Rethinking the Golden Horde breakup

[Mad King James]

In 1419, the Golden Horde wasn't quite the unified entity it is in the game, and I don't think revolts really simulate the civil war very well.

I think that Crimea, Kazan and Astrakhan should all exist at start, and we rename Golden Horde to the "Great Horde" (the Golden Horde being the overall entity of the hordes collectively) also Sibir should have all their future provinces.

Kazan would be Olug Maxammat's power base, and he starts out as the Khan of the Golden Horde (so everyone is his vassal). Monarchlist for Kazan remains the same but he begins in 1419. He should be annexed by Baraq Khan, but should regain independence with Lithuanian help, and turn around and annex Baraq's Great Horde. He should then declare war on Dawlat's Crimea.


Crimea would be Dawlat Berdi's power base, A civil war should occur in 1433 where Hajji Giray takes power. So add in Dawlat Berdi as a monarch between 1419 and 1433.

Great Horde would be Baraq Khan's power base until annexation by Kazan. Sayyid Ahmad should then declare independence in 1433 and declare war on Olug Maxammat. Maxmud of Astrakhan should go to war with Sayyid Ahmad and annex him (once he takes his capitol) but then his brother Akhmat should AGAIN declare independence in 1465. In the 1480s he should go to war with Muscowy but lose. He dies in 1481 and for the next twenty years it should be ruled by "Anarchy" and then be annexed by Crimea in 1502. So monarch list is: Baraq Khan (1419 to 1433) Sayyid Ahmad (1433 to 1465) and Akhmat (1465 to 1481) and after that Anarchy (1481 - 1820)

Astrakhan would be Maxmud Khan's power base. Monarch list remains the same but begins in 1419.

Alliances at start:

Crimea and Kazan with Lithuania (Lithuania supported Devlet and Olug against Baraq)
Great Horde with Astrakhan, Uzbeks and Sibir (Baraq was supported by the east)

 

[Garbon]

Frankly unless its tested and works well, that sounds like we could have a of hellishly bad things happen if we start everyone off early.

Also, its worth noting that most sources have Baraq Khan as the ruler of the Uzbeks as well.

I don't think Sibir should start off large as there was no Sibir until much later.

 

[Mad King James]

Hmm ok a minor adjustment then:

Have the territory (Kazan plus Great Horde) be under Great Horde under Olug, and have Baraq in the east (Uzbek, Kazak territories) allied with Astrakhan. Baraq occupies the territory but is driven out with the help of Lithuania. Goes to war with Crimea.

Then: Civil war, player chooses to either support Sayyid Ahmad (independence/war with Kazan under Olug) or Olug Maxammud (become Kazan, move capital to Kazan, declare independence for Great Horde)

Then Astrakhan invades the Great Horde, annexes it. Then Astrakhan has its own civil war, and again you can choose to either support Maxmud (lose and go to war with Great Horde, stay as Astrakhan) or his brother Akhmat (become Great Horde, lose and go to war with Astrakhan)

In this case we don't need "Anarchy" and we can have Sayyid Ahmad II rule the Great Horde in 1481.

 

[Mad King James]

Oops I missed a generation of the Astrakhan monarchlist

Kuchuk Muhammed should actually start out in Astrakhan, Maxmud was his son. When Astrakhan annexes the Great Horde it should also become the Great Horde. The sequence should then be: Maxmud rises to the throne in 1459, but in civil war with his brother. He loses, so his brother Akmat rises to the throne and he splits off from the Great Horde to Astrakhan.

 

[Mad King James]

Little more detail on Akhmat's state: He is killed in late 1480, and his son Sayyid Ahmad II rules for only a year or so before being deposed by his brother Murtada. Civil war and chaos ensue, and continue even after Murtada dies in 1499 and his son Sayyid Ahmad III takes the throne.

The two Sayyid Ahmad's fight amongst themselves until the Girai Khanate invades and destroys the Great Horde.

 

[almoravid]

In my opinion, it would be very confusing, as we would be reusing the same tags for many factions. Also, Lithuania and Muscovy shouldn't be beating them before 1450. I think current setup, while maybe a strong simplification, is much more stable. Strong men rose and fell in the horde, and if we simulate the wars with more then revolts, weird results will be happening more often. Crimea for example even now often gets stomped by Poland-Lithuania in 15th century. It may be worth giving a try, having all the stuff going on with timurids, but I'd be cautious and test it beforehand, nevertheless.

 

[Garbon]

It may be worth giving a try, having all the stuff going on with timurids

Not exactly the greatest match up.

And yes, anything that makes large changes needs to have been run many times before.