Agreed. The only way I've seen Charlemagne succeed when not playing him is to switch to him in order to put his house in order with the game paused and then switch back to the character I actually want to play before unpausing.
Catholicism is too weak in the 769 start
- Thread starter MrFish291
- 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 my games outside of francia:
- start in wessex, have to free france and HRE from muslims
- start in sweden, the same
- start in bayern, block slavics push back muslims in france, germany
in my games inside of francia:
- i've to active support in wars to overcome the intruders,
for the cost of being free
otherwise the realm falls apart.
- start in wessex, have to free france and HRE from muslims
- start in sweden, the same
- start in bayern, block slavics push back muslims in france, germany
in my games inside of francia:
- i've to active support in wars to overcome the intruders,
for the cost of being free
otherwise the realm falls apart.
The problem is Muslims are way too stable. Their large empires almost never break up and its seems to only have gotten more stable since Holy Fury.
France has to deal with muslims, pagans and constant revolts which is fine. However muslims almost never revolt now.
Im doing another 769 jew run and ive been an abbisid vassal for 100+ years now. Theres only been one major revolt so far. I cant even remember any small revolts happening either.
It seems like there should be constant internal fighting for muslims. Kingdoms/empires getting very large and then breaking up only to be reformed and then break up again. Kinda the opposite of catholics who has a pope to keep things a liitle more stable.
France has to deal with muslims, pagans and constant revolts which is fine. However muslims almost never revolt now.
Im doing another 769 jew run and ive been an abbisid vassal for 100+ years now. Theres only been one major revolt so far. I cant even remember any small revolts happening either.
It seems like there should be constant internal fighting for muslims. Kingdoms/empires getting very large and then breaking up only to be reformed and then break up again. Kinda the opposite of catholics who has a pope to keep things a liitle more stable.
Last edited:
So this is like my 3rd game with the beta patch (modded but basically with pagan stuff; more doctrines, fixed animism, fixed ancestor + temporal, etc).
Charlie didn't form HRE this time but Catholicism imo isn't really doing poorly. Slavic is overperforming IMO.
edit: I should point out the ummayads succeeded in forming Hispania. As of right now though the Karlings have a slightly larger army so I don't expect the Ummayads to take any land from them (especially since once I'm done with Maghreb (sp) I'm coming for them, then the Abbasids so I can get GHW).
Charlie didn't form HRE this time but Catholicism imo isn't really doing poorly. Slavic is overperforming IMO.
edit: I should point out the ummayads succeeded in forming Hispania. As of right now though the Karlings have a slightly larger army so I don't expect the Ummayads to take any land from them (especially since once I'm done with Maghreb (sp) I'm coming for them, then the Abbasids so I can get GHW).
Ah Byzantium getting rekted in 769 as expected like every single observer game or any game without me helping it.
Looks like a typical game to me.
No Pagans in de jure Germany, Pagans only holding lands they hold at the start of the game. Face it unless it's England or Bavaria Pagans rarely if ever take Catholic lands in the 769 start. People overexaggerate pagan strength.
Umayyads not expanding into Aquitane even though Aquitane is fractured. Though this time may be because they do not have Mauretania secured as a power base due to player interference.
Abbasids posing zero threat to Byzantium as usual. Zero push into Anatolia. As stated before Abbasids are rather benign, usually too busy putting out dumpster fires fom its tributaries to acually expand itself.
No Pagans in de jure Germany, Pagans only holding lands they hold at the start of the game. Face it unless it's England or Bavaria Pagans rarely if ever take Catholic lands in the 769 start. People overexaggerate pagan strength.
Umayyads not expanding into Aquitane even though Aquitane is fractured. Though this time may be because they do not have Mauretania secured as a power base due to player interference.
Abbasids posing zero threat to Byzantium as usual. Zero push into Anatolia. As stated before Abbasids are rather benign, usually too busy putting out dumpster fires fom its tributaries to acually expand itself.
I think the main thing that's making pagans do so well is their retinues. They just get too much limit too quickly, between the amount frontloaded on the hillfort building and the big percentage boost from military organization.
No mention of the typical actual blob Khazaria that always either destroys most of the Slavic world or Byzantium. The pagans have also managed to create their usual superstate and saxony like all games remains pagan. Ethiopia destroyed as usual by the Abbassaids and Byzantium was so weak again as usual the Abbasids didn’t even get a chance to touch them. But the problem for Abbasid Byzantine contact is the Emirate in Armenia Minor that blocks the two empires that historically always fought in Celica should be controlled by the Abbasids. I’m surprised that Blobgaria actually got cointained by Blobzaria.
Last edited:
In my 769 games, the Umayyads are always smashed to bits, regardless of whether they manage to form Hispania. I even play with Sunset Invasion on(Umayyads are usually long gone before they arrive), and the Catholics do fine after the initial wave dies down because the Aztecs can't govern for shit.
Playing as a Romuvan empire in my current game, I've been raiding the Catholics for centuries, three consecutive crusades for Saxony against me have failed, at one point they lost both Spain and the British isles to the Aztecs(before 900, and they also reformed), Italy has been ruled by orthodox christians for around 200 years, a Catholic hasn't ruled over Rome for almost 300 years, and their moral authority has dropped to single digits multiple times, but they've managed to hold on.
That said, the current year is 1139, and things have recently taken a turn for the worse for them. Within the past century they lost Spain (again), this time to a Berber Muslim who managed to form the empire of Maghreb beforehand, and the Italian Orthodox ruler recently won a claim for the kingdoms of Austrasia, Germany, and Castille. If it weren't for my intervention, they would at least have converted all of Scandinavia, but I've made converting the Norse my pet project.
Uhh, I kinda rambled there, but my point is I've played a lot of 769 games and I've never seen the Catholics completely collapse. I might see it this game, but from what I can tell, that's mostly because I'm antagonizing them. I think this is mostly a YMMV type thing, as many things are in this game.
At least the Byzzies are doing fine this game.
Playing as a Romuvan empire in my current game, I've been raiding the Catholics for centuries, three consecutive crusades for Saxony against me have failed, at one point they lost both Spain and the British isles to the Aztecs(before 900, and they also reformed), Italy has been ruled by orthodox christians for around 200 years, a Catholic hasn't ruled over Rome for almost 300 years, and their moral authority has dropped to single digits multiple times, but they've managed to hold on.
That said, the current year is 1139, and things have recently taken a turn for the worse for them. Within the past century they lost Spain (again), this time to a Berber Muslim who managed to form the empire of Maghreb beforehand, and the Italian Orthodox ruler recently won a claim for the kingdoms of Austrasia, Germany, and Castille. If it weren't for my intervention, they would at least have converted all of Scandinavia, but I've made converting the Norse my pet project.
Uhh, I kinda rambled there, but my point is I've played a lot of 769 games and I've never seen the Catholics completely collapse. I might see it this game, but from what I can tell, that's mostly because I'm antagonizing them. I think this is mostly a YMMV type thing, as many things are in this game.
At least the Byzzies are doing fine this game.
Attachments
FWIW in my current game with the beta patch, Karl did manage to form the HRE. This is only my second long-term game with the beta.
Update: Abbasids got conquered by an adventurer (that's like 2 of 3 with beta), then got basically subjugated by the Western Protectorate. Should I be worried?Is attacking the WP the same as declaring War on China? I really wanted to take Mecca but if it means taking on China I guess that's out. Anyway Shia Caliph formed, has most of Persia; had 40k troops so decided to attack me; I won the war by sieging his castle down. Now he has 9k troops.
I've never really seen the Catholics fall to outside powers, but they drop to 0 MA fast and get consumed from the inside out by heresies.
Khazaria has no influence upon the Catholic world. They also never reform (barring Mongols Tengri is ridiculous for AI to reform,) so whatever havoc they do wreck (Slavic and Byz are not Catholic cores) eventually goes Christian. Even when they do successfully invade Byzantium the Abbasids still do not take advantage of it. Muslims still don't push into Anatolia even when the Byz is under such turmoil.
Again Abbasids are typically too busy putting out the dumpster fires from its tributary states to bother expanding. The Miaphysites in Ethiopia don't even fall to the Caliph. Usually just the Egyptian emirs or the Sultan does most of the work. Also, not Catholic.
"Superstate Saxony" as if it matters to Catholics. Pagans still make no headway into Italy, Germany, or France, the core Catholic areas. Even if reformed what is typically the kingdom of Sweden and Norway still makes no headway into Catholic core lands. They just never declare wars on the de jure Germany sized blob, let alone anything bigger. 50-100 more years of stalemates and they'll all begin converting. It'll typically be to Catholics.
The Abbasids can holy war via sea zones. "Buffer states" is no excuse for how impotent the Abbasids actually are. They are literally not a threat to an AI controlled Anatolia.
Last edited:
This thread seams to be dying but I just wanted to post this:
The Abbasids somehow gained their independence from the WP. The Umayyads were overthrown (decadence) and broke into a million pieces so I took Tangier and Seville. A relative somehow had a claim on the duchy of Sardina so I pressed that. Most of the blue east of Africa is due to vassals. Finally got GHW about 30 years after the Abhramics so I'm probably going to take Egypt first, then something in continental Europe near pagans since the last time I did that it triggered a conversion. I'm trying to convert other pagans now but I've only managed to convert two rulers and none of them gave an event to convert their entire realm.
I don't know why but I have yet to play a game where the Umayyads and the Abbassids were a serious threat.
Oh and the pope called a successful crusade for Greece.
The Abbasids somehow gained their independence from the WP. The Umayyads were overthrown (decadence) and broke into a million pieces so I took Tangier and Seville. A relative somehow had a claim on the duchy of Sardina so I pressed that. Most of the blue east of Africa is due to vassals. Finally got GHW about 30 years after the Abhramics so I'm probably going to take Egypt first, then something in continental Europe near pagans since the last time I did that it triggered a conversion. I'm trying to convert other pagans now but I've only managed to convert two rulers and none of them gave an event to convert their entire realm.
I don't know why but I have yet to play a game where the Umayyads and the Abbassids were a serious threat.
Oh and the pope called a successful crusade for Greece.
You know talking about the Abbasids, I was updating my proposed 769 more historical but balenced border changes to get even more historical Byzantine borders and I found giving the Abbasids the Emirate of Antioch which they should historically own really helped them out in my tests. They actually ended up fighting the Byzantines and managed to reconquer North Africa and hold it more often then not. I think having that bit of land changed who they wanted to attack instead allowing them to actually gain from their occasional conquests before they defend their tributaries.
In the mean time before the next patch, those of you who want to play Christians or deal with them substantially should just play a later start date. Charlemagne is pretty bad in general compared to Old Gods or the 1066 start. If you want to play near Constantinople, you should always play after 1077 when Rum forms anyway.
I disagree with this assertion somewhat. 1066 is the better start, that I agree on (if not the most balanced.) Charlemagne is not a balanced start but Old Gods takes the cake for unbalanced starts.
At least with Charlemagne you still have 1066 regional blobs that hamper player expansion. In this case it may be too big, allowing the player adequate expansion opportunities within the blob. But still, vassal vs vassal work is inherently slower than holy war spam. Old Gods desn't have that, with the small blobs unable to contain rampant player expansion. Not to mention event troops everywhere.
Part of the reason why Umayyads are even more complained about despite not really being an existential threat in Charlemagne. In Charlemagne Francia and whatever splits typically do an adequate job of stemming Umayyad advance until Crusades kick in. Karl rarely has more than 2 kids before he kicks the bucket. The small regional blobs versus the full might of Hispania? Good luck.
Last edited:
It's about who you're playing as in the given start date. I will admit it was my error in suggesting you play Old Gods as any Christian, 1066 or 1077 is much better for most Catholic and Orthodox rulers. I got mixed up because I was discussing the best start dates in general elsewhere, since Old Gods is basically where you should always play as pagans. If you want to play in East Aftican as a Coptic or in England, I also recommend the Old Gods start date.
A serious problem is that most christians can't switch from gavelkind for a long time (or they don't even try) and that breaks their realms apart. The successors then fight each other and get weaker and weaker and the large muslim realms with open, one of the most, if not the most stable succession law that never loses you land. With adventurers on it's just complete and utter torture to play a chrisitan realm in 769 since you get raided by random raiders with event spawned troops that constantly sack your holdings, I mean sure, if there was just a very small amount of them it would be fine but there is always at least one! When one dies and has their army killed another one shows up to take his place. You better be able to have a 3000 man strong retinue and willing to pay a boatload of gold to reinforce them or as I did in my mp Lombardy game: Hire mercenaries to do it for you because you're so tired of having to constantly raise levies. I'll stop here as this is starting to turn into another ramble about adventurers but it does play a huge role as they pick on the divided christian realms with an infinite amount of event spawned armies.
Catholicism did not exist up to .. 11th century.
Christianity was a Roman Religion ruled by Roman Emperor from Constantinople.
So it's crazy that Paradox implemented Catholicism so early.
Christianity was a Roman Religion ruled by Roman Emperor from Constantinople.
So it's crazy that Paradox implemented Catholicism so early.