Not a particpant but a house rule I have found useful is that you can only excommunicate someone with a peity of -10(or -100) or less. Usually on rulers or exrulers will have developed negative piety so that greatly limits options.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Good idea actually. Suggestion: A character can be excomunicated if he/she has negative piety, or less than 100 piety if been ruler for 5 (10?) years.Jasmo said:
Jarkko Suvinen said:
I'd just say negative piety or if you have a good role playing reason to do so. especially during the crusades, we're not going to beuilding up piety at a particularly fast clip.
Which reminds me, we still need to settle on whether we're going to change the crusading rules or not...
Patrucio said:
I certainly wish for stricter crusading rules, but mainly something to shift the focus towards the Holy Land, because that is where the true challenge lies. Maybe we could even make a super-arab, named Saladin?
Sterkarm said:I certainly wish for stricter crusading rules, but mainly something to shift the focus towards the Holy Land, because that is where the true challenge lies. Maybe we could even make a super-arab, named Saladin?
Cooperative AI bashing is a very poor reason to play MP game... Really...
Byakhiam said:
Well... perhaps we could get a new player to play the Fatimids? Or edit them to be very powerful? Besides, with the new patch, the Fatimids are much stronger than before.
And it's not necessarily cooperative, we would probably come to conflict over the Holy Land soon, and not all of us crusade anyway, such as yourself. Italy doesn't either. Only Germany, England, Burgundy, and France have crusaded at all.
Sterkarm said:
I am fully aware that Fatimids pose a challenge to any nation one-on-one already and I am not meaning by "ai-bashing" that there would be no challenge in fighting the AI.
I am saying just fighting the AI is stupid in MP, because we can fight the AI in SP too and much more often.
Sterkarm said:
Italy crusades, just on slightly smaller scale than the rest. He got Zirids down earlier and sent 4000 venetians towards Iberia just before we ended.
Now, I don't crusade, because in my story I described my character as a sceptic. I feel I am playing my character more properly if I plan my conquests with a practical view. Practical as seen by my ruler, who doesn't know how easy it's to get prestige for claims by squashing some pagans and who doesn't know that crusading is the best badboy-valve there is.
Oh, who is hosting the game? I'm gonna need an ip number to connect to when we play next (this weekend, right?)
Solmyr said:
Well, if you provide me with your ICQ number before the game time in saturday (USA) / sunday (Europe), I can in case need be give you the IP in an instant message.
Jarkko's the primary host. I don't have his IP number off-hand. I'm the back-up host, and since Jarkko's gone I'l probably be hosting. My IP is 216.86.64.55.
My hosting the game may change due to some unforseen circumstances, but I can assure you that Byak will definitely not be the host.
My hosting the game may change due to some unforseen circumstances, but I can assure you that Byak will definitely not be the host.
The proposals as far as crusading goes are as follows:
***************************************************
Option 1 (current rules)
Placers may declare only 1 offensive crusade against one foe. They must wait five (5) years after the end of the last crusade they participated in before they may participate in another. They may support an allied nation's or vassal's crusading effort by declaring war, but may only use their troops defensively.
**************************************************
Option 2
Placers may declare only 1 offensive crusade against one foe. They must wait ten (10) years after the end of the last crusade they participated in before they may participate in another. They may support an allied nation's or vassal's crusading effort by declaring war, but may only use their troops defensively.
***************************************************
Option 3
After declaring an offensive crusade, a player must convert all Muslim or Pagan lands in their country and fight in at least one war against a PC nation or their vassals before another Crusade can begin. Players must declare war on their crusading target before they can muster any troops for a crusading campaign.
**************************************************
Please vote for one of the following options before game time tomorrow. Also note whether you support the following rule, which has had nobody disagree with it thus far:
Any territory lost in the core region (and core region being defined as any part of Europe controlled by a PC realm or their vassals) to a crusading Muslim or Pagan nation by a PC realm may freely be attacked and retaken by any other PC without any regards to their current crusading status or the wishes of it's former controller.
***************************************************
Option 1 (current rules)
Placers may declare only 1 offensive crusade against one foe. They must wait five (5) years after the end of the last crusade they participated in before they may participate in another. They may support an allied nation's or vassal's crusading effort by declaring war, but may only use their troops defensively.
**************************************************
Option 2
Placers may declare only 1 offensive crusade against one foe. They must wait ten (10) years after the end of the last crusade they participated in before they may participate in another. They may support an allied nation's or vassal's crusading effort by declaring war, but may only use their troops defensively.
***************************************************
Option 3
After declaring an offensive crusade, a player must convert all Muslim or Pagan lands in their country and fight in at least one war against a PC nation or their vassals before another Crusade can begin. Players must declare war on their crusading target before they can muster any troops for a crusading campaign.
**************************************************
Please vote for one of the following options before game time tomorrow. Also note whether you support the following rule, which has had nobody disagree with it thus far:
Any territory lost in the core region (and core region being defined as any part of Europe controlled by a PC realm or their vassals) to a crusading Muslim or Pagan nation by a PC realm may freely be attacked and retaken by any other PC without any regards to their current crusading status or the wishes of it's former controller.
Last edited:
I vote for option 1, as it would not make sense for every nation to be crusading for Jerusalem only.
Well, rule 3's Jerusalem rule makes sense if we assumed that the Pope called specifically for a Crusade to liberate Jerusalem and the surrounding area in order to ensure the safety of Christian pilgrims headed for the Holy Land. Making that assumption would them make the question "Do I care or not about risking my country to liberate Jerusalem on behalf of the Pope?" rather than "Whom should I crusade against."
I favor either #2 or #3- haven't decided between those two yet....
I favor either #2 or #3- haven't decided between those two yet....
Yah, but not everybody rushed to Jerusalem as soon as the Pope called for it. The Spanish had their own local crusades to fight, and the Scandinavians and Germans tended to go for the Baltics more (though Germans also occasionally went to the Holy Land).
The Spanish had their own local crusades to fight, and the Scandinavians and Germans tended to go for the Baltics more (though Germans also occasionally went to the Holy Land).
True. IIRC, it took 3 crusades before the majors decided to try and take care of Jerusalem themselves. The main impetus behind the rule is to draw people away from cruading and making them focus more on each other. Also, Sterk wanted to encourage people to go to the middle east.
That said, we could drop that clause from the 3rd rule, and just make that option "convert your heathens and fight your neighbors." Like I said in an earlier post, knowing that other players are looking for an excuse to attack you should in and of itself cut down on all the crusading. It worked in real life, after all. If we did that, I'd definitely support the 3rd rule (as I, like a good German King, care more about the Baltics )
In fact, let's do that. That's the rule I suggested, so I can amend it as I please.
3rd option amended, and I vote for that one.
That said, we could drop that clause from the 3rd rule, and just make that option "convert your heathens and fight your neighbors." Like I said in an earlier post, knowing that other players are looking for an excuse to attack you should in and of itself cut down on all the crusading. It worked in real life, after all. If we did that, I'd definitely support the 3rd rule (as I, like a good German King, care more about the Baltics
)In fact, let's do that. That's the rule I suggested, so I can amend it as I please.
3rd option amended, and I vote for that one.
Yes.
EDIT: Although, if I am correct, Britain currently has Daylight Saving - thingy and the local time in Britain is GMT + 1. So at 4 AM.
EDIT: Although, if I am correct, Britain currently has Daylight Saving - thingy and the local time in Britain is GMT + 1. So at 4 AM.