I asked this earlier in the thread and am still curious. Will the 1187 scenario start right on January 1st. Mainly I want to know because I want to know if the Crusader states have a chance to avoid the disaster at the Horns of Hattin.
-
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.
Havard might know. And tell if it doesn´t break his NDA?
If it´s pre-Hattin the scenario might actually be too easy, mightn´t it? Would any skilled human player blunder as badly?
Post-Hattin might be more of a challenge for a human player (both if playing England or the Kingdom of Jerusalem).
Cheers,
Vandelay
If it´s pre-Hattin the scenario might actually be too easy, mightn´t it? Would any skilled human player blunder as badly?
Post-Hattin might be more of a challenge for a human player (both if playing England or the Kingdom of Jerusalem).
Cheers,
Vandelay
Whichever way it happens, I suspect there'll be a mod someday that allows you to avoid or include Hattin as you see fit.
In some games, you'd want to try a strong Jerusalem, while in others, you'd like the challenge of the Third Crusade.
Count Raymond V (1134-1194), I believe this is right. He was married with Constance Capet (1128-1176), daughter of Luis VI, King of France.
I believe Count of Flanders and Artois was Philip of Alsace (also known as Philip the Great of Flanders), he acceded 1968 and died 1191. He was married to Teresa of Portugal. His father was Thierry of Alsace (also Count of Flanders).
Re: Re: The Christian world in 1187
The question marks (and parenthesis) were more to indicate uncertainity if they will be playable or not, but thank you for the confirmation
To me it makes more sense to start the scenario after the Christians have been defeated at Hattin. If not then the idea of a third crusade kinda goes out the window if there is a chance to avoid the disasterous battle - which there would be if the start was Jan.1st. And if no third crusade then why have 1187 as a starting date anyway?
Originally posted by Sonny
To me it makes more sense to start the scenario after the Christians have been defeated at Hattin. If not then the idea of a third crusade kinda goes out the window if there is a chance to avoid the disasterous battle - which there would be if the start was Jan.1st. And if no third crusade then why have 1187 as a starting date anyway?
That's pretty much line of thinking. 1187 is defined by that very event. If we start before Hattin, then I forsee a mod being developed which allows you to start just after the conflict. Shouldn't be too hard. Just eliminate all Crusading armies, kill a lot of the nobles, wipe out the Templars.
There were wallachians around and some small statal formations were around
Moldova
Tara Romaniilor XII-XII Bucovina(NV)
Bolohoveni (Volohoveni-slavic) XI-XIII Basarabia (NE)
Tara(COUNTRY) Berladnicilor XII-XIII Centre
Tara Brodnicilor XI-XIII South
Wallachia
Tara Romaneasca(vlahia-slavic) XI_XIII NE
Voievodate of Seneslau XIII Centre
Cnezate of Ioan XII SV
Voievodate of Litovoi(Basarab) XII NV
Cnezate of Farcas XIII North Centre West
Transilvania(prior to hungarian conquest)
Tara Severinul till XIII SV Motive of war bettween Wallachia and hungary the hungarians lost.
Voievodate of Glad-Ahtum IX_XI Banat
Voievodate of Alba VIII-XII South well in the mountains
Voievodate of Menumorut IX-X West Maros
Voievodate of Gelu( Gyula hungarian) IX-X Centre East Transilvanya and south of Ruthenia(60%)
Dobruja
Tara of Seslav XI North
Tara of Satza XI Centre
Tara of Tatos XI South (Cadrilater)
Jupenate of Dimitrie Centre ? Maybe some nobleman(chieftan)
The Pechenegues were also around not only the Cumans.
Originally posted by Mettermrck
That's pretty much line of thinking. 1187 is defined by that very event. If we start before Hattin, then I forsee a mod being developed which allows you to start just after the conflict. Shouldn't be too hard. Just eliminate all Crusading armies, kill a lot of the nobles, wipe out the Templars.
Well, if the scenario starts after Hattin, playing the Kingdom of Jerusalem might not be a lot of fun, as you would be confined to the city of Tyre. One wonders if you could even survive...
Now if it started on the day of Hattin (July 4), that could be interesting. See if you can survive the battle even after all the Christian blunders...
Re: Re: Re: The Christian world in 1187
You mean we cannot take a Flemish or Toulouse or Champagne dynasty to glory, displacing those perfidious Capets?
Originally posted by Havard
The question marks (and parenthesis) were more to indicate uncertainity if they will be playable or not, but thank you for the confirmation
You mean we cannot take a Flemish or Toulouse or Champagne dynasty to glory, displacing those perfidious Capets?
Re: Re: Re: Re: The Christian world in 1187
They wouldn't rank as "sovereigns", although some of the French houses were just as powerful as the king at times... Playing the Toulouse house through the Albigensian crusade could get hairy (and fun!) though
"uncertainity" => I don't know for sure.Originally posted by Abdul Goatherd
They wouldn't rank as "sovereigns", although some of the French houses were just as powerful as the king at times... Playing the Toulouse house through the Albigensian crusade could get hairy (and fun!) though
You could still try to defend Jerusalem and Antioch and Tripoli. Would quite a challenge with such depleted forces.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Christian world in 1187
IMO, at least the "six peers" of France -- Normandy, Burgundy, Champagne, Toulouse, Flanders, Aquitaine -- should be played as "sovereigns". Wasn't the French king -- or rather "Duke of France" -- merely "first among equals"?
At least the French peers should be as playable as the German stem duchies.
I thought the French monarchy (at least in its early days) was pretty much organized like the German monarchy. Just as a Duke of Saxony or Swabia could become King of Germany, displacing the Duke of Franconia, I don't think it would have been inconceivable if, say, the Duke of Aquitaine or Flanders became the French king, displacing the Duke of France.
Or was there an implicit constitutional clause that required that the French king always had to be the Duke of France?
Originally posted by Havard
"uncertainity" => I don't know for sure.
They wouldn't rank as "sovereigns", although some of the French houses were just as powerful as the king at times... Playing the Toulouse house through the Albigensian crusade could get hairy (and fun!) though
IMO, at least the "six peers" of France -- Normandy, Burgundy, Champagne, Toulouse, Flanders, Aquitaine -- should be played as "sovereigns". Wasn't the French king -- or rather "Duke of France" -- merely "first among equals"?
At least the French peers should be as playable as the German stem duchies.
I thought the French monarchy (at least in its early days) was pretty much organized like the German monarchy. Just as a Duke of Saxony or Swabia could become King of Germany, displacing the Duke of Franconia, I don't think it would have been inconceivable if, say, the Duke of Aquitaine or Flanders became the French king, displacing the Duke of France.
Or was there an implicit constitutional clause that required that the French king always had to be the Duke of France?
IIRC, the County of Burgundy was made a Palatinate by Frederick I and given to his son Otto upon Empress Beatrice's death (1184).
Since Otto hadnt been declared of age and knighted yet, Barbarossa was his ward; so while Frederick I controlled the County in 1187, his 17-year-old son Otto was actually Count.
Last edited:
Well, that brings up the question of how the battle system will work. If it's like EU2, you load the game, hear the swords clanging and hope you win. If not, reload!
Yes! Starting 1187 the Albigensian Crusade was what? One generation away? Did the French south have a strong heretic presence already in 1187?
Havard, you´ve listed all the playables. What about Moslem and "Tribal/ Pagan" areas (e.g. Lithuania) - will these have complete AI-run dynasties or will they be "featureless" opponents? I.e. will the difference be merely one of playability rather than an essential difference? What happens when a Pagan dynasty becomes Christian - will they the suddenly become playable?
Am I going to get the NDA answer?
Many questions...Cheers,
Vandelay
The Albigensian crusade started off around 1209, the initial investigations some five years earlier...I believe the Cathars were quite numerous already in 1187, although not as much as 20 years later...
I have no idea...
Havard, you´ve listed all the playables. What about Moslem and "Tribal/ Pagan" areas (e.g. Lithuania) - will these have complete AI-run dynasties or will they be "featureless" opponents? I.e. will the difference be merely one of playability rather than an essential difference? What happens when a Pagan dynasty becomes Christian - will they the suddenly become playable?
Am I going to get the NDA answer?
Cheers,
Vandelay