Crusader Kings II Thread IV: Time to Create a New Title

[Wardog]

I got bored with my Queen Medb game, and started another. I decided to go for something little different, and started as Farbas Zoumana the ruler of Ghana in the Viking Age.

One problem I immediately discovered was a severe shortage of politically useful marriage candidates. The only single women in Mali were commoners/courtiers, an no-one from any other kingdom would marry me because I had the wrong religion. In the end I just took three concubines, with the intenion of finding a more politically useful match later. (But I didn't, so ended up just marrying the concubine that gave me two sons. We even fell in love later. Daaaw ) The only problem with that strategy, I discovered, was that if you are not married you can use the "have son/daughter" ambition for the fertility boost. So despite multiple partners, I only fathered four children, one of which probably wasn't actually mine. (That rates pretty poorly against Queen Madb, who managed to produce seven offspring while leading an almost non-stop rampage across Ireland. Although to be fair, Medb was min-maxed with the ruler designer for health/martial, whereas Zoumana was the default ruler).

I couldn't even find decent wives for my sons either - I married my heir to a priestess who provided an alliance with herself, and the other to a "strong" commoner (and -100 and -200 prestige respectively). I did manage to marry both my daughters (one matriliniarily) to Ynglings - which could have some interesting consequenes for the ethnic makeup of Europe.

I also managed to conquer Songhay, a couple of provinces to the North (founding the kingdom of Mali), and Infa (giving me access to the sea). Although the latter is going to be really hard to defend should another war break out, as it's miles from the rest of my kingdom and the garrison is barely recovering from my conquest, due to the -70% "new administration" penalty.

Then I died, leaving the kindom to my son Mansa Musa (not the famous one), which thankfully didn't fragment.

[Leecros]

One problem I immediately discovered was a severe shortage of politically useful marriage candidates. The only single women in Mali were commoners/courtiers, an no-one from any other kingdom would marry me because I had the wrong religion.

This is sort of the problem with playing in West Africa.

I'm going to fall short of calling them unplayable, because they definitely are. However, I can't help but feel as if they were put into The Old Gods as more of an afterthought. They don't have that much interesting going for them and are consistently one of the most underdeveloped religious/culture groups in the game. They pretty much exist to either become the punching bags for The Muslims, or get converted to Islam.

[tyckspoon]

Yeah, Mali is one of the 'hard mode' areas to play as; most of the land sucks, you don't have good access to anywhere decent to try to expand to, you don't even have really good options for places to go raiding for money and prestige (unlike Norse with their fancy free Viking boats and lots of coastal land) and being a nearly unique combination of culture and religion means nobody really wants anything to do with you diplomatically. Aside from declaring war on you. They'll do that plenty. Especially if you do manage to expand out of your de jure territory a little and take over some place that might be worth something; the AI rulers will want that back and they'll generally have their choice of CBs to do it with.

The 'easy' way to do it is to convert to Islam and join up with your local Muslim Blob Ruler, then build up your holdings to whatever degree you can and expand internally until you're ready to make your bid for independence/break the Blob from the inside/bid for rulership of the Blob yourself. But that's boring, conventional, and if you wanted to do that you probably wouldn't have chosen a pagan group to start with.

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

Weird that they don't have "Mansa Musa" under a religious lock, given its an arabic abrahamic name not native to Ghana... Musa is Moses.

[Leecros]

It may be a bit of a non-sequitur, because Crusader Kings and Europa Universalis starting dates are 700 years apart, but take a look at EUIV's west africa region.

It's a large region with plenty to do even if you start in that area. Sure, It would probably require another map expansion to do something on that scale and much of the community(at least on the Paradox forums) are divided as to whether map expansions are good or bad, but my point is that there's definitely more they could do with the region.

[tigerusthegreat]

I would assume that St. John owned his fingers too, but that particular artifact displays the ruler who found/obtained it and not St. John.


of course most all of those myriad of fingers are fraudulent. Your characters in-game don't know that though.

Crusaders brought home enough shards of wood and nails from the original cross to build a sailing ship, and enough pieces of Christ's shroud/robe to make sails for it.

And then there's the spear of destiny....which is a whole other thing.

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

Really, West Africa SHOULD be powerful. I mean, the Ouagadou (popularily known as the Ghana Empire, except "Ghana" was the title of its ruler) was a hugely rich, powerful kingdom! According to the contemporary writer al-Bakri, 1066 start Ghana could field an army of 200,000 men. He says the capital of Ghana had no less than twelve mosques! And that's for a country that wasn't even entirely Islamized. Even if we take these numbers as exaggerated, it's clear that al-Bakri thought they were hugely powerful. For reference, al-Bakri lived in Andalusia, and Ghana would have been only two states to the south, with only the Almoravid Empire in between them. I love him so much, he's a fantastic historical source.

Not to mention that the famous Mali Empire falls in the CK2 era, with a regularly recorded 100,000 man army.

Both were the main sources of gold in Europe and the Middle East (or rather, Ghana controlled the gold trade before Mali, as the actual mines were south of Ghana, but all the trade routes went through Ghana.) It really should be more powerful.

[Corvus]

West Africa is one of the (many) starts I want to try one of these days. I don't mind difficult starts - I've played a Nubian start and also the Zunist start, neither of which are easy.

I doubt I'll get all the starts done I want, not before CK3 comes around...

[Leecros]

I doubt I'll get all the starts done I want, not before CK3 comes around...

Well, I think they're planning to release DLC through this year....CK3 hasn't even been announced yet. So you still have some time.

[tigerusthegreat]

Just had my kickass leader, after a successful embargo of Pisa, eyeing the invasion of England get brought low by becoming infirm at 50. Unfortunately, because of his Regent's stupidity, several holdings completing (that I could not get rid of because regent wouldn't allow it) and my eventual suicide, my heir has a -50 "Opinion of Predecessor" modifier for the next 10 years. Top it off with my new ruler being arbitrary, having a crappy stewardship wife, and crappy stewardship in general, means by 10 demesne gold mine is down to 8.

I solve parts of that by bribing certain vassals, divorcing my wife (she gave my a single male child, yay) and marrying an older, high stewardship wife. With a feast event granting me just, and removing arbitrary, my stewardship shot up quickly, combined with an event or two from the improve stewardship ambition, I got back up to 10 demesne rather quickly.

I have enough gold to handle the inevitable rebellion, and enough allies to make things less painful. HOwever, enough vassals have joined to put a nephew on the throne (with terrible stats) that are starting to worry me (130%) and I am shocked they haven't gone for it yet. I am not sure I can last another 7 years for them to stop hating me because of my ruler's dad.

[Flickerdart]

Well, I think they're planning to release DLC through this year....CK3 hasn't even been announced yet. So you still have some time.

What could they even do for CK3 that would be better than CK2+expansions? I doubt they would release it anytime soon:
CK: 2004, 2012
EU: 2000, 2001, 2007, 2013
HOI: 2002, 2005, 2009, 2016
V: 2003, 2010

They are probably focusing on Victoria 3 right now. The gaps between releases for the more recent games have been huge (8 years for CK, 6 years for EU, 7 years for HOI). CK2 is only 4 years old.

[Leecros]

What could they even do for CK3 that would be better than CK2+expansions?

China

If they do the same thing they did with the transition from EUIII-EUIV, then the next incarnation will have everything that the previous game had, plus more.

I doubt they would release it anytime soon:
CK: 2004, 2012
EU: 2000, 2001, 2007, 2013
HOI: 2002, 2005, 2009, 2016
V: 2003, 2010

They are probably focusing on Victoria 3 right now. The gaps between releases for the more recent games have been huge (8 years for CK, 6 years for EU, 7 years for HOI). CK2 is only 4 years old.

It's important to keep in mind that Crusader Kings 1 was fairly mediocre and did not have anywhere near the critical success as their other titles and definitely not its successor. While I agree that Victoria 3 will probably be the next game, I wouldn't be surprised to find CKIII in development sometime shortly after that.

[Flickerdart]

China

If they do the same thing they did with the transition from EUIII-EUIV, then the next incarnation will have everything that the previous game had, plus more.



It's important to keep in mind that Crusader Kings 1 was fairly mediocre and did not have anywhere near the critical success as their other titles and definitely not its successor. While I agree that Victoria 3 will probably be the next game, I wouldn't be surprised to find CKIII in development sometime shortly after that.

I don't know about shortly, but yes, it seems like it'd be the next one. Simply because CK is the second oldest property to get a refresh. I think we will see V3 in 2017 or 2018, and then CK3 in 2019 or 2020.

[Alex Knight]

I don't know about shortly, but yes, it seems like it'd be the next one. Simply because CK is the second oldest property to get a refresh. I think we will see V3 in 2017 or 2018, and then CK3 in 2019 or 2020.

What I would REALLY like in a new Vicky is the ability to mod it for Space: 1889.

[Rockphed]

China

If they do the same thing they did with the transition from EUIII-EUIV, then the next incarnation will have everything that the previous game had, plus more.

My hope with CKIII is that the various sub-systems will be more coherent with each other. Probably also the ability to turn Castle holdings into cities or temples and vice-versa. Probably with lingering effects for having been the other holding.

[Flickerdart]

My hope with CKIII is that the various sub-systems will be more coherent with each other.

But then how will they sell you DLC?

[Rockphed]

But then how will they sell you DLC?

I'm not talking about how mercenaries, levies, retinues, and nomads are all different. I'm talking about how the only religion that uses decadence is Islam. Now, Islam being noticably different from Catholics/Orthodox is not bad, but I imagine other religions could benefit from a similar mechanic (where rulers who do not embody the virtues the religion values eventually are overthrown).

Quick question: as the emperor of byzantium, is there a good way to get more mercenary companies vassalized?

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

Decadence for Islam makes sense though, it's based almost entirely in a single contemporary historians theory, that of ibn Khaldun, who had a theory of a historical 'cycle' where a decadent empire would get overthrown by zealous simple barbarians, who would then adopt the decadence of the empire they overthrew, and begin the cycle anew. It is a very limited theory, of course, based almost entirely on the Islamic history of the Maghreb, specifically the cycle of the Al-Murabitun and Al-Muwahhidun, or Almoravids and Almohads, but that's why Decadence is 'fluffy' for Islam in a way that it's not for the rest of the world.

[Grim Portent]

It's also an easy system to implement, which is a big part of the design process, finding what can fit without too much effort. Trying to make a mechanic to simulate Rome culling all it's good generals for generations, underfunding it's military and then not holding up their end of the bargain with mercenary groups like the Visigoths would be much harder comparatively.

I do hope that if/when a CK3 happens they include mechanics for commanders and the like to betray you if you fail to keep agreements with them. Like a commander asking for a title as a reward if they help lead your armies, then getting a hidden stat modifier to resent you if you don't hold up your end of the deal, eventually leading to them taking the army they lead and trying to oust you, so you either need to cull generals periodically to avoid rebellion, or always be just and fair when dealing with them.

Wouldn't make sense for smaller nations, but once you get to Roman Empire levels of power it would be rather appropriate. The Grand General of the Empire of Leon or whatever should be someone with a lot of political clout, not just some courtier with high stats.

[Flickerdart]

Decadence for Islam makes sense though, it's based almost entirely in a single contemporary historians theory, that of ibn Khaldun, who had a theory of a historical 'cycle' where a decadent empire would get overthrown by zealous simple barbarians, who would then adopt the decadence of the empire they overthrew, and begin the cycle anew. It is a very limited theory, of course, based almost entirely on the Islamic history of the Maghreb, specifically the cycle of the Al-Murabitun and Al-Muwahhidun, or Almoravids and Almohads, but that's why Decadence is 'fluffy' for Islam in a way that it's not for the rest of the world.

Sounds fairly similar to the Mandate of Heaven concept. I imagine that CK3 would include what Paradox learned from EU4 and HoI4.

[russdm]

Now, Islam being noticably different from Catholics/Orthodox is not bad, but I imagine other religions could benefit from a similar mechanic (where rulers who do not embody the virtues the religion values eventually are overthrown).

The problem with that is that it rarely actually occurred in history. How many accounts actually feature catholic or orthodox rulers that were affected by this? I know that some were excommunicated by the church, but that didn't always last as rulers took steps.

As I recall it, Henry 2, who was father to King Richard and King John had issues with Beckett, who died/murdered, and that caused henry issues with the catholic church. Then King John had issues, but more with his barons than the catholic church.

I can't immediately recall of any others, since many rulers had someone to confess to and get relief from the consequences of their sins, but that really applied only to Christian faiths. Muslims would be different, and their leaders would be held to different standards.

The present system seems to work to simulate the interrelations that occurred, with maybe a few exceptions occurring that needed modeling.

[Corvus]

I'd never played a merchant republic before the Gotland run but I have to say they are a lot of fun. It is a lot like elective monarchy but instead of hoping that you vassals don't elect some terrible person you can just buy the heir you want into power.

Sure, you might have weaker levies than a fuedal lord with but you have all the gold you need to hire mercs.

My current ruler is nearing the end of his days, having hit 66. Which is rather sad given how amazing he turned out. His father, who founded the republic went senile in the end and died when unknown assailants drowned him in his bath. It turns out it was his son and heir, which I found out because he still had the plot active when he took over.

Not that I was concerned as the new ruler was quick, shrewd and ambitious. During his life he also became a viking, brave, zealous and a game master. His early adventurous youth ended when he was disfigured in battle and then later on lost his leg. Since then he has seen his family grow in power and wealth, founding many trade posts along the coast of france and pushing the republics borders further east. It is on the verge of taking in all of de jure Scandinavia and also all the Baltic coast line.

Sadly his preferred heir, a grandson, died of the gout and while the new heir is quick as well, he isn't as impressive as the current ruler.

He is currently rocking 26 stewardship, 20 learning, 20 diplomacy (despite the -4 from disfigured) and martial and intrigue in the mid-teens if I remember correctly. If only he had become immortal.

Oh, and the Jomsvikings are a vassalised Duchy. And they can go raiding. Given their free upkeep, my new favourite thing it to load them up with the 4K retinue and go off sacking places. And Venice is a loot pinata in that regards. Its an easy 1K gold each run. Rome is a glorious target as well.

[Nerd-o-rama]

I'm not talking about how mercenaries, levies, retinues, and nomads are all different. I'm talking about how the only religion that uses decadence is Islam. Now, Islam being noticably different from Catholics/Orthodox is not bad, but I imagine other religions could benefit from a similar mechanic (where rulers who do not embody the virtues the religion values eventually are overthrown).

That's pretty much simulated by the "Church Opinion of..." opinion bonuses and maluses and the usual opinion shifts for being a jerk or a saint in general, which makes sense since rather than permeating every aspect of the sociopolitical sphere like Islam does for Muslim nations, to Christian nobles, the Holy See or the Patriarchate are more or less rival power structures, albeit unusually influential and multinational ones by the standards of the time.

Now, what the Muslim world could use is an Iqta government type that's less of a faux-feudal kludge, I'll say that. "Decadence" is fine for representing religious fundamentalists taking matters into their own hands when the Caliph might or might not, which is something you might see in medieval Islam but not so much medieval Christendom. Or then again they could import Impiety/Piety from EU4, but they'd need some other mechanic for breaking up big green blobs.

And besides, unique mechanics for each religion are fun, or so my EU4 experience has taught me.

[tyckspoon]

I'd never played a merchant republic before the Gotland run but I have to say they are a lot of fun. It is a lot like elective monarchy but instead of hoping that you vassals don't elect some terrible person you can just buy the heir you want into power.

Sure, you might have weaker levies than a fuedal lord with but you have all the gold you need to hire mercs.

You can own castles; no reason your personal levies need to be less than a feudal lords, especially once you've got the family palace all tricked out. Plus trade posts make it very, very easy to have a huge retinue cap... once you get a Republic rolling, I often find that you don't actually have to do anything with levies at all if you don't want to.

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

Elvain wrote a fantastic thread with a game design for better Muslim gameplay.

Highlights were a better nomadic tribe government, called Qabila, which involved confederating technically independent tribes, based on their 'Asabiya, or tribal solidarity, and a better muslim government, the Mulk government, which involved balancing slave armies (led by powerful slave leaders), dynastic politics, and, for those with access to it, the tribes of the Qabila. It was a really good design document imho.

[Grim Portent]

Wanted to share this,

Spoiler

Show

I accidentally made the Pope have an anti-pope as a vassal. I had made a bishop in Rome an anti-pope while trying to form the HRE, and eventually decided to just give the county back to the Pope because I was in constant civil wars and couldn't land him to press my anti-papal claim. This gave him the baron tier vassals already there, leaving the bishopric of Rome in the hands of the anti-pope, but now as a vassal to the real Pope.

Turns out being an anti-pope isn't just cause for revocation by the pope.

[Flickerdart]

Wanted to share this,

Spoiler

Show

I accidentally made the Pope have an anti-pope as a vassal. I had made a bishop in Rome an anti-pope while trying to form the HRE, and eventually decided to just give the county back to the Pope because I was in constant civil wars and couldn't land him to press my anti-papal claim. This gave him the baron tier vassals already there, leaving the bishopric of Rome in the hands of the anti-pope, but now as a vassal to the real Pope.

Turns out being an anti-pope isn't just cause for revocation by the pope.

That's hilarious! Imagine the Pope walking down the street and his neighbour is shouting "away with you, usurper, I am the true pope!" the whole time.

[Grim Portent]

I like to imagine they've come up with a schedule of who gets the Vatican on which days.

Pope: 'It's Wednesday! I'm supposed to be managing the affairs of our Lord today!'
Anti-Pope: 'But I let you get Thursday last week! You said I could get Wednesday today!'

[tigerusthegreat]

I like to imagine they've come up with a schedule of who gets the Vatican on which days.

Pope: 'It's Wednesday! I'm supposed to be managing the affairs of our Lord today!'
Anti-Pope: 'But I let you get Thursday last week! You said I could get Wednesday today!'

How deep could it go? Is there any way you could keep making antipopes and transferring vassalage?

[Rockphed]

If you make an anti-pope, they become your religious head, right? So, is the pope's religious head the anti-pope?