Stability of Muslim blobs

[Lord_P]

In real life:

Abbasid Caliphate: power of the Caliph wanes over time, governors of outlying territories start breaking apart, eventually taken over.

Umayyad Caliphate: power of the Caliph wanes over time, revolts and civil wars tear the country apart, eventually overthrown and disintegrated.

How often do you actually see these two go down in CK2? Most strong Islamic realms in the Middle Ages tended to fall apart due to inside pressure (e.g. Abbasids, Umayyads, Almohads, Fatimids, Ayyubids, Seljuks, ...). This rarely happens in CK2. Oh, it does happen sometimes, but very seldom in my experience. Blobs either stay strong and keep growing or their name is changed by a decadence revolt.

 

[Thorkel the Tall]

Depending on start date. From the Old Gods start I frequently see the Ummayad break up. Mostly after roughly 1.000AD, but sometimes even before. Depends alot on who I am playing (say, in my Asturias game, I controlled most Iberia by 950, thus Ummayad couldnt break up as they were very small). If I play norse and raid the Christians alot, conquer England etc, the Christians usually looses Aquitaine. To prevent this I sometimes raid extensively in the Ummayad lands (especially if they have a north African province). This keep them using soldiers/money, and weakens them from expansion, while looting muslim temples.

Usually playing in western Europe (Spain, the British Isles, Scandinavia, sometimes France), I do not watch the abbassids as closely. I have seen some decadence revolt succeeeding though splitting it somewhat.

 

[Robert II]

It's not the muslims blobs it's blobs in general. Paradox don't want managing a blob to be difficult I assume because the majority of people like medieval map painter 2.

Strange how little people complain about the ERE never falling.

 

[DukeDayve]

It's not the muslims blobs it's blobs in general. Paradox don't want managing a blob to be difficult I assume because the majority of people like medieval map painter 2.

Strange how little people complain about the ERE never falling.

I used to complain about empires (including the ERE) not falling all the time. Not only not falling, but also never losing even a single county. I don't just mean mine, I mean all. It's so rare to see one fall that when it happens it actually sticks in my mind for months afterwards. But over time I stopped complaining because it became apparent that Paradox wants the game to be easy for its fans - the majority of whom want to pain the whole map a certain colour and never ever ever lose a single county, because if they do they start making threads about whoever they lost the county to. "Their retinues are OP!!!! Buff mine and nerf theirs!!!!!".

Back before Rajas ruined the game, it used to be fun watching the map as you played. Empires fell, or at least weakened during particularly nasty faction rebellions. One particularly cool thing that always sticks in my mind was when the Byzantine emperor died and his infant son took the throne. He was deposed in a faction plot and his older sister took the throne. She was already married (non-matrilineal) so when she died the empire was ruled by a new dynasty. That new dynasty faced 10 or so years of rebellions to put the old dynasty back on the throne (some of them were still counts and dukes) and they succeeded once, only to lose it almost immediately to the new dynasty again. Then when they were weakened from the civil wars some Muslim power took advantage and did an invasion for Anatolia.

You wouldn't see such a thing happening these days, and haven't for a while. Whatever dynasty is ruling an empire continues to rule it until the end of the game. They'll never get deposed because factions are so weak since they were united under one leader and can't call in their allies or hire mercenaries. It's boring to see the Doukas dynasty rule uninterrupted from 1066 to the end of the game.

 

[Robert II]

I used to complain about empires (including the ERE) not falling all the time. Not only not falling, but also never losing even a single county. I don't just mean mine, I mean all. It's so rare to see one fall that when it happens it actually sticks in my mind for months afterwards. But over time I stopped complaining because it became apparent that Paradox wants the game to be easy for its fans - the majority of whom want to pain the whole map a certain colour and never ever ever lose a single county, because if they do they start making threads about whoever they lost the county to. "Their retinues are OP!!!! Buff mine and nerf theirs!!!!!".

Back before Rajas ruined the game, it used to be fun watching the map as you played. Empires fell, or at least weakened during particularly nasty faction rebellions. One particularly cool thing that always sticks in my mind was when the Byzantine emperor died and his infant son took the throne. He was deposed in a faction plot and his older sister took the throne. She was already married (non-matrilineal) so when she died the empire was ruled by a new dynasty. That new dynasty faced 10 or so years of rebellions to put the old dynasty back on the throne (some of them were still counts and dukes) and they succeeded once, only to lose it almost immediately to the new dynasty again. Then when they were weakened from the civil wars some Muslim power took advantage and did an invasion for Anatolia.

You wouldn't see such a thing happening these days, and haven't for a while. Whatever dynasty is ruling an empire continues to rule it until the end of the game. They'll never get deposed because factions are so weak since they were united under one leader and can't call in their allies or hire mercenaries. It's boring to see the Doukas dynasty rule uninterrupted from 1066 to the end of the game.

Slight correction. Now it's very common to see a dynasty losing a throne but it's by losing the election. Now the majority of titles will go elective and rarely change back.

 

[Kokomorari]

It's not the muslims blobs it's blobs in general. Paradox don't want managing a blob to be difficult I assume because the majority of people like medieval map painter 2.

Strange how little people complain about the ERE never falling.

Oh geez make it about the ERE as always. ANY empire should have rough times

 

[Dahoota]

Since Conclave in my games the Abbasids consistently either fracture due to an independence revolt or lose to a decadence revolt, then split. The key difference between them and the Umayyads + ERE is that it takes much longer for them to respond to revolts - it takes a year in-game to march from one end to the other. So eventually a revolt or two way out east will happen or they get called into a war out there, combine that with a Shia Caliphate event/decadence revolt/independence revolt and the AI can't handle it effectively.

I agree the Umayyads are very stable, but sometimes will go down after 900 as they trigger Crusades by taking Aquitaine and lose - when they control Hispania and Aquitaine most of the holy orders spawn. Then independence revolts fire, especially if they haven't actually formed the empire of Hispania.

Since Conclave the ERE seems to always go Elective and then prosper.

 

[Karlingid]

It's not the muslims blobs it's blobs in general. Paradox don't want managing a blob to be difficult I assume because the majority of people like medieval map painter 2.

Strange how little people complain about the ERE never falling.

For the most part, I figure people don't complain about ERE not falling because it historically never did. The end of the game is, in fact, the point at which ERE dies off, so it is pretty much the only country in the whole game to survive the entire period*. Likewise, it collapsed from external, rather than internal, pressure: the invasions of Turkic powers and the Crusader attacks led primarily by Venice.

*It does fall into "successor" realms eventually, yes, but the Nicaean Empire was "founded" by the Byzantine emperor proper, who fled Constantinople to escape the Latins. It is almost certainly to be considered the same country as Byzantium, just without the city that gives "Byzantium" its name.

 

[DukeDayve]

For the most part, I figure people don't complain about ERE not falling because it historically never did. The end of the game is, in fact, the point at which ERE dies off, so it is pretty much the only country in the whole game to survive the entire period*. Likewise, it collapsed from external, rather than internal, pressure: the invasions of Turkic powers and the Crusader attacks led primarily by Venice.

It didn't fall entirely until after this game ends, sure, but it did shrink slowly and surely until all that was left was Constantinople and Morea (and maybe Adrianople and Philippopolis). Start in 1066 and play a whole game to the end - see how much land the Byzantines lose.

(the answer is none - it grows).

 

[ahyangyi]

Yeah, Conclave has bring us the super stable blobs. There used to be lots of unpreventable independence wars -- no more, as factions waste their time to make the realm elective and controlled by the council and then get satisfied enough with that.

 

[ahyangyi]

For the most part, I figure people don't complain about ERE not falling because it historically never did. The end of the game is, in fact, the point at which ERE dies off, so it is pretty much the only country in the whole game to survive the entire period*. Likewise, it collapsed from external, rather than internal, pressure: the invasions of Turkic powers and the Crusader attacks led primarily by Venice.

*It does fall into "successor" realms eventually, yes, but the Nicaean Empire was "founded" by the Byzantine emperor proper, who fled Constantinople to escape the Latins. It is almost certainly to be considered the same country as Byzantium, just without the city that gives "Byzantium" its name.

There's also naming conventions I guess.
If the Abbasids were simply called "the Arabian Empire", or the ERE were named after the dynasties (i.e. Alexiad Roman Empire), people's opinions might change.

 

[KhaineFH]

Slight correction. Now it's very common to see a dynasty losing a throne but it's by losing the election. Now the majority of titles will go elective and rarely change back.

^^^^ this so many times !!!
It is so annoying and not immersive at all to see complete random dynasties leading great nations.
Now I tend to aways ally Capet, De Normandie/Plantagênets, Rurikids, etc... so that I can help them keeping their realm together.
It's quite fun actually, but I hate the fact that AI stick to that succession rule. It should at least try to switch back to gavelkind, it would spread their dynasty and at least they would keep the highest title.

 

[GCRust]

Since Conclave, the Muslim blobs don't seem to be nearly as stable as they once were. The Byzantines are super stable, though.

 

[ahyangyi]

^^^^ this so many times !!!
It is so annoying and not immersive at all to see complete random dynasties leading great nations.
Now I tend to aways ally Capet, De Normandie/Plantagênets, Rurikids, etc... so that I can help them keeping their realm together.
It's quite fun actually, but I hate the fact that AI stick to that succession rule. It should at least try to switch back to gavelkind, it would spread their dynasty and at least they would keep the highest title.

(The cadet branch of ) House of Capet ended within CK2 timeframe :|

 

[KhaineFH]

(The cadet branch of ) House of Capet ended within CK2 timeframe :|

And guess who inherited ? House de Valois, with the cousin of the former king, which was more legitimate that any random count with no link to the royal family, which tend to be elected in Ck2 (the higher your diplomacy and ages are, the more likely you will be elected... ). Sure it did and it should happen, but currently there is a huge problem with elective monarchy which is basically everywhere, and AI does nothing against it, even if it might lose its titles.