Why defeat the Jihad?

[nyah]

I had a new baby king take over after his father was assassinated and several faction independence rebellions followed. During one rebellion both the Sunni and Shia declared Jihad on me (one for Jerusalem, one for Andalusia). I defeated the rebellion and then won the Jerusalem jihad, and while waiting for the counter to tick up to 100% for the other Jihad I noticed that although there was a strong independence faction they didn't declare war. At one point it was at over 120%, and they surely had enough support to attack. I believe the reason they didn't attack was because of the penalty they get for declaring war on somebody defending against infidels. I allowed the Muslims to capture one holding and if I keep it like this then there will be no more rebellions. It seems a little gamey, but other than that I can't see any reason to recapture the holding and win the war, at least until I've got a decent long reign bonus.

On another note, the rebellion wasn't defeated, I ended it with a white-peace, but the leader of the faction was still imprisoned. I then revoked his duchy and banished him (his heir was also the heir to Scotland, and keeping him in place would have meant losing the rich duchy of Sicily). It doesn't seem right that a white peace should have sent him to prison.

 

[iehoa0083]

I think there are better ways to stop fractions from gaining enough power or rebelling against you than what you suggest though...

 

[perpetualmuse]

This is just yet another example of how the game mechanics are exploitable. There are all kinds of things like this that you can do, but they certainly don't make the game more fun and it's not challenging enough in single player as it is without making it easier.

 

[Bialaska]

It is similar to giving a county to a Shia or a Sunni when you are Christian and then when you are about to start a war, simply give the guy who already hates you because you are infidel and foreigner, the court jester and provoke him to rebel against you. Then quickly beat his single county up, but do not enforce peace or accept his, simply go to war on the other opponent. Because there is a civil war, you will not suffer raised vassal penalties, which means that even if the war lasts 50 years, you will not suffer war attrition.

 

[Sam L]

Very gamey. I don't like gamey stuff.

 

[Dracko81]

Lets all marry old women of great houses - after securing our hiers - so that everytime we get married we get prestige and cash.

Also alot of events do not trigger whilst wars are active.

 

[nyah]

Very gamey. I don't like gamey stuff.

Well yeah, that's the only real reason for not doing it. Anyway, it took a while for the counter to tick up and by the time it had most of the dissidents had been appeased, and the tyranny penalty I took for banishing the duke of Sicily earlier on had ended. So, I recaptured the holding and ended the war. It's strange though, throughout the war the Muslims only landed one or two stacks and only of about 12000 each, which I easily defeated. It seems strange that they should declare a Jihad which they were in no position to even stand a chance of winning.

I even checked to see if the faction leader had enough piety to take the penalty and he had plenty. I understand that the AI should be more reluctant to take a penalty like this, but it shouldn't prevent them from altogether from declaring on me.

 

[Sir Tornado]

It is similar to giving a county to a Shia or a Sunni when you are Christian and then when you are about to start a war, simply give the guy who already hates you because you are infidel and foreigner, the court jester and provoke him to rebel against you. Then quickly beat his single county up, but do not enforce peace or accept his, simply go to war on the other opponent. Because there is a civil war, you will not suffer raised vassal penalties, which means that even if the war lasts 50 years, you will not suffer war attrition.

It is not exactly gamey. All this has been done throughout history. In real life terms, you are really creating an external enemy/"enemy of the state" to unite internal factions. Bismarck created German Empire using a variation of this "gamey" behaviour when he sent the Ems Dispatch to provoke French to attack knowing other German states will unite and come to Prussia's aid if it is fighting a defensive war.

In WWI as well, one of the reasons why both French and Germany were in favour of going to war was to whip up national/patriotic frenzy and reverse the gains liberals were making in both the nations.