Age of Vikings and Fanatics: Total war

[Spongly]

Ok, I have only just begun the research, so your help is very welcome. Should scots and picts really be a single faction too?

Yep, they should be called "The Kingdom of Alba" really. The Picts don't really disappear so much as they and the DalRiadan Scots unite into a single kingdom, in fact originally under the King of the Picts, Cinaed MacAlpin. The issue of language is a weird one - both people seem to have spoken Gaelic by this point, possibly under the influence of the Church in the area.

As to religion, the Picts were actually probably Christian from about the year 400 onwards. Bede tells us that St Ninian was the first to convert them.

[The Apostate]

I am quite happy to join the team as a researcher.

Did my degree in history specialising in late antiquity and early medieval period and have a big library covering the period.

Am particularly knowledgeable on the Byzantine and Viking worlds, less so on Islam.

No skill whatsoever as a modeller/skinner but am happy with changing the data export files so can help out there.

General comments:

Magyars in 843 are pagan and remain so until 1000.

Bulgars are also pagan but christianised in 867.

The Danes, Poles and Rus (which is a better term than Novgorod) were still Pagan in 843 and remained so til the later 10th century.

It is highly debatable how Jewish the Khazars were - certainly some of their khagans were converted but the great majority of the population were either Pagan, Muslim or Christian - however I do love the idea of building synagogues...

Conversion is thus a big issue in this period and as there is no way the AI will ever switch religions you will end up with half of your factions starting and remaining pagan.

This is fine if you want a short campaign with lots of different pagan temples to add variety.

However if you want the mod to be open-ended and allow development into the High Middle Ages you would be much better starting at 1000 - at which point almost everyone but the peoples around the Baltic have converted.

While 843 is an era of fragmentation, in 1000 you have much more solid and organised states (although Bulgaria would have to go - disappearing in 1014).

You also have no Fatimids in 843 and pretty much the whole Muslim world except for al-Andalus is part of the Abassid Caliphate - which the AI being what it is will end up swallowing everything just as Egypt does in RTW - whereas in 1000 you have Abassid, Fatimid and Umayyad Caliphates each of which is of roughly equal power.

Re map I can't see much value in including the North Atlantic and Northern Scandinavia - which will just be dead space - just as much of the north and east of the RTW map is.

Personally prefer the Europa Barbarorum or Rome Total Realism maps which do not go as far north but do include Persia - where a lot more of interest is happening.

With an eastern-stretched map you also get to include the Turks as opponents for the Byzantines (again in 843 these are a minor confederation of tribes in Central Asia but in 1000 they control an empire covering much of Persia and the Indus Valley).

Don't think the papacy should be a state in this period (for much of it the Popes were corrupt puppets of the Roman nobility) and of course the Lombard League does not come into existence until the late-1100's (in 843 North Italy was part of the short-lived kingdom of Lotharingia which stretched from Rome to the North Sea and which represents another problem for an 843 start as it disintegrates within a generation).

Will you have a Marian reform event? - strikes me that the transition to the couched lance and crossbow which occurred in the early-mid 11th century would fit this (i.e. before the reform Frankish armies have relatively weak cavalry, after it they have real knights as well as crossbows and a better range of siege equipment - OTOH the Byzantines at about the same time would lose much of their Thematic troops and become more dependant on mercenaries).

[tutankamon]

Hi great idea.. but why have you listed the Danes as a chatholic nation as I recall we didn't become real chatholic until 1099!

[Spongly]

As far as religion goes, could you not implement conversion in some other way?

For example, pagan temples give you various benefits, but after a fixed time period (like the Marian reform event) you get the option to build churches if you demolish the temples...the churches should give you big benefits to running a well organised and wealthy state in this period, so there should be some political incentive to convert....

[Rodion Romanovich]

As far as religion goes, could you not implement conversion in some other way?

For example, pagan temples give you various benefits, but after a fixed time period (like the Marian reform event) you get the option to build churches if you demolish the temples...the churches should give you big benefits to running a well organised and wealthy state in this period, so there should be some political incentive to convert....

I don't know about that. Aren't marian reforms triggered in all "roman" factions simultaneously? I haven't really though about marian reforms much for this mods, but this idea of yours seems interesting - perhaps possible to include.

[Rodion Romanovich]

Hi great idea.. but why have you listed the Danes as a chatholic nation as I recall we didn't become real chatholic until 1099!

Sorry for that mistake, they'll be pagan in the mod

[Rodion Romanovich]

After some thinking I've come to the conclusion that I should probably try to add it so that factions can get their religion converted at different dates. Once I've fixed the campaign map and some of the basic unit editing I'll start looking at such features that would definitely add a unique flavor to this mod. But I'm eager to get a campaign map and some test units up quickly, I think it's easier to experiment once those basic details have been fixed.

[Rodion Romanovich]

Here's a temporary province and city list, The Apostate. In case you confirm your interest in helping with this mod, this is the first project I need help with from a historian. These things will be easy to change later even if I start coding with incorrect info here, but it'd be great to have an as accurate list as possible to start from when modelling the campaign map, to save work time etc.

Many of these cities were officially founded later than 843 but one can in some cases assume there were minor villages/towns in the area before that, however, other cities in these areas might have been of greater importance at the time, so the ones I've picked will probably in many cases have to be changed. I've also used much modern spelling for these names, I think it'd be better to use the old spelling if it's possible to find the old, local spelling and names for all these provinces and cities. I've written the list in this format: province_name - settlement_name, comments. We'll also need to fill the list with data regarding whether each settlement will be village,town, large town, city or large city from the start of the mod, as well as what resources and farm level the province should have.

NORWAY AREA
* Central Norway - Kaupang (position close to Oslo but further down the fiord)
* Trondelag - Trondheim
* Lofoten (both islands and part of the mainland, which is where Narvik is situated) - Narvik
* Northern Norway - Tromso
* Hafrsfjord (rebels) - Nord-Jaeren / Stafangr
* Finnmark (rebels) - Kirkenes, situated next to Barents Sea and modern Russian border

SWEDEN AREA
* Roslagen - Sigtuna
* Upland - Upsala
* Ostgothia - Visingso - BETTER CITY NEEDED (visingso is a small island in the lake in that province, whose southern part was used as a fortress - therefore not exactly a good settlement for this province)
* Waestrogothia - Skara
* Gotland - Visby - VISBY NOT BUILT AS AN OFFICIAL CITY AT THIS TIME, but one can assume there was a village/town there. It'll be a province poor in farming and trade of course, as it historically was until the time before the Hansa/Hanse (spelling?).
* Smaland - Kalmar - BETTER CITY NEEDED. THE PROVINCE IS HERE AS FOR STRATEGIC REASONS, TERRAIN IS HEAVY FOREST ETC. because this piece of land shouldn't be part of the Swedish holdings from start. The province name is also a modern one, a better suited old one would be appreciated.
* Samland? - ? - ALSO HERE FOR STRATEGIC REASONS. Any city or village name can do, preferably a city far to the north. This is the northernmost part of
* Halland? - ? - BETTER NAME NEEDED FOR THIS PROVINCE AT THIS TIME. I was considering to use Loedoese (Lödöse) as settlement for the province - at this time. I believe it was a minor trading center in Sweden through the rivers leading from Vaenern (Vänern), so it has stratetic significance even though it's importance might have been reduced later, when the leaders of Waestrogothia strengthened their control over the coastal area south of it and got better ways to the sea from Vaenern?

DENMARK AREA
* Skane - Lund - DON'T SURE IF SKANE WAS CALLED SKANE BACK THEN, AND THE CITY LUND WAS FOUNDED LATER, but one can assume there was at least some sort of settlement in the area. Better, older name for the settlement and province probably needed. Perhaps Lund wasn't among the more significant cities in this area either, so I'm open to better suggestions for settlement name for this province, that constitutes the southernmost part of modern Sweden.
* Zealland - Roskilde (the dot on the map is correctly located now)
* Holseta Land / or Nordfriesland? (in modern Schleswig-Holstein area) - Haithabu / or Hedeby, was the largest nordic city of the viking age according to my sources, therefore it should be a quite big city and not just a town or village.
* North Jutland (northern Jutland) - Viborg - better province perhaps name needed. Settlement will perhaps have good fortifications from start.
* East Jutland (better province name needed, East Jutland is an incorrect representation) - Jelling/Jellinge (the city dot is now correctly located)

ICELAND AREA
* Iceland - Reyjkjavik (village/town) - only one province, so name Iceland is given. However I'm not sure about existence of Reyjkjavik at that time, or the spelling for that part...

IRELAND AREA
I was planning to use the province names below, which are the same as the parts of modern Ireland. I believe it's the best way to split up Éire, because the borders of the viking-conquered areas were almost the same. For example Thorgest will own Ulster and Connacht from start. I'm not entirely sure about the cities though, especially not for Ulster, where I haven't even made any suggestion.
* Ulster - ?, I have no idea what city we should use for this province?
* Connacht (western Ireland) - Limerick (town)
* Leinster (southeast Ireland) - Dubh Linn (town)
* Munster (southwest Ireland) - Cork (village/town)

FINLAND AND BALTICUM AREA
* Karelia (west of Lake Ladoga but not blocking Baltic port for Novgorod province) - ?, I think Finland should be split up into more than one province because of the viking focus of the mod. This will of course be compensated by very low farm income etc. for each of the provinces - conquering them will probably require almost as much garrison cost as it'll contribute to economy.
* Finland (rest of Finland, pretty much) - ?, better name perhaps needed for province. Settlement needed.
* Soumissalmi - ? (village) Where does this place lie? I just heard the name, not sure where it is though. Is this a part of northern Finland? For strategical reasons I'd like to have Finland represented by 3 provinces - Finland, Karelia (with corrections if historical data contradicts these names etc.) and one more to the north.
* Livonia (Estonia and Latvia area) - ?, settlement name needed.
* Lithuania - ?, settlement name needed.

RUSSIA AREA
* Novgorod - Novgorod
* Kiev - Kiev
* Smolensk - ? WHERE PUT SMOLENSK? ACCORDING TO MY SOURCES BULGARIANS AIDED SMOLYANS VS THE BYZANTINES, aren't smolyans the people of Smolensk? Shouldn't that mean Smolensk is close to Bulgaria area? But M:TW map suggests they're further to the north... Help needed!
* Volga-Bulgaria - ?, settlement name needed
* Muscovy - not sure about this one, should it be included? Perhaps better provinces for steppes and Russia area should be used.
* 1 or 2 provinces probably needed between Kiev and Constantinople for Pechenegs and other tribes that had some significance in the area. I can't come up with a good province plan for that area though. Also see East Europe Area below...

STEPPES AREA
* The Crimea - ?, city needed
* Khazar - ?, city needed
* Georgia - ?, city needed
* ...other steppe provinces not planned, needs to be done. Khazar should own several provinces, not just one, so a good, historically relevant splitting up of the area into 1-3 provinces would be good

EAST EUROPE AREA
Many of these need an appropriate city (not sure about provinces either - especially not the Greece area):
* Volhynia? - ?
* Poland - ?
* Prussia? - ?
* Wallachia
* Carpathia
* Bulgaria - Bolgar
* Moldavia
* Macedonia - ?
* Athens? - ?
* Pelopponesse? - ?
* Croatia - ?
* Serbia - ?
* Hungaria? - ? - probably not good province name as hungarians were magyars then, or?
* Austria - ? also probably not very good...
* Bohemia - ?

GERMANY AREA
Same here (not sure about provinces either):
* Saxony - ?
* Pomerania?
* Bavaria - ?
* Swabia? - ?
* Tyrolia? - ?
* Switzerland? - ?
* Friesland? - ?
* Franconia? - ?

WALES AREA
Not very thoroughly researched, but here's a list of some provinces chosen from the M:TW-VI map. A total of 3 provinces is IMO perfect for the game representation of this area, but I don't know if I chose the best 3 provinces:
* Pouis? - ?
* Clwyd? - ?
* Guent? - ?

SCOTLAND AREA
Same as for Wales here...
* Dal riada (western Scotland) - ?
* Moray (northern Scotland) - ?
* Athfotla (middle Scotland) - ?
* Cyil (soutwest Scotland) - ?
* Fib (southern Scotland) - ?

ENGLAND AREA
Same as for Wales here, although I've slightly more control here I think (ahem... hope... ):
* Northumbria - ? (northwest England)
* Beornice - York (east England)
* Mierce/Mercia - ? (middle England)
* West seaxe - ?
* Suth seaxe (southeast of West seaxe)
* Middle seaxe (below Mercia)
* East engle (east England south of Beornice)
* Cerniu - southwest England (is this one supposed to be Welsh-owned from start by the way?)

SPAIN AREA
these need to be checked too. Should Catalonia be a separate province or should I expand Aragon slightly? Which of the cities should I choose for Leon? The latter would be more strategically fun due to it's position at the coast, far away from the other provinces. Which provinces should be owned by Al Andalus and which by Kingdom of Asturia from start?
* Navarre - Pamplona (city)
* Leon - Leon, or Santiago de Compostela
* Portugal - Lissabon
* Andalusia - Sevilla
* Cordoba - Cordoba
* Granada - Granada
* Valencia - Valencia
* Castile - Toledo
* Catalonia - Barcelona
* Aragon - Zaragosa

FRANCE AREA
These provinces need so thorough checking... I did this way too quickly...
* Aquitaine - Bordeaux?
* ? - Orleans
* Ile de France? - Paris?
* Champagne - ?
* Burgundy - ?
* Normandy - ? I wouldn't mind having Normandy represented by more than 1 province in order to strengthen the normans somewhat, but I don't know what those provinces would be called then.
* Britanny - ?
* Flanders - ?
* Alsace - ?
* Toulouse - ?
* Provence - ?
* Lorraine? - ?

ITALY AREA
* Genoa - Genoa
* Venice - Venice
* Milan - Milan
* Tuscany - Florence
* Naples - (byzantine-controlled I believe) Naples
* Sicily (rebels) - Palermo?
* Papal states - Rome (owned by Pope)

NORTH AFRICA AREA
* Morocco - ?
* Algeria - ?
* Tunisia - Tunis
* Sahara - ?
* Libya - Tripoli
* Cyrenaica? - Barka
* Western Egypt - Siwa?
* Nile delta - Alexandria (large city)
* Egypt - Cairo (city) - better name probably needed. Entire Egypt area needs to be fixed, I think.
* Nubia/Abyssinia - ? (town) - although the map won't reach down to Nubia it'd probably be best to have a nubia province. Why? Because in order to get Nubia I'd have to move southern edge of map down and add LOADS of useless desert to the west. By having a fake Nubia a little too far north you can still make them affect the gameplay. However your historical expertise will have to decide if they're important enough to make it worth including them this way. My intention for the province was to have it as only recruit zone for abyssinian guard and/or nubian mercenaries and normally recruitable troops.
* Sinai - ?

ASIA MINOR AREA
* Constantinople - Constantinople (large city)
...the rest not planned yet... Georgia planned though (see steppes provinces). Need help here in order to know which provinces and cities were most important at the time.

MIDDLE EAST AREA
? Not planned yet, but Jerusalem and Antioch will be included. Baghdad also, of course. Province Arabia should have either Mecka or Medina as city, probably Medina unless we want to move the city slightly more north than it in reality is - something I personally don't mind for this or for Nubia, but you might not and besides if we can choose Medina and have it in correct position that's probably better. It also comes down to which city would have most significance at the time. Mecka was of course of religious importance but how were the two in terms of economical/strategical importance? Which one should be on the map to represent Arabia? I believe Mosul should also be one of the cities included in this area. Damascus too.

MEDITERRANEAN ISLANDS
* Baliares - ?
* Corsica - ?
* Sardinia - ?
* Siciliy - ?
* Cyprus - ?
* Crete - ?
* Rhodes - ?

This counts for a total of 123 provinces, plus approximately 20 in the areas that have not yet been planned.

I'll below post the map so we can discuss redrawing of some borders and you can download and draw notes on it in Paint or something to aid the discussion of these provinces and settlements. Put a black pixel for a settlement and a white pixel for a port. A province can be marked by either a red line around the province or by coloring the entire province in a unique color, then I'll understand what you mean.

[skeletor]

I ton't think you shuld use Oslo as a city. At startingdate, it was only a village (Oslo is celebrating it's 1000nd year this year. The largest city in this area war Kaupang (located a bit further down the fjord, on the west shore).
Kaupang was presumably the largest tradecenter in Norway before 1000ad.

google Kaupang

-Skel-

[The Apostate]

Some thoughts on conversion:

What we need for the Norwegians, Danes, Swedes, Rus and Magyars are tech tree that are pagan at the lower levels and christian at the higher.

So is it possible to have say temples to Odin at levels 1-3 but a Christian Mission at level 4?

Higher level military and economic would also be made dependant on the Christian Mission being built.

i.e. without conversion the pagans stay at the same restricted levels as barbarians in RTW and with it they can get access to the same stuff as Christian feudal states.

While on the subject some more variety to Christian buildings would be nice - Churches dedicated to Saints and Monastic orders would give different types of bonuses (yeah I know these are all fantasy elements but are still worth considering).

For instance the famous shrine to St Michael the Archangel at Monte Gargano in Southern Italy attracted Norman pilgrims who ultimately set up a state there.

You could either have this as a wonder (The Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem, Grand Mosques of Damascus and Cordoba, Hagia Sophia at Constantinople, St James at Compostoella and St Peters at Rome could be the other wonders) or as a church that can only be built in a province with a hidden resource of St Michael - so you can't have cathedrals of St Michael turning out +3 exp troops all over Europe.

Sts George and Demetrius fulfilled a similar role as warrior saints in the orthodox world (in fact most of our depictions of Byzantine soldiers are actually depictions of the these saints and of old testament kings)

Benedictine monasteries would also give agricultural bonuses, Marian churches fertility bonuses etc.

[Rodion Romanovich]

I'm still a little dubious about the starting date. Going as far as 911 is a little too much in my opinion. The fact that Normandy didn't exist until 911 is a minor inaccuracy if the mod starts in say ~880 AD or after - at least compared to the inaccuracies caused by AI and game mechanics. However, Normandy is probably too far out of the time frame in the 843 AD, so therefore I agree the starting date should be slighly later, but not be moved as far as to 911 AD. If you can find an interesting date around 850-900 that would make sense to have as a starting date, I'd like that.

Some replies to your list of reasons:
1-3. The lack of unity for the Scandinavian factions is imo a bonus, as it gives them a challenging start. Regarding not yet founded settlements, I see that as a minor problem if they were historically founded shortly after the starting date. Some approximations have to be done with the starting situation, or it'll pay back as a more inaccurate situation later in the game. I'm of the opinion that things that happened shorter than 50 years after the starting date aren't necessarily bad to have included from start.

Re AI not being able to send fleets, I've actually seen use of fleets from several AI factions in vanilla R:TW. One of the tricks is to have some rebel territories up for grabs in the British isles area, another trick, that could be relevant for the Danes, would be to have them own one province in the British isles from start - that'll make them want to reinforce their hold there.

4-7 The reason why I wanted scots, irish, welsh and saxons despite their inferior military strength compared to for example Byzantines and French in this period, was because a. gameplay-wise it's fun to have some really weak factions mixed with the stronger in order to grant a challenge to better players, b. the focus was on British isles. Even though Welsh were weak and mostly not united, I like the idea of having the ability to play them.

8 Normandy - I agree 843 was a bit too early. A compromise between 843 and 911 would be the best imo.

9 Rus - A strong Rus gives a strange balance imo. AI will expand far too quickly and perhaps also try to attack Scandinavia, which will then probably lose. Having a small Novgorod culture centered mostly around Novgorod will probably work better with AI, and make them more challenging to play. Still, they'll be relatively strong compared to the Swedish who are by then not united, and the Danes and Norwegians will prefer moving west so the Rus will be weak but still not likely to be conquered but instead grow steadily through the game. I think that's a better reflection of them - a growing empire in the 9th century than an overpowered dynasty (that will tend to conquer too much land) in the 10th century.

10-12 Magyars, Khazars, Bulgars religions. I explained this above, the magyar conversion however being too late to have from start if we start in 843 AD. Adding a conversion event, if that's at all possible, would solve all this. If we move the starting date to my newly suggested ~880 AD we'd still obtain the best results game mechanics-wise by letting Bulgars be orthodox, Magyars be pagan and Khazars be jewish. Around 880 AD I also believe Hungary have moved further into the northern Balkans area than in 843 AD. Having them as a too strong power from start would probalby upset balance.

13 Poles, the faciton limit can't allow including the Poles. Also, the first Polish kingdom fell pretty quickly, so Polish can't be in the mod, no matter what time we choose. Even though they were more important than the Welsh, I'm afraid I can't accept removing the Welsh, due to the Viking focus. I've already removed Mercians and Northumbrians among others up there.

14-16 Muslim States - I believe there are two choices for around 843 and 880: Al Andalus + Abbassids, or Fatimids + Abbassids. If we move far forward Abbassids would be Mamluks. I think I prefer Al Andalus + Abbassids, but it's just a matter of taste. I actually like having a "Spanish" Asturia too, just because they started in a hard position and they'd be fun to play. Besides, most muslim factions would have a similar fighting styles in many ways, so including some Iberian peninsula catholic faction would add variety.

17 Italians - After looking at those maps I've decided to replace Lombards with Lotharingia. Lotharingia will have little control and high unrest etc. in their northern provinces but good strength in modern northern Italy. That will be an accurate depiction of the decline and fall of the middle part of the Frankish empire.

18 Byzantines - I actually prefer having the Byzantines as a weak but rising power, for balance reasons. After all they already have the impregnable Constantinople from start. I know about the Iconoclasm and heretics etc., but 843 AD was the end of some of these problems and my sources claim it's approximately after 843 AD that the Byzantines enter their "golden age".

21 Rome - I'll make the pope pretty weak in the mod. "If you're stuck woth the Senate-Family relationship I suppose you can make the Julii France, Brutii Germany and Scipii Italy in which case they won't attack each other (which is not historically accurate) and the conquest of Rome is equivalent to the same event in RTW" - Yes, that's probably what I'd do.

[Rodion Romanovich]

Some thoughts on conversion

As I said I'm still not sure conversion is possible to implement. I'll do some research on the subject first, so perhaps we shouldn't yet waste time on planning for a system WITH conversion. Just using a tech tree will still keep the culture penalty when conquering settlements from Christians, and also probably make all new buildings still show up as for example "church (pagan)" just like in vanilla R:TW: "muster field (barbarian)" etc. unless we can find some script or something that can change culture for a faction.

While discussing religion and buildings I might as well post most of my tech tree plans so far. I haven't planned anything for Khazars or Magyars yet, these are still half-generic building trees mostly centered around the catholic factions.

NOTE! MOST UNITS MENTIONED BELOW (FOR MILITARY BUILDINGS) ARE GENERIC PLACEHOLDERS! FOR MOST FACTIONS THEY'LL NEED TO BE REPLACED BY UNIQUE UNITS. PLEASE DON'T MISUNDERSTAND ME AND THINK I MEAN THESE UNITS WILL BE EXACTLY THE FINAL UNITS WHICH WILL BE TRAINED IN THESE BUILDINGS!

RELIGION RELATED BUILDINGS
======================
- Main ideas: All faction have temples or similar which grant a happiness bonus. The pagan factions also have different temple types which will grant different boni. Choosing to honor a certain God in a certain province means locking the ability of honoring another God in that very province. Most factions will have one or more "fanatic" units, which will be trained in one of their holy buildings.

- Vikings: three Gods to choose between (and what boni they grant apart from the happiness): Odin (+morale, +xp, enable training of berserkers), Thor (+armor +weapons), Freya (+population growth). Vikings can also keep public order up by the happiness created by a "tavern", which can then be upgraded to a "mead hall".

- Catholics: chapel (no boni except happiness), church (+1 xp, +5% law), cathedral (+much happiness, +1 morale, enable training of catholic fanatics - clubmen?). Church will also unlock "monastery", which grants some extra happiness and is cheaper than cathedral. Perhaps monastery could be replaced by monasteries of diffent types, in case the game mechanics allow for it. There's a maximum of 60 different building series, so if there's room after we've planned the rest, I like the idea of replacing "monastery" here by monasteries belonging to different religious orders. The Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem should be a wonder which grants happiness in all provinces just like the Zeus statue in R:TW. The Holy Sepulchre will really be "The Holy Sepulchre, the Mosque of the rock and the Jewish temple", which means it's logical that all factions can get a happiness bonus from conquering it (except the pagans, but they'll eventually have converted to Christianity so it makes sense there too). The reason for this is because I doubt you can make wonders that only give boni to certain factions. Perhaps wonders could be replaced by "important cities", where those could be Jerusalem, Constantinople, Rome and perhaps some more - granting specific boni. I believe we'll have to discuss that further...

- Orthodox: chapel, church (+1 xp, +5% law), cathedral (+much happiness, +1 morale, can't think of any specific fanatics here...). Church would unlock
Sts George and Demetrius monasteries just like church for catholics unlock catholic monasteries.

- Muslims: minarete, mosque (+1 xp +5% law), grand mosque (+much happiness, +1 morale, enables training of al-murabitin fanatics for western muslims, some other unit for eastern muslims - if at all they'll have one unlocked by this one).

Grand Mosque of Damascus and Cordoba should be buildings that can't be constructed by any factions but exist in these provinces from start, with culture set to "muslim". Same thing with shrine to St Michael the Archangel at Monte Gargano in Southern Italy - with culture set to "catholic". With this system, Hagia Sophia at Constantinople, St James at Compostoella and St Peters at Rome could also be buildings of this type. I'm against making buildings that have a meaning only to one of the cultures a wonder as I believe the wonder gives boni to conquerors no matter of which culture he is. In some cases, these special buildings could be constructable in only one province and not be there from start - a solution perfect for the cases when the building wasn't historically created at the starting date of the mod.

I haven't planned for the Magyars and Khazars yet.

AGRICULTURE AND HEALTH
====================
I suggest farming income is given a greater importance than in R:TW compared to trade. The base farming level and the farm upgrades will be modelled realistically by letting base farming represent fertility in the province, and in the cases where crop yield was relatively good at this time despite perhaps a low fertility, this should be represented by already having one or more farming upgrades in the province from start. Here are the farming levels:
- Forest clearings (already available from start in a lot of provinces)
- Farms (farms now more organized and effective)
- Crop rotation
- Farming technology (by letting some fields lie fallow effectiveness is increased further even though all land isn't used at the time, and better ploughs allows every peasant to take care of a larger area without more effort which can increase crop yields per year)
- Irrigation (expensive and time consuming to construct, irrigation can in proper climate result in 2 or even 3 harvests per year - something that increases yields a lot)

And the health buildings:
- Proper sewage (+10% health bonus, separating the sewage water from drinking water is a simple step that improves health a lot - however this technique isn't commonly known and it's cheaper and faster for lazy people to use same flow for both because they have to dig less...)
- Herbal medicine (+15% health bonus, much herbal medicine is unscientific and can even cause disease when there isn't any, but there are some medicines which are actually very effective at driving out evil)
- Water pipes (+20% health bonus, soap made from animal fat, and water pipes leading water into a house is advanced technology for many, but a few of the richest as well as church representatives who are spreading their faith are also bringing technologies like these with them).

PORTS, TRADERS, ROADS
===================
Roads:
- Paths
- Mud roads
- Paved roads (only available for catholics, orthodox and muslims)

Trading (all of these improve trade - and perhaps also population growth):
- Trader
- Market
- Merchant
- Master merchant (+10 happiness)

Docks/harbors:
- Port
- Shipyard
- Dockyard

Good seafaring nations such as vikings can perhaps not create master merchant, but will in return get trade boni from their ports, shipyards and dockyards.

BLACKSMITH AND ARMOR
===================
- Blacksmith (+1 to all weapons)
- Master blacksmith (+2 to all weapons)
- Armorer (+1 to all armor, will NOT require blacksmith in order to be constructed)
- Master armorer (+2 to all armor)

I suggest these upgrades buildings should ONLY be possible to build in provinces with the "iron" resource, at least the blacksmith buildings should IMO.

MINING
=====
I'd like several different mine types. I've checked and it's possible to implement this. All mines should exist as "x mine" and "large x mine" where x is the name of the metal recieved from the mine.
- Salt
- Copper
- Silver
- Gold

MILITARY RELATED BUILDINGS
======================
I had in mind a system where you have to construct one building for making of weapons, enabling recruitment of a militia force using these weapons, and an extra building for training of soldiers (unlocked after creating the weapons construction building), enabling training of professional soldiers using these weapons. There are also specific town guard/police force buildings which can only train milita. I've used generic unit names below - the respective factions will of course have to use more specific names (and have more specific looks) for the units. In cases where no specific units are known we might have to use a generic unit in each field. Militia units can also be generic in most cases.

MILITIA:
- Muster field (javelinmen, town watch, peasants), Town militia (urban militia), Police force (urban guard, +5 law bonus).

BOWS:
- Bowmaker (militia bowmen), Bowmaker's workshop (militia archers), Bowmaker's guild (militia archer +1 xp), Master bowmaker (crossbowmen, pavise crossbowmen).
- Practise target (bowmen, requires bowmaker), Archery range (archers, requires bowmaker's workshop, +1 to missile weapons).
- Some factions will have exceptions, for example Welsh will be able to train longbowmen and bulgarians perhaps bulgarian brigands, and Lotharingia get crossbowmen for lower cost perhaps and be the only who can recruit the Genoese crossbowmen as standard units rather than mercenaries.

SPEARMEN:
Spearmen don't require advanced buildings for training, and spearmen are seldom professionals so no special training buildings are available to improve the spear units.
- Spearmaker (wooden-spear militia), Spearmaker's workshop (spear militia, spearmen), Spearmaker's guild (heavy spear militia, heavy spearmen), Master spearmaker (feudal foot sergeants, halberdiers).
- Saxons will have fyrdmen to replace appropriate units above (perhaps the generic heavy spearmen and spearmen with fyrdmen +1xp and fyrdmen, respectively).

CAVALRY:
Cavalry is a professional force that takes much training so here there'll be very important to build the training buildings to improve cavalry quality. "Nobles" are the soft version of "knights" below.
- Horse farmer (militia cavalry), Stables (militia swordscavalry, militia spear cavalry), Cavalry stables (mounted sergeants, dark-age nobles, dismounted dark-age nobles), Elite cavalry stables (feudal cavalry sergeants, feudal nobles, dismounted feudal nobles).
- Cavalry training field (swordscavalry, spear cavalry, requires Stables),
Cavalry training grounds (dark-age knights, dismounted dark-age knights, requires Cavalry stables), Cavalry academy (feudal knights, dismounted feudal knights, royal knights, requires Elite cavalry stables).
- The cavalry tech tree above is adapted for catholic factions. Pagans will have more primitive cavalry, Rus will have druzhinas instead of royal knights and boyars instead of nobles, and perhaps more focus on light and missile cavs than on heavy knights. Muslims will use much lighter cavs and also unlike the others have camels, and little or no super heavy cavalry. Byzantines will of course have their cataphracts - but they'll be available earlier in the tech tree than catholic cavalry of the same class.

SWORDSMEN:
- Swordsmaker (sword militia, axe militia), Swordsmaker's workshop (militia swordsmen, militia axemen), Swordsmaker's guild (dark age men-at-arms militia), Master swordsmaker (feudal men-at-arms militia).
- Barracks (swordsmen, axemen, requires Swordmaker's workshop), Army barracks (dark age men-at-arms, requires Swordmaker's guild), Military academy (feudal men-at-arms, requires Master swordsmaker).
- Perhaps feudal men-at-arms should be available more easily than above on second thoughts but I'll edit it later. Saxons will have huscarles swordsmen and huscarles axemen rather than the generic units here as their best swordsmen. Welsh and Irish should perhaps use some kind of generic "celtic swordsmen" and "chosen celtic swordsmen" instead of the standard swordsmen. Irish should perhaps have the bonnachts and gallowglasses of M:TW (haven't checked about them yet). For scots there'll be highland clansmen, perhaps one unit of highland clansmen and a unit "elite clansmen" too.

SIEGE WEAPONS:
I suggest there'll be a lot of siege weapon crew mercenaries around, especially far south. However there should be some training facilities for siege weapons too, I think. I haven't planned those yet, though.

ACADEMIES
=========
Available to muslims, catholics and orthodox. Perhaps muslims should have more academy levels as they were better than the Christians at most sciences at this time.

WALLS
=====
I mentioned this in an earlier post, but:
- Wooden pallisade
- Wooden wall
- Large wooden wall (possible to move on top of it)
- Stone wall (possible to move on top of it)
- Large stone wall (possible to move on top of it)

I think it'd be fun to edit so that there can be a wooden type of wall that troops can move on top of. I don't yet know if it's possible to implement but I hope it is - otherwise we can stick to standard walls (slightly edited in look, though).

[Captain-Tiguris]

Your mod seems like ours, Norse: Total War.

Here is the forums: http://12.freebb.com/index.php?freebb=norsetotalwar

Maybe we could work together?

Get around to pming me.

[Rodion Romanovich]

Your mod seems like ours, Norse: Total War.

Here is the forums: http://12.freebb.com/index.php?freebb=norsetotalwar

Maybe we could work together?

Get around to pming me.

lol, skeletor from your team PMed me yesterday about cooperation, to which I responded that I was interested in a cooperation. He has apparently not informed you about our correspondence yet, but this is good news because it means at least 2 of your 3 team members like the idea of cooperating with me. So I repeat to you what I said yesterday to skeletor: I'd be very glad if you would merge with my mod team, that way we'll be able to make a better mod, and also be able to complete it faster.

btw I love this part in your forums :
"There is a modder (LegioXXXUlpiaVictrix) (yes that is hes name) over at the .org forum"

[Rodion Romanovich]

I am quite happy to join the team as a researcher.

You are very welcome, The Apostate!

- Magyars in 843 are pagan and remain so until 1000.
- Bulgars are also pagan but christianised in 867.
- The Danes, Poles and Rus (which is a better term than Novgorod) were still -Pagan in 843 and remained so til the later 10th century.
- It is highly debatable how Jewish the Khazars were - certainly some of their khagans were converted but the great majority of the population were either Pagan, Muslim or Christian - however I do love the idea of building synagogues...
- Conversion is thus a big issue in this period and as there is no way the AI will ever switch religions you will end up with half of your factions starting and remaining pagan.
- This is fine if you want a short campaign with lots of different pagan temples to add variety.
- However if you want the mod to be open-ended and allow development into the High Middle Ages you would be much better starting at 1000 - at which point almost everyone but the peoples around the Baltic have converted.
- While 843 is an era of fragmentation, in 1000 you have much more solid and organised states (although Bulgaria would have to go - disappearing in 1014).
- You also have no Fatimids in 843 and pretty much the whole Muslim world except for al-Andalus is part of the Abassid Caliphate - which the AI being what it is will end up swallowing everything just as Egypt does in RTW - whereas in 1000 you have Abassid, Fatimid and Umayyad Caliphates each of which is of roughly equal power.

The starting date has been a big issue that I've thought a lot about. I know that some of the attributes I've given to factions aren't true until some time after the starting date, but it was my intention to make a mod that approximately describes the entire era from starting date to ending date. Moving the starting date forward to 1000 AD is out of the question because that removes the focus from the viking era and there are already mods about those periods. I've chosen a compromise with a starting date in 843 to still be able to keep part of the dark age focus but without starting so early that normans and others would be so far out of the period that they couldn't be factions at all. This way, I can include normans and others even though they're slightly out of the period, in order to make the mod more interesting.

Some of your data above has led me to change my opinion, for example danes and Rus will be pagan, and Fatimids will be Al Andalus. Rebels in North Africa will be very strong, and the Abbassids will have very limited strength early. I'll keep testing until I find a solution that means they won't explode in power like R:TW Egyptians. Novgorod will be called Rus. Hungarians will also be pagan then.

However some things I don't think should be changed: Bulgars will be Christian in the game because 867 is so short after the starting date. The Khazars will be jewish just for the fun factor it adds to have another culture/religion in the game. I'll see if I can make their starting cities have pagan culture from start to give them a culture difference penalty to reflect that it was probably mostly the leaders who had converted, something that'll make the starting years harder for the Khazars. Conversion of any factions are as far as I know impossible to implement so that's why I've chosen to do it this way.

Re map I can't see much value in including the North Atlantic and Northern Scandinavia - which will just be dead space - just as much of the north and east of the RTW map is.

Personally prefer the Europa Barbarorum or Rome Total Realism maps which do not go as far north but do include Persia - where a lot more of interest is happening.

With an eastern-stretched map you also get to include the Turks as opponents for the Byzantines (again in 843 these are a minor confederation of tribes in Central Asia but in 1000 they control an empire covering much of Persia and the Indus Valley).

The reason for this was explained in a news post above. Those provinces are not intended for the player to capture, but if he wishes he can. They being there means the player can't just reach a map edge and eliminate one front to get rid of all problems and need for troops there, then direct all troops in another direction. This means a border along a steppes or desert line will be hard to hold. Not much action will take place far out on the steppes in the mod, but they definitely fill a function in my opinion, by forcing the player to keep a constant defensive force there. North Africa and the steppes will be so spread out that they should really be impossible to hold. Another reason for the expansion of map to the north is the focus on vikings - both their raids and the internal fighting that occurred. The turks don't become interesting until 1000 AD and that's so long after the campaign start that they shouldn't be a faction, because of my decision to stick to 843-1099 but otherwise they'd definitely have a place, and I'd have changed the map with more to the east and less to the north.

Don't think the papacy should be a state in this period (for much of it the Popes were corrupt puppets of the Roman nobility) and of course the Lombard League does not come into existence until the late-1100's (in 843 North Italy was part of the short-lived kingdom of Lotharingia which stretched from Rome to the North Sea and which represents another problem for an 843 start as it disintegrates within a generation).

Will you have a Marian reform event? - strikes me that the transition to the couched lance and crossbow which occurred in the early-mid 11th century would fit this (i.e. before the reform Frankish armies have relatively weak cavalry, after it they have real knights as well as crossbows and a better range of siege equipment - OTOH the Byzantines at about the same time would lose much of their Thematic troops and become more dependant on mercenaries).

I haven't planned any Marian reform yet so I haven't thought through the subject. If we stick to 843-1099, what reforms would be of interest?

It was my intention to represent the Papacy as a state in order to make "senate missions" and excommunication possible, but they aren't really more a state than the SPQR in vanilla R:TW is a state, it's just the only way to represent that. I agree that the Lombard league is out of the period (it was at the time of Barbarossa, wasn't it?), but I wanted a way of implementing the Italian city states as a strong faction enough to challenge the HRE. Rebels would just die too quickly and have no ability to retrain and strenghten their armies etc. It was my plan to have Lombard league as a methafor for this, just like the Greek cities in vanilla R:TW is a methafor for all the different greek city states - an emergency solution because there is the 20 factions limit. Perhaps they should be called "The Italian cities" instead of Lombard league?

I hope you're still interested in the mod despite these approximations of history I've been forced to make in order to be able to keep the time period 843-1099, which was the starting point when I decided to make this mod. It's my intention to stay as true to historical data as possible in all other aspects though, so a skilled historian is very much appreciated. In fact I believe the things I've mentioned here are the only diversions from real history needed, in practically EVERY other aspect there are no obstacles that I see that could prevent total realism.