Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Long range inheritances are sometime absurd

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Crusader Kings II 69866 Bug Reports 19707 User Modifications 10588 Suggestions 5969 Tech Support 6361 After Action Reports
ArmchairGenera1

ArmchairGenera1

Second Lieutenant
31 Badges
Aug 8, 2009
168
0
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall
  • Prison Architect
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • BATTLETECH
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • 500k Club
Playing as Umayyads, repelling Asturia Holy War on Portucale. Everything's going well. But one of my vassals dies in battle. His possessions are inherited by some guy from tulimid Sultanate, so he's vassal of sultan of Egypt (which is absurd enough), Egypt is actually on the other side of the world. I declare war to reclaim it. And half way into the war 2 Egyptian doomstacks appear in Spain. At that period no one seems to have boats, so Tulimid guys walked his whole army all the way through N.Africa into Spain:eek:

Imho, both things are highly unrealistic. 1st - no one would declare himself a vassal of someone who's on the other end of the world. 2nd at that time such long military expeditions were plain impossible without completely giving up on your own country.
 
I think the best was in my very first game where I created the kingdom of Ireland and then somehow inherited a duchy in Eastern Hungary. When it revolted I actually took my army, sailed it down to Venezia, landed, and than marched over to the rebellious province where I almost lost anyway because I had no troops. Good times and fond distant memories
 
Draker5 said:
Yeah I know, the only thing more impossible and unrealistic would be if someone had done that over a millenia before and taken elephants over the alps.
Click to expand...

The Carthaginians had base territory in what is in CK2 the duchy of Barcelona. So the comparison doesn't work. Also, Hannibal's troops took fairly major attrition going over the Alps.
 
the de jure Arabian Empire stretches from Mesopotamia to Mauretania...which is a strait away from Hispania...so not sure how 'far' that is.
 
stilgarpl said:
And someone really should have told Alexander the Great and Caesar that they couldn't move their armies that far!
Click to expand...

Sorry, but those comparisons simply don't work.
Alexander the great was a very special case in a world history. It took long long years to reach that far, his army suffered major attrition and it also didn't simply walked over some neutral territory but was constantly fighting and conquering. Hannibal's army started in todays Barcelona and even if the elephants were transported from Africa they were mostly on a friendly territory until they reached Barcelona. Crossing the Alps caused severe attrition and Hannibal won his battles because of his military genius, not because he moved a horde across the Alps.
To project power that far at that age was nearly impossible and it was a titanic problem which really only a few men were ever capable of. In CK II it happens way too often.
 
ArmchairGenera1 said:
Sorry, but those comparisons simply don't work.
To project power that far at that age was nearly impossible and it was a titanic problem which really only a few men were ever capable of.
Click to expand...
It was also 1000 years earlier.
Somehow back then "World Conquest" by Macedonians, Romans or Arabs was possible...

But, if it wasn't possible in Middle Ages to transport armies that far, how England, HRE and France was able to conquer Jerusalem in First Crusade?
 
stilgarpl said:
It was also 1000 years earlier.
Somehow back then "World Conquest" by Macedonians, Romans or Arabs was possible...

But, if it wasn't possible in Middle Ages to transport armies that far, how England, HRE and France was able to conquer Jerusalem in First Crusade?
Click to expand...

As to the first point, it was precisely because of conquest that rulers were able to do that sort of thing. They built up logistical bases in conquered territory behind them, recruited new soldiers in those areas, and expanded on that basis. In CK2, you see the King of France marching enormous armies across neutral or unfriendly territory all the way up to Novgorod to help his brother-in-law the King of Sweden. That doesn't make a lot of sense.

As for the second, I think what the OP is getting at is that things like the First Crusade were truly momentous and rare occurrences that required an incredible mobilization of resources, and for the most part weren't really that successful. In CK2, they happen much too frequently, and any random duke can pull them off.
 
tajerio said:
As to the first point, it was precisely because of conquest that rulers were able to do that sort of thing. They built up logistical bases in conquered territory behind them, recruited new soldiers in those areas, and expanded on that basis. In CK2, you see the King of France marching enormous armies across neutral or unfriendly territory all the way up to Novgorod to help his brother-in-law the King of Sweden. That doesn't make a lot of sense.

As for the second, I think what the OP is getting at is that things like the First Crusade were truly momentous and rare occurrences that required an incredible mobilization of resources, and for the most part weren't really that successful. In CK2, they happen much too frequently, and any random duke can pull them off.
Click to expand...

Yes, very rare, like that time the Normans invaded Sicily or Genoa got into Crimea.
 
stilgarpl said:
It was also 1000 years earlier.
Somehow back then "World Conquest" by Macedonians, Romans or Arabs was possible...

But, if it wasn't possible in Middle Ages to transport armies that far, how England, HRE and France was able to conquer Jerusalem in First Crusade?
Click to expand...

They did have their problems
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Crusade#People.27s_Crusade
and after fighting for food even in christian lands and suffering major attrition the first participants were slaughtered before even reaching Jerusalem.

The later Princes Crusade had the leaders actually swear fealty to Constantinople in exchange for provisions and transportation to their target.

In the case of England in the 3rd crusade Richard conquered bases in Sicily and Cyprus before finally landing in Outremer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Löwenherz#Occupation_of_Sicily
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back