Let us tread lightly, for this changes take time

[Lider_Picaro]

I made a post not so long ago suggesting that maybe religious revolt were OP. Some dev kindly responded that they had already nerfed them and that they were not going to nerf them more. He said that maybe I should be more patient with my conquests and take things more calmly. Well, I just won a holy war over the duchy of Lisbon, and since I was going to go on a difficult succesion soon I decided that I wanted stability over everything else, so I choose the soft conquest option. This is the result just 3-4 years after the war. I have 5-6k troops

 

[High Elder Ash]

Seems to me that religious civil wars will definitely happen at least once in each duchy you religiously conquer/reconquer. At least, that is the experience I've had.

 

[TheDovahkiin97]

I always focus heavily on money and stewardship so i can controll many holdings -> upgarding castle town and walls -> recruit mercenarys -> easy win

 

[myrt]

Their army composition is shite, don't be intimated by the numbers. Also, why do you have no money? You should be more prepared

 

[Lider_Picaro]

Their army composition is shite, don't be intimated by the numbers. Also, why do you have no money? You should be more prepared

I checked both the ERE and the Abbasids and they had less troops than them. The biggest army on Earth from Iceland to India is a bunch of angry sunnis

Anyway, army strenght aside, can some dev explain me what's the difference between harsh and calm conquest if the result is going to be the exact same? It didn't even take long, just 3-4 years to spawn

 

[High Elder Ash]

I checked both the ERE and the Abbasids and they had less troops than them. The biggest army on Earth from Iceland to India is a bunch of angry sunnis

Anyway, army strenght aside, can some dev explain me what's the difference between harsh and calm conquest if the result is going to be the exact same? It didn't even take long, just 3-4 years to spawn

It's almost entirely light infantry, to represent them as literally just peasant hordes. Calm conquest is supposed to lower the revolt chance but lower conversion as well.

 

[Lider_Picaro]

It's almost entirely light infantry, to represent them as literally just peasant hordes. Calm conquest is supposed to lower the revolt chance but lower conversion as well.

What's the point of delaying the doomsday besides wasting the player time thinking everything is going well and then BOOOM 14K rebels. I dont care if they are mostly light infantry. I have never seen a 6k army defeat a 14k army. It's ridiculous, just for one duchy. I had another sunni county as seen on the image, but its just adding another 1k. So 13k rebels for one holy war. Great balancing job

 

[tunapirate]

Did those armies merge after the screenshot? Even with just a 5k army, all those battles should be pretty winnable.

 

[TheDovahkiin97]

@Lider_Picaro
This is actually pretty accurate...

 

[High Elder Ash]

What's the point of delaying the doomsday besides wasting the player time thinking everything is going well and then BOOOM 14K rebels. I dont care if they are mostly light infantry. I have never seen a 6k army defeat a 14k army. It's ridiculous, just for one duchy. I had another sunni county as seen on the image, but its just adding another 1k. So 13k rebels for one holy war. Great balancing job

I have. You just need to bait them into attacking you over rivers onto hills or mountains. Have good commanders, as well.

 

[Lider_Picaro]

Did those armies merge after the screenshot? Even with just a 5k army, all those battles should be pretty winnable.

My 6K army has to be raised and merged. And all those little armies tend to stack in 2 7k stacks that stay close to each other, so whenever I attacked they reinforced

 

[High Elder Ash]

My 6K army has to be raised and merged. And all those little armies tend to stack in 2 7k stacks that stay close to each other, so whenever I attacked they reinforced

No, you bait them into attacking you so you get all the terrain bonuses.

 

[Lider_Picaro]

No, you bait them into attacking you so you get all the terrain bonuses.

The AI knows about errain bonuses. They only attack if the other stack is close enough to quickly reinforce.

Anyway, this is offtopic. The point is the outrageus ridiculness of the image I posted

 

[myrt]

The AI knows about errain bonuses. They only attack if the other stack is close enough to quickly reinforce.

Anyway, this is offtopic. The point is the outrageus ridiculness of the image I posted

It's not very ridiculous, you're acting like 14k is an awfully large number, which it isn't. Maybe for the year you're in, but not otherwise.

 

[DorlasAnther]

It's not very ridiculous, you're acting like 14k is an awfully large number, which it isn't. Maybe for the year you're in, but not otherwise.

I think the problem here is how many peasants rise in revoltwhen you do everything to prevent said revolt. I don´t think I ever had holy wars without revolts in this new system, despite almost exclusively choosing the softest approach after taking the land. If you decide to be gentle towards the newly conquered population, shouldn´t fewer peasants rise against you?
On top of that, this mechanic only affects holy wars. I could fabricate claim on Sunni duchy as Catholic, press said claim, take over lands that are Sunni, appoint Catholic rulers, start converting them without any negative modifiers to conversion speed and yet nobody would say a word. But when I do it through holy war (which is much harder to win, because you often have to fight against people who join the war in defense of their religion), suddenly 15k Sunni peasant rise against me.
Honestly, right now, holy wars are the worst CB, because no matter what you do, you will have to face the most powerful peasant revolts in the game.

 

[Lider_Picaro]

I think the problem here is how many peasants rise in revoltwhen you do everything to prevent said revolt. I don´t think I ever had holy wars without revolts in this new system, despite almost exclusively choosing the softest approach after taking the land. If you decide to be gentle towards the newly conquered population, shouldn´t fewer peasants rise against you?
On top of that, this mechanic only affects holy wars. I could fabricate claim on Sunni duchy as Catholic, press said claim, take over lands that are Sunni, appoint Catholic rulers, start converting them without any negative modifiers to conversion speed and yet nobody would say a word. But when I do it through holy war (which is much harder to win, because you often have to fight against people who join the war in defense of their religion), suddenly 15k Sunni peasant rise against me.
Honestly, right now, holy wars are the worst CB, because no matter what you do, you will have to face the most powerful peasant revolts in the game.

Yep that's it.

It's not very ridiculous, you're acting like 14k is an awfully large number, which it isn't. Maybe for the year you're in, but not otherwise.

I don't know what kind of black magic you use but 14k vs 6k it's not manageable if the 14k pile up into bigger stacks and stay together. Add to that I'm close to die and play as my hatedbyeverybodyonearth son and that my commanders are average. The excuse of it's light infantry is bullshit because troop quality is nearly not enough to compensate. I tried inviting great military courtiers to make them generals and still 14k beats 6k

 

[Windlife]

Yeah, the amount of troops these religious revolts get are ridiculous. I've seen them outnumber the HRE and France combined at some points.

It's even worse when you're a duke, who just won a long holy war, and have to rely on an AI ruler to help you. Good luck.

 

[mcmoor]

I think the problem here is how many peasants rise in revoltwhen you do everything to prevent said revolt. I don´t think I ever had holy wars without revolts in this new system, despite almost exclusively choosing the softest approach after taking the land. If you decide to be gentle towards the newly conquered population, shouldn´t fewer peasants rise against you?
On top of that, this mechanic only affects holy wars. I could fabricate claim on Sunni duchy as Catholic, press said claim, take over lands that are Sunni, appoint Catholic rulers, start converting them without any negative modifiers to conversion speed and yet nobody would say a word. But when I do it through holy war (which is much harder to win, because you often have to fight against people who join the war in defense of their religion), suddenly 15k Sunni peasant rise against me.
Honestly, right now, holy wars are the worst CB, because no matter what you do, you will have to face the most powerful peasant revolts in the game.

Yup, it's even worse if you use Muslim invasion CB. On top of very huge piety (for HIP) cost, have to deal with all nearby infidel rulers, have to revoke every single infidel ruler manually which when they rebel may be stronger than ruler you previously defeated, THEN you have to deal with a kingdom wide peasant rebels. I can deal with it when my empire is already big to begin with, but damn, I don't think the challenge has to be that hard.

 

[Farbolo]

In general,
I really like the mechanism as it mirrors likely civil unrest after a foreign religious takeover. Plus, it allows a greater cultural diversity since converting rulers may stay in power. I really like that.
Yet, I have to assent to the OP's argument, that the rebels forces tend to be too strong. So maybe consider toning their strength down, a little dear dev's? Or, even better, create a game rule which allows three to four intervals (weak (0.5), normal (1.0), strong (2), very strong (3)) to suit the individual player's preference in terms of challenge.
And on top of that, please consider extending such a religious rebellion mechanism to a greater variety of CB (e.g. Muslim invasion, as mentioned above) so that people not simply discard of the duchy holy war-CB as to risky in the long run

 

[myrt]

It would make more sense to have the revolt size scale depending on the three choices you get after a war. Faster conversion implies some sort of persecution or discrimination (since you're not spending any extra cash), so it's a given that more Muslims are willing to take up arms than if you choose slow conversion