0.2.0 Goals

[LT-Rascek]

Initial Planning for 0.2.0 Features

• Bold are currently in progress tasks
• Italics should be considered "stretch goals"
• Strike-outs indicate planned features overtaken/modified by/into other designs

Bookmarks

• [ ] Add Sub-Roman Britain Bookmark (476)
• [ ] Add Bordering the Black Sea Bookmark
• [ ] Add Julius Nepos (480) bookmark
• [ ] Add Shattered Empire (480) bookmark

Religion

• [x] Implement religious vegetarianism that was in CK2
  • Probably should be some sort of additional doctrine category where things like pilgrimages should be (so it's a selectable instead of hardcoded feature)? I'm open to category name suggestions.
• [x] Implement foreign missions as a Cleric Task
• [ ] Decide on how to deal with the Pentarchy and the Praefectus Urbi
  • Being unlanded leads to them falling back to feudalism after a few days. We might have to have them be single-barony counties in the interim
  • However, while set_de_jure_liege_title to change what county a barony is in works, it won't display correctly in the game GUI and destroy_title does not work on counties.
• [ ] See if we can override the GUI so that if a fellow rite owns a holy site, we get the same effects?

Culture

• [ ] Implement language + name list / heritage drift mechanics
• [ ] Implement the melting pots that were in CK2 as creation names
• [ ] Implement culture event for monolithic cultures (vanilla event is currently blocked)
• [ ] Remove unnecessary Vanilla cultures

Map

• [ ] Revisit culture/faith of counties in light of minorities
• [ ] Add An-Nahrawan province back into game

Map Stretch Goals

• [ ] Review Crimea Baronies; we may need more
• [ ] Consider splitting up Constantinople to make room for Hagia Sophia

Landed Titles

• [ ] Reorganize title files to reduce clutter and decide which titulars to add/remove.
• [ ] Review Gothic Empire/Gothic Kingdom decisions
  • Convert the decision into one that amalgamates Gothic Titles? Might require some sort of "Cultural Title" mechanic to do

    Landed Titles Stretch Goals

• [ ] Remove Most De Jure Empires then re-enable with game rule

Decisions

• [ ] Re-add at least some of the missing CK2 decisions
  • Definitely decisions relating to Ostrogothic conquest of Italy
• [ ] Flesh out Chariot races

Events

• [ ] Extend all events referring to Aniconism to Iconoclasm as well
• [ ] Reimport at least some of the various CK2 flavor events that aren't implemented
  • Definitely decisions relating to Ostrogothic conquest of Italy

GUI

• [x] A good minority map mode variant; version that is included with minorities mod is not sufficient.

Mechanics

• [ ] Implement "Cultural and Religious Minorities" within WtWSMS
  • Relatively lightweight to implement
• [ ] Revamp tributaries using T4N Tributary module
  • Requires adding some additional functionality that T4N plans on adding (calling tributaries/suzerains to war)

    Struggles

• [ ] "Matter of Britain" struggle
  • Struggles are rather extensive coding, so we should get our feet wet with something more small-scale to start
  • Also, struggle mechanics would probably work well with Anglo-Saxon migration mechanics

Other

• [ ] Implement buildings that were in CK2 but are missing (Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Sarvestan Palace, Hagia Sophia)
  • May require creating additional provinces
• [ ] Should "House of David" be a trait (replacing Savior for Jews?) or a dynasty legacy?

[loup99]

I personally don't think "Matter of Britain" struggle should be a priority at the moment as opposed to porting content from CK2. For example, mechanics relating to tribes (tribal shatter events) or the story and history events for 476 (WtWSMS_story_events.txt and WTWSMS_historical_events.txt) feel like content which partially could be interesting for 0.2 version. In terms of mechanics, to what extent are the Roman legions a priority? Features that were not fully in CK2 (church councils and Rise of Islam) are not pertinent goals for a 0.2, but are the Henotikon and Three Chapters Controversy things that should be included?

[LT-Rascek]

I personally don't think "Matter of Britain" struggle should be a priority at the moment as opposed to porting content from CK2.

Because we are probably going to want to model the Roman Religious situation as a struggle, I viewed it prudent to get our feet wet with struggles; the situation in Britain is relatively self-contained and should be a much smaller scope than something like Rome or even the Caucuses (which have a greater amount of diversity than Britain).

So items like the Henotikon or the Church Councils would probably be better written from the ground up as part of a struggle system, rather than porting in from CK2 then rewriting wholesale, or at least will save dev time. At least that's how I see it.

For example, mechanics relating to tribes (tribal shatter events) or the story and history events for 476 (WtWSMS_story_events.txt and WTWSMS_historical_events.txt) feel like content which partially could be interesting for 0.2 version.

Good points, so those might be useful things for other modders who are looking to get their feet wet with CK3. Porting events isn't too painful. I'd say those fall under "Re-add at least some of the missing CK2 decisions" and "Reimport at least some of the various CK2 flavor events that aren't implemented"

In terms of mechanics, to what extent are the Roman legions a priority?

I haven't experimented with vassal mercenaries yet. I'm also considering giving them leasing like Holy Orders do, but I haven't dug that deep. I did try creating some landless counties in game, but that creates a host of errors that aren't really fixable.

[loup99]

Probably should be some sort of additional doctrine category where things like pilgrimages should be (so it's a selectable instead of hardcoded feature)? I'm open to category name suggestions.

For vegetarianism diet ethics or nutritionism (the term is a bit too contemporary)? For pilgrimage it could be called just that, no?

[LT-Rascek]

For vegetarianism diet ethics or nutritionism (the term is a bit too contemporary)? For pilgrimage it could be called just that, no?

I just called the group "Ritual Decisions" and then Used "Views on " for each item.