• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Greetings friends, 'tis I, Doomdark, your faithful purveyor of hopes and dreams!

This month, I shall speak of those who know no loyalties and would shamelessly sell their services for money. No, I don't mean prostitutes. No, not politicians either. I am speaking, of course, of mercenaries! Brave, yet prudent, these companies of professional soldiers were the closest thing to standing armies around for much of the Crusader Kings II period. In the game, there are a number of predefined mercenary regiments that can be hired by anyone with sufficient funds (though not heathens and infidels - there are limits, even for soldiers of fortune.) As long as they get paid, they will fight loyally, and, unlike regular levies, they even reinforce, albeit slowly. They do not come cheap however, and woe to the lord who cannot pay their fee. At best, mercenaries who do not get paid will simply abandon their employer. At worst, they will defect to the enemy. Some disgruntled but enterprising condottieri might even attempt to seize land to call their own (as, for example, the Victual Brothers actually did with the island of Gotland in the Baltic Sea.)

CrusaderKing2_DevDiary_09_01.png

Yes, mercenaries can seize territory, at which point they start acting like regular states. This brings us to the in may ways similar, but rather more pious, knightly orders. These humble soldiers of God can be hired not for gold, but for Piety. However, they will not fight brothers of the faith, and they will request ownership of the holdings that they seize (acceding is a very pious act). Landed mercenaries will retain their standing army, though it will no longer reinforce (eventually, it might thus be lost), and everyone will have a Casus Belli on them. Landed Holy Orders can still freely call on their main force, however. (If lost, they can raise it again through a special decision.) Similarly, the Byzantines have access to the Varangian Guard, which is treated much like a "vassal" mercenary force.

CrusaderKing2_DevDiary_09_02.png

Should a mercenary regiment or a Holy Order lose its last holding, it will return to being a landless entity available for hire.

CrusaderKing2_DevDiary_09_03.png

Here's a bonus screenie of what occupation looks like in the terrain map mode.

CrusaderKing2_DevDiary_09_04.png

That's all for now. Next month, plots and intrigue (unless I change my mind!)

Henrik Fåhraeus, Associate Producer and CKII Project Lead
 
Then I wish them sunny days, good company, and fond memories. Winter is coming.

A DD is never late. It arrives exactly when it's supposed to.
 
A DD is never late. It arrives exactly when it's supposed to.

Thus spoke Johan.

I hope that the mercenaries and lords who make use of them are a fun part of the game, with a lot of intrigue events and such. Machiavelli was writing about Renaissance Italy, sure, but some of his ideas applied to the medieval era as well. And who is to say what will happen along alternative timelines. I think that balancing feudal levies and mercenaries will be an interesting part of the game, but it takes prudence to do it well. Maybe certain realms should get a modifier (I hope that there are EU3-style triggered modifiers) for over-reliance on mercenaries, so that defenders can be more easily bribed during sieges and made to give up their employers or certain mercenary companies could refuse to fight each other.
 
Maybe certain realms should get a modifier (I hope that there are EU3-style triggered modifiers) for over-reliance on mercenaries, so that defenders can be more easily bribed during sieges and made to give up their employers or certain mercenary companies could refuse to fight each other.

It would be nice if certain mercenary bands could be 'bought off' for more money by another ruler. Some mercenary groups would perhaps honour a ruler, but others would easily turn coat at the promise of more gold.

Otherwise I fear a situation where the AI simply maintains a lot of mercenary groups to bolster its own armies and to keep the king's peace.
 
It would be nice if certain mercenary bands could be 'bought off' for more money by another ruler. Some mercenary groups would perhaps honour a ruler, but others would easily turn coat at the promise of more gold.

Otherwise I fear a situation where the AI simply maintains a lot of mercenary groups to bolster its own armies and to keep the king's peace.

For that reason, I said earlier that mercenary captains need to be full-fledged characters (I don't know if they are or not, or to what degree), with traits. That way, some are ambitious (maybe they should all be), some are proud (don't stay with cowardly rulers), some are deceitful (taking money from both sides), some are honorable and some are not. They should also have their own ambitions: does this one want fame, gold, and land, and in what proportions? I think that it would be nice to make them as well-rounded as other characters, or at least leave it to modders to do so--and mercenaries and holy orders are one area of the game that you should be able to fine-tune to your specifications.
 
Cool idea. But some of those traits would have to stay hidden - at least for a time - or else the human player will never hire "risky" captains.

I guess you wouldn't quite know what you were getting when you hire them. When you are looking for a thousand men to fortify your ranks, you can only be so choosy, but you could have long-term relationships with certain companies, and compete with your rivals for their loyalty. Plus, you get what you paid for. The more distinguished and professional companies should cost more I would think.
 
In general though CK seems to not hide traits even when it would be realistic to. I think I would prefer it if it stayed that way. As then you could have an interesting situation where you could hire a great mercanary captain to save your nation... but at the same time he's deceitful so it's a tradeoff.
 
Will there be some advantage of using mercenaries? I only uses mercs occasionally on EU3.

Mercenaries reenforce, and feudal troops do not. When your soldiers start to deplete, you need to raise new ones in your homeland to replace them, and then ship them to the battlefield. This will likely become more impractical the further you are away from home. That means if you're the King of Sweden and you're fighting in Damascus, it's probably a better strategy to hire on mercenaries to replace any troops you lose.
 
Mercenaries reenforce, and feudal troops do not. When your soldiers start to deplete, you need to raise new ones in your homeland to replace them, and then ship them to the battlefield. This will likely become more impractical the further you are away from home. That means if you're the King of Sweden and you're fighting in Damascus, it's probably a better strategy to hire on mercenaries to replace any troops you lose.

Good point. It does take a long time for those reinforcements to arrive from Stockholm. ;) I also think that feudal troops should not see combat far from home, and although you do not pay for them, raising feudal levies effectively means keeping on very good terms with your vassals. EDIT: also, good for raising a fighting force when you're short on manpower in your own provinces, so a rich but rather sparsely populated duchy could raise a mercenary army in defense of its own independence or to expand the realm.
 
Last edited:
Mercenary need something more beside trait, maybe relation to player? In every paradox game, mercenaries = body to throw at enemies, you can lose a battle with them until they have 0 man, they never protest, deserted or complaint. Maybe if you take care your mercenaries by giving them good job (siege, winning battle with them, standing around waiting for your manpower recover), next time when you want to hire them they have lower initial cost and better replacement rate, but if you abuse them you got bad reputation among mercenaries, they will want more money and lower mercenaries replacement rate?

If your reputation really bad among mercenaries, no merc will want to work for you, they even give initial recruit cost discount to your winning enemy for a chance to loot at your country! Or you can give some money to your fourth/fifth son with no chance to inherit any title but have high martial ability to become mercenary captain, let them take a chance at world, who know later they can help you or become some sort of pretender (civil war) with mercenary army
 
I wonder about how the Holy Orders will work in reference to landholding. Sure, you can gain their services to help you in your crusade, but as international organizations, the Templars and Hospitallers had land throughout Europe and the Mediterranean and were not bound to one kingdom. If the Templars establish themselves in the Holy Land as they did historically, will it be possible for the King of Aragon to enlist their services in his war against the Emirate of Valencia and then grant land to the Templars in the conquered territory? And will it also be possible for lords in say France, or Scotland, or England, or Italy to grant the Templars, established in the KoJ, baronies in order for the sake of public displays of piety and more pragmatically to gain the services of local Templar masters on their councils and maybe other benefits, too?
 
I wonder about how the Holy Orders will work in reference to landholding. Sure, you can gain their services to help you in your crusade, but as international organizations, the Templars and Hospitallers had land throughout Europe and the Mediterranean and were not bound to one kingdom. If the Templars establish themselves in the Holy Land as they did historically, will it be possible for the King of Aragon to enlist their services in his war against the Emirate of Valencia and then grant land to the Templars in the conquered territory? And will it also be possible for lords in say France, or Scotland, or England, or Italy to grant the Templars, established in the KoJ, baronies in order for the sake of public displays of piety and more pragmatically to gain the services of local Templar masters on their councils and maybe other benefits, too?

Didnt someone from the Devs talk about this?

From my understanding is that they will just be vassals like any others. So if templars have baronies in Aragon, Germany, Poland and Italy, while they're headquarters(capital) is in Acre, they will have numerous lieges in those areas. So Aragonese templars would probably(?) still owe feudal service to the King of Aragon if he mobilized them, but they could be independent in Outremer. (Think of William the Conqueror's case in relation to France).
 
Didnt someone from the Devs talk about this?

From my understanding is that they will just be vassals like any others. So if templars have baronies in Aragon, Germany, Poland and Italy, while they're headquarters(capital) is in Acre, they will have numerous lieges in those areas. So Aragonese templars would probably(?) still owe feudal service to the King of Aragon if he mobilized them, but they could be independent in Outremer. (Think of William the Conqueror's case in relation to France).

I was trying to find something in the thread about that issue. Thanks. I was just reading up on the Aragonese Templars, so I thought I would ask the question, as to how developed these orders will be in vanilla CK2. Hopefully we will be able to grant land to them, and be able to call on them for service. And also have the historical problems of kings dealing with these orders, over borrowing money from the orders, the conflicts of loyalty between the papacy, the order itself, the Kingdom of Jerusalem, and the other kingdoms in which they operate--if western kingdoms push the issue. Plenty of room for a Templar mod (or several).
 
But HOW will be accurate map affecting gameplay? and this should stop this is really OT
The difference between a one-province county making 10d a month and a three-province county making 10d a month is that the latter will have far more strategic depth. It doesn't matter that the former has equal revenue and possibly an equal number of troops, you only need to siege one province before it's annexable.

How provinces border each other and which areas they cover can also affect the viability of invasion routes, how much defensible forest/hills/mountains a state will have vs. less defensible plains and deserts, etc.

Paradox games are based on provinces, so the number and layout of provinces can definitely have an impact on the gameplay. To think otherwise is just stupid.
 
The difference between a one-province county making 10d a month and a three-province county making 10d a month is that the latter will have far more strategic depth. It doesn't matter that the former has equal revenue and possibly an equal number of troops, you only need to siege one province before it's annexable.

How provinces border each other and which areas they cover can also affect the viability of invasion routes, how much defensible forest/hills/mountains a state will have vs. less defensible plains and deserts, etc.

Paradox games are based on provinces, so the number and layout of provinces can definitely have an impact on the gameplay. To think otherwise is just stupid.

+1
 
Status
Not open for further replies.