Where have all the Barons gone

[Sentinel]

Playing Wales in Kingdom’s Britannia Campaign.

I occupy all provinces in Ireland and am now slowly working my way north on the mainland. I control all of the settlement south of Chester and Lincoln.

The Baron alliance control Lancaster, Carlisle and Newcastle.
The English have only York left and a few, full stack, armies hold up in forts.

When I took York, the last English settlement, I expected the usual “faction destroyed” message and their remaining armies / forts to turn rebel.

Instead, I got an “End of the old order” message. The remaining English armies stayed as English armies and all the Baron Alliance settlements and armies changed into English.
All reference to the Baron Alliance in the trend graph and diplomatic screens have disappeared.

Is this a Bug or is it supposed to happen?

[Rhedd]

Is this a Bug or is it supposed to happen?Take your pick, but it does happen. Every time.

I honestly don't mind the Alliance becoming England when it wins, because that's what essentially happens historically, but I do mind the fact that the "new" England keeps all of the political standings of the "old".

As Wales, I had a strong marriage alliance with the Barons, and we helped each other squash the nasty English royalists.

The moment the last English town was taken, my buddies (and in-laws) suddenly HATED me, and also suddenly had a long-standing alliance with Scotland, which we had all been fighting for the last hundred years.

The change of flags makes sense, but the change of diplomatic standing (or lack thereof) is insane.


On a slightly different but related subject, has anyone ever played England and gotten the Baron's uprising to happen?

I was reading another forum, and it pointed out an error in the campaign script that would make this completely impossible, and after a lot of testing and examination on my part, that seems to be correct. The script as it stands makes it impossible for the Barons to revolt.

Now, the thing is that with the vanilla script, I can't for the life of me figure out why they revolt when you're not playing England, which they provably do. The script should work the same for the AI and players.

So, again, has anyone played an unmodded game as England and gotten the Baron's to revolt?

[Boyar Son]

thats some smart thinking by CA!!!!

it logical, barons alliance defeats the king, now the Barons install the new english gov't

no bug!! just suprisingly well thought out!!

[Rhedd]

thats some smart thinking by CA!!!!

it logical, barons alliance defeats the king, now the Barons install the new english gov't

no bug!! just suprisingly well thought out!!Yep!

Except for, you know, the whole insane diplomacy thing.

[Sentinel]

Quote by Rhedd

I honestly don't mind the Alliance becoming England when it wins, because that's what essentially happens historically, but I do mind the fact that the "new" England keeps all of the political standings of the "old".

I agree.
In my current campaign I am a war with the Barons so the change in political stance is not that important. What is irritating is that this new English faction get to keep the forts and armies of the old English faction. This nearly doubles the forces that I will have to deal with.

One other interesting fact is that the new English faction has TWO kings and a faction heir. All of which were the leaders of the old English faction.
The leaders of the Barons faction are now merely generals in the new English faction.

Quote by Rhedd

So, again, has anyone played an unmodded game as England and gotten the Baron's to revolt?

My first Kingdom campaign was as the English. About turn 25 most of my provinces in Ireland suddenly changed to Barons Alliance. Also, later in the campaign any province that I let riot changed to baron Alliance. If I gave that province to another faction then created unrest it would go to rebels not Barons Alliance.

[DVX BELLORVM]

has anyone ever played England and gotten the Baron's uprising to happen?

Yes, I lost 2 settlements to the BA after rioting, and a 1 full stack army, including the general.

On topic, this kind of behavior is quite logical, when the "old" England falls, the rebel Baron's alliance take its position.

[WhiskeyGhost]

Maybe it's because most human players won't let their settlements fall into rebellion status (burning pitchforks and all). On the other hand, the AI will allow that to happen, or at the least get some odd perk to "balance" it out due to difficulty level (all assumption, i base my theories on observations, NOT facts, code, etc etc)

[Khan Krum]

It didn't happen in my campaign with Wales. At the time I defeated England, there were 3 or 4 towns owned by the Barons. Next turn I received message stating something that Baron Alliance has not purpose anymore (I'm not sure about the exact message) and all the baron's towns become rebels, so I took them easily.
In my campaign with England, I kept good order in the towns so Baron's rebellion has never happened.

[Sentinel]

I agree that there is certain logic to the creation of a new English faction after the old one falls.

What I fail to see is the logic that says -


The faction leader of the surviving Barons Alliance and his heir should be demoted to just generals in the new regime. They should be the leaders.


The king of the old English faction should still be the king of the new English faction.


That the old English faction heir is immediately promoted to be a second King of the new faction (this must be a bug. Two kings for one faction at the same time).


Two turns after these changes the second king dies (old English heir) and is immediately replaced by the new heir, maintaining two kings for this faction.


The political alignment defaults to that of the destroyed, old English, faction.