chinese players in to buy it and would be a reason to
make this dlc.

I think you miss read his post, he said that much of the huge steam base of players would be buy a china dlc, not that a china DLC would cause more Chinese to buy the game. Thought perhaps it might, but is the game even localized into Chinese?

 

[Tabris01]

So because the scope is already to wide, one has to make it even wider? Let's forget about depth, we have to add more regions please...

As I said:

From my PoV the question is: Can you really have a plausible "simulation" of Europe without having at least the rest of Eurasia? Things like the Mongols and Black Death (even if both are endgame, from a CK PoV) didn't happen out of thin air - the whole continent is one giant, communicating system, it always was. Even if the Chinese or Indians never got out of their respective regions, what happend there still had its influence on all of the landmass, even if that influence was small on most of the European rulers, even if, at some points, this influence only concludes out of hypothetical possibilities - after all, what would have happened if Seljuk went east, into India? Those hypothetical things though is what this game is about, at its core, how history might have played out.