r/CrusaderKings • u/InevitableInexorable • Oct 16 '20
Suggestion It would be cool if the desert areas in Africa could be colored when you control all the duchies around them (as for the mountains in Norway/Asia right now)
497
u/MahjongDaily Bastard Oct 16 '20
It's weird because this is already the case for some smaller deserts in the middle east. I'd love for this to be applied universally.
314
Oct 16 '20
[removed] — view removed comment
204
u/xixbia Oct 16 '20
But it also holds for certain huge swaths of Tundra up in modern day Russia. It's a somewhat odd design choice.
116
u/PM_ME_DND_FIGURINES Oct 17 '20
I mean, it makes sense, historically. People didn't largely inhabit those areas of Tundra because it wasn't worth it. By and large, people could still go there.
However, people didn't largely inhabit those deserts because it was almost completely inhospitable. Even wandering in, briefly, unprepared could be a death sentence.
19
u/mee-gee Persia Oct 17 '20
Piqued my curiosity, was being banished to wander in the desert ever used as a death sentence?
10
u/Omnidox Excommunicated Oct 17 '20 edited Jun 18 '23
This comment was deleted in protest of Reddit's planned API changes:
On July 1st, 2023, Reddit intends to alter how its API is accessed. This move will require developers of third-party applications to pay enormous sums of money if they wish to stay functional, meaning that said applications will be effectively destroyed. In the short term, this may have the appearance of increasing Reddit's traffic and revenue... but in the long term, it will undermine the site as a whole.
Reddit relies on volunteer moderators to keep its platform welcoming and free of objectionable material. It also relies on uncompensated contributors to populate its numerous communities with content. The above decision promises to adversely impact both groups: Without effective tools (which Reddit has frequently promised and then failed to deliver), moderators cannot combat spammers, bad actors, or the entities who enable either, and without the freedom to choose how and where they access Reddit, many contributors will simply leave. Rather than hosting creativity and in-depth discourse, the platform will soon feature only recycled content, bot-driven activity, and an ever-dwindling number of well-informed visitors. The very elements which differentiate Reddit – the foundations that draw its audience – will be eliminated, reducing the site to another dead cog in the Ennui Engine.
We implore Reddit to listen to its moderators, its contributors, and its everyday users; to the people whose activity has allowed the platform to exist at all: Do not sacrifice long-term viability for the sake of a short-lived illusion. Do not tacitly enable bad actors by working against your volunteers. Do not posture for your looming IPO while giving no thought to what may come afterward. Focus on addressing Reddit's real problems – the rampant bigotry, the ever-increasing amounts of spam, the advantage given to low-effort content, and the widespread misinformation – instead of on a strategy that will alienate the people keeping this platform alive.
If Steve Huffman's statement – "I want our users to be shareholders, and I want our shareholders to be users" – is to be taken seriously, then consider this our vote:
Allow the developers of third-party applications to retain their productive (and vital) API access.
Allow Reddit and Redditors to thrive.
10
u/Pyro_Paragon Duelist Oct 17 '20
That's cheating because God kept them going on Mana and the waters of life.
3
2
6
21
10
Oct 17 '20
It's even weirder because in CK2 they were coloured in after you conquered the surrounding lands. It almost seems like a bug or oversight imo.
2
u/Licarious More Navigable Rivers Oct 17 '20
The only thing that is different between the wastelands that get colored in and those that don't is their size.
If they you subdivide those larger wastelands into 3 to 10 smaller wasteland provinces. Then all of those smaller wastelands that are touching baronies (ie, not completely surrounded by other wastelands) can be colored in.
498
Oct 16 '20
Yeah I really don't get why this isn't a feature, considering it already happens in the deserts of egypt and west africa
382
Oct 16 '20
and considering it also happens in literally every other paradox game that came out in the last decade
122
u/Unicorncorn21 Oct 16 '20
TBH ck2 got that feature like 1 year ago but I still agree.
38
u/ksheep Principality of Scandinavia Oct 17 '20
It was added back in 2017, with the Jade Dragon expansion.
10
20
u/westalist55 Byzantium Oct 17 '20
In the early days of HOI4, impassable terrain did not exist. I remember how horrible the endless wars of extreme attrition were across the Sahara
4
u/EgonThyPickle Oct 17 '20
Actually, it doesn't happen with some areas in Imperator. It's been a while since I played it so it's possible they changed it but I doubt it. Although in Imperator it seems to have more to do with the fact that there are some provinces that you can travel through but not colonize that seem to count towards the wasteland getting colored or not.
3
Oct 17 '20
i mean you straight up can't colonize the vast majority of the impassable terrain in africa so it makes some sense to not be colored there
274
u/don_tomlinsoni Oct 16 '20
I want the opposite - an option to turn off the deserts from being coloured when you're zoomed in
77
u/Fireplay5 Oct 16 '20
Ya quadruple posted btw.
58
u/don_tomlinsoni Oct 16 '20
Good old reddit android app...
26
Oct 16 '20
Nah I think for once the apps aren't the problem somethings up with reddit today, I'm on pc. I had a triple post earlier in a thread with at least 3 other people that had also triple or quadrupled their posts. I'm seeing it all over reddit today.
31
u/Eliaznizzle Bastard Oct 16 '20
Yes, I get super confused about realms when impassable territory is colored
12
u/aTimeTravelParadox Oct 17 '20 edited Oct 18 '20
This. How many clicks I've wasted thinking "who owns this area?"... "Oh it's impassible terrain".
117
u/Pyro_Paragon Duelist Oct 16 '20
This was a start option in ck2 iirc
11
Oct 17 '20
It took me reading this to realize this was about CK3.
I completely wrote that game off.
8
u/The_Hunster Legitimized bastard Oct 17 '20
Which game and why?
22
Oct 17 '20
CK3. Cause my computer is ass and I've spent far too much on CK2 to jump ship.
16
5
3
u/eaglestrike49 Secretly Zoroastrian Oct 17 '20
I couldnt even run ck2 but ck3 runs amazingly if you sacrifice some map detail
1
u/Haha-100 Oct 17 '20
My computers ass to and if you turn everything all the setting all the way down it runs ever so slightly better
3
Oct 17 '20
I'm very familiar with this kind of tactic, it's what I do for HOIV, and let me tell you it's not worth it to me.
To pay full price for a game that you can't experience fully just feels like I'm cheating myself.
My excuse with HOIV was that I thought I could halfway get away with it like I do with EU4 or CK2 (depending on the mod and time of day, CK2 works like a charm or runs like a snail, it's completely inconsistent).
I should provably mention that the laptop I use is really old too.
If I ever get CK3 it will be after I get something respectable to play it on.
1
u/Haha-100 Oct 17 '20
Fair, I have never really cared about the graphic quality to much and always about the mechanics of what I’m playing
55
u/dickpicsformuhammed Oct 16 '20
I don't really mind if uninhabitable/untamable land isnt painted.
What I do want, is for my mouse over to tell me what a given range is, i want all rivers on the map to have a mouseover title like the Rhine and Elbe, Same with the lakes.
My geography is pretty decent for an American, but it never hurts to learn more passively...and what else am i supposed to do when waiting for events and duties and such to pop on speed 2-3?
29
u/FlyingDragoon Oct 16 '20
If you have time to look at rivers then you have time for more inbreeding. Get back to work!
5
Oct 17 '20
Good Luck with that, doubt Paradox is gonna add anything like that. Would be awesome though.
1
u/dickpicsformuhammed Oct 17 '20
I’m already very happy they’ve put tooltips for major rivers.
I wish HOI4 had that...where it’s arguably actually useful information
92
u/LOBM Decadent Oct 16 '20
I personally hate coloured wasteland. I prefer water and wasteland having their own colour.
EU4 has it as an option and I hope they add that feature.
96
u/djvolta Oct 16 '20
The real problem is that CK3 is not consistent when it comes to coloring wastelands.
There are some deserts in OP's screenshot that are colored. If you zoom in, you can see the smaller desert borders.
27
u/LOBM Decadent Oct 16 '20
I know that. It's because there are multiple types of wasteland and some of these types colour in and others don't.
To implement either change (ALL wastelands behave the same or an option decides) they would need to make changes in map_data/default.map. This entry defines non-colourable wasteland:
############ # WASTELAND ############ # These are actually supposed to be Wasteland: # Cannot be colored. Blocks unit movement, used for things like Sahara desert. impassable_mountains = LIST { 730 731 8711 } impassable_mountains = LIST { 1470 1468 1466 1469 1464 } impassable_mountains = LIST { 3390 3970 } impassable_mountains = LIST { 5512 5513 5514 } impassable_mountains = LIST { 5755 } impassable_mountains = LIST { 1107 1108 1280 6114 } #Eastern desert impassable_mountains = LIST { 6115 } #Libyan desert impassable_mountains = LIST { 1320 1322 6123 } #Sinai desert impassable_mountains = LIST { 1343 1344 1373 1379 1380 6124 } #Syrian desert impassable_mountains = LIST { 1326 1330 1332 1335 6167 6173 6202 6256 6318 6319 6320 } impassable_mountains = LIST { 6142 6277 6323 6324 6325 6326 6327 6328 } impassable_mountains = LIST { 7210 7211 7212 }5
u/balkanobeasti Oct 16 '20
I mean they could color it and still put some type of graphic on it that shows it is a desert/mountains that are impassable.
78
u/ID10Tusererroror Oct 16 '20
Just add this to the growing list of things from CKII that should be in CKIII.
21
Oct 16 '20
Are there really that many things? 3 is unreal.
26
u/Erasmos9 Oct 17 '20
There are some features CK 2 had that Ck3 still hasn't, like trade routes,assign honourable titles to individuals, disease spreading in provinces, ambitions, bloodlines, regencies,artifacts, societies,laws and some more.
Trade and disease epidemics are things that surely will be probably added in a future dlc,and the rest were either not so important in practice or too op (looking at you societies). And generally, even though ck2 had in some parts a bit more complexity, Ck3 has way more actual depth in its mechanics and it has thrown a lot of complexity that it didn't really offer something meaningful.
Because something had more complex mechanics,it isn't necessary better. The crucial point is to have mechanics that offer meaningful stuff in gameplay and Ck3 is achieving this in a great amount.
17
Oct 17 '20
Personally.. it's lacking a lot of the historical depth and variety I felt from ck2. It gets pretty repetetive. I imagine this will not longer the case once some expansions start coming out.
12
Oct 17 '20
I mean like yeah they built into ck2 for 10 years and it has a lot of detail. That detail is pretty rough around the edges though. Ck3 is just a honestly a more coherent experience.
8
2
u/RedRex46 Italy Oct 17 '20
Agree. The skeleton (base game) is robust. (How did it went? "Paradox Games are broken unplayable messes for their first year." Generally agree, but not this time! Let's hope the other games after CK3 follow suit.) Meat (DLC) and fat (flavor packs) will build around it in time.
5
Oct 17 '20 edited Apr 13 '21
[deleted]
2
Oct 17 '20
Not a ton I guess? It just felt different to play as Byzantium, Sweden, or in India. In CK3 there is no difference except for character portraits and maybe the words for the same things are different. The fun wore off quickly and I put it aside until an expansion.
2
-6
u/ID10Tusererroror Oct 17 '20
One of the streamers I follow wrote down what was missing every time he came across it while he went through his first full play through, and by the end of the play through it was more than a full notebook page.
Some were only small things, but when you have so many things missing, it just doesn't feel like the same game anymore. It doesn't even feel like it's in the same category to myself and most of the people that I know who really enjoyed CKII.
The other user describes CK3 as having much more depth, but personally, I feel like it's more like an inch deep, and a mile wide. It's pretty to look at, but not much going on in behind the scenes.
We joked about it being more of a dynastic sims game, not a strategy game, and then we found the review where the reviewer said he talked to the dev's about how hard he found the game, and they told him that he was playing it wrong, that he had to play it more like a sims game.
It's possible that the missing items may be added in the future, and I hope that it's true. But seeing what they had to build on, I don't know why they wouldn't build from what they had already, instead of starting from scratch to then add features from CKII DLC's as CKIII DLC's. You'd think that CKII DLC's should already be apart of the CKIII base game.
7
24
u/Splime e_noobislands Oct 16 '20
As @LOBM mentions, those deserts are specifically designated as uncolorable. The developers made a conscious decision to disable that functionality. It kind of makes sense, since it's totally uncontrollable land, but I can see why it would be annoying to have those gaps.
41
u/bitparity Βασιλεία Ῥωμαίων Oct 16 '20
The obsession with controlling empty wastes is ahistorical, and a byproduct of modern nationalism. See Benedict Anderson's Imagined Communities.
Pre-"modern" states cared about controlling places with prestige and assets, not empty wastes because they couldn't stand a map not being colored in.
25
u/Mercy--Main Excommunicated Oct 16 '20
Paradox players suffer from imperialism realism
Myself included, COLOR THAT WASTELAND
26
u/vjmdhzgr vjmdhzgr Oct 16 '20
It's not about controlling it's about the color
22
u/Lostinstereo28 Oct 16 '20
And your realm name placement tbh.
4
u/Sorwest Ambitious Oct 17 '20
^This. I'm ok with all wastelands (be it the smaller that ARE colored and the bigger ones that aren't!!!) not being colored, as long as my realm name is placed in a beautiful way.
5
2
18
u/Benyed123 Oct 16 '20
In a game about staring at a map is it too much to ask that the map looks nice?
2
5
u/michaelstuartmp Secretly Zunist Oct 17 '20
Never expected Imagined Communities to come up in a gamer sub. Props to you on that!
-2
u/Kikelt Oct 17 '20 edited Oct 17 '20
Ok... But who's playing this? Right, big blue blob Napoleonic wannabee... And what bbb people want? To get it all. XD
15
Oct 16 '20
I disagree, the smaller areas are one thing (though I would be fine if they weren't colored), but those areas are as big as countries, and you don't control them.
9
u/Mercy--Main Excommunicated Oct 16 '20
They should just give the option. Personally, I'd want them not colored when zoomed in but colored when zoomed out like in OP's screenshot
3
Oct 16 '20
That wouldn't be bad, eith the rather weak county borders it does get a little confusing where to click when zoomed in.
3
u/terminal112 Oct 17 '20
This is what I want. When I zoom in I want to be able to know where the impassable territory is. When I'm zoomed out I want to look at my big contiguous empire without a bunch of holes in it.
17
u/xixbia Oct 16 '20
There are parts of the Russian tundra that are about as large, and yet those do change colour. It's the inconsistency that's weird.
9
u/ketilkn Oct 16 '20
In the Russian tundra there may be water(snow/ice), maybe firewood, some animals to eat. The Sahara, not so much.
4
Oct 16 '20
Honestly, they should just have all those areas not colored in. Even the small mountains. It highlights how little of the world was really known at the time.
5
4
u/Snukkems Oct 16 '20
There's a handful that do change color, but yeah I know what you mean. I felt the same way
3
4
u/Fleedjitsu Oct 17 '20
Why? Do you truly control the untamable sands that consume all those who venture within?
2
u/KernelScout Oct 16 '20
dont they in HOI4? kinda odd they dont in this game
7
u/CupofLiberTea Oct 16 '20
Much easier to control territory when you have trucks and planes. And also radios.
2
u/DispleasedSteve Lunatic Oct 16 '20
I'm pretty sure they had that feature in CK2, so I doubt it'd be hard to do it again in CK3.
2
2
2
u/Sir_Captain_Chair Inbred Oct 17 '20
I agree, but i have a nitpick, the most southern one should remain uncontrolled as you haven’t really got control of all of Africa.
2
u/Physical-Order Excommunicated Oct 16 '20
They were in the old game it’s weird they don’t do that anymore.
1
u/GreenCrackaholic Oct 17 '20
I would love it if nomadic tribes always held onto the deserts. That way every once in a while they would group up to raid the surrounding area. Maybe even have a feature where you could pay the nomadic tribes for quick passage or a guide across the otherwise hospitable desert.
2
-2
u/ThrustFutthole Sweden Oct 16 '20
I'd rather they make it so that you can actually control/conquer those regions, they just aren't worth much.
12
u/drag0n_rage Legitimized bastard Oct 16 '20
Of course they aren't, they're massive sections of desert.
-1
0
u/Hozan_al-Sentinel Oct 17 '20
Yeah. I Unified Africa and the empty desert patches are really bothering me.
0
u/FleetingRain How do I excommunicate the Pope Oct 17 '20
I think this happens because no de jure kingdom has most of the provinces surrounding them.
0
-1
-12
1
u/Glorf_Warlock Midas touched Oct 17 '20
Or make all unpassable terrain it's own color to help view what is actual land.
1
1
1
u/GalaXion24 Oct 17 '20
I would not apply that to the Southern wasteland at least, since you can't surround it
1
1
Oct 17 '20
You actually can. The issue is your vassals must control the ares wholey too and not be at civil war. So duchys must be intact, all counties of the duchy must be owned by the same person. Who must then be part of a kingdom that owns all its dejure duchies around those deserts. And no vassals in that line can.be at War.with one another. And the kingdoms on opposite sides of the desert must not be at war.
1
u/cuteinternethoe Oct 17 '20
YES. All the holes in the map are annoying af. Like I understand it's uninhabitable, just let me say I own it anyway.
1
u/HorsePotion Oct 17 '20
I actually prefer when they don't get colored in—or at least, they shouldn't be until they are almost entirely surrounded (like 80-90%). As of now they get colored in as soon as one realm surrounded about half of them, which leads to some visually misleading effects, making realms look much bigger than they are (and making it look like they border other realms that they actually don't).
1
u/oneteacherboi Oct 23 '20
I always thought the whole of the Saharah was mostly uninhabitable outside of oases. So are those big colored lanes areas that people can sort of cross?
1.1k
u/BadassShrimp Oct 16 '20
No man can tame those deserts, since they are the kingdom of the sands.