I just got Crusader Kings about a week ago and am loving it. But I am wondering why the Europeans always loses there Crusades. I am yet to see them take a single territory. Is this common?
Europeans always lose their Crusades?
- Thread starter Zookie
- 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.
I would say the outcome of crusades dpendend mostly on if France and/or the HRE can join them and if the muslims are in internal wars when the Crusade is called. I have seen both many successful and many failed crusades.
A reason you might see too many failed crusades, especially against Jerusalem, is that the Fatimid dynasty in Egypt is way too stable if you start the game in 1066. The balance issues with the Fatimids is a fact agreed on by most people here in the forums.
A reason you might see too many failed crusades, especially against Jerusalem, is that the Fatimid dynasty in Egypt is way too stable if you start the game in 1066. The balance issues with the Fatimids is a fact agreed on by most people here in the forums.
Last edited:
Depends on the playthrough. That said I think they usually lose repeatedly. For me personally the Europeans lose completely in Iberia 100% of the time and they lose the Crusade to the Levant about 90% of the time. This is largely due to Muslims, especially the Fatimids, being extremely unbalanced. Fatimids need to be beaten to a pulp with the nerf stick and Iberian Christians need to be beefed up or given their own holy order.
Last edited:
Christians will lose their crusades almost all the time.
Until the superweapon of Christianity is unleashed : the player.
(As in other Paradox games, any competent player is vastly superior to the AI, and able to make circles against the AI. There is something quite pathetic when 3 25k stacks attack the Kingdom of Jerusalem at one month of intervals, allowing you to beat them in row.)
Until the superweapon of Christianity is unleashed : the player.
(As in other Paradox games, any competent player is vastly superior to the AI, and able to make circles against the AI. There is something quite pathetic when 3 25k stacks attack the Kingdom of Jerusalem at one month of intervals, allowing you to beat them in row.)
In my game experiences, I have seen the AI do plenty of successful crusades. The most important part like another player said is that enough large Kingdoms join with enough troops to destroy the superstacks of whichever Islamic Empire they are crusading against. If forces like the Holy Roman Empire, France, England, and Scotland join up and send strong forces down to crusade, they will usually be successful against your average Fatimid dynasty. I have also seen the Pope do work all by himself once he gets his Piety-bought Holy Orders going.
So true.
It's pretty rare that I'll see a completely AI Crusade being successful.
And even when it is, I'll probably have done a good bit of the work already in taking their territory/raising their decadence.
I've seen plenty of successful and failed crusades and jihads. Whether a crusade succeeds or not depends on a lot of factors. HRE and France provide a major boost and often win. England helps a lot, but isn't as powerful. If Fatimids are in a middle of a civil war then crusades can both have an easier time (since Fatimids are bleeding out) or a harder time (Fatimids already have an army ready and can suddenly peace-out). Holy Orders play a major role as well. No Orders or just one is usually a bad sign. Templars+Knights can even win crusades on their own. And don't forget the Hashassins - they are usually Fatimids' leash dogs, but sometimes they may end up hired by another nation. All of that is without player interference.
Overall the answer is: it depends.
Overall the answer is: it depends.
I've seen a handful of successful crusades happen before it depends on who gets involved and what type of situation that attacked power is in, the real issue it that Christianity always loses Spain and that the Fatimid have an obsession with taking Greece and are way to likely to succeed these thing both occur all the time and complete screw up the areas they are involved with.
I've seen Crusades won before. I just haven't seen the Crusader State last longer than 5 years.
In my experience it all depends if the HRE, France or England get involved in the particular crusade. If neither of those participates, a christian victory won't happen outside of player involvement. That said, most of my games since 1.07 have been with the Alexiad bookmark, so Jerusalem belongs to the Seljuks, who are often boggen down in civil wars, so a well timed crusade can very likely be a quick win.
BaronNoir said:
Perfectly right. And yes, I also feel almost all crusades got lost until I'm big enough to join in.
In this one game I had Genoa win the crusade... So there was a Serene Doge of Jerusalem and the holy land became Italian, and then for some reason the Serene Doge became Egyptian. Also they lost Genoa, and they were totally cruising the Middle East down there. It was crazy.
In my current game((Desmond-->Ireland 1066, an easy "return to the roots" game to test the new patch), the AI had a first, failed, crusade for Jerusalem, but a few decades later, it came back with a vengeance, with the assistance of the HRE. I only had a minor part in both crusades and the Emperor got the Kingdom.
And that's not all. Christians also won in Spain, with France holding the south, and the North being split between Castille, Portugal and Aragon. Plus, the Pope almost singlehandedly won a crusade for Sicily and now directly owns almost all of the south of Italy. All of this without much participation on my part(just a little help in a defensive war when I was allied with Castille, but that killed my current King and the alliance dissolved).
An interesting game, and a good example of successful AI Christians. Except in Sweden/Denmark, of course, where for some reason, the Pagans are expanding...but that is another thing entirely XD
And that's not all. Christians also won in Spain, with France holding the south, and the North being split between Castille, Portugal and Aragon. Plus, the Pope almost singlehandedly won a crusade for Sicily and now directly owns almost all of the south of Italy. All of this without much participation on my part(just a little help in a defensive war when I was allied with Castille, but that killed my current King and the alliance dissolved).
An interesting game, and a good example of successful AI Christians. Except in Sweden/Denmark, of course, where for some reason, the Pagans are expanding...but that is another thing entirely XD
Playing in ERE, caring only about spreading of my dynasty, at the same time wreaking havoc to many foreign states (French didn't like when my grandgrandson, Orthodox Greek, became their King, for example). Still there were three crusades already, all three won — for Jerusalem, for Africa and for Jerusalem again. They rarely hold onto their possessions, now that's true.
Screenshot or it didn't happen. Seriously, that's the weirdest thing I've read on this forum in a long time.
well the issue with the Europeans in the crusades is that they dont group together and assault as one large force. When up against the Fatmid or other powerful muslim state, you have the pope with his 1000-2000 men hit the lands first, get smashed by 20k+ Muslim army, then a stream of 100-400 troops from dukes. Even if the French and HRE get involved if they are landing 5k or so near large Muslim forces they get destroyed.
So I say the crusades should be redone, one idea is to have the Pope forces march to the crusade and over time his forces grow from people pledging to the cause. Kings, and dukes can join troops with the crusaders but many catholic nations will incure a possible event where one of the players court/vassal members decides to join the crusade with the pope and leaves, and also an event were your levies are decreased from men leaving to join the pope forces. This would make the popes army stronger force, and the most highly ranked member of the popes forces becomes the king if they win it. Of those from your court who leave would be brothers or 2nd sons who have nothing coming to them, just like in the real crusade, and knights will bloster the force the most. So that say if its 1090ish the pope would start with say 2k + one holy order (7K) and march to Jerusalem, which would take a while, but over time should arrive their with around 20-30k + who ever has decided to send their troops to join him.
Much better than random ai landing 20 troops to besiege a city before a 35k fatmid stack destroys them.
So I say the crusades should be redone, one idea is to have the Pope forces march to the crusade and over time his forces grow from people pledging to the cause. Kings, and dukes can join troops with the crusaders but many catholic nations will incure a possible event where one of the players court/vassal members decides to join the crusade with the pope and leaves, and also an event were your levies are decreased from men leaving to join the pope forces. This would make the popes army stronger force, and the most highly ranked member of the popes forces becomes the king if they win it. Of those from your court who leave would be brothers or 2nd sons who have nothing coming to them, just like in the real crusade, and knights will bloster the force the most. So that say if its 1090ish the pope would start with say 2k + one holy order (7K) and march to Jerusalem, which would take a while, but over time should arrive their with around 20-30k + who ever has decided to send their troops to join him.
Much better than random ai landing 20 troops to besiege a city before a 35k fatmid stack destroys them.
It actually didn't happen, you're right. I read "Kemi" and "Karelia" on the Independent Realms Map, covering most of the north, and I assumed that they were pagans, but they are Catholic, so, my bad. I don't really play much in that area of the world, and sometimes I get confused with names
I don't really care about crusades in most of my games (80% of them I'd say), and I usually see the first 2 or 3 crusades fail, then later on they are always successful. And i join them, but just not to take a relation hit or to gain the crusader trait, i never really use my army.
When i care about crusades, and i'm a good duke at least, i usually help to win. So, no big deal, it's rare to see every crusade fail and to see every crusade be successful. As it should be actually.
When i care about crusades, and i'm a good duke at least, i usually help to win. So, no big deal, it's rare to see every crusade fail and to see every crusade be successful. As it should be actually.
The later you are in the game, the more the balance will tip in favour of the Christians.
I'm playing with ERE, and I've seen first, a crusade in hispania, that was won and secured to the spanish kingdons expressive force, and then, a crusade for Jerusalem, that was won for Denmark. Only joy for the catholics.