How Crusade/Jihad/Great Holy Wars could work

[Tryvenyal]

Crusade overhaul is a hot topic and here is my suggestion on how it could be modelled

Maybe best solution would be a unique modell for each religion but here is a general design, that easily can be changed with events, decisions and flavour for each religion

• Religious Head(RH) anounces a GHW(Great Holy War aka Crusade/Jihad)
  • A ducal title working as a Holy Order of that religion is created - Named something fancy like "Pope Inocentes Crusade for Andalucia" or "Caliph Ahmed II second Jihad for Anatolia". Maybe too long titles
  • RH designates a leader for the "GHW -adventurer"(Or is autogenerated with a preset opinion boost both ways to/from RH).
  • Rulers can designate any courtier to join the "GHW - adventurer".(Think Jade dragon China interface can be used/tweaked for this?) When designating, depending on how much the ruler likes the person they designate, he "steals" levy from from the ruler and brings as event- troops to the "GHW- Adventurer".
• Like a prepered invation, RH fires the GHW.
  • The GHW is like a Liberation Revolt for the defender really.
  • Participating rulers gets a trait for participating when the invation force reaches the target kingdom(As today, but they need not to be there in person.)
• When GHW is won, the GHW - title renames to something usefull, depending on religion("Crusader state" for Catholics), and is a vassal or parmanent Ally the RH. The "crusader state" is a titular duchy/kingdom(?), it keeps at least a portion of it´s event- troops. It´s locked to the inheritance of holy orders of that religion. They are recruiting like a Holy Order of that religion.
• All landed rulers with the trait is considered Allies to the "Crusader State".

 

[HRErceg]

Maybe allow landed christian rulers offer to go to the Crusade by themselves where they would gain the Crusader trait, they would take their levies and be a leader of the troops and can't abandon them. Even to make it so that while he is on the Crusade there could be scheming back home so rulers of big empires and kingdoms wouldn't be so willing to offer themselves.
After offering themselves they would have to reach a rally point for all the ones who offered it and the Crusaders

 

[Tryvenyal]

Yes, not a bad idea to be able to join if you're participating. Your levies are quite low if you liked the person you sent and today all your forces are at disposal when you join. But you would not gain anything from beeing best participant as the target would be owned by the crusader state.

 

[klopkr]

This is more or less what I've been thinking for ages.

Maybe good rulers should be allowed to just join the crusaders as an ally too? That way players can still have the feel of fighting a crusade like it is now.

This could even enable something like a 4th crusade situation where an event could cause the crusaders to declare the war on a same religious group target, especially if its leaders are not virtuous.

Heck there could be an event for republics to sell ships to the crusaders therefore gifting a bit of money to a republic or two in exchange for a modifier to their ship levy for the duration of the crusade.

I'd also suggest a special albbigensian crusade which could trigger if a same religion nation has many heretical provinces and crusades have been enabled. This could spawn the same crusader army and title but as an ally to the realm in which the crusade is taking place. Instead of fighting a realm though several heretic rebels could spawn for every heretical province. If the rebels win then they create their rebel state like usual and maybe damage a ton of moral authority, if the crusaders win then the heretic provinces convert back automatically and heretic provinces are automatically gifted to the crusaders under the target realm.

Crusades against unreformed pagans could gift the realm to a holy order instead of the crusaders but otherwise work the same to represent the northern crusades.

 

[Tryvenyal]

Maybe good rulers should be allowed to just join the crusaders as an ally too? That way players can still have the feel of fighting a crusade like it is now.

I don't think without "participating"(with eventroops and a charachter), or? Like discussed with @HRErceg above?

EDIT: You can still control majority of your troops by sending someone you don't like that much and then join, as discussed with @HRErceg above.

Heck there could be an event for republics to sell ships to the crusaders therefore gifting a bit of money to a republic or two in exchange for a modifier to their ship levy for the duration of the crusade.

I'd also suggest a special albbigensian crusade which could trigger if a same religion nation has many heretical provinces and crusades have been enabled. This could spawn the same crusader army and title but as an ally to the realm in which the crusade is taking place. Instead of fighting a realm though several heretic rebels could spawn for every heretical province. If the rebels win then they create their rebel state like usual and maybe damage a ton of moral authority, if the crusaders win then the heretic provinces convert back automatically and heretic provinces are automatically gifted to the crusaders under the target realm.

Can definatly be flavour- events/submechanisms for christianity. Remember, the suggestion above should be applicable for all religions that can do GHW and not build in to much religion-specific mechanisms in the feature itself. But in the end, such events, subfeatures and flavour is very important

Crusades against unreformed pagans could gift the realm to a holy order instead of the crusaders but otherwise work the same to represent the northern crusades.

For Catholicism, this works as they have so many holy orders, for other religions, it´s abit sad to lock up the only Holy order in in realm- management. My suggestion is, that "GHW-adventurer" and the resulting "crusader state/GHW - state" IS essentially a custom holy order but is not listed as one.

 

[klopkr]

I don't think without "participating"(with eventroops and a charachter), or? Like discussed with @HRErceg above?

EDIT: You can still control majority of your troops by sending someone you don't like that much and then join, as discussed with @HRErceg above.

You know what. I think with a little work ruler lead crusader armies could actually work like the condottieri in EU4 and people would enjoy that a lot.

Can definatly be flavour- events/submechanisms for christianity. Remember, the suggestion above should be applicable for all religions that can do GHW and not build in to much religion-specific mechanisms in the feature itself. But in the end, such events, subfeatures and flavour is very important

For sure! There's no reason each religion can't have slightly different GHW though. I think paying a doge of your same religion if the GHW target is coastal could apply to any religion though. I think albbigensian crusades could be universal too since I'm sure Jihads would have been called if heretics took root somewhere important. I guess you could call them heretic crusades.

For Catholicism, this works as they have so many holy orders, for other religions, it´s abit sad to lock up the only Holy order in in realm- management. My suggestion is, that "GHW-adventurer" and the resulting "crusader state/GHW - state" IS essentially a custom holy order but is not listed as one.

That could work but i'm not sure the ability to generate new holy orders would break balance. Here's my thoughts on this though, Only abrahamic GHW should give pagan land to holy orders, while others just do the normal style crusade state as outlined by yourself. Since Jihads rarely happen to pagans you wouldn't see the bekteshi order or the shia one on map too often but I don't think it'd be a big deal if it did happen. Historically it was only really the teutonic order that was ever in control of lots of land after crusading so only one order getting the land doesn't seem like a big deal to me. I don't think the Livonian order is even represented in game but I might be wrong. If holy orders getting crusader states was only a christian thing though I don't think that'd be a big deal, although this would all be fluff only worth considering if your idea was ever implemented.

 

[Tryvenyal]

You know what. I think with a little work ruler lead crusader armies could actually work like the condottieri in EU4 and people would enjoy that a lot.

Had to google it as I don't play alot EU4. How would this work in practice? If I understand the EU4 feature correct, a country rent away their army to another countrys control? Should this feature in CK2 raise levies, merge with my retuines and any other troops I happens to have, hand over control to GHW- leader and stay under his control untill he release it/war is over or contract is cancelled? The levies becomes a mercenary, with it´s owner as the " fixed captain"? If I understood it right, it´s a really thrilling idea!

For sure! There's no reason each religion can't have slightly different GHW though. I think paying a doge of your same religion if the GHW target is coastal could apply to any religion though. I think albbigensian crusades could be universal too since I'm sure Jihads would have been called if heretics took root somewhere important. I guess you could call them heretic crusades.

Yes, of course. It´s just me thinking MR = Christians but there COULD be republic of any religion! So yes, a general feature! Today, there are no difference in how a infidel or heretic crusade works. My suggestion is covering also heretic crusades and does not change what can be targeted or the waging of the targets atm. Just the feature itself!

That could work but i'm not sure the ability to generate new holy orders would break balance. Here's my thoughts on this though, Only abrahamic GHW should give pagan land to holy orders, while others just do the normal style crusade state as outlined by yourself. Since Jihads rarely happen to pagans you wouldn't see the bekteshi order or the shia one on map too often but I don't think it'd be a big deal if it did happen. Historically it was only really the teutonic order that was ever in control of lots of land after crusading so only one order getting the land doesn't seem like a big deal to me. I don't think the Livonian order is even represented in game but I might be wrong. If holy orders getting crusader states was only a christian thing though I don't think that'd be a big deal, although this would all be fluff only worth considering if your idea was ever implemented.

Hmm.. It´s not really generating a holy order in it´s full meaning. Just that the "GHW -Adventurer/ GHW-state" would be flavourvice reminding of a holy order in perks and appearance but in the end it´s only a ducal adventurer with a big area of land and some event-troops after a successfull GHW that happens to have a lot of allies for the first few years They would not be listed as a Holy Order in Military Screen.

The reason you only see catholic holy orders landed on map is that a won Jihad today requires the emperer caliph to play the main part. Rerely sees a Jihad won but not awarded the Arabian empire, either beeing the Caliph or having the Caliph as vassal. It might have happened though... But it would change with this suggestion, as upon successsfull jihad, an independent ducal Jihad - Adventurer would controll a kingdom.

 

[klopkr]

Had to google it as I don't play alot EU4. How would this work in practice? If I understand the EU4 feature correct, a country rent away their army to another countrys control? Should this feature in CK2 raise levies, merge with my retuines and any other troops I happens to have, hand over control to GHW- leader and stay under his control untill he release it/war is over or contract is cancelled? The levies becomes a mercenary, with it´s owner as the " fixed captain"? If I understood it right, it´s a really thrilling idea!

So the way it works is that you designate a stack of troops as condottieri and sell it to another nation for a time, in this example you would gift it to the GHW leader, That stack then is marked and and is able to fight the gifted nations enemies, attach to their troops, and generally act like they're allies in a war. You still have full control of their movement though.

So basically you'd be able to be in the crusade with some of your army (the designated ones) but not others and for all intents and purposes it will count as an army of the person you gifted it too.

It's a pretty interesting although poorly implemented mechanic in EU4 but I think it'd work really well here.

I agree with everything else

 

[Tryvenyal]

So the way it works is that you designate a stack of troops as condottieri and sell it to another nation for a time, in this example you would gift it to the GHW leader, That stack then is marked and and is able to fight the gifted nations enemies, attach to their troops, and generally act like they're allies in a war. You still have full control of their movement though.

So basically you'd be able to be in the crusade with some of your army (the designated ones) but not others and for all intents and purposes it will count as an army of the person you gifted it too.

It's a pretty interesting although poorly implemented mechanic in EU4 but I think it'd work really well here.

I agree with everything else

Yes, could in theory work really well but in reality - is this not what we have today in concern of syncronisation? Although - I am not a big opponent to de desynced GHW we have today as they were not very synced IRL but syncronisation is a big issue to alot of players.

Could be cool with an event where joining rulers chooses if leading on their own or not. Those choosing not are under full controll of the GHW leader, those choosing to lead on their own, are potentially desynced. Probably a hard feature to do properly, though :/

 

[klopkr]

@Tryvenyal Well what i was thinking was that a sizable amount of troops would spawn simply for the crusade (these would be all the peasants and knights that joined in on their own), then a ruler could press a button to give some of their man power for piety and good relations (backing a crusade), then lastly a ruler could go on crusade with a portion of his troops as 'condettiari' that they could control. The AI would just be less likely to go full out on crusade rather than just support it.

By having these three systems players could still have all the fun of fighting in a crusade if they want to, which i think most players want, plus the benefits of your system, plus a portion of the troops could scale to the enemy (the event ones) to make most crusades a fight every time for both sides, and lastly it would cut down on the amount of actual crusader kings which would be very historical.

Something else i thought of while playing stellaris is that if we wanted to go really crazy crusades could allow crusaders to keep any held land at the end of the war and generate crusader states out of the ones outside the kingdom the crusade was declared for, there fore making crusades huge religious battles.

 

[Tryvenyal]

@klopkr, so GHW is announced. I decide to participate, so I click the GHW banner, triggering a flavourfull event with following options. Choises from here can't be changed later. The level of participation is fixed for the duration of the GHW with the exception mentioned in Option 3.

1. Option 1 is to "participate". That generates a decent portion(samewhere based on my realm- size or mayby on my demesne?) of event- troops to the GHW- leader. Mostly trash(LI, Archers, LC, I assume as it´s 'Peasants' but also a very small amount of HC to simulate holy knights). I would like a realm/demesne- modifier to simulate this lack of peasants. Non- independent non-player rulers are locked to this option only(?). Most AI participants would have only this option.
2. Option 2 is option 1 + choose to extend my support with a proper HI force, this could be like 50% of my personal HI, going to him as eventroops(and withdrawn from my reserves) Independent Non- player dukes or below is locked to this options only(?). AI lords eligable for this option would likely choose it.
3. Option 3 is option1 and 2 + join with a "Condottieri" which is a maximum of 50% of your available demesne + vassal soldiers(Not retainies). The ruler is a fixed leader and is allying the GHW. This is the only way to join the war. If this ruler is removed as commander, he leaves the crusade. He or his successor can´t rejoin. Only available to independent kings and emperers and AI should not likely use it. Big bonus is if this lord´s could gain the enemyland they contoll outside the GHW target. EDIT: these troops should be at the ralleypoint annouced in the event at the date announced in the event to make you join and mark troops as Condottiers with the maximum size that was announced in the event. If not already, you will be set as leader when that happens if army is there. If any of these fails, you are joining as Option 2 only.
​

Something like this?

 

[klopkr]

Perfect!

 

[jim198913]

Or another simpler and realistic idea to implement, is first.....


For the Developers to create a new minor title for catholic rulers called "Crusader King candidate" that can only be given to the ruler's unlanded children who is not heir to the main title, or to close relatives.

Secondly, when you go on a crusade and contribute the most to it, your "Crusader King" candidate will become king of an independent Jerusalem. But if you don't have a candidate for the title, the next ruler who contributed the most to the crusade, will nominate their "Crusader King" candidate to take the title instead.

Thirdly, to compensate for this and because you will not gain any of the land in Jerusalem for yourself like how the way it happens now, an extremely generous gift in the form of thousands of gold, prestige and piety shall be rewarded to the one who contributed the most to the crusade.


As far as I know, didn't this happen historically of where it was often the second sons and other unlanded sons who had no chance of inheriting any land back in their home countries to gain lands there? wasn't the first King of Jerusalem an unlanded second son of a Duke in France? unless I'm wrong. Also, for Jerusalem to be created and be independent from the start would reflect this pretty well instead of becoming a colony of whoever wins the crusade which is totally unrealistic for that time.

 

[Tryvenyal]

As far as I know, didn't this happen historically of where it was often the second sons and other unlanded sons who had no chance of inheriting any land back in their home countries to gain lands there? wasn't the first King of Jerusalem an unlanded second son of a Duke in France? unless I'm wrong. Also, for Jerusalem to be created and be independent from the start would reflect this pretty well instead of becoming a colony of whoever wins the crusade which is totally unrealistic for that time.

This is what my suggestion is there for, really. Christian holy orders are crowded with heirless sons, brothers and uncles of european rulers. Having a crusader state with the mightiest of these as a ruler is a good idea, I think. When a kingdom is created, the holyorder -title could be destroyed and the kindom gets a heratory succession.