The day that Paradox adds a 'be molested or -50 mana' event is the day I stop playing their games
In other news, CK3 dev diaries:
Steam presented me with "Dev Diary #116 - Agrarian Research Techniques"
Medievalistfags like me and most others who made CK2 a success probably lit up at the prospect of CK3 getting hardcore historical content, rather than 'Among Us' or 'You have a Small Penis Haha' events (both are in-game). Perhaps a focus on land-use, the most important aspect of human civlization before the advent of the atom bomb, would provide us with actual medieval stories? Maybe the advent of windmills or crop rotation would show up?. Perhaps Middlesex would no longer outproduce the entirity of Bohemia?
Nope. It was just a joke;
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...iary-116-agrarian-research-techniques.1569914
I haven't followed 'dev diaries' and never will - but who are they appealing to? Who wants things like this? Casual or hardcore, this is an insult to your intelligence.
If you don't want to be molested, convert to based anti-homosexuality Judaism and make the United Kingdom (Israel) the Mediterranean superpower.
I've spent time thinking about how a CK2 economy might work and I think the best thing may be to basically fuse Imperator's trade system (with cities being the agents capable of setting up trade routes) and MEIOU's basic concept of workers first feeding themselves and then using agricultural surplus to support workforces in their food market. Land-use and techniques would in that case be like technologies and laws which improve the agricultural efficiency.
Social conflict was something prominent in the time period that got ignored. Peasant revolts just spawn out of nowhere, get crushed. No laws reflecting your actual rule over them. I had this idea that all holdings should just be "settlements" with a legal code and legal tradition, the former how the settlement is administered (ie republican/imperial/feudal/theocratic) and the latter the socially legitimated legal code (so a memory of what the legal code used to be, like how cores in other Paradox games are a memory of national identity). You can at a somewhat minor expense transform the legal code of settlements, with different codes unlocking different branches of buildings, so something like a castle can grow into a city or a "temple" can be expropriated and made feudal, that sort of thing. But it pisses off the locals, or at least the relevant local estate, to do so. Instead of having weird ahistorical "temples" all over the Islamic world (prince-bishoprics) each county would have a religious authority whose opinion and approval rating directly effect your interactions with the social classes.
Counties are divided into Peasantry, Gentry, and Burghers and have a separate culture, religion, and sentiment (composite of views towards their various lords and religious authorities) for each. I don't know much about social resistance back then, but for peasants you'd expect to see an escalation of banditry and riots and then overt guerilla warfare (like killing gentry) and finally full rebellion. Sentiment would be revolt risk, basically, the measurement of how angry the population is. There could be trade-offs like, for example, sumptuary laws please the gentry but piss off the burghers, droit de seigneur (yeah, I know it was a Marxist myth) pleases gentry but pisses off peasants, militia regulations (improve your levies but anger the peasants), etc. With religious authorities, the authority basically draws the classes' opinion of the lord towards him if he's popular and against his own opinion if he's unpopular. (If the Church hates a ruler but the people hate the Church, that can make the ruler even stronger, Reformation-type stuff.) In general, the religious authorities did most of the bureaucratic heavy-lifting and were the main propaganda vehicles, so unless moral authority is extremely low, the authorities (bishops, muftis, whatever) should be intimidating to deal with.
I have no idea if guilds had any organization beyond the municipal level, but if they did then it would make sense for them to have "personality" in the game organizing around their industry.
In general, yeah, there's a lot of stuff you could do to add more interactions with and standards to measure peasant welfare with, but even on the forums nobody expresses any interest in that, they only want more court roleplaying. I'd rather have more reigning than holding court.
en.m.wikipedia.org
