Islamic Factions too Stable in Latest Patch

[Zelwindin]

Literally was playing a campaign earlier where the Muslim Emperor of Hispania has -130 rep penalty for "raised levies" and -100 reputation with almost all of his vassals, and there was not a single revolt. Not one, over the next 10 or something years until he died.

Quit that campaign because while Hispania had conquered half of france the Abbasids had conquered the byzantines, all of the balkans, and had declared a Jihad on Avaria... (not to mention already conquered all of egypt, arabia, persia, africa, the caucasus, etc. etc.)

Trying another campaign now where I took control of each Muslim blob in Charlemagne start and had all vassals rebel, switch to the top liege and surrender to each, so there would at least be a chance for others...didn't work, it's 850 and Abbasids have 20k levies, byzantines are gone, and my tiny Red Sea republic cannot kill their armies faster than they can regenerate those same levies so I'm losing the war of attrition massively...(how does that even make sense anyway? insane manpower...)

I'm going to go mess around in the game files to make decadence like 5% per person with the trait per month to try and put a little balance back into this game.

/end rant.

PS: Paradox please roll back whatever changes you made to make blobs so incredibly stable, it's ridiculous.

 

[TL_]

-100 reputation doesn't really matter if you split up your land between powerful vassals who are on the council and the council is content (and your government is at least despotic).

None of your biggest vassals will join factions so you're safe unless you declare an unpopular war

 

[Griff Lancer]

I hear ya.
And while I do try to keep my self endorsements somewhat tasteful, I think you should check out my Vanilla Overhaul mod if you just can't enjoy the game as is. I largely agree with your outlook.
My mod makes decadence more harmful and the AI will seam more 'Zealous' when it comes to looking after one another.

 

[Jaang]

I simply consolidate my vassals, with each powerful vassal holding three or four duchies, and make sure I breed enough children to marry into every powerful vassal's family, with enough spares to get alliances with nieghbors too.



I could literally sacrifice babies on the pallace steps in front of a crowd, all day, every day, and never get a revolt... because power is concentrated into the hands of a few vassals who CANNOT revolt.



I assume the AI had a bunch of kids and wisely married into his Dukes' families to get the same effect.

 

[Thrake]

In my games the byzantines barely ever fall to the Abbasids, which kind of loose to decadence half of the time. Ummayad usually stand their ground better and regularly push into Aquitaine but I'd say half of time too Charly or his successor forms Germania or Francia, which is then pretty much fair match against the Ummayad, until the start of crusades and Christians unlocking some 15k free heavy cav or so.

However, I can see how only decadence is the only real threat to Muslims, although Christians aren't really threatened by factions either. There probably should be more done to allow councilors to join factions.

 

[kmh42]

I mostly played later start dates since (1066+) 2.5.2 and there the Muslims are weak as hell. The only blob are the Seljuk's and they sometimes manage to blob harder but at some time they brake apart. The few earlier playthrough I did went also better then yours. With all those council factions the big blobs had constant revolts and were unable to blob much harder.
I think it's not a muslim problem, more of a Empire problem. Did you ever see the HRE or the ERE fall apart?. The Umayyad's and the Abbasid's start out in a strong region, are huge and only the Abbasid's have a real enemy, the ERE. The Umayyad's only possible enemy is Charlie (769) or a newly formed HRE (867).

 

[Dragatus]

I think it's not just a Mulsim problem and not just an empire problem, but a Muslim empire problem. Empires are super stable and rarely collapse, but without a valid CB there is only so much they can do against you. Muslims on the other hand have plenty of great CBs and plenty of children for NAPs. And when you combine the two things get ugly.

 

[eternalsteelfan]

Umayyad's seem crazy stable and powerful. Even multi-front wars and a decadence revolt simultaneously can fail

The faction that is supposed to check them is far more inconsistent and variable the the Abbasid's. Byzantines are there, they don't need to be formed or allied, Charlemagne and his successors, as well as their effectiveness, is highly variable.

The smaller, more compact area of the Iberian peninsula and it's powerbase is tough, too. Even after moments of weakness, the Umayyads have no trouble recovering from losses of territory. Even after a successful crusade their massive levies replenish and take back their land in no time.

 

[Tufto]

The solution is simple: instead of "decadence revolts", high decadence should give a negative opinion modifier to vassals. It's an idea that has been suggested many times, makes perfect sense, integrates decadence into other game mechanics better and would make it a far more present danger than an occasional prepared invasion.

I don't know why the devs haven't done anything about this, given how often it's been suggested. It's like that Aragon de jute bug; a quick change which would only improve things and has been requested numerous times.

 

[Robert II]

All places are too stable. Paradox and I assume the majority of people don't want a difficult game so we're not getting one.

 

[EvilTom]

I've had trouble with this and the muslim Hispanic Empire.

Rome was taken by norse pagans in 900 and the pope militarised and declared crusade on Aquitain which was taken by the muslims empire in Iberia.
I, as the petty chief of manaw (who also had kent, Lancaster and half of Ireland) joined the Crusade. I went along with a few thousand troops and took the target. A lot of knightly orders spawned... in England. They could not get to the target area!
So the Ummayads (now called something else) turn up with a 21k doom stack and we just couldn't hold out. A few years later, crusade over and everyone is embarrassed as 4 holy orders starve to death over the subsequent winters.

If the pope calls for another crusade (which I'm looking forward to joining again) will they spawn again in England?

EDIT: just thinking about it... I should've hired those holy orders and too them over myself, but I never really play with them often!

 

[Sergeant Flutter]

Meanwhile, gavelkind screws up Christendom.

 

[StarSword]

Muslims have always been like that. The things that are supposed to make them prone to collapse (Decadence, Shi'a Uprisings) don't work very well and are offset by several limitations on factionalism:

• Internally:
  • No ability to change succession style without Full Council Authority = no ability to faction for elective succession.
  • The sheer number of claimants and pretenders generated by agnatic open succession means you'll frequently have many vassals supporting several different claimants with no one claimant getting enough support to deliver an ultimatum.
  • Polygamy means tons of pacts with vassals, making factionalism harder. This is the only factor new since 2.5.
• Externally:
  • Iqta = much higher tax income especially compared to Catholic rulers.
  • Charlie almost never manages to make Francia or the HRE and usually breaks up by gavelkind, meaning the only people who can reliably stand up to the Umayyads are the Lombards.
  • The things that made the Goths in Spain not worth the trouble to the RL Umayyads (attrition too high, pillage too low) aren't well-simulated.

 

[Dakilla TM]

Muslims have always been like that. The things that are supposed to make them prone to collapse (Decadence, Shi'a Uprisings) don't work very well and are offset by several limitations on factionalism:

• Internally:
  • No ability to change succession style without Full Council Authority = no ability to faction for elective succession.
  • The sheer number of claimants and pretenders generated by agnatic open succession means you'll frequently have many vassals supporting several different claimants with no one claimant getting enough support to deliver an ultimatum.
  • Polygamy means tons of pacts with vassals, making factionalism harder. This is the only factor new since 2.5.
• Externally:
  • Iqta = much higher tax income especially compared to Catholic rulers.
  • Charlie almost never manages to make Francia or the HRE and usually breaks up by gavelkind, meaning the only people who can reliably stand up to the Umayyads are the Lombards.
  • The things that made the Goths in Spain not worth the trouble to the RL Umayyads (attrition too high, pillage too low) aren't well-simulated.

Don't forget the big relation bonuses Muslims get. Sayyid, Hajjaj, Mirza, Fatiq, Hafez, Ash/Muz Thought(Sunni), Mujahid, and of course the typical traits along with bribes and marrying into families.

And the Iqta should also have a -25% manpower malus to it since dhimmis that payed jazya were often exempt from military service.

 

[StarSword]

Don't forget the big relation bonuses Muslims get. Sayyid, Hajjaj, Mirza, Fatiq, Hafez, Ash/Muz Thought(Sunni), Mujahid, and of course the typical traits along with bribes and marrying into families.

Really? Let's go through them, talking only about how they apply to the Charlie start.

• Sayyid: +5 coreligionist opinion is functionally meaningless, and since it's passed patrilineally and Muslims can't matrimarry, it's next to impossible to acquire if you don't start with it (though both the major Sunni blobs have it).
• Mirza: +5 coreligionist opinion is functionally inconsequential and only applies to one generation.
• Hajjaj: Same as Christian Pilgrim, though more common since it's on the Intrigue tab instead of requiring Theology focus.
• Mujahid: Same as Catholic Crusader and can't be acquired until jihads are unlocked.
• Ashari/Mutazilite: Tends to cancel itself out overall, since you get +25 same trait, -25 opposite trait, and the event to convince a vassal to switch is pretty rare (75 years into my Kurdistan game across four rulers and I've only gotten it once).
• Faqih: Only available at random.

The thing I did forget was moral authority. The Sunnis default with all five of their holy sites under full or partial control (I think the direct controller of Mecca or Medina, I forget which, is actually a Shi'ite in Charlie, but they're vassals of the Abbasids) so heresy outbreaks are really rare. Whereas the Catholics are missing Santiago and Jerusalem and often lose control of Rome to the Vikings, so it's much more common for big waves of Waldensians, Frats, and Cathars to cause serious damage.

EDIT: Factual corrections.

 

[Arsonik]

Really? Let's go through them, talking only about how they apply to the Charlie start.

• Sayyid: +10 coreligionist opinion is noticeable but fairly minor, and since it's passed patrilineally and Muslims can't matrimarry, it's next to impossible to acquire if you don't start with it. Doesn't apply to the Umayyads, who are the main problem in the Charlie start: only the Abbasid Caliphate has it and they're usually countered externally by the Byzzies and nomads.

There are at least three sayyid's in the 769 start that are Umayyad. The caliph, his son and heir, and one other IIRC. I'm not in the game at the moment. In fact it only takes four (or five, again not in game right now) assassinations for the Abbasid Caliphate to inherit the Umayyad Caliphate and unite the mediterranean.

 

[eternalsteelfan]

The weakness of Shia event is a big one and because of it you also, basically, never see a Shia state form.

 

[StarSword]

There are at least three sayyid's in the 769 start that are Umayyad. The caliph, his son and heir, and one other IIRC. I'm not in the game at the moment. In fact it only takes four (or five, again not in game right now) assassinations for the Abbasid Caliphate to inherit the Umayyad Caliphate and unite the mediterranean.

I just checked, and my bad, the Umayyads do have Sayyid. But actually the wiki page I was looking at was wrong: it's only +5 Muslim opinion as of 2.5.2. That's practically nonexistent. And it's highly unlikely an AI caliph is going to do that.

 

[Arsonik]

I just checked, and my bad, the Umayyads do have Sayyid. But actually the wiki page I was looking at was wrong: it's only +5 Muslim opinion as of 2.5.2. That's practically nonexistent. And it's highly unlikely an AI caliph is going to do that.

Yea I'm not trying to diminish your points I just wanted to correct the part about Sayyid Umayyad's and also point out that interesting fact that I never see anyone exploit. To be fair I never see anyone do Muslim campaigns at all. Plenty of seudo-muslim vikings however

 

[StarSword]

Yea I'm not trying to diminish your points I just wanted to correct the part about Sayyid Umayyad's and also point out that interesting fact that I never see anyone exploit. To be fair I never see anyone do Muslim campaigns at all. Plenty of seudo-muslim vikings however

I've got a "Kurds restore the Persian Empire and found the Yazidi Sheikhdom" game going right now (pretty much just to flip the bird at Daesh). Personally I think the biggest issue in the current version is the way NAPs interact with polygamy: just because of how many siblings and children any of my shahs have, it's super-easy to tie my entire realm up in knots and make it virtually impossible for my vassals to form an effective faction no matter how much they hate me. Christians just cannot match the Muslim ability to form marriage alliances.