Principality of Antioch or Kingdom of Jerusalem?

[homefry]

I'm about to start up a Crusades campaign and really only play a campaign once with 1 faction.

I can't decide between these 2 factions.

What are the pros and cons of each and why would you pick one over the other?



BTW, I've looked through the unit planner for Jerusalem and I don't see how you can recruit the Constable of Jerusalem and Marshall of the Templars.

But I went through the export_descr_building file and I see you can recruit both units with a kings stables and earls stables. What's going on?


Earl's Stables

recruit_pool "Marshall of the Templars" 0 0.1 0.999 0 requires factions { jerusalem, }
recruit_pool "Constable of Jerusalem" 0 0.1 0.999 0 requires factions { jerusalem, }

Kings Stables

recruit_pool "Marshall of the Templars" 0 0.2 1.1 0 requires factions { jerusalem, }
recruit_pool "Constable of Jerusalem" 0 0.2 1.1 0 requires factions { jerusalem, }

[Robespierre]

Personally I think you should pick the Turks homefry. they are the bees knees. the infantry is top-class and the speedy hores archers catch any who run away. all their soldiers are allowed to remove their jumpers and loosen their ties in hot weather whereas the catholic crusader states shoulders are committed ideologically to wearing heavy woollen cloaks no matter what.

[PBI]

The two factions are very similar, but IIRC Jerusalem has slightly more powerful heavy cavalry, whereas Antioch is a bit more infantry-focussed. Otherwise I don't think there's really much difference.

As for the two units you mentioned, I believe they are unique units, i.e. only one can be in existence at any time. You start the campaign with them but cannot train any more, although you can retrain them to full strength. They are a pain to replace though, so make sure they never get wiped out completely.

[Henry707]

Just my opinion but I would go for Antioch. More scope to expand, better challenge & cooler uniforms...

Also the fantastic Krak de Chevaliers castle!!!

Henri

[Sentinel]

There is little difference between the units of these two factions.
They are both allies to each other and ememies to Egypt / Turks.
The main difference is in their geographical location. The Kingdom of Jerusalem is the easier faction to play, if you deal with Egypt early in the game. This will secure your south / west border and give you a good base from which to expand anticlockwise around the map.
The Kingdom of Antioch has the Turks to fight on two sides. Also it is usually the first port of call for the Mongol horde when it arrives.

[Andrei]

I've played all factions in crusades...but in this debate i would answer this...antioch was much more fun to play do to reasons stated above...mongol target, turks on both sides it's more thrilling but tends to get repetitive.

[CountMRVHS]

I've tried both, but haven't won with any faction in the Crusaders campaign... keep getting distracted by other things. A few days ago, though, I start up as Jerusalem, and THIS time for sure I'll see it through!

Playing on H/H and it's been a lot of fun. The Turks have left me alone entirely -- we even were trade partners for awhile until I was informed suddenly that we were at war... maybe they tried to assassinate one of my units? Anyway, I've had my hands full with Egypt. I can see how the KoJ *can* be an easy faction, in that you can corner the Egyptians, but on Hard the Egyptians start off sending lots and lots of troops for Ascalon and the rebel province to the south. The Mongols have emerged, and I'm still trying to finish off the Egyptians before I get attacked in the east.

Antioch would have more problems, potentially, with the Turks & Byz, and later with the Mongols, but I seem to remember that the Turks were fairly passive when I was playing Antioch. In my current game the Turks actually have some scary-looking units, like JHI, running around in big stacks.

If you do the long campaign, the KoJ will eventually have to go east, as Baghdad is a victory condition. So you won't just be fighting the Egyptians.

Of course the bigger factor is the faction colors. The Templars look brilliant in my battles, so I'm glad I went with them. And, as they have a bit more "heavy cav" focus than Antioch, the KoJ can really have some excellent cav-charge battles against the Egyptians or Turks.

[Privateerkev]

KoJ: Better cavalry, easier VC in my opinion.

PoA: Better infantry, harder VC in my opinion.

With 1.5 patch you can build KoJ's unique units in a King's Stables if your unique unit is dead.

[Quintus.JC]

Principality of Antioch - Home to the Hospitallers plus you get to train the Mighty Canon of the Holy Sepulchre

[Ferret]

I'd say KoJ, the fights in Egypt are epic.

[homefry]

Anybody see Kingdom of Heaven the movie?


Jerusalem is such an epic city with big significance that I'll probably play KOJ.

[Privateerkev]

Anybody see Kingdom of Heaven the movie?


Jerusalem is such an epic city with big significance that I'll probably play KOJ.

Four of your starting generals in KoJ are characters in the Kingdom of Heaven movie. Both the game and movie are based "loosely" on a real historical setting.

[homefry]

Four of your starting generals in KoJ are characters in the Kingdom of Heaven movie. Both the game and movie are based "loosely" on a real historical setting.

So I recognize the king (lepor king), Prince Guy, and Balain.

But who's the 4th guy supposed to be in the movie?


I'm about ready to do some role-playing and kill off Prince Guy so Balain can be king. :)

[Privateerkev]

So I recognize the king (lepor king), Prince Guy, and Balain.

But who's the 4th guy supposed to be in the movie?


I'm about ready to do some role-playing and kill off Prince Guy so Balain can be king. :)

Raymond of Tripoli is played by Jeremy Irons in the movie.

[Ferret]

shame they don't have cool avatars like in BC.

[Quintus.JC]

Anybody see Kingdom of Heaven the movie?


Jerusalem is such an epic city with big significance that I'll probably play KOJ.

Krak des Chevaliers is a epic castle. Headquarters of the Knight Hospitallers.