Wrong starting kings

[Tepes]

I know that this subject isn't supposed to be on this forum, but I wonder if has anybody observed that the kings that some factions get at the start are historically incorrect.
For example, the Germans in Early have Conrad II, but in real history his reign ended in 1039. In 1087 the real HR Emperor was Heinrich IV.
And the Byzantines in High got Constantine XI, while the correct choice would have been Theodor I Lascaris (emperor between 1204-1222).
And there may very well be other such examples.
My question is, how did the creators of the game decided the starting kings for each factions and if there are any intentions or possibilities of solving these mistakes?
If anyone thinks that I'm wrong and that the game's version in historically correct, please tell me.

[PseRamesses]

Quote[/b] (Tepes @ Feb. 19 2004,18:07)]My question is, how did the creators of the game decided the starting kings for each factions and if there are any intentions or possibilities of solving these mistakes?

Well, the game is sadly enough not perfect in a historical sense and the kings-lists are inaccurate. Since the game is created to let YOU change history everything starts out as it should mostly but then you start interfering and making your own history right?
BUT you can actually mod this yourself. Beware though not to get your kings and heirs killed in battles because then YOU will have changed history and made it incorrect.

[RZST]

w00t, notice the armies are also somehow perfectly aligned? and somehow they carry this bigger than life banner that just seems to float out of nowhere O.o notice theres also a giant pointer in the battlefield that hovers around faster than you can say smack my biatch up

very weird indeed.

[Brutal DLX]

I don't think that level of sarcasm in the previous reply is justified. Tepes made a good observation and asked a serious question.

Yes, the starting kings are incorrect, what you could do is look into the Dungeon forum here on the .org in order to find out how you can edit the starting kings. I believe this should be doable without going to great lengths. Default heroes.txt and startpos files will probably need to be edited.
As for why these inconsistencies are in the game, it may be due to another planned starting date, I can't recall the devs stating anything about this issue, mainly because I can't remember it being brought up before.

[o_loompah_the_delayer]

I agree the sarciness is unnecessary - if you play England in High for example you start of with that idiot Edward II but never get what should be a great heir in Edward III (and then the Black Prince), but this isnt like Shogun anyway none of the heirs are historical in terms of births/dates/names - afterall with all the princesses buzzing around you would never get the right mothers/ wives.

[RZST]

meh.
i have lot of little annoyances with the game too but i dont go around asking questions i know wont be answered, mtw has been out for like what...2-3 years now right? probably the developers arent even looking back at mtw since theyre busy with rtw.
mtw isnt even a harcore simulation game, maybe crusader kings will be more to the authors liking but...ah f00k it. i was a mean s.o.b. so sorry...i guess.