Assign kingdom crusade (jihad/great holy war) priority.

[Caspoi]

I think Jerusalem should always have a higher weight than anything else except the Christian core regions of France, Constantinople and Italy. Jerusalem was the inspiration behind the whole movement, it's the holy city at the centre of Christian apocalyptic hopes and expectations. An excursion against, say, Yorkshire, isn't going to have the same effect.

Catholic, Fraticeli:
1. Italy (seat of the Pope)
2. France, Burgundy, Aquitaine, Bavaria, Lotharingia (very near to Italy and a long Christian history with a lot of Holy sites)
3. Greece (to reclaim Constantinople)
4. Jerusalem/Israel (The Holy Land)
5. England, Frisia, Hungary, Germany/Saxony, Norway, Sweden, Denmark (to mop up remaining heathen realms threatening western Europe)
6. Egypt, Syria, Africa, Anatolia, Poland, Pomerania, Bohemia, Finland, Lithuania, Sicily (Historical crusade targets)
7. Galicia (for Santiago de Compostela)
8. Navarra, Aragon, Asturias, Leon and Castille (once the middle east is taken, crusading can commence in Iberia)
9. Andalusia, Mauritania, Portugal
10. Ireland, Wales, Scotland and Brittany
11. Mesopotamia and Arabia (to finish off the Saracens)
11. Rus, Ruthenia, Bulgaria, Serbia, Croatia, Wallachia, Georgia and Armenia (filling in remaining gaps)
12. Alania, Cumania, Volga Bulgaria, Taurica and Nubia (hypothetical crusades)
13. Persia, Abyssinia
14. Afghanistan, Balauchistan, Khiva and Turkestan (consolidating Persia)
15. Tamilakam ('rescuing' the south Indian Christians)
16. Punjab, Sindh, Gujarat, Karnata, Maharastra, Andhra, Lanka (general offensive into India)
17. Delhi, Rajputana, Malwa
18. Kosala
19. Bihar
20. Bengal
21. Orissa, Kamarupa, Gondwana, Telingana (ridiculous jungle crusades)
22. Mali, Khotan, Mongolia (ridiculous steppe crusades)
23. Perm (THE GREAT ICE CRUSADE!!!)

I've started the Iberian crusades later, because historically the Reconquista was seen as something separate and Spanish Catholics were supposed to focus on that rather than running off to the holy land. Gameplay-wise it solves the problem of the whole Catholic world going back and forth trying to rescue little Spanish principalities instead of crusading in the east like they're supposed to. It would also be a good idea to get rid of the 'Germany not controlled' requirement since Germany is now lower down the pecking order than Jerusalem.

Sunni, Shia, Ibadi, Kharijite, Hurufi:
1. Arabia (Holy Land of Islam)
2. Mesopotamia (heartland of the middle east)
3. Egypt, Syria (to remove any crusaders from the environs of Jerusalem)
4. Jerusalem/Israel
5. Armenia, Africa, Persia (securing the borders of Islam)
6. Anatolia
7. Greece (the conquest of Constantinople)
8. Sicily, Serbia, Bulgaria, Taurica, Georgia (Historic targets of Ottoman expansion)
9. Mauritania, Andalusia (conquering Constantinople has a higher priority than securing Spain)
10. Aquitaine (briefly Umayyad territory)
11. Burgundy (historic Umayyad influence, encircling Italy)
12. Italy (the conquest of Rome)
13. Portugal, Galicia, Asturias, Leon, Castille, Navarra, Aragon, Bavaria, Croatia (mopping up)
14. France
15. Lotharingia, England (the last remaining major kingdoms within the old Roman borders)
16. Bohemia, Hungary, Wallachia, Alania (consolidating the northern frontier)
17. Germany/Saxony
18. Brittany, Wales, Ireland, Scotland, Frisia, Denmark (mopping up again)
19. Mali, Nubia
20. Khiva, Afghanistan, Balauchistan (turning to the east now that Christendom is mostly or entirely conquered)
21. Sindh, Punjab, Turkestan, Abyssinia
22. Khotan, Rajputana, Gujarat, Delhi
23. Malwa, Kosala, Cumania
24. Bihar, Mongolia, Volga Bulgaria
25. Bengal, Gondwana, Maharastra
26. Karnata, Tamilakam, Lanka
27. Andhra, Telingana, Orissa, Kamarupa (finishing off India)
28. Norway, Sweden, Poland, Pomerania, Lithuania, Finland (finishing off pagan Europe)
29. Perm (Impossible to do Ramadan up here!)

I've given Constantinople and the war against the Romans a higher priority than Andalusia, since conquering Rum plays a much more important role in Islamic eschatology and ultimately in history the loss of Al-Andalus didn't slow the Ottomans from invading eastern Europe, plus if the Christians aren't crusading in Iberia there's less pressure there anyway. The Muslim goals are more oriented around fighting the Christians than expansion against pagans and other heathens, but once Christendom is beaten the jihads turn to the east.

Zoroastrians:
1. Persia (Heartland of the Achaemenid Empire)
2. Khiva, Afghanistan, Balauchistan (regions with large Zoroastrian populations and historic connections to Persia)
3. Mesopotamia (Heartland of the Sassanid Empire)
4. Syria, Armenia, Punjab, Sindh (Achaemenid satrapies)
5. Jerusalem/Israel (Achaemenid satrapy)
6. Egypt (Achaemenid satrapy)
7. Anatolia (Achaemenid satrapy)
8. Arabia (partially conquered by the Sassanids)
9. Greece (invaded by the Achaemenids and Sassanids)
10. Africa, Nubia (invasion targets for Cambyses)
11. Georgia, Bulgaria, Serbia
12. Abyssinia, Sicily, Mauritania, Croatia, Hungary, Wallachia, Taurica, Alania, Turkestan, Delhi, Rajputana, Gujarat, Tamilakam (just logical expansion targets now)
13. Andalusia, Bavaria, Cumania, Khotan, Kosala, Karnata, Maharastra, Malwa, Andhra, Lanka
14. Italy (Major obstacle)
15. Mali, Portugal, Galicia, Leon, Castille, Asturias, Navarra, Aragon, Aquitaine, Burgundy, Bohemia, Ruthenia, Volga Bulgaria, Mongolia, Bihar
16. France (Major obstacle)
17. Lotharingia (Lotharingia without France looks ugly)
18. Germany/Saxony
19. England (Last major Catholic kingdom)
20. Brittany, Wales, Ireland, Scotland, Frisia, Denmark, Pomerania, Poland, Rus, Bengal
21. Norway, Sweden, Finland, Lithuania, Telingana, Gondwana, Kamarupa, Orissa
21. Perm

The Zoroastrians are more 'defensive' and land-oriented than the Muslims and Christians, so they mainly get Great Holy Wars that help them rebuild Persia and secure its borders.

Yazidi:
1. Mesopotamia (location of Sinjar)
2. Syria (a number of Yazidis here)
3. Armenia (close by)
4. Persia (also close by)
5. Khiva, Balauchistan (same as Zoroastrians from here on)
6. Punjab, Sindh
7. Jerusalem/Israel
8. Egypt
9. Anatolia
10. Arabia
11. Greece
12. Africa, Nubia
13. Georgia, Bulgaria, Serbia
14. Abyssinia, Sicily, Mauritania, Croatia, Hungary, Wallachia, Taurica, Alania, Turkestan, Delhi, Rajputana, Gujarat, Tamilakam
15. Andalusia, Bavaria, Cumania, Khotan, Kosala, Karnata, Maharastra, Malwa, Andhra, Lanka
16. Italy
17. Mali, Portugal, Galicia, Leon, Castille, Asturias, Navarra, Aragon, Aquitaine, Burgundy, Bohemia, Ruthenia, Volga Bulgaria, Mongolia, Bihar
18. France
19. Lotharingia
20. Germany/Saxony
21. England
22. Brittany, Wales, Ireland, Scotland, Frisia, Denmark, Pomerania, Poland, Rus, Bengal
23. Norway, Sweden, Finland, Lithuania, Telingana, Gondwana, Kamarupa, Orissa
24. Perm

Yazidis are non-Muslims, so they get a different list based on the Zoroastrian one.

Germanic Reformed:
1. Denmark, Norway, Sweden (Norse homelands to be defended at all costs)
2. Saxony (also important Germanic territory)
3. England, Frisia, Germany (Major Christian kingdoms full of Norse and Germanic holy sites)
4. France (very important Catholic land)
5. Sicily (historically conquered by Normans, good jumping-off point for Italy)
6. Italy (capital of Latin Christendom)
7. Greece (Miklagard, under heavy Norse influence for a long time)
8. Finland, Perm
8. Andalusia (parts of the old Germanic kingdoms of the Visigoths and the Suebi)
9. Portugal, Galicia, Leon, Castille, Asturias, Navarra, Aragon (mopping up Iberia)
10. Brittany, Wales, Ireland, Scotland, Lotharingia, Burgundy, Bavaria (mopping up western Europe)
11. Africa (the Vandal kingdom)
12. Persia (Serkland)
13. Egypt (Also Serkland, a good route to the Indian ocean)
14. Hungary (Once home to Gepids, Goths, Lombards and other Germanic tribes)
15. Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Anatolia, Georgia, Armenia (mopping up the Byzantines)
16. Taurica (Still inhabited by Gothic peoples in some areas)
17. Poland, Bohemia, Pomerania, Lithuania, Rus, Ruthenia (mopping up eastern Europe)
18. Mauritania, Jerusalem/Israel, Syria, Arabia (mopping up the middle east)
19. Volga Bulgaria, Alania (steppes reachable by river)
20. Balauchistan, Sindh, Punjab, Gujarat, Maharastra, Tamilakam, Rajputana, Lanka, Bengal, Bihar, Kosala, Delhi (Norse India)
21. Malwa, Gondwana, Orissa, Andhra, Telingana, Karnata, Kamarupa (Indian interior)
22. Nubia, Abyssinia
23. Afghanistan, Cumania, Khiva
24. Mongolia, Khotan, Turkestan, Mali

Because the Vikings can attack very well over the sea and can travel down rivers, they have lots of disparate crusade targets across the world that don't necessarily border each other.

Jewish:
1. Israel (the Promised Land)
2. Egypt (land of Moses)
3. Abyssinia, Mesopotamia, Syria, Arabia (large historical Jewish communities)
4. Persia (Cyrus saved the Jews from Babylon)
5. Afghanistan, Balauchistan (theorised locations of the lost tribes)
6. Sindh, Gujarat, Maharastra, Tamilakam (the Beni Israel in India)
7. Africa, Armenia, Georgia, Nubia (strategic depth)
8. Alania (recovering the Khazar kingdom)
9. Taurica, Cumania (recovering the Khazar kingdom)
10. Andalusia, Sicily (multicultural kingdoms with large Jewish minorities)
11. Italy, Greece (revenge on the Romans for centuries of persecution)
12. Aquitaine, Burgundy, Bavaria (rescuing Jewish minorities there)
13. France
14. Lotharingia, England
15. Germany/Saxony, Frisia
16. Mauritania, Portugal, Galicia, Leon, Asturias, Castille, Navarra, Aragon, Wales, Brittany, Ireland, Scotland (mopping up western Europe)
17. Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Wallachia (Securing the Balkans)
18. Volga Bulgaria, Ruthenia, Turkestan, Khiva (mopping up Khazaria)
19. Rajputana, Punjab, Malwa, Lanka, Karnata (Indian expansion)
20. Delhi, Kosala, Gondwana
21. Bihar
22. Bengal
23. Orissa, Kamarupa, Telingana, Andhra
24. Poland, Bohemia, Pomerania, Denmark, Lithuania, Hungary, Rus
25. Sweden, Norway, Finland
26. Mongolia, Khotan
27. Mali
28. Perm

Reformed Tengri:
1. Mongolia (the Altai Mountains)
2. Cumania, Turkestan, Alania, Volga Bulgaria (the main belt of the steppes)
3. Taurica (Holy site in Crimea)
4. Hungary (site of steppe nomad invasions for millennia)
5. Wallachia, Ruthenia, Rus, Bulgaria, Croatia, Serbia, Georgia, Khiva, Khotan (logical areas of expansion)
6. Greece, Persia, Bavaria, Afghanistan (historic targets of nomadic invasions)
7. Balauchistan, Punjab, Rajasthan, Sindh (these regions were frequently invaded and settled by central Asians)
8. Delhi, Gujarat, Malwa (Indian expansion)
9. Maharastra, Kosala
10. Bengal, Karnata
11. Bohemia, Poland, Lithuania, Finland, Perm, Anatolia, Armenia, Mesopotamia (logical targets)
12. Arabia, Syria, Jerusalem, Sweden, Pomerania, Germany, Italy
13. Burgundy, Lotharingia, Frisia, Denmark, Norway, Sicily, Egypt
14. Aquitaine, France, Africa, Nubia
15. Aragon, Navarra, Brittany, Mauritania, Abyssinia
16. Portugal, Galicia, Leon, Asturias, Castille, Mali
17. Tamilakam, Telingana, Gondwana, Andhra, Orissa, Kamarupa (jungle is difficult for nomads to enter)
18. Lanka, England (on islands)
19. Scotland, Wales
20. Ireland (also on an island)

Reformed Slavic:
1. Rus, Ruthenia, Poland (ancient Slavic homelands)
2. Pomerania, Bohemia (West Slavic nations)
3. Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria (South Slavic nations)
4. Perm (historically colonised by Slavs)
5. Volga Bulgaria, Cumania, Taurica, Wallachia (Sviatoslav's invasions hit these areas)
6. Alania (Sviatoslav's invasions hit this area)
7. Lithuania, Finland, Georgia (close to the Slavic lands)
8. Greece (historically colonised by Slavs)
9. Denmark, Sweden (Slavic pirates sometimes struck these areas)
10. Germany, Hungary, Bavaria (historically inhabited by at least some Slavs)
11. Mongolia, Turkestan (Colonised by Russia much later)
12. Khiva, Khotan
13. France, Italy (Slavic invasions of the west)
14. Andalusia (lots of Slavic slaves lived in Islamic Spain)
15. Portugal, Galicia, Leon, Asturias, Castille, Navarra, Aragon, Brittany, Aquitaine, Burgundy, Lotharingia, Frisia, Sicily, Norway (mopping up)
16. England
17. Scotland, Wales, Ireland
18. Mauritania, Anatolia, Armenia, Persia, Afghanistan
19. Africa, Syria, Mesopotamia, Balauchistan, Punjab
20. Egypt, Arabia, Jerusalem
21. Sindh, Delhi, Rajasthan
22. Gujarat, Malwa, Kosala
23. Bihar, Gondwana, Maharastra
24. Karnata, Tamilakam, Telingana, Bengal, Orissa, Andhra
25. Lanka, Kamarupa
26. Nubia, Mali
27. Abyssinia

Reformed Romuva:
1. Lithuania (the core of the Romuva faith)
2. Ruthenia, Poland (contain holy sites)
3. Pomerania (contains a holy site)
4. Rus, Finland (close to Lithuania)
6. Denmark, Sweden (on the Baltic coast)
7. Norway, Perm (logical targets)
8. Germany, Bohemia, Hungary, Wallachia, Taurica, Cumania
9. Frisia, Lotharingia, Bavaria, Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Georgia, Alania, Turkestan, Mongolia
10. Burgundy, France, Italy, Greece, Anatolia, Armenia, Persia, Khiva, Khotan
11. Brittany, England, Aquitaine, Sicily, Syria, Mesopotamia, Afghanistan, Balauchistan
12. Ireland, Wales, Scotland, Navarra, Aragon, Jerusalem, Arabia, Punjab
13. Andalusia, Castille, Asturias, Egypt, Sindh, Delhi, Rajasthan
14. Portugal, Galicia, Leon, Mauritania, Africa, Nubia, Gujarat, Malwa, Kosala
15. Mali, Abyssinia, Bihar, Gondwana, Maharastra
16. Karnata, Tamilakam, Telingana, Bengal, Orissa, Andhra
17. Lanka, Kamarupa

Reformed Suomenusko:
1. Finland (largest Suomenusko area)
2. Perm, Rus (Finnish countries)
3. Sweden, Norway (Northern parts are Finnish)
4. Ruthenia, Lithuania (contain Suomenusko holy sites)
5. Cumania, Mongolia (full of dangerous nomads)
6. Poland, Pomerania, Denmark (forested areas of Northern Europe)
7. Scotland, Germany, Bohemia
8. England, Ireland, Lotharingia, Frisia, Bavaria
9. France, Wales, Croatia
10. Brittany, Aquitaine, Serbia
11. Navarra, Castille, Leon, Asturias, Galicia, Bulgaria
12. Andalusia, Portugal, Italy, Hungary, Greece, Wallachia, Taurica, Alania, Turkestan, Khotan (logical targets now that forested areas are exhausted)
13. Mauritania, Sicily, Anatolia, Georgia, Khiva
14. Mali, Africa, Syria, Armenia, Persia, Afghanistan
15. Egypt, Jerusalem, Mesopotamia, Balauchistan, Punjab.
16. Nubia, Arabia, Sindh, Delhi, Rajasthan
17. Abyssinia, Gujarat, Malwa, Kosala
18. Bihar, Gondwana, Maharastra
19. Karnata, Tamilakam, Telingana, Bengal, Orissa, Andhra
20. Lanka, Kamarupa

Reformed West African:
1. Mali (West African homeland)
2. Mauritania (Holy sites, inhabited by Berbers and Tuareg)
3. Africa (Holy sites, inhabited by Berbers and Tuareg)
4. Andalusia, Sicily, Egypt (conquest of the Muslim Mediterranean)
5. Nubia
6. Abyssinia
7. Arabia
8. Mesopotamia, Jerusalem
9. Syria, Armenia
10. Portugal, Galicia, Asturias, Leon, Castille, Navarra, Aragon
11. Aquitaine
12. Burgundy, France
13. Italy
14. Bavaria, England
15. Lotharingia, Brittany, Wales, Ireland, Scotland, Frisia, Croatia
16. Tamilakam (invasion of India)
17. Lanka, Maharastra, Karnata, Andhra
18. Gujarat, Malwa, Telingana, Gondwana, Orissa
19. Rajasthan, Kosala, Bihar, Bengal
20. Sindh, Delhi, Punjab, Kamarupa
21. Afghanistan, Balauchistan, Persia (closing the loop)
22. Serbia, Anatolia, Georgia (conquest of Byzantium)
23. Greece, Bulgaria
24. Germany, Bohemia, Hungary, Wallachia, Khiva (logical targets)
25. Denmark, Poland, Pomerania, Taurica, Ruthenia, Alania, Turkestan
26. Sweden, Norway, Lithuania, Rus, Cumania, Khotan
27. Finland, Volga Bulgaria, Mongolia
28. Perm

Reformed Zunist:
1. Afghanistan (Zunbil homeland)
2. Punjab (Holy site in Multan)
3. Balauchistan (very similar inhabitants)
4. Sindh (geographically close)
5. Rajputana, Delhi, Gujarat (the Zunbil faith was similar to Hinduism)
6. Kosala, Malwa, Maharastra
7. Bihar, Karnata
8. Bengal
9. Persia, Khiva (geographically-close, similar inhabitants)
10. Mesopotamia (Zunist Holy Site)
11. Egypt (Zunist Holy Site)
12. Arabia, Jerusalem, Syria, Africa, Nubia (securing Egypt)
13. Kamarupa, Orissa, Gondwana, Andhra (the Indian jungles)
14. Telingana, Tamilakam (South India)
15. Lanka (the last Indian kingdom)
16. Greece, Italy (Sol Invictus)
17. Mauritania, Burgundy, Bavaria, Sicily, Serbia, Bulgaria, Anatolia, Abyssinia, Armenia, Georgia, Turkestan (logical targets)
18. Andalusia, Mali, Aquitaine, France, Croatia, Hungary, Wallachia, Taurica, Alania, Cumania, Khotan
19. Lotharingia
20. Portugal, Galicia, Asturias, Leon, Castille, Navarra, Aragon, Brittany, Germany, Bohemia, Poland, Ruthenia, Volga Bulgaria, Mongolia
21. England, Frisia
22. Wales, Scotland, Ireland, Denmark, Pomerania, Lithuania, Rus
23. Norway, Sweden, Finland
24. Perm (no Zun up here!)

Reformed Aztec:
1. Mauritania, Andalusia, England (Aztec landing zones with holy sites)
2. Italy (Christian capital)
3. Greece, Denmark, Egypt (control important straits and Isthmuses)
3. Galicia, Brittany, Ireland, Wales, Scotland, Norway (additional Aztec landing sites)
4. Asturias, Leon, Castille, Navarra, Aquitaine, France, Frisia, Denmark, Finland, Perm, Africa, Aragon, Burgundy, Sicily (Atlantic and western Mediterranean coast)
5. Sweden, Pomerania, Lithuania (Baltic coast)
6. Bavaria, Croatia, Serbia, Wallachia, Taurica, Georgia, Anatolia, Syria, Jerusalem (eastern Mediterranean coast)
7. Arabia, Nubia, Abyssinia, Mesopotamia, Persia, Balauchistan, Sindh, Gujarat, Rajputana, Maharastra, Tamilakam, Lanka, Andhra, Orissa, Bengal (Indian Ocean coast)
8. Lotharingia, Germany/Saxony, Hungary, Poland, Bohemia, Rus, Ruthenia, Alania, Armenia, Afghanistan, Punjab, Malwa, Bihar, Telingana, Karnata, Kampura (inland kingdoms)
9. Delhi, Kosala (double-landlocked kingdoms)
10. Volga Bulgaria, Cumania, Khiva, Turkestan, Mongolia, Khotan (steppes)

A lot of good stuff here but a few odd things, for one why are areas like Khiva, Afghanistan and Baluchistan so low on the muslim priority list when they were among the areas first conquered by Islam? Second, why does Zoroastrianism have finishing of the conquest of India on such a low priority when doing so should be a much higher priority than conquering some distant European countries for symbolical (Many peoples in the area have seen the conquest of India as one of the great dreams), geographical (Much closer to the persian heartlands and by doing so you secure your flanks) and economical (It has a much higher population to support your economy). Also Italy, the home of the Roman nemesis should have a high priority as well, as should greecy, home to their current capital as well as an age long thorn in Persia's side. Thirdly the germanics should consider the conquest of the east, as in Finland, Rus and Ruthenia much more important than distant Sicily or Italy as they were areas that the norse made multiple attempts to conquer and are closer, plus the normans who conquered Sicily were not germanic in either a cultural or religious meaning and are thus irrlevant. While the Germanics have the ability to conquer more separate lands than others does not mean that the closer ones would not be more prioritised, and why is Perm so high? Finally the Finnish should have a higher prioritisation on the nomadic areas Close to them (such as Volga Bulgaria) than Mongolia and the like. Still I am impressed by how extensive this list is.

 

[Fishman786]

Hi TheDungen. Speaking from experience, I don't think this will work quite as well as you hope. I've actually done the same thing in my own TC mod, which isn't out but which I've been working on for years, mostly for my own amusement

I found that because the papal decision making is based on a more complex formula than just the weights, you need to have bigger gaps between areas to make the ai choose the right regions. Bigger kingdoms will still be more attractive to the pope when deciding which to invade and I think military strength comes into it too. For example here:

k_israel/k_jerusalem 4489
k_syria 4356
k_egypt 4225
k_africa 4096

You will find k_jerusalem is not actually much more likely to be picked than any of these others. Especially as Egypt and Syria both contain more holdings (I think). If that's what you're going for then great, but I found this a bit frustrating when trying to fine tune.

Do you think intervals of 1000 will work? Say, 30,000 for the most important kingdom, then 29,000 for the next and so on?

 

[TheDungen]

Hi TheDungen. Speaking from experience, I don't think this will work quite as well as you hope. I've actually done the same thing in my own TC mod, which isn't out but which I've been working on for years, mostly for my own amusement

I found that because the papal decision making is based on a more complex formula than just the weights, you need to have bigger gaps between areas to make the ai choose the right regions. Bigger kingdoms will still be more attractive to the pope when deciding which to invade and I think military strength comes into it too. For example here:

k_israel/k_jerusalem 4489
k_syria 4356
k_egypt 4225
k_africa 4096

You will find k_jerusalem is not actually much more likely to be picked than any of these others. Especially as Egypt and Syria both contain more holdings (I think). If that's what you're going for then great, but I found this a bit frustrating when trying to fine tune.

Well problem is that someone said that there was a cap on the sum of all the weights which means since I assign a weight to ever kingdom I have a lot less to work with.

Do you think intervals of 1000 will work? Say, 30,000 for the most important kingdom, then 29,000 for the next and so on?

It might have except there seems to be some kind of stack overflow issue. The sum of all the weights can't be more than 65535. And since I have 86 kingdoms I don't have 1000 for each of them. Maybee 500 would be enough.

 

[Dr Gonzo]

Well problem is that someone said that there was a cap on the sum of all the weights which means since I assign a weight to ever kingdom I have a lot less to work with.


It might have except there seems to be some kind of stack overflow issue. The sum of all the weights can't be more than 65535. And since I have 86 kingdoms I don't have 1000 for each of them. Maybee 500 would be enough.

Oh wow I actually had no idea about that. Do you know whether that's all weights for all religions or per religion?

From a quick look I'm currently well above 100,000 total for christianity alone.

Edit: Just to add to this, everything appears to be working largely as expected so I'm not entirely convinced by this.

 

[TheDungen]

Oh wow I actually had no idea about that. Do you know whether that's all weights for all religions or per religion?

From a quick look I'm currently well above 100,000 total for christianity alone.

Edit: Just to add to this, everything appears to be working largely as expected so I'm not entirely convinced by this.

Only for one religion I would assume. What I think it does is that it adds up all the weights and then rolls a random number between 1 and the sum, then it simply starts counting through the weights (in the order that they are listed in the landed titles file), at least that's how weighted numbers usually work. Since a 16 bit integer can't contain numbers above 65535 it screws with the process. In my case it resulted in it picking the same title every time. Perhaps the first eligible one from the top of the landed titles file.

 

[Dr Gonzo]

Only for one religion I would assume. What I think it does is that it adds up all the weights and then rolls a random number between 1 and the sum, then it simply starts counting through the weights (in the order that they are listed in the landed titles file), at least that's how weighted numbers usually work. Since a 16 bit integer can't contain numbers above 65535 it screws with the process. In my case it resulted in it picking the same title every time. Perhaps the first eligible one from the top of the landed titles file.

I'm now really confused by this. I don't have the technical backing to dispute what you say but it really does seem to be working as expected in my mod and my crusade weights go well over 65535.

 

[Fishman786]

A lot of good stuff here but a few odd things, for one why are areas like Khiva, Afghanistan and Baluchistan so low on the muslim priority list when they were among the areas first conquered by Islam? Second, why does Zoroastrianism have finishing of the conquest of India on such a low priority when doing so should be a much higher priority than conquering some distant European countries for symbolical (Many peoples in the area have seen the conquest of India as one of the great dreams), geographical (Much closer to the persian heartlands and by doing so you secure your flanks) and economical (It has a much higher population to support your economy). Also Italy, the home of the Roman nemesis should have a high priority as well, as should greecy, home to their current capital as well as an age long thorn in Persia's side. Thirdly the germanics should consider the conquest of the east, as in Finland, Rus and Ruthenia much more important than distant Sicily or Italy as they were areas that the norse made multiple attempts to conquer and are closer, plus the normans who conquered Sicily were not germanic in either a cultural or religious meaning and are thus irrlevant. While the Germanics have the ability to conquer more separate lands than others does not mean that the closer ones would not be more prioritised, and why is Perm so high? Finally the Finnish should have a higher prioritisation on the nomadic areas Close to them (such as Volga Bulgaria) than Mongolia and the like. Still I am impressed by how extensive this list is.

Basically, my guiding rationale behind this list was that a Crusade/Jihad/Great Holy War represents a conflict driven by religious fervour. In real life, the Crusades (at least the great ones to Jerusalem) were not driven by anything that made geopolitical sense. They weren't about defending Christendom or conquering nearby lands. If that was the case, the first Crusade would have been sent to Spain or Anatolia. Instead, the Crusades were about the apocalypse, they were about preparing the world for the End Times, they were about seeking forgiveness for one's sins. The Crusaders, at least at first, didn't see themselves as primarily leading a conquering army or fending off this foe or another, they saw themselves as penitents on an armed pilgrimage.

Of course there were smaller religious wars which were driven by geopolitical concerns, like the Pisan attack on Africa or the individual conflicts of the reconquista, but those are best represented in CK terms with generic holy wars rather than full-scale crusades. A Crusade is something different.

So when I set out planning this, I basically put symbolic targets highest rather than just practical ones. For the Muslims, the really symbolic target is Rum, Constantinople. There are all sorts of prophecies and legends about the conquest of Constantinople and apocalyptic wars with the Romans in Muslim eschatology, whilst there's scant little about anywhere in the east (or Andalusia for that matter). Constantinople was very much the epicentre of Muslim religious warfare, any Ghazi worth his salt would make his way to the desolate wastes of Cilicia or Anatolia to engage the Romans in what must have seemed like a battle that would continue until Judgement Day. Whilst Khiva or Sindh or even Persia were certainly very important in the geopolitical sense, they are not religiously-crucial in Islam. Umar himself actually wanted nothing to do with the Persian plateau, and it actually took Islam quite a long time to really penetrate into the area. So the Muslim Jihad targets are based around the conflict with the Romans, ie a big push into Anatolia, the conquest of Greece and then a shift to the west to finish what the Umayyads started in France and Italy. There are a few very high-priority targets based in the middle east, like Arabia, Mesopotamia and Jerusalem (all of which have religious significance, especially Mesopotamia for the Shi'a), but after that it's all on the offensive.

For the Germanics it's the same thing. The symbolic targets are above the boring practical ones. Colonising Russia and Finland was something the Norse did historically, but there's no religious significance there, there's nothing symbolic about it. The GHWs are about stuff like punishing the Franks and re-taking holy sites. Quite a few of them are more fantastic as well, but then the reformed pagan faiths are fantasy/counterfactual content as well. In our world the Norse probably didn't give a damn about the Vandals or the Visigoths, but in a world where there's an organised Norse church with a similar mindset and awareness about the past compared with the Catholics then perhaps they might have cared. And the Sicily objective is basically just a jumping-off point for Italy and the rest of the Mediterranean anyway. Scandinavians raided that area during the Viking age, Scandinavians fought in the Byzantine armies there as Varangians and mercenaries, and their Norman successors found their way back to the Mediterranean again. If we take the (rather large) leap of imagining a Norse Church then it's not unbelievable that they might perform similar feats themselves.

The Volga Bulgaria thing with the Finns is a mistake I believe. My idea with the Finns was first to have them ignore the steppes entirely, but unfortunately the nomads are quite powerful compared to their northern neighbours and it makes sense from a gameplay perspective to target the neighbouring nomad kingdoms with a GHW. Gameplay concerns motivated a lot of these listings, some of them are really quite unrealistic (a Zunist attack on Egypt for instance) and are there primarily to make interesting things happen. Pagan reformations are very rare anyway so I doubt this will affect much, they're mainly something that a player does and really you can make up your own justification for them. They're all consistent with CKII's internal 'lore' (ie fantasy material and artistic liberties taken by Paradox) as much as I can make them.

 

[Caspoi]

Basically, my guiding rationale behind this list was that a Crusade/Jihad/Great Holy War represents a conflict driven by religious fervour. In real life, the Crusades (at least the great ones to Jerusalem) were not driven by anything that made geopolitical sense. They weren't about defending Christendom or conquering nearby lands. If that was the case, the first Crusade would have been sent to Spain or Anatolia. Instead, the Crusades were about the apocalypse, they were about preparing the world for the End Times, they were about seeking forgiveness for one's sins. The Crusaders, at least at first, didn't see themselves as primarily leading a conquering army or fending off this foe or another, they saw themselves as penitents on an armed pilgrimage.

Of course there were smaller religious wars which were driven by geopolitical concerns, like the Pisan attack on Africa or the individual conflicts of the reconquista, but those are best represented in CK terms with generic holy wars rather than full-scale crusades. A Crusade is something different.

So when I set out planning this, I basically put symbolic targets highest rather than just practical ones. For the Muslims, the really symbolic target is Rum, Constantinople. There are all sorts of prophecies and legends about the conquest of Constantinople and apocalyptic wars with the Romans in Muslim eschatology, whilst there's scant little about anywhere in the east (or Andalusia for that matter). Constantinople was very much the epicentre of Muslim religious warfare, any Ghazi worth his salt would make his way to the desolate wastes of Cilicia or Anatolia to engage the Romans in what must have seemed like a battle that would continue until Judgement Day. Whilst Khiva or Sindh or even Persia were certainly very important in the geopolitical sense, they are not religiously-crucial in Islam. Umar himself actually wanted nothing to do with the Persian plateau, and it actually took Islam quite a long time to really penetrate into the area. So the Muslim Jihad targets are based around the conflict with the Romans, ie a big push into Anatolia, the conquest of Greece and then a shift to the west to finish what the Umayyads started in France and Italy. There are a few very high-priority targets based in the middle east, like Arabia, Mesopotamia and Jerusalem (all of which have religious significance, especially Mesopotamia for the Shi'a), but after that it's all on the offensive.

For the Germanics it's the same thing. The symbolic targets are above the boring practical ones. Colonising Russia and Finland was something the Norse did historically, but there's no religious significance there, there's nothing symbolic about it. The GHWs are about stuff like punishing the Franks and re-taking holy sites. Quite a few of them are more fantastic as well, but then the reformed pagan faiths are fantasy/counterfactual content as well. In our world the Norse probably didn't give a damn about the Vandals or the Visigoths, but in a world where there's an organised Norse church with a similar mindset and awareness about the past compared with the Catholics then perhaps they might have cared. And the Sicily objective is basically just a jumping-off point for Italy and the rest of the Mediterranean anyway. Scandinavians raided that area during the Viking age, Scandinavians fought in the Byzantine armies there as Varangians and mercenaries, and their Norman successors found their way back to the Mediterranean again. If we take the (rather large) leap of imagining a Norse Church then it's not unbelievable that they might perform similar feats themselves.

The Volga Bulgaria thing with the Finns is a mistake I believe. My idea with the Finns was first to have them ignore the steppes entirely, but unfortunately the nomads are quite powerful compared to their northern neighbours and it makes sense from a gameplay perspective to target the neighbouring nomad kingdoms with a GHW. Gameplay concerns motivated a lot of these listings, some of them are really quite unrealistic (a Zunist attack on Egypt for instance) and are there primarily to make interesting things happen. Pagan reformations are very rare anyway so I doubt this will affect much, they're mainly something that a player does and really you can make up your own justification for them. They're all consistent with CKII's internal 'lore' (ie fantasy material and artistic liberties taken by Paradox) as much as I can make them.

I can understand that the muslims would prioritise the conquest of byzantium but the British Isles and Denmark before that? If the areas around there are controlled by non-muslims then that means that there is probably a large anti-muslim realm just at their back door which should have a much higher priority than attacking some random realms far away in the northwest.

As for the germanics while trying to conquer Italy would have a symbolic meaning as you deal a serious blow to the catholic church I just think that 1. Taking over mediterranean kingdoms would have been too logistically far-fetched, even for the Norse until they have at least taken over Iberia. Also even if we go for a prot-pan-germanic thing the Places closest to home would still work better. Sure Africa hosted an old Vandal Kingdom but Poland was the homeland of the vandals and should not be a mere afterthought. Right now the places of Eastern Europe (which would have had germanic influences and would mean things like the total conquest of the baltic) are less priroritised than Persia! Persia doesn't even have any river connections to the lands that they would realistically control and I can't imagine any sane ancient norse person or such thinking of persia as a place of greater cultural or religious importance in comparison to Homgardr or Köningsgardr, they would have absolutely no contact with them apart from a few merchants trading.

 

[Fishman786]

I can understand that the muslims would prioritise the conquest of byzantium but the British Isles and Denmark before that? If the areas around there are controlled by non-muslims then that means that there is probably a large anti-muslim realm just at their back door which should have a much higher priority than attacking some random realms far away in the northwest.

Persia isn't below Britain and Denmark, though it is below Jerusalem. Balauchistan and Afghanistan are very much frontier regions for Islam, even in the 19th century there were still pagans in Afghanistan and in the middle ages Islam really had a hard time getting going there. In CKII obviously you have the Zunbils (who IRL were a major obstacle to Islam) but you also have Buddhist and Hindu Afghans and you had repeated interventions by the Tibetan Empire against the Arabs. It was only until the Turks moved that Afghanistan was decisively brought into the Muslim world. Khiva could probably be a bit higher owing to the fact that it contains Bukhara, but this is a bit of a problem with CKII's de-jure system. Whilst obviously Bukhara and Samarkand were major Islamic centres of learning, you have places like Sogdiana and the eastern shores of the Caspian, which were on the fringes for a long time. In CKII we know about the Karen near the Caspian sea, but Sogdiana was a pawn in the political games between the Arabs, Tang China and the Tibetans for much of the early period of the game and none of that is represented in CKII. The area represented by the kingdom of Khiva is important to the Islamic world (more important than Denmark and those other mop-up countries at any rate) but it's very much on the frontier still.

Perhaps the mop-up countries (which are really just there because everything needs a number and obviously they need to be ahead of the likes of Perm) should be left until later as they're quite small and unimportant compared to say, France or England. I tried to group regions together generally (at least for the highest priority targets) but that might not be the best solution.

As for the germanics while trying to conquer Italy would have a symbolic meaning as you deal a serious blow to the catholic church I just think that 1. Taking over mediterranean kingdoms would have been too logistically far-fetched, even for the Norse until they have at least taken over Iberia.

The higher-weighted targets are France, Germany, Frisia, England etc, so by the time Italy starts coming you you do really have an enormous Norse blob. If Italy was the first target it might be a bit unbelievable, but by this point we're dealing with an Attila the Hun type scenario. And the Norse did manage to sail into Italy and pillage various cities there before, so it's not as if they wouldn't be tempted to repeat the journey on a larger scale.

Also even if we go for a prot-pan-germanic thing the Places closest to home would still work better. Sure Africa hosted an old Vandal Kingdom but Poland was the homeland of the vandals and should not be a mere afterthought. Right now the places of Eastern Europe (which would have had germanic influences and would mean things like the total conquest of the baltic) are less priroritised than Persia! Persia doesn't even have any river connections to the lands that they would realistically control and I can't imagine any sane ancient norse person or such thinking of persia as a place of greater cultural or religious importance in comparison to Homgardr or Köningsgardr, they would have absolutely no contact with them apart from a few merchants trading.

There is contact between Persia and the Norse though via the Russian rivers and the Caspian sea, the Varangians were well aware of Persia and they even raided there. You're probably right about Holmgardr and Koningsgardr though, I'll see if I can increase their prominence.

 

[Rorgloin]

I've noticed the Egypt bug myself, where it will get called unnaturally often, even over higher-weighted kingdoms, if it is made a crusade target.

 

[Caspoi]

Persia isn't below Britain and Denmark, though it is below Jerusalem. Balauchistan and Afghanistan are very much frontier regions for Islam, even in the 19th century there were still pagans in Afghanistan and in the middle ages Islam really had a hard time getting going there. In CKII obviously you have the Zunbils (who IRL were a major obstacle to Islam) but you also have Buddhist and Hindu Afghans and you had repeated interventions by the Tibetan Empire against the Arabs. It was only until the Turks moved that Afghanistan was decisively brought into the Muslim world. Khiva could probably be a bit higher owing to the fact that it contains Bukhara, but this is a bit of a problem with CKII's de-jure system. Whilst obviously Bukhara and Samarkand were major Islamic centres of learning, you have places like Sogdiana and the eastern shores of the Caspian, which were on the fringes for a long time. In CKII we know about the Karen near the Caspian sea, but Sogdiana was a pawn in the political games between the Arabs, Tang China and the Tibetans for much of the early period of the game and none of that is represented in CKII. The area represented by the kingdom of Khiva is important to the Islamic world (more important than Denmark and those other mop-up countries at any rate) but it's very much on the frontier still.

Perhaps the mop-up countries (which are really just there because everything needs a number and obviously they need to be ahead of the likes of Perm) should be left until later as they're quite small and unimportant compared to say, France or England. I tried to group regions together generally (at least for the highest priority targets) but that might not be the best solution.


The higher-weighted targets are France, Germany, Frisia, England etc, so by the time Italy starts coming you you do really have an enormous Norse blob. If Italy was the first target it might be a bit unbelievable, but by this point we're dealing with an Attila the Hun type scenario. And the Norse did manage to sail into Italy and pillage various cities there before, so it's not as if they wouldn't be tempted to repeat the journey on a larger scale.



There is contact between Persia and the Norse though via the Russian rivers and the Caspian sea, the Varangians were well aware of Persia and they even raided there. You're probably right about Holmgardr and Koningsgardr though, I'll see if I can increase their prominence.

While complete control of the area was late they did take over much of it on their way to the sogdian republics and India, so even in Charlemagne (and much more prominently after William the conqueror, the default start date) they would have had a precence in the area that they would be eager to retain if it was lost.

But while you could build up a fleet in Southern France to really be in power to send in your Atlantic one (which should be the largest one) you need to Control the bosporous,(or Burgundy or Bavaria is already taken but they are further down). And quick raidings on cities is one thing but to conquer and hold the heart of catholicism all of this would be required. And again even in a symboloic sense I think that the Eastern areas would be important, more so than. All in all I think that 17. Poland, Bohemia, Pomerania, Lithuania, Rus, Ruthenia (mopping up eastern Europe) would have much more symbolic importance than 10. Brittany, Wales, Ireland, Scotland, Lotharingia, Burgundy, Bavaria (mopping up western Europe), 15. Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Anatolia, Georgia, Armenia (mopping up the Byzantines) as mopping up isn't exactly a great religious reason and you have said yourself that taking strategically Close land wouldn't enter into the equation, 13. Egypt (Also Serkland, a good route to the Indian ocean) which by the way isn't Serkland, a term for the areas around the Caspian sea, doesn't offer much access to the Indian Ocean as the Suez Canal wasn't built yet and moreover has no symbolic importance, 12. Persia (Serkland) as it is largely inaccible even by boat and did not have much history with the norse (I aknowledged things like trading but it was to too small an extent to warrant being a fairly high priority target to a germanic equivalent of a crusade), 11. Africa (the Vandal kingdom) because as I already mentioned while the Vandals did set up a kingdom based around Tunisia their homeland was rather in modern day Poland, 5. Sicily (historically conquered by Normans, good jumping-off point for Italy) again the Normans were latinised Christians and do not count and while I could certainly see the strategic reasons by controlling sicily I could also see the strategic reasons behind taking over the eastern Baltic and the rivers to the Black Sea, 7. Greece (Miklagard, under heavy Norse influence for a long time) while I can see the symbolism behind this if Greece with the Varangians count as "heavy Norse influence" then I don't know what to call the high amount of raiding, trading and settling in these countries, plus the Varangians are after Charlemagne.

 

[TheDungen]

Basically, my guiding rationale behind this list was that a Crusade/Jihad/Great Holy War represents a conflict driven by religious fervour. In real life, the Crusades (at least the great ones to Jerusalem) were not driven by anything that made geopolitical sense. They weren't about defending Christendom or conquering nearby lands. If that was the case, the first Crusade would have been sent to Spain or Anatolia. Instead, the Crusades were about the apocalypse, they were about preparing the world for the End Times, they were about seeking forgiveness for one's sins. The Crusaders, at least at first, didn't see themselves as primarily leading a conquering army or fending off this foe or another, they saw themselves as penitents on an armed pilgrimage.

Of course there were smaller religious wars which were driven by geopolitical concerns, like the Pisan attack on Africa or the individual conflicts of the reconquista, but those are best represented in CK terms with generic holy wars rather than full-scale crusades. A Crusade is something different.

So when I set out planning this, I basically put symbolic targets highest rather than just practical ones. For the Muslims, the really symbolic target is Rum, Constantinople. There are all sorts of prophecies and legends about the conquest of Constantinople and apocalyptic wars with the Romans in Muslim eschatology, whilst there's scant little about anywhere in the east (or Andalusia for that matter). Constantinople was very much the epicentre of Muslim religious warfare, any Ghazi worth his salt would make his way to the desolate wastes of Cilicia or Anatolia to engage the Romans in what must have seemed like a battle that would continue until Judgement Day. Whilst Khiva or Sindh or even Persia were certainly very important in the geopolitical sense, they are not religiously-crucial in Islam. Umar himself actually wanted nothing to do with the Persian plateau, and it actually took Islam quite a long time to really penetrate into the area. So the Muslim Jihad targets are based around the conflict with the Romans, ie a big push into Anatolia, the conquest of Greece and then a shift to the west to finish what the Umayyads started in France and Italy. There are a few very high-priority targets based in the middle east, like Arabia, Mesopotamia and Jerusalem (all of which have religious significance, especially Mesopotamia for the Shi'a), but after that it's all on the offensive.

For the Germanics it's the same thing. The symbolic targets are above the boring practical ones. Colonising Russia and Finland was something the Norse did historically, but there's no religious significance there, there's nothing symbolic about it. The GHWs are about stuff like punishing the Franks and re-taking holy sites. Quite a few of them are more fantastic as well, but then the reformed pagan faiths are fantasy/counterfactual content as well. In our world the Norse probably didn't give a damn about the Vandals or the Visigoths, but in a world where there's an organised Norse church with a similar mindset and awareness about the past compared with the Catholics then perhaps they might have cared. And the Sicily objective is basically just a jumping-off point for Italy and the rest of the Mediterranean anyway. Scandinavians raided that area during the Viking age, Scandinavians fought in the Byzantine armies there as Varangians and mercenaries, and their Norman successors found their way back to the Mediterranean again. If we take the (rather large) leap of imagining a Norse Church then it's not unbelievable that they might perform similar feats themselves.

The Volga Bulgaria thing with the Finns is a mistake I believe. My idea with the Finns was first to have them ignore the steppes entirely, but unfortunately the nomads are quite powerful compared to their northern neighbours and it makes sense from a gameplay perspective to target the neighbouring nomad kingdoms with a GHW. Gameplay concerns motivated a lot of these listings, some of them are really quite unrealistic (a Zunist attack on Egypt for instance) and are there primarily to make interesting things happen. Pagan reformations are very rare anyway so I doubt this will affect much, they're mainly something that a player does and really you can make up your own justification for them. They're all consistent with CKII's internal 'lore' (ie fantasy material and artistic liberties taken by Paradox) as much as I can make them.

The first crusade did go to anatolia. They just got sidetracked.

Persia isn't below Britain and Denmark, though it is below Jerusalem. Balauchistan and Afghanistan are very much frontier regions for Islam, even in the 19th century there were still pagans in Afghanistan and in the middle ages Islam really had a hard time getting going there. In CKII obviously you have the Zunbils (who IRL were a major obstacle to Islam) but you also have Buddhist and Hindu Afghans and you had repeated interventions by the Tibetan Empire against the Arabs. It was only until the Turks moved that Afghanistan was decisively brought into the Muslim world. Khiva could probably be a bit higher owing to the fact that it contains Bukhara, but this is a bit of a problem with CKII's de-jure system. Whilst obviously Bukhara and Samarkand were major Islamic centres of learning, you have places like Sogdiana and the eastern shores of the Caspian, which were on the fringes for a long time. In CKII we know about the Karen near the Caspian sea, but Sogdiana was a pawn in the political games between the Arabs, Tang China and the Tibetans for much of the early period of the game and none of that is represented in CKII. The area represented by the kingdom of Khiva is important to the Islamic world (more important than Denmark and those other mop-up countries at any rate) but it's very much on the frontier still.

Perhaps the mop-up countries (which are really just there because everything needs a number and obviously they need to be ahead of the likes of Perm) should be left until later as they're quite small and unimportant compared to say, France or England. I tried to group regions together generally (at least for the highest priority targets) but that might not be the best solution.


The higher-weighted targets are France, Germany, Frisia, England etc, so by the time Italy starts coming you you do really have an enormous Norse blob. If Italy was the first target it might be a bit unbelievable, but by this point we're dealing with an Attila the Hun type scenario. And the Norse did manage to sail into Italy and pillage various cities there before, so it's not as if they wouldn't be tempted to repeat the journey on a larger scale.



There is contact between Persia and the Norse though via the Russian rivers and the Caspian sea, the Varangians were well aware of Persia and they even raided there. You're probably right about Holmgardr and Koningsgardr though, I'll see if I can increase their prominence.

Yes afghanistan should probably be low on the list, all landlocked mountainous kingdoms should be a little lower than their counterparts with sea access, because unless you are a horse tribe you are going to use ships. And this leads me to the Italy question, the vikings aren't Attila, invading down through the alps is not their style, if they were to attack italy they'd sail there.

 

[Fishman786]

I'm compiling the Crusade weights I made before into an Excel spreadsheet now. Haven't applied any changes yet, I want to get the numbers in, but that should make it easier for them to be edited into a mod once the're finished.