Value of excommunication and alliances?

**NodachiSam** · 07-20-2005, 18:02

I find the only real disadvantage to being excommunicated is crusades, which can be annoying especially if you are not a central catholic power. If you are big enough then excommunication won't hurt you too much. I think alliances ~seem~ to be somewhat effective at preventing factions from attacking you.

**manbaps** · 07-20-2005, 20:38

Alliances only matter if you want an awesome trade income, which only really matters if you got pretty poor lands that dont have a large farm income. If your doing total dom then just rush everyone its the quickest and easiest way to win the game. The AI are bastards i find it next to impossible to make alliances myself i have to wait for them to intiate the alliances otherwise they just say, go away we dont want a ceasefire even though youve taken all my provences except one besieged me in my last one, only have 100 men surronded by 5000+ enemy. Nah im good ill take my chances.

**Marcellus** · 07-20-2005, 21:04

You only really have to worry about excommunication and crusades if you are fairly small and have powerful catholic enemies.

**Roark** · 07-21-2005, 01:49

I really dig alliances. My Viking allies just sent 48 berserkers to aid my weakened Saxon army in their fight against the invading Mercians. Total butchery.

I find that the HRE consistently stabs me in the back in Medieval campaigns. I don't trust them as far as I could throw them. Maybe it's their geographic position, and (therefore) their need to take advantage of opportunities as they arise, I guess...

**Martok** · 07-21-2005, 05:12

Originally Posted by Roark

I find that the HRE consistently stabs me in the back in Medieval campaigns. I don't trust them as far as I could throw them. Maybe it's their geographic position, and (therefore) their need to take advantage of opportunities as they arise, I guess...

I've noticed this as well. The Germans are probably the biggest backstabbers in the game--aside from the Sicilians, of course, who aren't to be trusted in any case.

I also share your assessment that the Germans are faithless to their allies simply because they have to be opportunistic (at least more so than everone else) in order to expand. I've rarely seen them hesitate to take advantage of an underdefended province, be it my own or someone else's. Playing as the Germans is tough, if only because it's virtually impossible to *not* get excommunicated......

**Ironside** · 07-21-2005, 08:03

Originally Posted by Martok

I've noticed this as well. The Germans are probably the biggest backstabbers in the game--aside from the Sicilians, of course, who aren't to be trusted in any case.

Hmf, the Sicilians are my most loyal allies... After they been trapped on Malta without a large navy that is

Declaring war on an ally gives 1 loss in influence. A failed invasion, causing a civil war is the best revenge on that treacherous ally.

**Babij** · 07-21-2005, 08:36

Ah, I get it now. The higher influence your king has, the greater chance of forming alliances you have. But if you break an alliance, your king loses influence, which means less factions will ally with you in the future. Is that right?
Hmm.. I wish I had known this before I wiped out my allies, the Egyptians.

**EatYerGreens** · 07-22-2005, 07:57

Originally Posted by manboobs

The AI are bastards i find it next to impossible to make alliances myself i have to wait for them to intiate the alliances otherwise they just say, go away we dont want a ceasefire even though youve taken all my provences except one besieged me in my last one, only have 100 men surronded by 5000+ enemy. Nah im good ill take my chances.

Err, I don't think it's possible to negotiate a ceasefire whilst besieging the other faction in its last province...

Now, if you were to pull your beseigers completely out of the province, let them retake it for themselves and drop emissary on their leader on the following turn, you just might get it to work. Technically, any provinces in dispute (ongoing sieges) means hostilities are still in progress and you can't request a ceasefire under those conditions.

As per Papal warnings you have to conclude sieges by winning an assault or by totally withdrawing from the province, within the stipulated time limit.

Then again, the comment, in one of the posts above, about 'if you've taken one of their homelands' inclines me to believe that they still won't play ball.

As I see it, the reasons you want the ceasefire at all are:-
a) you've eliminated them as a threat but do not want to completely finish them off since subsequent under-garrisoning will virtually assure a re-emergence - one which is likely to succeed if troop moves back to there will take you more than a few turns;
b) you want your beseiging army to go elsewhere and clobber someone else round about now, and cannot also afford to leave money-eating garrisons behind to quell border troubles with your new 'protectorate'.

They know all that. Now do you see why they won't take it lying down?