Most Desireable Culture and Religion

[Dragatus]

I think Dragatus concluded Hussars make for the most punch for your buck here

That depends on whether you're using the LC retinue solo or if you're mixing it with your levies. Either way my last test only covered Hussars and Caballeros (and the standard Cavalry retinue) to determine whether a defense bonus or an attack bonus was more useful. I suspect Berber Cavalry or Himalayan Mountaineers would both actually be even better, with Berber Cavalry excelling when mixed with levies and Himalayan Mountaineers excelling when used solo (they would use the good Harass tactic instead of Disorganized Harass).

A high offense is more useful when you're mixing the LC retinue with your feudal levies. Here the levies take over much of the damage absorption, so doing extra damage during skirmish phase is more important. When used solo though the retinue is taking all the damage so it's own defense becomes a lot more significant and defensive LC perform better. The same principle can be applied to all skirmish focused retinues (anything with a lot of Light Infantry, Light Cavalry, Archers, or Horse Archers) and to a lesser extent to retinues in general.

Here's the spreadsheet with the results of my retinue test for version 2.8 of the game: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...tcum7SrvftXsIOF-eIhArwIIU/edit#gid=1397225253

If you want to know more about how the testing was done, it's explained in the thread I made: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...d-retinues-for-2-8-1-1.1089330/#post-24102207

 

[majdavlk]

I guess that's what you get for asking questions in too general a way. Obviously I meant the cultures and religions that offer some sort of strategic benefit.

Unfortunately I find Islam rather boring as a concept, too bad it's so powerful. Especially for my current game (NK mode Spain) being able to hold two types of demesnes would have been great. Are there other, more interesting cultures or religions that help with NK mode campaigns? (No need to mention Egypt's and Seljuk's vassal mercs, I'm aware of them)

the cultures with which you can have chinese imperialism, tangut jurchen, han

 

[Lopatou_ovalil]

Sumpa and Zhangzhung unlock a lot of gameplay options:

• Dynasty name first.
• Can always raid for loot.
• Independent dukes are called petty kings.
• Enables Absolute cognatic gender law.
• If religion is Bön or Buddhist, can adopt Monastic Feudal government

i quite like harmonic reform in Bon religion

 

[Lopatou_ovalil]

You can check table of cultures in this link.

 

[incognitus]

What happens if you change cultures or religions in a way that makes existing laws illegal? Will they automatically change or will they remain?

 

[WJS]

They change to something compatible. So if you're a Viking who goes Irish and adopts Tanistry, and a Norse family member inherits, the laws switch back to Elective Gavelkind when they inherit.

 

[incognitus]

They change to something compatible. So if you're a Viking who goes Irish and adopts Tanistry, and a Norse family member inherits, the laws switch back to Elective Gavelkind when they inherit.

How unfortunate. So if I change from Basque to Berber I lose my Absolute Cognatic inheritance? Unless I remain Cathar, right?

 

[manager2525]

That's a weird way to say Assyrian, or Coptic. Or both Israelites (Sephardic and Ashkenazi).

Might be only my idea but i think there are a lot more people wishing to create a new kingdom of Israel as Sephardic and/or Ashkenazi. Also the Assyrians and Coptic have a lot more interestic history - heritage background going on for them than those poor Volga Finns living in some backwater forest.
Also modern Albanians are likewise to pick the two province minor Arberians etc.
Even someone interested in playing as a Bolga Finn is more likely to pick the Mordvids than the Meshchera.
It seems to me that the Meshcheras have nothing going on for them (no modern descentants, not a "cool culture" etc). Then again i might be wrong.

 

[Narvait]

Well, they got Moscow, so at least there is that
But I agreed to general statement in your post.

 

[majdavlk]

How unfortunate. So if I change from Basque to Berber I lose my Absolute Cognatic inheritance? Unless I remain Cathar, right?

from my experience absolute cognatic and iqta tax/levy remain

 

[incognitus]

from my experience absolute cognatic and iqta tax/levy remain

How about Chinese Imperial after reverting to a non-eligible culture?

 

[majdavlk]

chinese imperial does not stay
after i get to my computer ill check if roman imperial stays

 

[vandevere]

This is a question with a subjective answer.

My personal preference is Catholic Religion. Culturally, I like the French, the Anglo-Saxon, and the Welsh cultures.

But it's all a matter of personal preference...

 

[knppel]

I found my love for catholics again recently. Thanks to paradox encouraging me to play as Eustace de Boulogne.
Outremer culture reformation a click away, 3.8k saved up to build knight-camels, yasyasyas

Or should I quickly go levantine and build me some pure camels in first, hmmmm

 

[Reman]

Defense is more important for heavy infantry than offense

Do you have reasoning behind this assertion?

 

[Crimson Grog]

Do you have reasoning behind this assertion?

There have been too many topics about tactics+retinues for me to track them all down but the general consensus has been that defense is more important in melee phase, which is where heavy infantry excel. Defense is also useful in skirmish phase but an argument can be made for offense if you're going for feint (LI + AR) or harass (LC + LI) tactics with the goal of wiping out the enemy flank before ever getting to the melee phase.

 

[Reman]

There have been too many topics about tactics+retinues for me to track them all down but the general consensus has been that defense is more important in melee phase, which is where heavy infantry excel.

I don't understand. Say the casualty ratio between you and your opponent in a given situation is 1:1. If you get a 60% boost to attack, that becomes 1:1.6. If you get a 60% boost to defense instead, that becomes 0.625:1. In either case the casualty ratio between you and your opponent has improved in your favor by 60%. Aren't bonuses to attack and defense thus logically equivalent? The only functional difference between the two is that the defensive bonus makes battles last a bit longer.

 

[Crimson Grog]

I don't understand. Say the casualty ratio between you and your opponent in a given situation is 1:1. If you get a 60% boost to attack, that becomes 1:1.6. If you get a 60% boost to defense instead, that becomes 0.625:1. In either case the casualty ratio between you and your opponent has improved in your favor by 60%. Aren't bonuses to attack and defense thus logically equivalent? The only functional difference between the two is that the defensive bonus makes battles last a bit longer.

I found a good explanation from Dragatus here https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...-composition-efficiency-metric.1105064/page-2

"Without context offense and defense should both be equally valid and they do reinforce each other as I mentioned before.

But context changes things. Skirmish units will do damage during both the skirmish and the melee phase, while melee units will only deal significant damage during melee phase. This means that for a melee focused unit skirmish defense is much more significant than skirmish offense. For example, Pikemen have 0.1 skirmish attack while Heavy Infantry have 0.25 skirmish attack, so if we just look at the ratio of the two we see that the Heavy Infantry is more than twice as good. But in reality neither will really do significant damage and what truly matters is which unit can reach melee phase with lower losses.

With skirmish units it's the opposite. Feudal armies are predominantly melee focused, so incoming damage during skirmish phase is lower than incoming damage during melee phase. This mean skirmish units can afford to have a lower defense, but since they are capable of doing notable damage during skirmish phase they will want to maximize that.

Or to put it simply, when fighting feudal levies skirmish units want to rout the enemy before melee can begin which requires a high skirmish attack and melee units want to reach the melee phase with minimal loses which requires a high skirmish defense."

 

[Reman]

I found a good explanation from Dragatus here https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...-composition-efficiency-metric.1105064/page-2

"Without context offense and defense should both be equally valid and they do reinforce each other as I mentioned before.

But context changes things. Skirmish units will do damage during both the skirmish and the melee phase, while melee units will only deal significant damage during melee phase. This means that for a melee focused unit skirmish defense is much more significant than skirmish offense. For example, Pikemen have 0.1 skirmish attack while Heavy Infantry have 0.25 skirmish attack, so if we just look at the ratio of the two we see that the Heavy Infantry is more than twice as good. But in reality neither will really do significant damage and what truly matters is which unit can reach melee phase with lower losses.

With skirmish units it's the opposite. Feudal armies are predominantly melee focused, so incoming damage during skirmish phase is lower than incoming damage during melee phase. This mean skirmish units can afford to have a lower defense, but since they are capable of doing notable damage during skirmish phase they will want to maximize that.

Or to put it simply, when fighting feudal levies skirmish units want to rout the enemy before melee can begin which requires a high skirmish attack and melee units want to reach the melee phase with minimal loses which requires a high skirmish defense."

That makes sense, thanks!

 

[knppel]

Keep in mind that all is one factor of many to take into account when it comes to battles in an open game. Baltic Retinue might be statistically a little weaker than Druzhina, but more important (and in numbers more impactful) it is to gain a defensive strategic position, for example.
As long as we speak of a realm that faces bigger armies from its neighbours, this will still matter much more than exact cultural retinue type, as long as you have the right units for your desired tactic in the center or whichever flank you prefer them on. Enemy river crossing alone will give more penalties and boni to all unit types, as will mountain, hill or forest defense.

Certain terrain also disables certain tactics- a crappy levy army or a generic skirmish retinue will be able to face to a horde army in a forest, where they'd be squashed in the open plain without ever entering melee, for instance.