Change Knights to Companions (plz read!)

[Saman Wilson]

You guys should change the name "knights" to companions (or something else) for characters we can bring to fight battles with/for us.
The name should definitely be reworked especially if it's not TRULY representing the actual number of knights in the battles we will be fighting. There were definitely more than just a handful of knights in most european Medieval battles. I hope you can understand what I am trying to say. Please figure something out, it just does not feel right.

 

[Ezumiyr]

Companions would be even worse, as in medieval times it was a word more generally associated with masonry or craftmanship.
Knights could be renamed Great Knights I guess.

 

[Rubidium]

Honestly, retainers or retinue would probably be the best term (although the latter has baggage from CK2).

 

[Saman Wilson]

Companions would be even worse, as in medieval times it was a word more generally associated with masonry or craftmanship.
Knights could be renamed Great Knights I guess.

Like I said it doesn't have to be companions, just anything else. The name Knights here is misleading since its not actually representing the number of the Knights present in the battle.

 

[sreckom92]

What about an option to rename them?

 

[Austregisel]

No, this is just a abstract thing in the game, like many other things.

 

[Olden Weiss]

I don't feel this is necessary, as although there were more than just a handful of knights in a realm... Well, certain concessions are always made for gameplay. A royal household wasn't only a spouse, a chancellor, a marshal, and a steward. A court wasn't merely one's direct vassals and a few stray characters. Certain concessions must be made for CPU and manageability.

That being said, I do understand what you're saying, but the reason I'm opposed is that knights deserve to be named. Simply making them a man-at-arms unit doesn't sit well with me. Every knight William the Bastard brought to England with him had his name recorded. Knights were "somebody", they weren't merely faceless shock cavalry. Many were even landed. Thus, as the purpose of the mechanic is to put more characters on the battlefield, I think "knight" is a perfect name to take advantage of in this situation.

 

[sreckom92]

I would like to point out how the numbers in the game are far from final. Even after the game releases, there is bound to be changes to certain numbers.
For example, in CK2, I used to have a retinue the size of more than one hundred thousand men, while holding Byzantine Empire, Italy, North Africa and Egypt. Of course, accompanied by more than half a million regular soldiers.
That was in 2013 or 2014 if I recall well. Game had those numbers for more than a year, again, if I remember well.

If you can provide some info about composition of European armies and what percentage of it was consisted of knights, then we can start a proper discussion and possibly attract the attention of Paradox devs.

 

[Zeeg]

How about renaming Knights to Sharters?

 

[Barnham]

(plz read!) It's fine.

 

[dav77-b]

Commanders or Leaders?

 

[Ronzo38]

You guys should change the name "knights" to companions (or something else) for characters we can bring to fight battles with/for us.
The name should definitely be reworked especially if it's not TRULY representing the actual number of knights in the battles we will be fighting. There were definitely more than just a handful of knights in most european Medieval battles. I hope you can understand what I am trying to say. Please figure something out, it just does not feel right.

Actually I am huge fan of Medieval shows and stuff over the web . I have recently seen Merlin in Netflix , and if that is any indication , I think there were more Knights in battle , They were more like Renowned Warriors known for their warrior prowess , their stature was basically just below the War Generals or Commanders of Medieval ages.
Like Raising Fyrds for battle , they had reliable men-at-arms ranging between few hundreds , according to their prowess and skills.

 

[sandro chronicler]

Actualy, name "knights" only used for christian Europe, other cultures have different names - from what was shown "champions" and "shoorveers"(indian equivalent). +that's NOT all of your knights, just notable ones.

 

[the glory of plain]

knight was obviously a bad name for what the mechanic are
champion might be the best choice for modern audience
replace the name with things like hero or famous warrior it just looks silly
but since it will most likely only be used in western europe it doesn't matter that much

 

[wilcoxchar]

Knights is fine.

 

[Saman Wilson]

How about commanders people?

 

[Iaminfantry]

Royal guard, house hold guard?

 

[sandro chronicler]

How about commanders people?

They are not commanders, that is separate position.

 

[Zhetone]

Actualy, name "knights" only used for christian Europe, other cultures have different names - from what was shown "champions" and "shoorveers"(indian equivalent). +that's NOT all of your knights, just notable ones.

yes and it's very good, I don't want to see "knights" in an Islamic Arab society for example. I think it's fine how it is

 

[Olden Weiss]

yes and it's very good, I don't want to see "knights" in an Islamic Arab society for example. I think it's fine how it is

Agreed, I was happy to see this was the case. I was a bit worried about the naming of the knight role in the east.