How is 769 "imbalanced?"

[Chlodio]

Oh and the messy borders when Karl dies is because the AI doesn't know how to hand out titles properly. Like he gives the Duke of Aquatine control of Flanders or transfers the count of Bourbon to the Duke of Brabant. Or he hands out multiple duke titles to one character. And then when he dies, France, Aquatine, Burgundy, Mid France, and even Germany looks super messy. With the king of France controlling Saxony and Aquatine ruling Holland.

Dunno how much it would help with map gore, but Carolingian vassals should be mostly viceroyal:

By the early 9th century, the efficient administration of Charlemagne's Empire was ensured by high-level civil servants, carrying the, then non-hereditary, titles of counts (in charge of a County), marquis (in charge of a March), dukes (military commanders), etc. During the course of the 9th and 10th centuries, continually threatened by Viking invasions, France became a very decentralised state: the nobility's titles and lands became hereditary, and the authority of the king became more religious than secular and thus was less effective and constantly challenged by powerful noblemen. Thus was established feudalism in France. Over time, some of the king's vassals would grow so powerful that they often posed a threat to the king.

 

[ninoallen]

There are two 1066 starts and in one William has already conquered England. So how is this a problem?

trying to ge tthe survivor achievement it just bothers me seeing a anglo-saxon england in 1200AD

 

[Secret Master]

Well, for one, feudalism just straight-up did not exist in 769, even in the broadest possible strokes.

I honestly think that the best thing for the game would be a stepping stone between feudal/iqta and tribal. Or some kind of additional law-title set ups that cover the in-between better than we have now.

I understand why this was not originally the case, but I think the 769 start, even under Conclave's rules, illustrates how the current system has limits.

I still like the 769 start, but I can see where the mechanics could be improved.

 

[Dakilla TM]

Dunno how much it would help with map gore, but Carolingian vassals should be mostly viceroyal:

It could be a possible solution, but it won't help with land distribution. The Duke of Gascony will still be given a county title on the other side of Francia, which combined with all the other dukes, makes a messy map after Karl is gone.

 

[Thorkel the Tall]

This is why every time I play as France(769), I always have to bailout Asturias or else it gets eaten and soon I'll be the one dealing with the Moors.

And this is bad how? It seem very realistic that you as a strong Christian need to help weaker Christians against strong Muslims, in order to maintain a powerbalance. Seem very medieval, and adds some strategic considerations to the game. Keep it up for 100 years and the Moors will start to disintegrate. The issue is that AI controlled France is not as stable as player controlled France, and then the Moors get too powerfull.

I agree on the AI handing out of titles! It should really use the de jure borders much more active, and the player should have a (stronger) say in how his titles are divided.

 

[yourworstnightm]

Since the release of Charlemagne, I've seen dozens of forumites label the 769 bookmark as "imbalanced." Can someone explain what is meant by that and what changes you'd make to correct the situation?

Is it that...

• You don't consider the bookmark historically accurate? If so, what errors do you observe?
• You dislike that many of the characters are fictional? If so, how would you fix this? How is this a balance issue?
  
• You don't like that there are giant blobs? If so, would you adjust it at the expense of historical accuracy?*
  
• You don't like that the game leads to ahistorical outcomes? If so, how is this different/worse than other start dates?
• Something else?

I'm trying to understand if it's the database (title, province, and character histories) or the game engine (AI, rules definitions, laws, etc) that is the root cause of the complaint. It might also help if you identify what start dates are balanced better in your opinion and why you think that. Thanks!

* It can be argued that the Abbasids are already nerfed from historical reality. At the time, rulers of remote provinces were governors appointed by the caliph, thus they should have ducal viceroys like Byzantium. Several realms are set as tributaries rather than being direct vassals.

There are also some big historical inaccuracies like how Rus culture is handled, basically made into NOT Russian, NOT Ukrainian and NOT Belarussian. Basically just making pre- reformed Russian into a generic East Slavic culture would be more accurate.

And it's a scenario that really suffer from lack of good sources, thus many made up characters and the inclusion of Ragnar Lodbrok, who's a mythical character that there's no evidence actually existed.

The problem with big empires are they are way too stable in CK. The empires you see at start usually are there when the game end, except they have eaten all the minors.

 

[Gnorrosch]

And this is bad how? It seem very realistic that you as a strong Christian need to help weaker Christians against strong Muslims, in order to maintain a powerbalance. Seem very medieval,

Well, in reality, Galicia survived because it was simply neither feasible nor worth it to send a doom stack to conquer it. It was not feasibly because the land could not support a doom stack, supply lines could be easily intercepted and you still needed enough men to defend against attacks from your other neighbours; it was not worth it because the area was poor and occupation would cost more than the region paid in taxes. In game, you can easily send your doomstack hither and to through your and your enemies territory, in reality, you had to prepare the movement of such large armies in advance, often deciding where to split and where to reunite your forces. In reality, the Asturians evaded the enemy till attrition took its toll, and then defeated foragers and stray groups piecemeal. In the game, the Asturians cannot evade the Ummayyid doomstack, and if they do, the doomstack will simply storm all their strongholds within moments.

 

[AchedTeacher]

Unbalance (and by extension, unbalanced) is a verb meaning the further movement towards a state of not being balanced, imbalance (not imbalanced) is a noun denoting the state of not being balanced.
Sorry, that is all

 

[KlinkerFyren]

I think that k_andalusia should be titular in 769. Muslim power in Iberia was barely establish and the titular nature of the title could reflect that, also the titular title thing should give the lords of muslim Iberia the "not de jure" opinion malus, hopefully making the Umayyads more unstable. What title should replace k_andalusia in 769 as the de jure setup in Iberia? I dunno. Asturias? Some kind of awesome Kingdom of Visigothia? Hard to say.

Also a event that lets zealous AI (also player character) send money to Christian realms under attack from a Heathen kingdom with more total holdings (maybe at least 30-60% more total holdings than the defender) that the defending Christian realm. The Christian realm would actually not receive the money (since that would be way too open to abuse/cheese), but rather event troops corresponding to the amount to money sent 250 gold would be something like 250-500 troops, 2k gold from all of Christendom would equal to 2k-3k troops (mostly light infantry and archers?). The troops would ofc disband after the war is ended and this defensive event would disable after the Crusades begin. Just an idea though.

Also some kind of opinion malus based on distance from the capital of the kingdom, might be a good idea. Like if the Umayyads conquer their way into France, then the new provincial lords should be more active in scheming and banding together to achieve independence, and loathing the interference of the central Umayyad administration potentially trying to exert influence over the lords far away from the capital. This opinion malus would stack with "not de jure".
A Umayyad lord ruling over the newly conquered Paris would have a -20 of "distance to capital". A Umayyad lord ruling over newly conquered Rome, would have a -30 to -40 opinion malus. A Umayyad lord ruling over newly conquered London would have a -50 to -60 opinion malus. This malus would be negated by teching up in legalism and/or majesty. The more feudal/vassal-controlled a state is the more inclined a lord should be to break free and strike out on his own, since ain't nobody is gonna tell this mighty lording what to do. However a imperial/absolute-monarch state the local lords should not be more inclined towards breaking free... yet. Instead they should be rebelling all the time in order to get a more decentralized state, that they would eventually seek to break free from, since by then monarch would be weakened enough to break away from.

To recap: Powerful Umayyads overextend themselves, lords rebel and decentralize/destabilize the state, the state now decentralized is powerless to stop distant (or even close) vassals from breaking free.

Another solution might simply be to give powerful lords (even if they are council members) in a non-absolutist state the ability to send a "request" to their liege, saying something along these lines "... my liege I no longer feel any love for thy rule, I ask now to seek my destiny as a independent sovereign..." or something like that. Saying yes grants him independence. Saying no pisses off all non-content non-friend rulers under the monarch (especially ambitious characters) and allows them to (and inclines them towards) a independence faction.

 

[Dakilla TM]

And this is bad how? It seem very realistic that you as a strong Christian need to help weaker Christians against strong Muslims, in order to maintain a powerbalance. Seem very medieval, and adds some strategic considerations to the game. Keep it up for 100 years and the Moors will start to disintegrate. The issue is that AI controlled France is not as stable as player controlled France, and then the Moors get too powerfull.

I agree on the AI handing out of titles! It should really use the de jure borders much more active, and the player should have a (stronger) say in how his titles are divided.

It's always bad. Very rarely do the Umayyads not attack Asturias, and even more rarely that they fall apart. The only time I've seen the Umayyads fall was because there was a succession war, and then a Shia revolt pops up. Now the Moors are split and later a Crusade was called for Andalucia and they were beaten back to Africa. This only happened ONCE.

This is all down to AI. AI France is very helpful to Asturias, until the vikings come.

The worst I've ever seen was my game as Italy. Umayyads took Iberia, formed Hispania. Of course Karl dies and his realm becomes a giant mess with Saxony owning Gascone and France owning Baden. Soon the Karlings are kicked out of their thrones by factions and now the Karling alliance is broken, which meant the Umayyads took all of France, which they did, and I had to fight them back and put claimants back on the throne. Makes for a pretty epic tale

 

[Secret Master]

ome kind of awesome Kingdom of Visigothia?

I'd like a Visigothic Kingdom title that preserves the culture if it exists, much like the Scandinavia Empire title preserves Norse culture if it exists and is held by a Norse character.

This doesn't balance anything. I just think it would be cool.

 

[keynes2.0]

And this is bad how? It seem very realistic that you as a strong Christian need to help weaker Christians against strong Muslims, in order to maintain a powerbalance. Seem very medieval,

It's not remotely medieval. It's massively, massively anachronistic. Charlie might have had sympathy for some fleabitten bandits on the north coast of hispania but the thing that actually kept them there was the fact that no muslim emir was going to spend the ridiculous amount it would have cost to conquer the worthless territory. In game conquering it costs less then building a new wall for a castle.

That is the central problem, blobs get blobbier because none of the things holding them back exist.

 

[StarSword]

It's not remotely medieval. It's massively, massively anachronistic. Charlie might have had sympathy for some fleabitten bandits on the north coast of hispania but the thing that actually kept them there was the fact that no muslim emir was going to spend the ridiculous amount it would have cost to conquer the worthless territory. In game conquering it costs less then building a new wall for a castle.

That is the central problem, blobs get blobbier because none of the things holding them back exist.

Hell, that's even what stopped the Roman Empire from expanding further north. The Celts and Germans were too poor to loot and too ornery to rule.

 

[ComplexIvano]

You guys are missing a big problem, if you pick the 769 start after 200-250 the game can be considered completed, all the kingdoms or empire on the will not fall in the next 400-500 years, no matters how many problems they have, i saw the ummanyds being crushed by rebellion after rebellion and war, the king was still there but only with two duchies and he managed to get back all spain and even Aquitaine, while the kingdom of France where unable to be of a decent size to counter them, only an emergency crusade stopped them to go inside europe, and 100 years later they menaged to beat even another crusade for Aquitaine, with the same size of lands they got befere the first crusade but the europeans ruler were weaker then before so Aquitaine fells, i saw Byzantium hold 2 Jihads against the massive arabian blob but they were unable to expand more while the Arab took down easily the divided steppes of asia gaining more power and they lastly lose the 3 Jihad, the computer don't know how to manage titles, army, and succession but this were alwais a problem in this game the problem with the 769 start is that after 200 years i see no point in exapand further without being streamrolled by the huge power created by them, previous of the old god expansion i were able to for massive empire form the 1066 strating date, but with the game getting more difficoult and complex i need more time to get the same amount of conquered land because i need to deal with a lot more problems i can't get the same experience as berofe unless i'm not really good in this game and it's not that the case...

 

[Secret Master]

That is the central problem, blobs get blobbier because none of the things holding them back exist.

It's more or less built in to Clauzewitz games: conquering territory = more resources.

Different games have different mechanics to mitigate these issues. EU4 has several mechanics, but the basic premise is there. Vic2 makes conquest very profitable even with the administrative efficiency and manpower nerf in colonies/non-cores. Hell, conquering the Balkans as Austria is a net gain even with the nationalism in place. (Although I consider it a waste of infamy given other issues.) Who cares if you get a crises every five years?

In CK2, as long as you have a semi-competent ruler, conquest brings a net benefit to your realm in once you get past 30 years or so of holding the territory. Tributary arrangements are still useful in CK2 (more so than before, I feel), but forcing someone to pay tribute is usually an intermediate step to outright conquest (waiting on a claim, need prestige as a tribal, or need a new ruler for a subjugation CB as a nomad).

It's a part of the game; it won't change. But it does mean that certain kinds behavior that historically made sense make no sense in the game.

It's not all doom and gloom, though. I see empires collapsing in some games. I think poor sample size causes players to see stable empires all the time, when they aren't permanent or stable as they appear.

 

[Helios Panoptes]

Charlemagne is as far distant from CK2's timeframe as Napoleon is. Could you set up a bookmark for 1799 with reasonable accuracy? Sure, probably even easier than 769 given the wealth of records and holdover feudal structures. Would it be a good simulation once you hit 'unpause'? Ehhh, passable, given the heavy abstraction anyways. Would you ever get anything close to the historical outcome? Pfahahaaha.

 

[Thorkel the Tall]

"It's not remotely medieval. It's massively, massively anachronistic. Charlie might have had sympathy for some fleabitten bandits on the north coast of hispania but the thing that actually kept them there was the fact that no muslim emir was going to spend the ridiculous amount it would have cost to conquer the worthless territory. In game conquering it costs less then building a new wall for a castle."

And similar comments: I disagree. Muslim in the 8th century Spain was on the offensive. Remember that they Ummayyads where repelled from France at Tours by Charsel Martel in 732, so Ummayyads did have "aquatanian" ambitions. I am pretty sure the continued threat from France was part of keeping the Ummayyads at bay. Not to mentione conituned wars from 778 (9 years after the bookmark) to somewhere around 810 kept them pretty busy.

Yes, Asturian small size and defensive position was great for themm, but if the Ummayyads hadnt been dealing with tougher oponents it was likely a matter of time before they succumb.

"The worst I've ever seen was my game as Italy. Umayyads took Iberia, formed Hispania. Of course Karl dies and his realm becomes a giant mess with Saxony owning Gascone and France owning Baden. Soon the Karlings are kicked out of their thrones by factions and now the Karling alliance is broken, which meant the Umayyads took all of France, which they did, and I had to fight them back and put claimants back on the throne. Makes for a pretty epic tale"

Right: the problem is that the Gavelkind is too nasty, and that the AI cant do a proper job of forming a stable Western Christianity. It is so rare that the Karlings establish stable realms, that any nerphing of the Ummayad is not really going to help. In general the AI is poor at forming titles (kingdom and empire titles), its the same with the old gods bookmark: I rarely see holy roman empire formed, and then AI distribution of the subtitles is also awfull. I also think that claims to realms you predecessors actually controlled should remain longer by at least one generation - as well as having the AI more willing to press its kingdom level titles, than small de jure county wars.