Conquest of the holy places

[unmerged(18849)]

Historically the conquest of Jerusalem by a christian nation would give that country a huge boost in stability. Likewise with the conquest of Medina or Mecca by some (other) muslim nation.
That should be integrated as an event when conquering one of those places.
Just with reduced effect in the christian world the further up in history the conquest takes place. In 1800 the reaction would not be as overjoyed as in the 14 hundreds.

 

[Orm]

I don't think so. The whole crusading idea was pretty much dead by 1453. And after the reformation Europe was too deep into the struggle between protestantism and catholicism to be bothered with Jerusalem and such.

 

[unmerged(48663)]

I don't think so. The whole crusading idea was pretty much dead by 1453. And after the reformation Europe was too deep into the struggle between protestantism and catholicism to be bothered with Jerusalem and such.

Yes, those are good reasons for why it never happened. But they shed no light on what would have occured if it HAD happened. I think if the OE takes Rome, or a christian nation takes Constantinople back, or takes Jerusalem, there should be some kind of event.

 

[unmerged(53264)]

There should be an event- the Catholics or the Protestants would trumpet their victory at the time.

 

[KaRei]

Yes, this could be done by scripted events, not by hard code.
Making this possibility would attract many players to conquer Jeruzalem and make a next crusade! This could fit for CK, not EU.

 

[unmerged(53264)]

Considering how alternate EU games can get, events would be great.

Imagine the typoe of religious victory the Pope would get by taking Jerusalem- just because it didn't happen doesn't mean it wouldn't do anything.

I read something about some British rightists who cheered the British mandate over Palestine- so its not far-fetched for a more far-reaching effect.

 

[joriandrake]

Yes, this could be done by scripted events, not by hard code.
Making this possibility would attract many players to conquer Jeruzalem and make a next crusade! This could fit for CK, not EU.

I always do that in EU, mostly wih a catholic BYZ, but also with France, England and the Papal States.

 

[joriandrake]

Considering how alternate EU games can get, events would be great.

Imagine the typoe of religious victory the Pope would get by taking Jerusalem- just because it didn't happen doesn't mean it wouldn't do anything.

I read something about some British rightists who cheered the British mandate over Palestine- so its not far-fetched for a more far-reaching effect.

I like crusades need those for fun, this is a game, and when I want to play historical or ahistorical, both options should be there.

Also I like knights, and I would like if we could make in-game a new knight order, or resurrecting old ones...like the Templars. (of course this means negative impact in relationship with Papal States and possibly France)

 

[Registered]

Also I like knights, and I would like if we could make in-game a new knight order, or resurrecting old ones...like the Templars. (of course this means negative impact in relationship with Papal States and possibly France)

Erm, there were knightly order in EUII. Teutonic order, Livonian order and the knights of Rhodes.
And you need the blessing of the pope to establish such an order so reviving the templars is right out.

 

[joriandrake]

Erm, there were knightly order in EUII. Teutonic order, Livonian order and the knights of Rhodes.
And you need the blessing of the pope to establish such an order so reviving the templars is right out.

Except if you're good with them? or have conquered them? Puppet state maybe?

 

[Smirfy]

Except if you're good with them? or have conquered them? Puppet state maybe?

Or if you have got CK II

 

[Registered]

Except if you're good with them? or have conquered them? Puppet state maybe?

But what ruler in his right mind would revive an order that could, potentially, challenge the state?
And on a purely technical level, the age of the knight was by this time most definitely over. They simply were no match for pike and musket armies.

 

[Orm]

Yes, those are good reasons for why it never happened. But they shed no light on what would have occured if it HAD happened. I think if the OE takes Rome, or a christian nation takes Constantinople back, or takes Jerusalem, there should be some kind of event.

Of course there could be, but what would the events do? I don't see any historical reason why it would be a stabilizing event like Thomz suggests. Let's say England captures Jerusalem but at the same time is in the middle of the bloodiest period of their religious struggles at home, what would the result be?
Besides, knighthood was on its way out even when EUIII is supposed to start, and I have a hard time imagining what historical monarch after 1500 would feel at ease taking a large (and ruinously expensive) army with him to the middle east, leaving his country defenseless.
Certainly if Rome is conquered by non-catholics, catholics should get something for retaking it, but basically I don't want to see any large incentives for going on ahistorical crusades.

 

[joriandrake]

Of course there could be, but what would the events do? I don't see any historical reason why it would be a stabilizing event like Thomz suggests. Let's say England captures Jerusalem but at the same time is in the middle of the bloodiest period of their religious struggles at home, what would the result be?

Yes, what if maybe reformists capture it?

 

[unmerged(54425)]

I like this idea, but ofcourse with script events and not hard code. Im sure that even if its 1400's or 1500's a christian country conquering jerusalem would be a big thing. (Or atleast worth of stab bonus )

 

[joriandrake]

I like this idea, but ofcourse with script events and not hard code. Im sure that even if its 1400's or 1500's a christian country conquering jerusalem would be a big thing. (Or atleast worth of stab bonus )

...I want those ideas in-game, not in a mod...

 

[Geroshabu]

Jerusalem I don't feel would be of much importance for the christian nations, except if they recaptured it from the muslims for some reason. However, I do belive Mecca and Medina would be of significant importance for the muslim nations, and as such would be enough to give a casus belli similar to the one you get if you capture Rome.

 

[Symmetry]

I don't think that having Jerusalem should be a huge thing, but I don't see that a litte "You've conquered Jerusalem, +1 Stability" event is out of order either. Or maybe a +20 prestige if we introduce a prestige system. Nothing Earth shattering, just "oh look isn't that nice."

I can't really imagine England getting it, but Spain and Portugal both fought the Muslims in this time period and I can see Spain at least capturing Jerusalem if it does well enough.

It would be nice to just have an event that fires whenever it comes into Christian from non-Christian possesion, or Muslim from non-Muslim. However, its not that important, and I'd be happy if it was left to myself or others to mod.

 

[unmerged(18849)]

The fun thing about EU2 is that you can choose to play it historically, although the game AI has a tendency to always wonder off in alternative directions, or you can choose to play ahistorically.
Therefor a question about "what if... the catholics conquered Jerusalem" is very relevant for there to be logical historical consequences of that event.

For the christians (especially the catholics):
- Reconquest of Byzantium would lead to celebrations (but since the place is not considered holy these would not be as great as if it was Jerusalem) of that deed and a boost of the conquering nations reputation within the christian world
- Conquering Jerusalem would also lead to massive celebrations and a major boost of the conquering nations reputation, however it would lead to the relations going to below freezing point with the muslim nations - and give these a permanent casus belli against the conquerors (but then again the muslim nation holding Jerusalem should also be subject to permanent casus belli from all catholic nations - if not all christian nations)
- Conquest of Medina and Mekka would lead to the entire muslim world uniting against the conquering nation

For the muslims:
- Reconquests would lead to celebrations and boost of reputaion amongst muslim nations. However it it was Jerusalem or Byzantium that nation would also be subject to permanent casus belli from the christian nations
- Conquest of Mekka and Medina would lead to celebrations and boost in reputation among muslim nations. Nation would become sole defender of its faith.

Historically the effects for the christian nations should be determined by the age they take place. In the 15th and 16th century the effects would still be big, but later they would be less dramatic. It is also clear that an orthodox nation would celebrate the reconquest of Byzantium more than for example a catholic nation, and that generally the protestant and reformed nations would have much less effect from such events.

Conserning the muslims I feel pretty sure that the effects would remain equally strong throughout the game as there was no kind of muslim reformation. Conserning differnces between shiites and the sunis I would love some input from somebody who knows the politics of the time to sort out if there would be any reason to assume stronger reactions from one line of faith than the other.

 

[Alex Gariepy]

There should be some sort of reaction or something if the Christians (Catholic mainly) take Jerusalem or Constantinople (Orthodox nation moreso). Even though in later centuries the idea of Crusading was pretty much ditched, I'm sure there would be a hoopla if the holy sites were taken. Ditto if a Muslim country took back Medina or Mekka. I probably wouldn't go so far as the give a CB on any Muslim nation that has Jerusalem, though. Rome seems fair enough on that front.

Speaking of Rome, this comes to another question. What would any sort of reaction/reprucussion be should Rome be taken by a Protestant/Reformist nation, if any?