gradenko_2000 posted:

I was wondering why "old style retinue" mods were so highly rated on the ck2 workshop. So that's it.

DStecks posted:

It would be interesting if holy orders and mercenaries were more robust/playable, because then the whole retinue system could probably be swapped out for a creatable-vassal-warrior-order thing. So you could get some of the original effects of retinues pacifying your vassals, but they themselves are a vassal to be kept happy (see: the Janissaries).

SeaTard posted:

That would be amazing.

Dibujante posted:

On the topic of Janissaries, if CK2 gained exploration, trade, and naval warfare mechanics I am confident it could do a really interesting take on 1444-1789.

DrSunshine posted:

But there is a game about this -- it's called Europa Universalis IV!

Dibujante posted:

What!? I am not- I mean -



And I love it to death. But there are a bunch of important events in EU4 that would just work better with CK2's dynastic/vassal mechanics:

• The 100 years' war
  
• The Burgundian Inheritance
  
• Actually, all of Austria all the time
  
• The Ottoman Empire cycling through sultans like a bossmurder carousel
  
• Ottoman client states (Crimea, Barbary coast)
  
• The Iberian Wedding
  
• The fall of the Ming and the rise of the Qing
  
• Sengoku Jidai
  
• The fall of the Aztec Empire
  
• The fall of the Incan Empire
  
• The steppe in general
  
• The PLC's elective monarchy
  
• Ottoman Empire vassals/"vassals" in Europe
  
• Mali and Malian collapse
  
• The disintegration of the Mughals
  
• Actually most things disintegrate better once you do dynastic/vassal mechanics
  
• Actually I'm bad at bulleted lists because this is not an acceptable bulleted list format
  
• England and Scotland and that whole mess.
  

PittTheElder posted:

True story. EU4 doesn't need all the characterization that CK2 has, but holy poo poo could it ever use sub-national entities and dynastic modelling.

Fintilgin posted:

All Paradox games need more characters.


EDIT: Okay, CKII probably has enough characters. I mean all the other ones.

Pornographic Memory posted:

I don't know about you but I want to personally select all the soldiers for my retinues individually. It can be the new use for the tournament events. Just imagine holding your yearly tournament so that you can test the worthiness of potential recruits and re-evaluate the fighting skills of all of your thousands of current soldiers

Agean90 posted:

but hoi3 was bad because of that feature

Raenir Salazar posted:

Some simple dynastic modeling for EUIV would be the next big thing I'd like. Its annoying how much of a crapshoot it is to keep your dynasty intact.

Fintilgin posted:

All Paradox games need more characters.

Ofaloaf posted:

I don't know about you, but I enjoyed building up Mackenzie King's retinue. The tournament events were easy enough to deal with if you just took the event options that upped your martial skill.

zedprime posted:

If you are marxist enough world history can be described entirely by the original CK and Vicky while EU2 and HOI2 are RTS abstractions to gamify a couple of the more interesting eras of history. Anything including and post EU3 are fictions to distract the sheeple from reality.

YF-23 posted:

I don't see how you could say it describes world history entirely

zedprime posted:

If you are marxist enough world history can be described entirely by the original CK and Vicky while EU2 and HOI2 are RTS abstractions to gamify a couple of the more interesting eras of history. Anything including and post EU3 are fictions to distract the sheeple from reality.

quote:

There was no such thing as the Tartar and Mongol invasion followed by over two centuries of yoke and slavery, because the so-called "Tartars and Mongols" were the actual ancestors of the modern Russians, living in a bilingual state with Turkic spoken as freely as Russian. So, Russia and Turkey once formed parts of the same empire. This ancient Russian state was governed by a double structure of civil and military authorities and the hordes were actually professional armies with a tradition of lifelong conscription (the recruitment being the so-called "blood tax"). The Mongol "invasions" were punitive operations against the regions of the empire that attempted tax evasion. Tamerlane was probably a Russian warlord.

Mans posted:

DStecks posted:

I don't think it would be unreasonable to extend CKII's timeline up to 1600, since that's the final point at which New World colonization can be feasibly ignored. As far as CKII politics are concerned, Columbus could be handled with a flavour event chain.

Mans posted:

Mans posted:

quote:

One of Fomenko's simplest methods is statistical correlation of texts. His basic assumption is that a text which describes a sequence of events will devote more space to more important events (for example, a period of war or an unrest will have much more space devoted to than a period of peaceful, non-eventful years), and that this irregularity will remain visible in other descriptions of the period. For each analysed text, a function is devised which maps each year mentioned in the text with the number of pages (lines, letters) devoted in the text to its description (which could be zero). The function of the two texts are then compared.[21]

For example, Fomenko compares the contemporary history of Rome written by Titus Livius with a modern history of Rome written by Russian historian V. S. Sergeev, calculating that the two have high correlation, and thus that they describe the same period of history, which is undisputed.[22] He also compares modern texts which describe different periods, and calculates low correlation, as expected.[22] However, when he compares, for example, the ancient history of Rome and the medieval history of Rome, he calculates a high correlation, and concludes that ancient history of Rome is a copy of medieval history of Rome, thus clashing with mainstream accounts.[23]

Smoremaster posted:

Paradox devs have repeatedly said they won't do a game set in modern times. Why not?

DStecks posted:

Indeed, why not attempt to model the Israel-Palestine conflict in a video game, especially when their fanbase is already notorious for making nationalistic mountains out of molehills?

Smoremaster posted:

I mostly think it would be awesome if Paradox did a space game, but based in the near future. I want to play as the USA and fight colonial wars against Russia on Mars.

Drone posted:

CK2 already runs like a snail swimming through molasses after around 1300 or 1350 anyway, making it go to 1600 would be ridiculous.

And CK2 would be absolutely awful at modelling the Reformation.

Edit: gently caress it, make CK2 run to the modern day, only replace monarchs with presidents/prime ministers and replace counts/dukes with mayors/governors. Holy Orders and mercenary companies can become PMC's, crusades can be wars for oil. Just because you -can- model the world like that using the CK2 system, doesn't mean you -should-. The same applies with extending CK2 into the modern era.