In all fairness the First Crusade is pretty impossible to model with the game's current mechanics, even with a lot of scripting involved.
It would require an overhaul DLC at least.
Let Orthodox Call Crusades and Join Them
- Thread starter eirecount
- Start date
-
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.
In all fairness the First Crusade is pretty impossible to model with the game's current mechanics, even with a lot of scripting involved.
It would require an overhaul DLC at least.
.png){kind=avatar}
You people are nauseatingly narrow-minded, cynical, and assumptive. I am disgusted.
You know NOTHING about Orthodoxy and you know it. You dropped your fedora.
*All* of the major crusades are pretty impossible to model with the game's current mechanics. Except the Albigensian Crusade, which basically works, although because crusades can only target individuals rather than several rulers within a defined de jure or religious area, even that fails to an extent.
Just in terms of how the first worked in terms of the Fatamid/Seljuk flip, the Byzantine involvement and the fact the equivalent of 4 dukes took on the Caliph. And won.
I have an ERE game at about 900 right now.
You don't need retinues, you just need to be below your vassal limit.
Plus, retinues take ages to reinforce and have been overnerfed
Cash? Yeah you need a bit of cash, but with the ERE and the abundance of potential and conquerable merchant republics, I can pile around 6000 and barely notice.
Abbasid attacks? Well if you're below your vassal limit you can usually beat them, but if not, you can very easily get ~10k mercenaries.
They didn't even take on the Caliph - the Abbasids didn't really get involved at all. Said few dozen counts, dukes and hangers-on took on approximately 100000000000000000000 fragmented Levantine and Persian-Mesopotamian states, who eventually managed to raise around 100000000000000000 troops, most of whom were routed at Antioch. They then proceeded to take on the Fatimid caliph as well, even though the Fatimids retaking Jerusalem in 1098 basically invalidated the stated aim of the entire First Crusade anyway.
And then won.
And then divided the entire Levantine coastline, well outside of the in-game de jure area of the KoJ, among themselves. Without giving the Byzantine emperor the stuff they had all absolutely solemnly sworn to give him. And after one of the crusaders launched a coup in a Christian Armenian principality (Edessa) literally just because he could and because it looked easier than Jerusalem.
It really is genuinely impossible to model well.
That's why I love the first crusade, it's completely ludicrous.
Although the fact the game is called Crusader Kings II means they at least have to try.
That's why I love *history* as a whole, as well as CK2.
There's just so many ludicrous, ridiculous and fascinating episodes in medieval history alone, if you know where to look.
But yes, I know it's been said before, but Crusader Kings II should have mechanics which model at least some historical crusades, because at the minute, off the top of my head, only Saladin's jihad prior to the Third Crusade actually works fine with the existing mechanics.
Enlighten us. Cause I have plenty of sources saying your wrong. Julius Norwich, for one. How can byzantine's war NOT be characterized as religious?
The Crusaders did promise their allegiance and gave it other than Raymand of Toulsouse who swore instead to not bring harm to the empire and fully expected the emperor would be leading the army against the enemy to which they were disappointed but followed though with their oaths and later at the Siege of Antioch when Alexios and his army turned back because of Stephen of Blois declaring the siege lost the leaders of the crusade understandably believed the emperor betrayed them breaking any oath binding them to him. If that hadn't have happened the crusaders most likely would have continued fighting for the empire and turning territory back to the empire.
Would be nice if there'd be an 'Aid the Empire!' war (East or West) before the full Crusading thing kicked off. 9/10, the AI would screw it up, but a player of either empire should be able to avoid the insanity...
That's conjecture, and pretty dubious conjecture at that. They only really accepted the Byzantines taking Nikaea because it was a fait accompli.
Almost anything would be an improvement on the current mechanics, really. Maybe there's a place for...*shudders*...event troops, and/or a Peasant's Crusade whereby a potential target gets swarmed with low-quality light infantry after the Crusading period has begun but before a Crusade has been called. (I know that the historical Peasants' Crusade was after Clermont, but it'd be a bit unfair on the poor AI otherwise.)
I wouldn't call it dubious, most of the crusaders most likely would have held to their oaths, while some seemed motivated by personal gain most of them were motivated by religious fervor not personal gain and to the crusaders the turning back of the Byzathine army instead of relieving the Siege of Antioch was a massive unforgivable betrayal by the emperor of both the oaths they gave to him and of what they saw as a divine mission from god.
In my games the holy orders always win every crusade by themselves. Aquainte is Knights Templar/Hospitaler Turf, pretty much always.
Right, plus he was the Emperor. It's easy to scoff at that and say "what about the HRE" but when you're in Thrace and you SEE Constantinople and you MEET the Emperor. Well... That pretender in the West looks like a oafish barbarian when he claims to be the "Emperor of Rome."
Had Alexios led the Crusade those men would likely have remained as his vassals - whether that would have resulted in a major swing in the Empire's favour against the Caliph is a different question.
This post says pretty much everything I could hope to on the subject.
Now if you want to make Orthodox participation in crusades more realistic, introduce backstabbing Franks and Venetians into the picture who rape and pillage Byzantium into oblivion!
edit: better yet, just let the Pope call crusades on Byzantium directly!
:cackles menacingly:
All I want is an option for catholoics and other Orthadox nations to have the OPTION to join in the defence of a Jihad.
That's all I want -.-
That's all I want -.-
For the pope to directly call a crusade on the Queen of Cities would be insane. The Fourth Crusade was at least a ridiculous mess.
Somehow in my mind's eye I saw you coming with a historical correction
Rest assured, I merely jest.
Some legitimate mechanics to simulate Venetians being two-timing backstabbing bastards would be nice though!