Pagan Tribalism is better than Main Faith Feudalism.

[Vampiresoap]

It's also kind of weird that some people here start asking, "who says feudals are always better than tribals?"

I'm kind of baffled by this sentiment. I mean, yeah, who says? When did I say someone said that? This is not a reply to any other thread. This is me making an assertion that tribes are almost always better. (Not accounting for starting spot difference). You can prove or disprove my assertion with your reasoning, but I'm not sure I can answer something that I haven't actually said.

 

[junassa]

There's clearly something wrong with that picture, isn't there?

Even accounting for bad tactics that Feudal levy should have pasted your stack.

I don't know what you mean by "wrong." The screenshot is from one of my games. It's modded but there's nothing that affects that battle that I couldn't conceptually have had.

edit: here's my ruler from that battle:

I don't remember what that trait next to sea king is. Maybe it's from a mod I don't remember. There's a trait from a mod (between the leadership traits and child of concubine) that's a worse version of bright. It's difficult but not impossible to get the ancestor bloodline that provides 20% bonus to light foot. In fact I have that in a vanilla game I played. The mod does get ridiculous though as I now have a ruler with over 300% light foot troop damage.

Also the ERE troops came in 2 waves but iirc each one was larger than my army. I'm pretty sure on my flank with the damage and morale damage I rout the enemy on the first day of combat.

2nd edit: so to duplicate this in vanilla you need to reform with ancestor veneration (you'll probably want hierocratic but if you're lucky you can get away with temporal), get blood of Ragnarr , have a Chinese strategist, and vassalize someone of the Slavic religion. Not sure why I got the Zun trait and not the Bon one but whatever.

 

[SigurdStormhand]

I don't know what you mean by "wrong." The screenshot is from one of my games. It's modded but there's nothing that affects that battle that I couldn't conceptually have had.

edit: here's my ruler from that battle:
View attachment 509972

I don't remember what that trait next to sea king is. Maybe it's from a mod I don't remember. There's a trait from a mod (between the leadership traits and child of concubine) that's a worse version of bright. It's difficult but not impossible to get the ancestor bloodline that provides 20% bonus to light foot. In fact I have that in a vanilla game I played. The mod does get ridiculous though as I now have a ruler with over 300% light foot troop damage.

Also the ERE troops came in 2 waves but iirc each one was larger than my army. I'm pretty sure on my flank with the damage and morale damage I rout the enemy on the first day of combat.

2nd edit: so to duplicate this in vanilla you need to reform with ancestor veneration (you'll probably want hierocratic but if you're lucky you can get away with temporal), get blood of Ragnarr , have a Chinese strategist, and vassalize someone of the Slavic religion. Not sure why I got the Zun trait and not the Bon one but whatever.

The Byzantines have twice as many men and about four times the number of archers. They shouldn't be running away on day one. Although, if your Emperor is that jacked up he can route a flank just like that he'll win a lot of battles.

 

[Rockphed]

The Byzantines have twice as many men and about four times the number of archers. They shouldn't be running away on day one. Although, if your Emperor is that jacked up he can route a flank just like that he'll win a lot of battles.

Yeah, a lot of this is "tribals who cheese commander modifiers are scarily good at combat" rather than "tribals are better than feudals". It might take a lot to get the same sort of cheese from a feudal lord, but I think if you stacked even half that amount of stuff on a feudal lord he would win. Someone call up Dragatus for a testing mod!

not a big fan of how tribals get such a large number of retinue points just for building the cheapest baseline building (earth hillfort) but then no further points from any of the other buildings. that seems like a weird way of basically handing them free troops.

There are 6 improvements that grant retinue size: Lvl 1 fort gives +100, Lvl 1 market gives +20, Level 1 weaponsmith gives +25, level 2 WS gives +20, Level 3 WS gives +15, Level 4 WS gives +10. I agree that the hill fort should probably be split at least a little.

 

[junassa]

Yeah, a lot of this is "tribals who cheese commander modifiers are scarily good at combat" rather than "tribals are better than feudals". It might take a lot to get the same sort of cheese from a feudal lord, but I think if you stacked even half that amount of stuff on a feudal lord he would win. Someone call up Dragatus for a testing mod!

I don't really have to go out of my way to get on at least even footing though. I could just roll with AV and hope for the best (duelist bloodline). Ragnarr's bloodline gives a shot at another bloodline while also providing an event that boosts morale damage ("shared loot"). In my vanilla game I didn't bother getting other lodge traits, I just had light infantry retinues and I still dominated. Admittedly I normally just resign if Ragnarr dies before leaving a ton of kids behind.

My later game feudal characters are probably better than early game because I can build up the cultural building and my retinue will be even more powerful (and moar bloodlines). So sure African feudal is better than African tribal if that's what you all mean. But the AI feudal will never ever ever beat me once I get myself and some commanders lodge artis. The only downside to tribal is that I'm in elder succession and Paradox changed the code so lodge masks no longer stack, so a lot of the time I inherit land and the masks go poof, and I no longer have enough masks to outfit my commanders.

 

[jwalche]

Catholic is not a war religion in CK2. Both Pagan and Muslim are much better for winning wars, or having the right wars.

However, tribalism is not stronger than feudalism at the right hand, for world conquest. Feudalism with Pagan or Islam exploity NK-ish style works far faster than tribal.

When I play tribal, I am stronger than AI feudal realms of course. But when I play Avar Germanic feudal or Sunni, AI tribal and nomad melt away.

 

[Tryvenyal]

On thing I have grumbled over are the difference of a Gavelkind Tribal and a Gavelkind Feudal realm. The Fuedal realm is alot weaker than a tribal realm, right after succession. in a defensive war, literally all tribal troops are in while in a feudal realm, your vassals providas only a small portion, even if war is defensive.

EDIT: Now I mean from an external point of view

 

[DPS]

But the AI feudal will never ever ever beat me

That's not evidence that tribals are stronger than feudals; that's just evidence that the AI is dumber than you.

 

[junassa]

That's not evidence that tribals are stronger than feudals; that's just evidence that the AI is dumber than you.

I guess but that wasn't my point anyway.

 

[Furleppe]

Part of the problem is that player controlled tribal can get absurd stats and modifiers (warrior's lodge), which really helps, as showcased by screenshot above.

 

[junassa]

Part of the problem is that player controlled tribal can get absurd stats and modifiers (warrior's lodge), which really helps, as showcased by screenshot above.

If you mean post #25 that one is affected by mods. It's unlikely even with hierocratic that anyone could get those stats. But post 22 is just Tuesday.

 

[yezhanquan]

Surprised no one has mentioned the terrible succession laws. Unless you convert to Islam, you happen to have access to Tanistry/Eldership, or you reform your religion, you're stuck with Gavelkind or Elective Gavelkind. You can of course get around either with things like bastard succession or abusing the ability to set concubines aside, but it is cheesy. That alone usually makes me want to feudalize as soon as possible. The other big caveat is that once you do decide to feudalize, it is painful as all hell since you have to sign away all of your rights to your Council. Not to mention until you have your Tribal Retinue of Doom, you have light infantry based armies which are worth half of a feudal levy and a quarter of a nomadic horde.

With me at least, I would rather be a Muslim (ideally Shia, Ibadi, or Sunni heretic so you have a CB on the world) with a raiding culture any day. Not that you really need the raiding culture if you happen to be on the Silk Road and you're ruling over infidels with your Jizya tax.

Before you adopt feudalism, you can propose to reclaim voting powers. Light infantry based armies need help from combat tactics. It's definitely not easy, but seems to be doable.

As for 1066, yeah, at 1066 starts, you're beginning to feel the difference.

 

[junassa]

Before you adopt feudalism, you can propose to reclaim voting powers. Light infantry based armies need help from combat tactics. It's definitely not easy, but seems to be doable.

As for 1066, yeah, at 1066 starts, you're beginning to feel the difference.

Just started a 1070ish campaign. Started as Sunni tribal but eventually reformed African. This is my first African ruler so no Ragnarr or cool ancestor bloodlines. No non cosmetic mods to speak of. Granted, combat occurred in the desert but I was the aggressor so they had some bonuses. Unlike the OP I'm not saying tribal > feudal, just I don't see a need to switch to feudal in terms of combat. I'm paranoid about the plague though so I almost always change so I can close the gates.

 

[JosunUrashima]

I think the bigger thing here is that 9 times out of ten, all that matters is the numbers and terrain. Tribal or Feudal, I've found as long as I outnumber the other side by enough of an amount it doesn't really matter what my army is made up of or how it's kept maintained.

 

[Castimirr]

I think the bigger thing here is that 9 times out of ten, all that matters is the numbers and terrain. Tribal or Feudal, I've found as long as I outnumber the other side by enough of an amount it doesn't really matter what my army is made up of or how it's kept maintained.

Yes, but we are talking about winning when they outnumber you, often by a significant amount. Throwing more men at it can work against the AI, but only because it doesn't know about adjusting the composition of its flanks. When you can do that then you're correct that the tactics and such don't matter much. I also don't agree with the OP on tribal always being stronger, I think what they are seeing is more a human vs AI limitation, in that a human tribal realm can be stronger than an AI feudal one. I do think they are correct about there being a balance problem, though I don't think it is completely a tribal vs feudal one.

Currently, light infantry is in a weird place where it is easy to rout larger armies of much heavier troop types before the melee phase ever starts. Heavy infantry, pikes, and heavy cavalry do no damage during the skirmish phase, they just sit there and take it. If you can break their morale it switches straight to the pursue phase, where the base damage for light infantry doubles and light cavalry do more damage than heavy. It's pretty easy to build a mix of troops on a flank that mostly rolls tactics that give a bonus of several hundred percent to light infantry, archers, and light cavalry. When you add that to be bonuses from even decent commanders it's easy to break an opposing army and keep them from ever going into the only phase where the heavy units can even do damage. If you add the bonuses that players can stack, it gets insane. Those same armies are also really good at killing fleeing troops, so not only do they lose the battle but you still kill most of their army as it retreats.

The bonuses that the tribal retinues give to LI exacerbate the situation by helping compensate for a lot of the weaknesses of LI. While you can hit attrition issues with them in theory, so far it hasn't been much of a real hindrance. I don't need that many to counter the stacks the AI can bring against me. It can be a bit frustrating because I want to use my huscarls, but they mostly just take up space on the boats without contributing anything. :/

 

[junassa]

I will say though that sieging right now is a pita. I'm in China range but not enough currency yet to get a strategist to train my guys. None of my commanders even have siege leader even though I've set my marshal to train commanders for over 3 generations now. Pray for me during this difficult time.

 

[Karlington]

I will say though that sieging right now is a pita. I'm in China range but not enough currency yet to get a strategist to train my guys. None of my commanders even have siege leader even though I've set my marshal to train commanders for over 3 generations now. Pray for me during this difficult time.

Just get a foreign siege leader. If there aren't any that will come even with a gift, use a favor invite. I always get one siege leader and one organizer as soon as I can to speed up both sieges and movement. Makes a huge difference!

 

[Karlington]

I will say though that sieging right now is a pita. I'm in China range but not enough currency yet to get a strategist to train my guys. None of my commanders even have siege leader even though I've set my marshal to train commanders for over 3 generations now. Pray for me during this difficult time.

By the way, if you are in China range, check the court of the Western Protectorate. You can often find commanders there with Chinese leader traits that can be favor-invited over. If you enjoy Siege Leaders, wait 'til you get a load of Way of the Leopard ones...

(I tend to just search for "way of the" in the character finder and try to scoop up Chinese-trained leaders, even from other countries who have bought strategists from China. The strategists are protected from invites, but their students often are not. )

 

[jwalche]

Yes, but we are talking about winning when they outnumber you, often by a significant amount.

In other words, if you play Sigurdr Ring in 769 then you don't need any of that. You can just tank everything and founding an empire is only a matter of time.

If you are a small time Christian, you can borrow 300 ducats, buy a cheap merc, and make a solid foundation with any ruler.

However, if you start as a 1~2 county "defensive" Slavic/Romuva/Suomi count with martial 7, in the middle of bigger pagan, nomad, and feudal neighbors, and still want to expand your realm, than you have to make the most of few hundred tribal savages you have.

 

[Castimirr]

By the way, if you are in China range, check the court of the Western Protectorate. You can often find commanders there with Chinese leader traits that can be favor-invited over. If you enjoy Siege Leaders, wait 'til you get a load of Way of the Leopard ones...

Also, Architect combined with one of the other two can be a better siege commander than someone with just one with a much higher martial score.

I still think back fondly to a commander from a few games ago who had Way of the Leopard, Architect, and a decent martial score. While I've managed to have better siege speed on my own character before by stacking everything, he was a dream. I was so sad when he finally died.

If you can't find a siege commander or Way of the Leopard for some reason, check for Architect. You're more likely to find the others, but sometimes you get lucky.

However, if you start as a 1~2 county "defensive" Slavic/Romuva/Suomi count with martial 7, in the middle of bigger pagan, nomad, and feudal neighbors, and still want to expand your realm, than you have to make the most of few hundred tribal savages you have.

Yes, exactly. Guys we have to win this, and win this now. If they get to melee and close with us, we're dead.