Claimable duchy & kingdom setups for CK 1.05

[tommassi]

I strongly disagree with the renaming of Spanish duchies because I would like to have counties and duchies with different names (i.e. Catalonia instead of Barcelona). The same principle goes for Aragon, though it's trickier because Zaragoza IS the name of a county.

But this is supposed to reflect history, right? Then, the ruler of Catalonia was the Count of Barcelona (a duke by CK standards, since he had quite a few counts as vassals), and there wasn't a thing such as a Duke of Zaragoza. So, in the need to repeat a name, it's far more accurate historically to use Aragon instead of Zaragoza.

 

[Quift]

Trouble is, you are using a map that is not of the 1066 timeframe, in which the Almoravides have invaded (Al-Muratibids), something that very well may not happen at all in the game.

If it does not make sense historically, and it will not help to bring a desired gameplay approach, this is, quite frankly, a useless proposal.

When you come with the mod already done with this changes, and have played it 5 or more times, with 3 out of 5 times the kingdom of Castilla/León forming, then, I will start to think about it.

Up to that moment that falls into the realm of your own imagination, I am afraid. And the only thing that you could support yourself before actually and really testing gameplay is history and as you can notice, it's quite against you in several fronts.

Sorry, couldn't find the actual borders of the game in 1066, so i took the 1100 euratlas map, made an approximation of the border. Counted the provinces to ensure that Castilia-Leon can form with the original combined provs, and then added as much as I could in the south. Then I added the 11 province granade in the leftovers.

Point being to ensure that the realm forms often enough, that they have logical cores when they do, and then granada gets quite natural borders.

Pretty beats historic every time!

 

[Duuk]

For the record...

I'd rather keep Venice as a Kingdom and keep Venice's province as ITAL. I don't like NONE unless it is absolutely necessary (like Brittany).

What is the obsession with eliminating King titles? They really don't offer significant advantages. They give a boost of 0.4 monthly prestige (if held with another King title) and have the possibility of reducing monthly prestige (if held alone - Kings get no prestige from county vassals).

The only time I've ever bothered to take the Venice king title was playing as Toscana, and it was because "Queen of Venice" just sounds cool. No one auto-pledges to Venice (or Navarre, or Pisa, etc), so that part isn't an exploit.

 

[Lucius Sulla]

Sorry, couldn't find the actual borders of the game in 1066, so i took the 1100 euratlas map, made an approximation of the border. Counted the provinces to ensure that Castilia-Leon can form with the original combined provs, and then added as much as I could in the south. Then I added the 11 province granade in the leftovers.

Point being to ensure that the realm forms often enough, that they have logical cores when they do, and then granada gets quite natural borders.

Pretty beats historic every time!

Posting a map of Spain past the Almoravid invasion is more or less like posting a map of Russia past the Golden Horde invasion. That, is, history changed dramatically. If it had not been by the africans invading, probably the reconquista would have been over far sooner (in fact the african kingdom invaded because the taifa kingdoms were quite despaired at Alfonso VI's quite succesful invasion).

Still, the limits you have used are, want it or not, quite arbitrary. Maybe not bad, but they clearly don't follow any of the assumed conventions for the matter in the whole of CK (that is, not the starting limits in 1066 OR the final limits in 1420), and such a switch of policy does not fit in the way the scenarios are done. That's why, in my assumptions for the possibilities of your proposal (the A1,A2,B1,B2a,B2b stuff), since I had not seen your proposal I had to assume that either you were restricting the boundaries of the kingdoms to their start possitions, or to their final ones.

 

[tommassi]

Sorry, couldn't find the actual borders of the game in 1066, so i took the 1100 euratlas map, made an approximation of the border. Counted the provinces to ensure that Castilia-Leon can form with the original combined provs, and then added as much as I could in the south. Then I added the 11 province granade in the leftovers.

Point being to ensure that the realm forms often enough, that they have logical cores when they do, and then granada gets quite natural borders.

Pretty beats historic every time!

I really thought that we had already outruled Granada as a possibility. Really, that would've been a rather strange name for a christian kingdom thru all CK time frame, and even more before the actual kingdom of Granada was wounded well into the XIII century!

So, if there's no Granada, those lands have to go somewhere and, frankly, there's no better option than Castile and Leon.

 

[Duuk]

I really thought that we had already outruled Granada as a possibility. Really, that would've been a rather strange name for a christian kingdom thru all CK time frame, and even more before the actual kingdom of Granada was wounded well into the XIII century!

So, if there's no Granada, those lands have to go somewhere and, frankly, there's no better option than Castile and Leon.

"Andalusia"

Couple that with the new culture Byakhiam proposed...

 

[Cuke]

But this is supposed to reflect history, right? Then, the ruler of Catalonia was the Count of Barcelona (a duke by CK standards, since he had quite a few counts as vassals), and there wasn't a thing such as a Duke of Zaragoza. So, in the need to repeat a name, it's far more accurate historically to use Aragon instead of Zaragoza.

The key word is RULER. And OF So I don't see a problem with Catalonia.
If the Zaragoza region doesn't have any other name, it can very well be Aragon. No objections to that.

 

[Quift]

Posting a map of Spain past the Almoravid invasion is more or less like posting a map of Russia past the Golden Horde invasion. That, is, history changed dramatically. If it had not been by the africans invading, probably the reconquista would have been over far sooner (in fact the african kingdom invaded because the taifa kingdoms were quite despaired at Alfonso VI's quite succesful invasion).

Still, the limits you have used are, want it or not, quite arbitrary. Maybe not bad, but they clearly don't follow any of the assumed conventions for the matter in the whole of CK (that is, not the starting limits in 1066 OR the final limits in 1420), and such a switch of policy does not fit in the way the scenarios are done. That's why, in my assumptions for the possibilities of your proposal (the A1,A2,B1,B2a,B2b stuff), since I had not seen your proposal I had to assume that either you were restricting the boundaries of the kingdoms to their start possitions, or to their final ones.

Sorry for not making myslef clear.
No, the point was to make upped dukes whom after uniting their realms can form the castilia-leon (real kingship, demesne bonus et al). Since you only need 66% to for a new realm (or is it less if you have a claim, because then they could just be given a claim at start). When they are united under one crown (technically one, historically two), they may be considered big enough to assert authority, so the 33% not needed for the title are dispersed in a pretty pile with pretty borders in souther iberia (though not too much to ensure realmformation.). The provinces outside this sphere are too be considered "gained" provs. ie, not part of Castilia-Leon in province files (many of these provinces wern't Cq either), ie treated like finland/sweden.

This is off course very arbitrary, i took first map I found and played around in MS paint, but it's the general idea I'm going for. I think it would solve quite a few problems in iberia, both historical and gameplay. And while Leon was considered a separate realm within the realm, I think this might be reflected enough by naming the combined kingdom Castilia-Leòn.

 

[tommassi]

"Andalusia"

A christian ruler using an arab word as a name for his title? ehm... no way

The key word is RULER. And OF So I don't see a problem with Catalonia.
If the Zaragoza region doesn't have any other name, it can very well be Aragon. No objections to that.

I mentioned Catalonia to make my self clear. There was no such thing as "Catalonia" back then, but a series of counts and nobles that pledged allegiance to the count of Barcelona

 

[Quift]

I really thought that we had already outruled Granada as a possibility. Really, that would've been a rather strange name for a christian kingdom thru all CK time frame, and even more before the actual kingdom of Granada was wounded well into the XIII century!

So, if there's no Granada, those lands have to go somewhere and, frankly, there's no better option than Castile and Leon.

Off course there are better candidates. Sweden for example could well get compensated after it's loss of finland. Granada is maybe not the name we are going for. Regnum Vandalorum might suit you taste better? otherwise Cordoba is prolly the way to go. Being an emperor tier and all.

 

[Quift]

On separate note,
We have agreed on making aragon a duke in 1066 scen.file right?

 

[tommassi]

Off course there are better candidates. Sweden for example could well get compensated after it's loss of finland. Granada is maybe not the name we are going for. Regnum Vandalorum might suit you taste better? otherwise Cordoba is prolly the way to go. Being an emperor tier and all.

My opinions is there should be NO christian creatable kingdom in southern iberia at all, so there's no name suitable for something that never existed and that's out of logic, has no historical reasons justifying it and that, as Lucius already stated, threatens to worsen the christian AI situation in Iberia.

On separate note,
We have agreed on making aragon a duke in 1066 scen.file right?

Yep. Absolutely (at least, Lucius you and me think the same on that, don't know about the rest).

 

[Quift]

My opinions is there should be NO christian creatable kingdom in southern iberia at all, so there's no name suitable for something that never existed and that's out of logic, has no historical reasons justifying it and that, as Lucius already stated, threatens to worsen the christian AI situation in Iberia.



Yep. Absolutely (at least, Lucius you and me think the same on that, don't know about the rest).

Wouldn't Cordoba do? I'm quite sure that the spanish kings used a kingtitle from this area. Since it's after the town Cordoba I can't see why anyone else wouldn't use it.

 

[tommassi]

Wouldn't Cordoba do? I'm quite sure that the spanish kings used a kingtitle from this area. Since it's after the town Cordoba I can't see why anyone else wouldn't use it.

Not as a primary title, IMO. Christian kings of Castile and Aragon used various secondary titles such as king of Toledo, king of Algarves (there's a huge list, and I won't go thru all of it) but that was, to say in some way, just a bunch of silly names given to themselves trying to look more pretigious. But there were no real kingdoms behind it. The only cases in the CK time frame that a new kingdom was created in Iberia were Portugal (that gained independence from Leon thru war) and Valencia. No Cordoba, no Granada, no Andalucia...

 

[Lucius Sulla]

Wouldn't Cordoba do? I'm quite sure that the spanish kings used a kingtitle from this area. Since it's after the town Cordoba I can't see why anyone else wouldn't use it.

They used, past 1492, the main tittles of: Kings of Castilla, León, Aragón, Navarra and Granada. In fact these are the only tittles that do appear at the shield, so they were the main ones. So it would be Granada.

Problem with using Granada, though, is that it makes no sense in the 1066 and 1186 scenarios. And using Vandalusia, andalusia, Regnum vandalorum or anything else, also makes no sense in any of the three scenarios.

I have nothing against having Castilla as a recreatable tittle and León as a non-recreatable one. I would understand making Leon into a Duchy in 1066. But it makes a lot more sense keeping castilla as a Kingdom in 1066 and both Leon and Castilla as kingdoms in 1186. Making them go ducal makes no sense both from a historic point of view or from a gameplay and game balance point of view.

 

[Quift]

Not as a primary title, IMO. Christian kings of Castile and Aragon used various secondary titles such as king of Toledo, king of Algarves (there's a huge list, and I won't go thru all of it) but that was, to say in some way, just a bunch of silly names given to themselves trying to look more pretigious. But there were no real kingdoms behind it. The only cases in the CK time frame that a new kingdom was created in Iberia were Portugal (that gained independence from Leon thru war) and Valencia. No Cordoba, no Granada, no Andalucia...

Well then, then we just gotta make one brand new title for them, right? See no problem with that. Would REGNAE VANDALORUM do it?

 

[Lucius Sulla]

Well then, then we just gotta make one brand new title for them, right? See no problem with that. Would REGNAE VANDALORUM do it?

I'm afraid you will not find a single name that will not sound funny and will actually and ultimately make any sense in that time frame for that area.

 

[Quift]

They used, past 1492, the main tittles of: Kings of Castilla, León, Aragón, Navarra and Granada. So it would be Granada.

Problem with using Granada, though, is that it makes no sense in the 1066 and 1186 scenarios. And using Vandalusia, andalusia, Regnum vandalorum or anything else, also makes no sense in any of the three scenarios.

I have nothing against having Castilla as a recreatable tittle and León as a non-recreatable one. I would understand making Leon into a Duchy in 1066. But it makes a lot more sense keeping castilla as a Kingdom in 1066 and both Leon and Castilla as kingdoms in 1186. Making them go ducal makes no sense both from a historic point of view or from a gameplay and game balance point of view.

You have understood that they will be as much kings as navarre? Just that the recreatable title is Castilia-Leon. They will both start as kings of Castilia, and on the other hand, Leon. Well, since no title needs to make sense in 1066. The question is what would a christian who conquered that area proclaim himself? Duke of XX,NN, YY; and BB, or king of Andalusia/granada? Since there seems to be a factual basis for Granada, why can't we go with it? It would exaclty be the first historical atrocity in this thread so...

 

[tommassi]

I'm afraid you will not find a single name that will not sound funny and will actually and ultimately make any sense in that time frame for that area.

I completely agree with that. There's no possible name or provinces that put together make sense as a christian kingdom during CK period.

 

[Quift]

I'm afraid you will not find a single name that will not sound funny and will actually and ultimately make any sense in that time frame for that area.

If we are nitpicking I think you cannot find a single name for any of the kingdoms that isn't slightly funny, weird etc. Byz? France? Germany? The Sicily controversy, finland?, not to mention the Rus, bolgar, etc.