Every crusade in every game I played (plenty of those) failed. Every. Mosly because armies are split and Muslims fight with few hundred soldiers at once. Countries should just contribute their troops for papacy instead of commanding them...
Why do the Muslims always win Crusades again?
- Thread starter unmerged(569711)
- Start date
-
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.
And who were you playing as? Who participated in those crusades and how much did they commit? where you participating as well? on whic side?
I actually won crusades as a wide variety of rulers. Every king out there can win a crusade in 60% of situations, regardless of other lords. Every Emperor can win a crusade singlehandedly. Most dukes can win a crusade with smart tactics and a bit of luck. You just need to prepare and actually get into the fight.
Very much this. The pope has an uncanny knack for calling crusades in the middle of HRE & French civil wars, then wondering why nobody turns up. Especially when its run against a rock-solid Fatamids, allied to the Seljuks (One doomstack is bad. Two is...really bad)
It is all random. If the big catholic realms aren't in civil or other wars they will join and half the time win.
If they are at wars they won't join it will be all small realms and if only a dozen join they will probably not win.
And it depends on holy orders if there are 2-3 holy orders Catholics have an even playing field. If not the Muslim's have more troops and higher tech.
So there are so many different factors in each individual game that no two games are the same. There might be the same end result of the crusades but all the factors in why it ended that way are different and unique to that particular game.
If they are at wars they won't join it will be all small realms and if only a dozen join they will probably not win.
And it depends on holy orders if there are 2-3 holy orders Catholics have an even playing field. If not the Muslim's have more troops and higher tech.
So there are so many different factors in each individual game that no two games are the same. There might be the same end result of the crusades but all the factors in why it ended that way are different and unique to that particular game.
I haven't been having this problem. In fact I have seen the HRE and France taking a more active role in Holy Wars and Crusades than in 1.06. Can you be a little less vague about who you are playing as, who is participating in the Crusade, and what the target is?
I think it makes sense that they are failing so often; all of the logistical and money problems are recorded in the history books. I think the only problem is the Fatimids, but we all know about that. Something that I think would be a great change, however, is if moral authority would enhance the power of the holy orders. Thus, simulate the power, money and men being drawn to the cause as a region gains power.
Of course, at the end of the day, it all comes down to whether the Fatimids join in the fight or not. Because those guys just ROFLstomp any crusader army stupid enough to cross the Mediterranean.
Even when the Pope hits the perfect timing, it may not help. My latest game saw the first crusade (for Fatimid controlled Sicily) fail even though the Fatimids were up to their neck in their invasion of Greece. Not sure of the actual percentage (I wasn't part of the crusade), but they must have been close, until the destruction of the ERE. Then, it was all over in the blink of an eye. Worst part was, they pulled in three kings (though neither France nor England), and the Kaiser. All this while I'm playing in the ERE...
Still, I'd say that's not a universal thing. I've seen more than a few crusades succeed, especially when the timing is good. So many variables go into it, though. Did the ERE win their first wars? Has Iberia fallen? Keeps things interesting, except when you get 4-5 games of uber Fatimid blobbing in a row...
They often already do that, most crusading dukes just follow what's left of the pope's initial army.
I had a crusade for Egypt launched after Jerusalem de-jure drifted. It was the first crusade of the game and the Fatmids were revolting against their new liege who had won the kingdom (the fatmid guy was still caliph interestingly enough). I dropped my doom stack onto the Egyptian coast and proceeded to support the papal army in taking control of the region.
The main problem is most of the major AI Catholics do not join the crusade. England, France, the HRE and Iberia are all quite often absent from the fight, leaving about 10k troops from various duchies. The only major player is the papal states itself, which can often raise 20k+ troops to assist as long as the game has already been going long enough for the pope to be the richest man in the world.
As a country that can raise 20k+ troops (my 40k with holy orders was overkill) you can easily win the crusade just by diving onto the papal army when it gets attacked by the defenders troops.
The problem is the balance is hard to get right as France joining a crusade can pretty much win it straight off, if you have a mega AI like the HRE or Hispania(which forms in most of my games) then Islam just rolls over and accepts its demise.
If the crusaders win Iberia and Egypt before Islam takes over the ERE (which rarely happens) then its GG and the game stops being crusader kings and starts being a race to see which catholic country can swallow the most territory before the game ends.
The main problem is most of the major AI Catholics do not join the crusade. England, France, the HRE and Iberia are all quite often absent from the fight, leaving about 10k troops from various duchies. The only major player is the papal states itself, which can often raise 20k+ troops to assist as long as the game has already been going long enough for the pope to be the richest man in the world.
As a country that can raise 20k+ troops (my 40k with holy orders was overkill) you can easily win the crusade just by diving onto the papal army when it gets attacked by the defenders troops.
The problem is the balance is hard to get right as France joining a crusade can pretty much win it straight off, if you have a mega AI like the HRE or Hispania(which forms in most of my games) then Islam just rolls over and accepts its demise.
If the crusaders win Iberia and Egypt before Islam takes over the ERE (which rarely happens) then its GG and the game stops being crusader kings and starts being a race to see which catholic country can swallow the most territory before the game ends.
Strangely (and amusingly) enough, in my last Sicily game the Kingdom of England won a Crusade for Andalusia and about fifty years later the King of Ireland inherited a surprisingly powerful Kingdom of Galicia/Castille. I've been pleasantly surprised with how well Ireland can do lately.
I'm in an even situation. Lost the first two crusades, won the other two (with me involved only in name, never ever sent troops). It seems fair and balanced to me.
I'd rant about the lowborn spam instead, but that's another story...
I'd rant about the lowborn spam instead, but that's another story...
Well- 1 crusade was won and I indeed participated. But usually I was juz observer (playing as Poland, Byzantium or some minor catholic). Crusades always lose, no matter what- they don't know how to behave properly and usually die from attrition.
I haven't seen a crusade against the Muslims in awhile, but then my most recent games have had the Muslims and Catholics falling to heresy, I've had more crusades declared against myself. Though they have lost all of those 
I'm currently playing a game as the Duke of Anjou (+half of France), and it has been quite rare for me in that only about two crusades have been called. I'm at about 1205, and usually by now we will have seen at least four or five (which is actually probably more accurate historically, but what can you do? ). This, I think, only adds to the idea that the Pope mechanics are to blame. In my games there seems to be an abundance of Crusades for places like Marrakesh (the holy Christian city that is...) or Sicily (again, a very important place in Christianity.) It seems to me that the game just picks a Muslim-occupied area and goes for it. Some more thought could be added to it, for example, only declaring against states in the Levant or surrounding area. We could perhaps also see development of Crusading itself (for example, negative opinion modifiers with the Pope for 'passively Crusading' (see Frederick II)), but that's for another day...
). This, I think, only adds to the idea that the Pope mechanics are to blame. In my games there seems to be an abundance of Crusades for places like Marrakesh (the holy Christian city that is...) or Sicily (again, a very important place in Christianity.) It seems to me that the game just picks a Muslim-occupied area and goes for it. Some more thought could be added to it, for example, only declaring against states in the Levant or surrounding area. We could perhaps also see development of Crusading itself (for example, negative opinion modifiers with the Pope for 'passively Crusading' (see Frederick II)), but that's for another day...
Crusades in history were an incredibly risky proposition that basically only worked out by a combination of stupendous good look and hilarious poor management on behalf of the Fatimids/muslims (at least to my understanding). Usually the Fatimids should win because, both historically and in the game, the just care a lot more than the Europeans, especially after a few decisive engagments (holding territory against invaders VS maybe grabbing land for some random duke of HRE)
To be fair, something like half the crusades didn't even reach the Holy Land until after crazy Venician-shenanigans. In fact, as far as I'm concerned, their were only two (semi) successful crusades: The First and the Third. And the First wasn't even supposed to BE in the Holy Land. Bu hey, what can ya do?
they seem hit and miss, one time I saw the Fatimids at full strength just roll over and do nothing.
in another game the Fatimids actively fought but it was mainly a ducal and papal affair, the only king that joined was France and he soon got busy fighting England. thank god for mercenaries (when the crusade ended all the mercenary companies were hired by crusade participants)
yet in a game yesterday the Crusade despite HRE and French participation fell flat and all forces were destroyed piecemeal. A later crusade for Aragon was a success however.
in another game the Fatimids actively fought but it was mainly a ducal and papal affair, the only king that joined was France and he soon got busy fighting England. thank god for mercenaries (when the crusade ended all the mercenary companies were hired by crusade participants)
yet in a game yesterday the Crusade despite HRE and French participation fell flat and all forces were destroyed piecemeal. A later crusade for Aragon was a success however.
In my last game, I was HRE, gathered my stack of Doom (175k)to fight the Timurids.(late game 1390's)some how the pope and ducal contingents get warscore to 50%.i fight the timurid doomstack (138k) and lose all of my army to last man, timmies take about 10% casualties and next day surrender to Pope.i become king of Jerusalem.