Slavic pagans having castles

[szopaw]

Ok, I saw this in the vanilla game and in CKII+, but I didn't expect this here - the westernmost slavs are feudal. Despite still being pagan. Prague not only has a castle. It has TWO.


How is this historical? Prague didn't have even a single castle in 867, much less two, while all the pomeranian slavs were just as tribal as any others, eventually taken over and replaced by german settlers. You made a whole new map, but you couldn't tweak the vanilla setup?

I'm not Immersed.

 

[ekorovin]

You do understand that in current build tribes and such are just copy-pasted from vanilla? Or that SWMH map was made way before tribes were even conceived? I mean, how many times they had to say it?

 

[Sirrobert1]

Ok, I saw this in the vanilla game and in CKII+, but I didn't expect this here - the westernmost slavs are feudal. Despite still being pagan. Prague not only has a castle. It has TWO.

Concidering that peganism and fuedalism have nothing to do with eachother in HIP, I don't see the point

 

[GothicEmperor]

Concidering that peganism and fuedalism have nothing to do with eachother in HIP, I don't see the point

The point is that they haven't gotten around to implementing it properly yet.

 

[Sqwerlpunk]

Ok, I saw this in the vanilla game and in CKII+, but I didn't expect this here - the westernmost slavs are feudal. Despite still being pagan. Prague not only has a castle. It has TWO.


How is this historical? Prague didn't have even a single castle in 867, much less two, while all the pomeranian slavs were just as tribal as any others, eventually taken over and replaced by german settlers. You made a whole new map, but you couldn't tweak the vanilla setup?

I'm not Immersed.

As others have mentioned, SWMH has not implemented their own work of tribalism. The current map is roughly copied from vanilla in order to give general access to the nice features and gameplay CM brought with the new mechanics.

Further, EMF has recently decoupled Tribalism, Paganism, and the reform to Feudalism. Unreformed Pagans are allowed to Feudalize in HIP, and that's intended, so seeing Pagans with Castles shouldn't be too weird.

 

[zijistark]

Ok, I saw this in the vanilla game and in CKII+, but I didn't expect this here - the westernmost slavs are feudal. Despite still being pagan. Prague not only has a castle. It has TWO.


How is this historical? Prague didn't have even a single castle in 867, much less two, while all the pomeranian slavs were just as tribal as any others, eventually taken over and replaced by german settlers. You made a whole new map, but you couldn't tweak the vanilla setup?

I'm not Immersed.

What everyone else said, but also: the fact is that various pagans WERE feudal in 867, largely due to Roman and post-Roman influences in their region.

 

[Echbart]

What everyone else said, but also: the fact is that various pagans WERE feudal in 867, largely due to Roman and post-Roman influences in their region.

This is correct - but only for territory of former Roman empire - on the other side of border there were still tribal communities and kingdoms - and feudalisation came with Christianity.

 

[Sqwerlpunk]

What everyone else said, but also: the fact is that various pagans WERE feudal in 867, largely due to Roman and post-Roman influences in their region.

Given this map, are you arguing solely for the South Slavs? Everything else falls under already feudal lands, as far as I can tell (while the current decision allows any pagan to feudalize with ~350 gold/province).

I actually like Tribal mechanics, and locking certain rulers into the mechanic. Seeing odd bits of land go feudal for no reason is pretty annoying (and as a Tribal ruler who intends to stay tribal for a bit, makes Gavelkind harder to work around; I am forced to keep my hillforts and cities at level 3 instead of 4, since on succession my secondary heirs will immediately feudalize, locking me out of that land until I do so as well).

 

[SignedName]

What I find more annoying is that in the 1066 start, Iceland is still tribal, ruining its playability as a Republic.

 

[zijistark]

What I find more annoying is that in the 1066 start, Iceland is still tribal, ruining its playability as a Republic.

Can Iceland not form a merchant republic? I realize being tribal at start means you can't play the Iceland merchant republic of the past (which I always thought was kind of strange, but hey, it gives Icelanders something to do), but you should still be able to convert to a merchant republic via decision. Is it that you can't raise any money from raiding?

Given this map, are you arguing solely for the South Slavs? Everything else falls under already feudal lands, as far as I can tell (while the current decision allows any pagan to feudalize with ~350 gold/province).

I actually like Tribal mechanics, and locking certain rulers into the mechanic. Seeing odd bits of land go feudal for no reason is pretty annoying (and as a Tribal ruler who intends to stay tribal for a bit, makes Gavelkind harder to work around; I am forced to keep my hillforts and cities at level 3 instead of 4, since on succession my secondary heirs will immediately feudalize, locking me out of that land until I do so as well).

Actually, by 'Roman influences,' I meant the Romans and their predecessors such as the Franks. Also, one needn't be conquered by the Romans / their predecessors to be influenced heavily by them in terms of government form and military tactics (such as building castles).

You bring up an interesting point regarding the current looseness of feudalization restrictions. I can't revert to what Paradox does (require the AI to ahistorically reform their pagan religion to get to a simple historical outcome). I'm open to other ways to make feudalization more difficult that are plausible, though. One factor could be whether the tribe is part of a feudal realm (any of your lieges are feudal). Obviously, this would be a natural way to adopt feudalism. I'd also like to model the factor 'those guys over there are doing much better than us, are a major threat to us, and they are feudal / build castles / etc., so it probably makes sense that we would learn from them.' Perhaps bordering a feudal realm or feudal provinces could also unlock feudalization for tribals, even if their liege wasn't feudal. Both of these rules would help feudalization follow a more historical/plausible course and slowly "ripple outward" from Christendom over time.

I suppose that soft modifiers could also be added to the ai_will_do of the feudalization decision (or tribal organization law, although there's plenty in there already) based upon other factors. E.g., number of feudal provinces bordering (sub-)realm or hard-coded location stuff (though I'd like to stay away from the latter if possible).

 

[High chief]

Is there way to change west slavic pagan feudal lords back to tribes?(rewrite something in mod data or something like that)

 

[zijistark]

Is there way to change west slavic pagan feudal lords back to tribes?(rewrite something in mod data or something like that)

Nah, it's pretty time- and savvy-intensive to make those modifications correctly, unless you just want to convert one small ruler back to tribal or something. Even then, it means some modding.

Random aside: I wonder what folks would think of an all-tribal map as an option distributed with HIP?

 

[Sirrobert1]

Maybe there could be some way to feudalize if a large portion of your vassals are feudal.
Offcourse that's not exactly a factor since pegans can already feudalize without the reforming aspect right now, but maybe allow a tribal ruler to switch capital to a feudal country and adopt feudalism that way? When half the realm is already living in castles, there's little reason to not move into one of the castles you just took yourself.
All the infastructure to be feudal is right there

 

[zijistark]

Maybe there could be some way to feudalize if a large portion of your vassals are feudal.
Offcourse that's not exactly a factor since pegans can already feudalize without the reforming aspect right now, but maybe allow a tribal ruler to switch capital to a feudal country and adopt feudalism that way? When half the realm is already living in castles, there's little reason to not move into one of the castles you just took yourself.
All the infastructure to be feudal is right there

Sure, that too seems like a factor which could unlock feudalization if I were to tighten up the current rules: "My vassals are feudal, so I can be too (assuming I meet all the other criteria)." Not dissimilar to adopting feudalism if you have a feudal liege.

 

[zijistark]

Regarding tightening-up the restrictions for adopting feudalism, I've posted my current thoughts about it in the EMF thread (link to post here) and welcome any feedback.

 

[SignedName]

Can Iceland not form a merchant republic? I realize being tribal at start means you can't play the Iceland merchant republic of the past (which I always thought was kind of strange, but hey, it gives Icelanders something to do), but you should still be able to convert to a merchant republic via decision. Is it that you can't raise any money from raiding?

What annoys me more than Iceland being tribal is that only the capital province is a tribal holding. It also results messes up the previous Icelandic trade posts. It also seems silly that Iceland in 1066 should be stuck at the lowest level of tribal organization as well.