Who to play in India?

[Cidadd]

Mughals are a beast, they have awesome national ideas and once you form them you get permanent claims on all off India. It's a shame you don't keep the Horde can tho

 

[Reverend Belial]

Madurai for that Pandya dynasty swag (there is none but playing with the oldest dynasty in the world is it's own reward).

Katoch have them beat in that regard actually

 

[Duarte]

Katoch have them beat in that regard actually

the katoch are mentioned at the earliest in the 5th century BCE while the Pandyas are suposedly from the 6st BCE, though both dynasties seem to be mentioned in the same texts so for all we know they have the exact same age.

 

[Lord Finnish]

I like Bahmanis the most. Great flag, great colour, Shia, powerful but not OP powerful especially with the Vigs to the south.

 

[Thrake]

I'm thinking of Vijayanger or TImurids. Who do you suggest? Flavor is the most important factor for me, but easiness counts too.

Vijayanagar I'd say. They have the most flavour of all Indian states and it's the opportunity to play Hindu. They are more or less the strongest Indian nation and with their position they don't have much starting neighbours so no risk to get dogpiled fighting 3 wars at the same time.

Timurids have very few events, some of which are rebel events. Mughals have a few too and strong NI plus a decision for cheaper tech cost if memory serves right. A good share of those events are about Persia so you're not going to see them unless you did something wrong.

Timurids are stronger from start and only really threatened by Qara Qoyunlu (while Vijaya can be challenged by several Muslim states) but the whole shia rebels in mountains can bleed your manpower like nothing and both your starting king and heir are lancaster level.