Please make Navarra recreatable again

[Spruce]

ok - wasn't this decided due to the fact that a puny county could take 2 SPanisch provinces and claim himself to be a king and have dukes as vassals?

that's the reason, I'm sure if the kingdom of Navarra would have been much larger historically - it would have been in the game,

same goes for kingdom of Mallorca ! But on the other hand, you might grab that title and take it from that king (question = can you grab these low province kingdom titles?)...

 

[unmerged(31117)]

It's not unfeasable either. Some general or other took over Portugal and declared himself king, supported in this claim, suprisingly enough by the King of Castille (who he was a vassal of). So it's not entirely unfeasable that the same couldn't have happened had Navarra been taken over by Muslims. Many of the rulers of that area don't appear to actually have been very interested in Imperialism (ie building up big empires) given that they allowed a whole region to slip away from their grasp, out of apparant generosity to the general that had conquered it. The same could potentially have happened with Navarra, some nobleman could have taken it off the Muslims and the Portugal situation would have happened alblait on a smaller scale.

This wrangling about size is stupid, somebody's going to have to be the smallest kingdom and Navarra in this time frame was a very small kingdom that never the less was just as established a concept as the other Iberian Kingdoms in the eyes of both the locals and the "international community" at large. Therefore it should definately be recreatable as such.

 

[unmerged(2456)]

Exactly. I am quite convinced that if such thing ever happened someone would definately jump in....I am sure of this 200%.

Well consider that none of the Visigoth kingdoms were ever resetup and lasted in areas taken by the moors, even though their successors could have done so.

The game is not made for 2-province kingdoms, which is why it was taken out. Complain all you want, but that's a fact.

And considering a Granada nor any kingdom representing southern Iberia isn't there when it should be historically, i can't really shed a tear over this.

 

[unmerged(31117)]

Let's turn this thread into a sort of petition. Everyone who wants to see Navarra re-creatable again, post their agreement on this thread.

 

[Sarevokreo]

One here... and I agree with the addition of Vizcaya to the kingdom requeriments.

 

[Third Angel]

Well consider that none of the Visigoth kingdoms were ever resetup and lasted in areas taken by the moors, even though their successors could have done so.

There was only one Wisigoth kingdom, and you should know that the Kingdoms of Pampelune (later Navarra) and Asturias/Leon (Castille) claimed to be the successors of the wisigothic monarchic tradition, and their kings claimed to be descended from the Wisigoth Kings even though that last was surely false.

 

[Spruce]

Let's turn this thread into a sort of petition. Everyone who wants to see Navarra re-creatable again, post their agreement on this thread.

no that's not fair - why do we have to recreate Navarra (2 county kingdom) when there are kingdom of Baleares (one county kingdom). Honestly a count becoming king after conquering 2 or 1 county doesn't sound fair to me.

the same argumentation as you use - historical accuracy prevails here. In an old game I became king of Navarra - vassalised the duke of Toulouse and Provence and I was one of the most powerfull states in Europe. This is not serious imho... I don't want to see kingdoms that can be recreated from too low amount of provinces - they don't have any real power ...

All of Europe will see it as a "duke" of Navarra - not as a king.

Same goes for king of Valencia and stuff...

 

[unmerged(2456)]

There was only one Wisigoth kingdom, and you should know that the Kingdoms of Pampelune (later Navarra) and Asturias/Leon (Castille) claimed to be the successors of the wisigothic monarchic tradition, and their kings claimed to be descended from the Wisigoth Kings even though that last was surely false.

Indeed, but their claims of being a kingdom are no less justified than mostl of the Taifia states being given kingdom titles, which most are not and Granda or somesuch as a southern kingdom. Castile and Navarra never had any legitimate rights to the southern part of iberia and it was recognized that Cordoba was a Kingdom and thus their claims to the southern Visigoth kingdom were much weaker than someone who wanted to claim a Kingdom of Granada or Kingdom of Andalucia becuase up until just before CK began the Caliphate of Cordoba was a reality. Even Castile recognized Granada as the succesor rightful heir of southern Iberia, even though it was intent on conquering it eventually.

 

[yourworstnightm]

Yes, but if Navarra is no longer claimable, Castile, Aragon and Leon shouldn't be either. You can't just remove a kingdom because it is too small. No other of the north iberian kingdoms were big in 1066, they just grew bigger (unlike Navarra), still if one of the kingdoms is unclaimable, the others should also be. And which kingdom should the Navarran provinces be concidered a part of. No other kingdom in Europe had historical claims on Navarra during the middle ages.

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

MrT has divided the 2 provinces between Aragon and Castille, he himself says that it is not historically correct but that was the best solution.

I agree with Paradox here, Navarra should not be creatable again after it has disappeared. We have no idea what would have happend if Navarra had been overrun by the Muslims in real, so historically it can not be proven by anyone that someone would have recreated the kingdom of Navarra again after it would have disappeared.

And from a gameplay point of view this is, in my opion of course, the best solution.

And it is easy to ad the kingdom of Navarra as a recreateable kingdom again in your own games.

 

[Third Angel]

Indeed, but their claims of being a kingdom are no less justified than mostl of the Taifia states being given kingdom titles, which most are not and Granda or somesuch as a southern kingdom. Castile and Navarra never had any legitimate rights to the southern part of iberia and it was recognized that Cordoba was a Kingdom and thus their claims to the southern Visigoth kingdom were much weaker than someone who wanted to claim a Kingdom of Granada or Kingdom of Andalucia becuase up until just before CK began the Caliphate of Cordoba was a reality. Even Castile recognized Granada as the succesor rightful heir of southern Iberia, even though it was intent on conquering it eventually.

So do you think that there should be other creatable kingdoms in southern Iberia? Why not. The problem as I see it is that while claiming that CK is not a historical game, the Kingdoms of Castille, Aragon and Portugal already have the frontiers they will not reach before two to four-hundred years later. So I don't see why Navarra could not be given "cores" on Viscaya and Soria, and then one or two more amongst Molina, Catalayud, Labourd or Asturias de Santillana, so it would require at least four provinces to create it (just like Wales), as has already been proposed.
This would solve the exploit thing and would not be more unhistorical then giving Valencia to Aragon or Cordoba to Castille in 1066.

MrT has divided the 2 provinces between Aragon and Castille, he himself says that it is not historically correct but that was the best solution.

Actually, this is not entirely unhistorical since that was nearly the way the kingdom was divided in 1076, before it was recreated in 1134!

I agree with Paradox here, Navarra should not be creatable again after it has disappeared. We have no idea what would have happend if Navarra had been overrun by the Muslims in real, so historically it can not be proven by anyone that someone would have recreated the kingdom of Navarra again after it would have disappeared.

We have no idea either as to what would have happened if Castille or Aragon had disappeared instead. And it can't be proven that they would have been recreated especially for Aragon.

And it is easy to ad the kingdom of Navarra as a recreateable kingdom again in your own games.

I guess it would be just as easy to remove it as a recreatable kingdom in your own games.

 

[unmerged(31117)]

Solution to what?

 

[unmerged(27913)]

ok - wasn't this decided due to the fact that a puny county could take 2 SPanisch provinces and claim himself to be a king and have dukes as vassals?

Thats not a valid reason to remove the oldest kingdom from the setup.

that's the reason, I'm sure if the kingdom of Navarra would have been much larger historically - it would have been in the game,

It already is in the game. And size shouldn't matter here at all. Besides as I said it should be bigger anyway...it should contain Vizcaya and Labour provinces and also Bearn. With these three proinces added to Navarre demsense would be historical and harder to conquer and would fit the so-called "size requirements". However I've still had absolutly no comments on this as people just disregard it and continue to ramble on how it's too small...

same goes for kingdom of Mallorca ! But on the other hand, you might grab that title and take it from that king (question = can you grab these low province kingdom titles?)...

Kingdom of Mallorca was just like Galicia a "one-turn" kingdom. It appeared for some short period and then it was gone for ever. Navarre on the other hadn was the kingdom with longest tradition of all thse kingdoms in Iberia.

Well consider that none of the Visigoth kingdoms were ever resetup and lasted in areas taken by the moors, even though their successors could have done so.

By such logic we can also claim that the same would happen to Castile, Leon, Aragon, etc...

The game is not made for 2-province kingdoms, which is why it was taken out. Complain all you want, but that's a fact.

Thats why it needs to be exanded and it can be made and will be historical. Personally I don't know why in the first place Vizcaya and Labourd aren't part of Navarre demense. Bearn could also be added although it came under Navarre crown a bit later in 15h century.

 

[unmerged(31117)]

So Navarra actually managed to aquire lands inside France? Just out of interest did they inherit them or conquer them.

 

[unmerged(27913)]

Yes it did. In late 15th and early 16th century they held Bearn, Foix, Albret, Perigord and Limoges(Limousin). It was through inheritance.

Later Navarre was in personal union with France.

 

[unmerged(2456)]

Thats not a valid reason to remove the oldest kingdom from the setup.

I'd beg to differ. Byzantium is far older.

It already is in the game. And size shouldn't matter here at all.

IRL, maybe, but in a game like this, its extremely important, vital component in fact.

Thats why it needs to be exanded and it can be made and will be historical. Personally I don't know why in the first place Vizcaya and Labourd aren't part of Navarre demense. Bearn could also be added although it came under Navarre crown a bit later in 15h century.

That's still only 5, and that 5th one is stetching things a bit. Even Wales, which often gets critized, has atleast 6.

And its still more unresaonble to allow it in as a four-province one and not allow a southern iberian kingdom since even for the other places under muslim rule, kingdoms are made there that basically represent the regional powers, if not the names, FE: Mameluks/Fatimids for Egypt. Only southern Iberia is an exception here.

 

[unmerged(27913)]

I'd beg to differ. Byzantium is far older.

I am talking about Iberia.

IRL, maybe, but in a game like this, its extremely important, vital component in fact.

Only for you maybe...

That's still only 5, and that 5th one is stetching things a bit. Even Wales, which often gets critized, has atleast 6.

Wales as opposed to Navarre isn't really a historical kingdom. 5 is more than enough.

And its still more unresaonble to allow it in as a four-province one and not allow a southern iberian kingdom since even for the other places under muslim rule, kingdoms are made there that basically represent the regional powers, if not the names, FE: Mameluks/Fatimids for Egypt. Only southern Iberia is an exception here.

Navarre was real independent kingdom that really existed. You comparison is seriously flawed.

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

I guess it would be just as easy to remove it as a recreatable kingdom in your own games.

Ouch, yes, you got me there :rofl:

But I think that the developers have made up there mind already, so I doubt it will be recreatable.

 

[yourworstnightm]

I think I mentioned this before, but if Navarra is not recreatable, no other iberian kingdom should be, We don't know what would have happened if any of the kingdoms were defeated by the moslems. And since the kingdom once existed and had long roots, any crusader who conquered the area would have crowned himself king of Navarra. Navarra was for example a far more established kingdom than Aragon was in 1066. If Navarra can't be recreated, neither should Aragon, since I doubt the crown of Aragon would ever be resurrected if it had been conquered by moslems in 1066.

 

[unmerged(2456)]

Only for you maybe...

No, most people, especially if your playing mp and aren't going after infidel right away Navarra then is an easy target.

Wales as opposed to Navarre isn't really a historical kingdom. 5 is more than enough.

No its not. Numbers do matter in this game for provinces. I know its seems like a hard concept for you to grasp, but try, okay?

Yes Navarra is a historic kingdom, but, size and gamebalance are more important for this game.

Navarre was real independent kingdom that really existed. You comparison is seriously flawed.

:wacko: That's all you have to say? That's your defense? Come on! How many other kingdoms existed that aren't even represented as claimable kingdom titles?

Then look at southern iberia and how its screwed up as well...its hard to justify Navarra staying when southern iberia is screwed up like it is.