Well, should them? They had a lot of differences from the traditional hordes such as the mongol empire or golden horde
Should the Timurids be a horde?
- Thread starter gll25
- 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.
We had a rather interesting discussion about this in the multiplayer group I'm in. We came to the conclusion that the Timurids were the ONLY faction that suited the Steppe Nomads government, as they assimilated large tracts of land quickly and without peace treaties, and put numberless souls to the sword, thus the colonists required to take them back. They were not very diplomatic.
In comparison, the Golden Horde did not and had no incentive to expand during the period, and instead relied on diplomacy and a system of tributaries among the Russian and Balkan principalities for wealth, comfort and power. The expansion you see the Golden Horde doing in most EU3 campaigns is horribly unrealistic, and while we can blame the bad AI for it, it just should never have been allowed to occur.
In comparison, the Golden Horde did not and had no incentive to expand during the period, and instead relied on diplomacy and a system of tributaries among the Russian and Balkan principalities for wealth, comfort and power. The expansion you see the Golden Horde doing in most EU3 campaigns is horribly unrealistic, and while we can blame the bad AI for it, it just should never have been allowed to occur.
In any upcoming patches, I strongly believe the GH should be turned into a tribal federation. This way they can still be crippled by tribal successions, and it will take the pressure off Poland, Muscovy/Novgorod, and the Ottomans so they can expand freely and fairly. The AI's just too stupid to offer tribute right off the bat or pull any of the other tricks players can. You can't code that kind of gamey crap, but honestly it's the only way to proceed at least -somewhat- historically..
I've never not seen Muscovy get eaten by the Horde.
I've never not seen Muscovy get eaten by the Horde.
Offering Tribute isn't gamey, its realistic. Moscowy and the other Russian principalities paid tribute to the Golden Horde for centuries before Muscowy forged them into a proper nation.
The start of EUIII coincides with Timurid disintegration. From a game-play perspective , a Timurid Horde leads to all sorts of fustrating and bizzare outcomes - such as the Timurdis holding on to Persia for decades if not centuries even after they've been completely raped by everyone around them.
Absolutely.
And besides that, they didn't wipe out the majority of the population in say, Persia. Torched some cities perhaps, but so what?
It doesn't change the fact that most of their empire consists of settled agricultural communities, not nomads.
Needs more Tribal Succession Crisis beatdown, I agree. But its perfectly possible that an heir of Tamerlane could regain full control over the hordes after Tamerlane's death and expand further into the Middle East. They did have two choices, after all; expand into the weak and divided Indian subcontinent, where they formed the Mughal Empire, or fight the Ottoman Empire without the military genius of Timur to guide them. If the Ottoman Empire was divided or weakened, or the Timurids had a strong ruler, I see no reason why they wouldn't choose to invade the Middle East or couldn't hold on to Persia.
Althought, if you ask me, the Steppe Nomads are simply silly, and shouldn't exist at all.
I agree. AI controlled Timurids should always dissolve, IMO. Not that they don't, it just takes forever and by then the middle east/anatolia look like crap.
I see them dissolve almost all the time, which is what you want. And just because they conquered civilized lands doesn't make them (and more importantly) their government so now does it? I think the way they're now is pretty reasonable, dangerous at first but eventually destroyed, once in a while they leave a decent legacy behind in the Mughals.
No the Timurids do not need to be weakened. No the Timurids should not be a Horde. There are massive problems with the current horde system. Colonization should be completely done away with for hordes. My suggestion is that the Timurids start with a lot more money as they would have been one of the richest empires in the world due to the control of the spice road and every province captured should increase manpower. However, to make them fall apart easier they should start with no cores on most of their provinces, only a few around Samarkland (this should be the same for the GH). I'd also suggest that if the Timurids take a province that province should lose one tax base and Samarkland gain one to represent the taking of slaves. This could also be extended to the rest of the game which would require an infamy penalty depending on the culture of the province. Tribal succession crisis should be styled more like a civil war in EU:Rome where a whole area breaks away with it's own armies and if they survive then a new country is formed. All the current hordes should be able to have diplomatic options as Timur had offered an alliance to France and was on great relations with Castille This brings in a whole other point about Christian/Muslim relations which are very poorly represented in the early game. Finally the Timurids should be given (good) missions to expand into Northern India making it easier for the AI and the player to form the Mughals. With changes along these lines the game would work much better.
Don't the rebels already mean that eventually other countries break free? It would be bad if Mughals form all the time, if it's too sure a thing, that's no good.
I would rather see a Mughal empire than a Hindustan form. (I would also love to see some Sultanates actually survive in India for once.)
I've never seen the Mughals form and I think taking away the Timurid cores would help them split easier at least in the West. My point is really that the AI Timmys should be pushed east as the provinces in the west break away instead of being colonised which can create a huge Ottomans or a huge Persia which has knock on effects elsewhere.
The problem with the sultanates can be ascribed to three decisions made by the game designers.
1) Timurids start at war with Delhi and end up destroying or weakening it to the point that they can be overrun by the Hindu states. IOTL, the Timurids had just pillaged Delhi and consequently, should start off at a truce (or maybe even with Delhi paying a token tribute to the Timurids). This will give Delhi a chance to consolidate its empire considering it is a Muslim power in a Hindu land.
2) The kingdom of Bihar (a Hindu state in the game) should actually be the Sharqi sultanate of Jaunpur (a Muslim state) and they should start with excellent relations with Bengal.and Delhi. Mithila can be removed from the Sharqi sultanate and made a separate Hindu kingdom. It is the combination of Vijayanagar, Orissa, Rajputana, Bihar and Gondwana that destroys central Indian Muslim states and Delhi. Converting Bihar to Sharqi sultanate will strengthen all the Muslim sultanates.
3) Burmese kingdoms have a clear line of invasion into India, which is so ahistorical and a-geographical. In practice, no army of any consequence crossed the Arakan Yoma mountains from Burma into Bengal. Yet, in game, I see Pegu and Taungu invading Bengal, which is anti-geographical. Removing the Naga and Chin provinces, and adding a wasteland that separates Burma from India will greatly strengthen the Muslim states of the Indian subcontinent.
I never see timurides hold onto persia, since persia starts with cores in timurid territory they're always the first to revolt. I always see Persia revolting as a strong unified state. When if real life that area hadn't seen a strong unified state for 1000 years and wouldn't until the Saffayids reinvented Persia from scratch a few hundred years later (though what nations historians use the term 'persia' for seems pretty arbitary to me. Saffayids apparently counting when Parthians and Khwazarim don't).
Hordes work fine for areas that raiders come from and attack you from time to time. Only the only area that really makes sense in is where I always see manchu eat the mongols and oirats for breakfast whenever I make the mistake of trying Ming again.
Hordes wouldn't be a problem if they autopeaced with the AI after looting a few provinces and only went on conquoring sprees when a high stat warlord got hold of them.
Hordes work fine for areas that raiders come from and attack you from time to time. Only the only area that really makes sense in is where I always see manchu eat the mongols and oirats for breakfast whenever I make the mistake of trying Ming again.
Hordes wouldn't be a problem if they autopeaced with the AI after looting a few provinces and only went on conquoring sprees when a high stat warlord got hold of them.
Wait... this whole Khanate government is something new in DW? I thought it was part of the SRI mod!
There was a suggestion in another Timurid thread not that long ago to make an event triggered by the death of Timur to turn the Timurids' government type into a sedentary one, like tribal despotism or whatever. Doable?
I'm fairly sure that that is possible, the parameters would have to be something like "tag = timurids", "before = 1430" and the trigger would be "on_ruler_death". This means that playing the Timurid's doesn't mean that every time you westernise your government it gets reverted on ruler death, and if Timur manages to live past 1430, he is truly a god among men.
I think that could definitely work.
Living for almost 100 years back then is indeed godly, and creating such a big Empire while being lame is also pretty awesome.