Faction re-emergence peculiarities

[DensterNY]

Here are a few strange things that I experienced about re-emergences in my campaign. I remember reading somewhere on the forum how when a faction re-emerges they return with an army whose size and quality is related to the occupying army on their home province.

In my Early game just getting under way I was in Toulouse with a stack and some change fighting a war there against the Italians when the French re-emerged. They came back with three FULL stacks of mounted sergeants, and militia sergeants... its ridiculous because they came back with the strongest force on the map. Presumable the surviving heir has been sneaking around gathering support and men for this day but damnit this many men?!?!? I mean if there were three full stacks of potentially such quality troops laying around then you'd figure my king, my garrison or governor would notice... of course this is a kind of glitch so I'm really just ranting... Hehe

In another situation I took over Portugal from Spain which we know is always a troublesome province. Now before you build your first fort there is a 100% chance of rebellion no matter what for all four years as its being built. So I saved the game and tried an experiment... I left a sufficiently large army there in anticipation of a rebellion and WHAM another humongous stack off ass kickers pop out of nowhere... so I reloaded and this time left an old beat up unit of Hobilars with perhaps 20 men and next year one measly unit of archers appear. So I beat them and being so heavily outnumbered I even get a command star for that general... Next year archers reappear with a unit of spearmen so I meet them with that same Hobilar group and also a unit of Urban Milita... again I get another star for my general.

I had two more years of rebellions until my fort was built but the whole thing is kinda stupid because I could build nothing in Portugal and raze the fort and send men there to train up to generals and gain tons of valor. I try to avoid abusing glitches like this but just wanted to share my findings with you guys.

[Productivity]

Neither is really a glitch - Presumably the lost prince is actually working through other channels to build up forces, hiring people, gathering allies overseas etc. before bringing them all back to one province.

[Martok]

In another situation I took over Portugal from Spain which we know is always a troublesome province. Now before you build your first fort there is a 100% chance of rebellion no matter what for all four years as its being built. So I saved the game and tried an experiment... I left a sufficiently large army there in anticipation of a rebellion and WHAM another humongous stack off ass kickers pop out of nowhere... so I reloaded and this time left an old beat up unit of Hobilars with perhaps 20 men and next year one measly unit of archers appear. So I beat them and being so heavily outnumbered I even get a command star for that general... Next year archers reappear with a unit of spearmen so I meet them with that same Hobilar group and also a unit of Urban Milita... again I get another star for my general.

I had two more years of rebellions until my fort was built but the whole thing is kinda stupid because I could build nothing in Portugal and raze the fort and send men there to train up to generals and gain tons of valor. I try to avoid abusing glitches like this but just wanted to share my findings with you guys.

Yeah, some players use feisty provinces like Portugal, Scotland, and Livonia as "training grounds" for new generals and princes, exactly in the way you describe. I don't do it myself, but crushing a rebellion is always a good way to gain experience for your inexperienced commanders.....

[Satyr]

Also, realize that the peasant rebellions in Portugal that are based on the number of troops you have in that province are not related to the reappearance of another faction. They are two different things. You only need 100% loyalty to prevent peasant rebellions, but you need 120% loyalty to prevent faction reappearances.

[dgfred]

Yeah, some players use feisty provinces like Portugal, Scotland, and Livonia as "training grounds" for new generals and princes, exactly in the way you describe. I don't do it myself, but crushing a rebellion is always a good way to gain experience for your inexperienced commanders.....

I hate rebellions , I would rather just secure the province and
send my generals and princes to gain their 'training' elsewhere. I always
keep my loyalty way above 120% if at all possible .

[VikingHorde]

I find rebellions cool because I use them to finance my early danish empire with ransom money from Livonia.

[yesdachi]

They are two different things. You only need 100% loyalty to prevent peasant rebellions, but you need 120% loyalty to prevent faction reappearances.

i think you need 170% to keep Faction re-emergence from happening???

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

No, 120% but late in the game everything goes crazy and no matter what you do there will be some rebellions.

[Martok]

I hate rebellions , I would rather just secure the province and
send my generals and princes to gain their 'training' elsewhere. I always
keep my loyalty way above 120% if at all possible .

So do I. Don't get me wrong; I make every reasonable effort to keep rebellions from occurring, as I agree that they're annoying as hell. I'm just saying that that if rebellions do happen to pop up, that I might as well use the opportunity to break in some green generals.

[edyzmedieval]

Rebellions are kinda fun, because my troops get valour and experience.

On the other hand, I hate Civil Wars. They are very annoying, and sometimes, I use assasins to get rid of my unwanted Princes.

[VikingHorde]

I have only had one civil war in all the games I have played, but they are not very fun. Re-emergences are pretty useful in enemy provinces, but I hate when it happens in my provinces. Spyes and border forts are nice to keep things nice and peaceful.

[tigger_on_vrb]

Rebellions are fun and I do use the tactic of farming the ransoms for rebels and training up generals. This works well, especially fairly early in the game. I don't do this though in a province which has been owned by another faction recently or by one which has been eliminated for the game - you are just asking for a loyalist uprising/faction reemergence instead of the rebels.

[Martok]

I have only had one civil war in all the games I have played, but they are not very fun. Re-emergences are pretty useful in enemy provinces, but I hate when it happens in my provinces. Spyes and border forts are nice to keep things nice and peaceful.

Oh, I don't know about that. I've found civil wars can be pretty fun, especially if you deliberately engineered it. I won't recap it here since I've posted it elsewhere in the forums, but one of my favorite experiences of all time was playing through a Danish civil war after I had assassinated my own king. My two younger mediocre uncles led the "royalist" faction to victory against my older uber-uncle who was trying to usurp the throne. Yes, it was pretty rough going for a while, but I definitely had a blast!

[Mount Suribachi]

Rebellions are there for a reason, that is, to stop the player from steamrollering the map with no hinderances. They might not stop you, but they at least slow you down. And they are historically accurate - indeed, if anything I would say there are not enough rebellions!

I've only ever had 1 civil war, when I marched my King through a unit of my xbowmen just as they were firing...THUD! went my kings body as he fell to the ground and the next turn my English Empire broke out in civil war

[tigger_on_vrb]

The only games I have ever had civil wars in is when I have tried to be patient and stick with the few provinces I start with certain factions (eg turks) and build up an infrastructure before declaring war. The years of peace take their toll on influence and eventually you get a civil war. I dont use this tactic any more and I always go for early expansion, atleast a few provinces in the first 10 years for any faction. I've never had a problem after doing that.

[Del Arroyo]

Playing Northumbria in VI I had two or three civil wars. At least one after I had expanded quite a bit and won many victories. I remember at least one of them was particularly bruising, with my loosing a good general and some good troops, but at least one of them didn't seem to be a big deal, and seemed like a good way to get rid of some disloyal generals. I crushed all these rebellions immediately.

DA

[Viking]

You only need 100% loyalty to prevent peasant rebellions, but you need 120% loyalty to prevent faction reappearances.

Ah, thanks. You just saved me from starting a new topic.
But are the provinces where I need to have 120%< in loyality just the starter provinces of this faction, or all the provinces I have taken from them? And how long do I have to do this?

One more thing: can a faction re-emerge twice(or more)?


Any info on this is appreciated.

[dgfred]

Good question. I try to keep all the provinces I have taken above 120%.

This is because in a previous game I played the French were down to 1
province ( I had taken the others) and one of the ones I had taken was
below the 120 barrier. The English proceeded to pounce on the one remaining
province and the French re-emerged in one I had previously taken ---- I reloaded, fixed loyalty above 120 and the English didn't
attack the French the rest of the game , even though they could
have easily knocked them out for good. Those turds!

[mfberg]

The 120% loyalty is required in all provinces a fugitive faction has ever owned, if any are below 120% there is a chance that one or more of those provinces will break out in re-emergence every time a possible heir comes of age. My favorite tactic is to engineer a re-emergence in the middle of an enemy holding. Making the Byz reappear in the middle of the Hungarian/Turkish war (I was HRE) was my best so far, they re-emerged in Naples, Bulgaria, Constantinople, Trezibond, Crete, Rhodes, Georgia and Nicea the year before the Horde hit. Turkey was devastated and the Horde and the reemerged Byz were battling it out for control in the East, both losing faster than they could kill each other.

mfberg

[dgfred]

That is a nasty idea! Me like .

[Ludens]

The 120% loyalty is required in all provinces a fugitive faction has ever owned, if any are below 120% there is a chance that one or more of those provinces will break out in re-emergence every time a possible heir comes of age.

It is my understanding that for a reemergence to occur, the loyalty of a province has to be below 100%, but every other neighbouring province with a loyalty below 120% has a chance of joining. The 20% extra is just a buffer to prevent loyalty from falling under 100% if something happens (say a crusade fails or a high-influence king dies and is succeeded by a nine-toed retard) or if a reemergence occurs in the province of a neighbouring faction.

Is this correct or am I talking nonsense?

[Procrustes]

I beleive that a faction can only reappear if there was an under-age heir when it disappeared. The AI keeps track of those persons, even though they are never on the board. Once the heir comes of age the AI will do a die roll each turn a province is below 120% loyalty to see if there is a re-appearance. If you wait long enough, any old heirs will eventually die off and the faction will no long be able to reappear.

Yes, a faction can reappear several times in one game - as long as the above conditions are met. I've seen it myself several times.

I once had a game where the French had wiped out the English very early. Many years later I got into a war with the French. I landed a small army in Scotland just to hassle them in their rear as we were fighting along our major border in Europe. I defeated the French, but as I was beseiging the castle the English reappeared in Scotland with three stacks lead by a 70 year old king! Kinda sucked - now I was at war with them, too. (He didn't live long, but turns out he had a brother with him so the English did stick around for a while. I figured they were going to be more trouble to the French than I was, so I got out of the way and made peace with them.)

[VikingHorde]

The 120% loyalty is required in all provinces a fugitive faction has ever owned, if any are below 120% there is a chance that one or more of those provinces will break out in re-emergence every time a possible heir comes of age. My favorite tactic is to engineer a re-emergence in the middle of an enemy holding. Making the Byz reappear in the middle of the Hungarian/Turkish war (I was HRE) was my best so far, they re-emerged in Naples, Bulgaria, Constantinople, Trezibond, Crete, Rhodes, Georgia and Nicea the year before the Horde hit. Turkey was devastated and the Horde and the reemerged Byz were battling it out for control in the East, both losing faster than they could kill each other.

mfberg

he he, I got to try this . I think my spyes have a job to do

[dgfred]

In my current HRE game the English, with Rebels too, re-emerged in Wales--
with Feudal Knights , when the only units they had in their ONE
remaining province were peasants, urbans and a couple of Royal Knights.
This doesn't seem right that these elite units would just 'show up' from
thin air . What is the deal with this?

[littlebktruck]

It is my understanding that for a reemergence to occur, the loyalty of a province has to be below 100%, but every other neighbouring province with a loyalty below 120% has a chance of joining. The 20% extra is just a buffer to prevent loyalty from falling under 100% if something happens (say a crusade fails or a high-influence king dies and is succeeded by a nine-toed retard) or if a reemergence occurs in the province of a neighbouring faction.

Is this correct or am I talking nonsense?

I don't think so. For instance, Factions always pop up in rebel provinces, which always have loyalty of 100%.

[Martok]

In my current HRE game the English, with Rebels too, re-emerged in Wales--
with Feudal Knights , when the only units they had in their ONE
remaining province were peasants, urbans and a couple of Royal Knights.
This doesn't seem right that these elite units would just 'show up' from
thin air . What is the deal with this?

Do you have MTW *and* VI, or just the regular Medieval?

[littlebktruck]

In my current HRE game the English, with Rebels too, re-emerged in Wales--
with Feudal Knights , when the only units they had in their ONE
remaining province were peasants, urbans and a couple of Royal Knights.
This doesn't seem right that these elite units would just 'show up' from
thin air . What is the deal with this?

I had that happen in my Italian game. I let Provence rebel and a loyalty revold ensued, with some Feudal Knights and FFK coming for the germans. This was at the spearmen/urban militia stage. Ouch. In my current game the english came back with Feudal Knights, FFK, and a ton of Highland Clansmen.

[EatYerGreens]

I don't think so. For instance, Factions always pop up in rebel provinces, which always have loyalty of 100%.

Too right. I found this out to my cost recently.

I'm the Byz, still holding Naples and the Sicilians are playing havoc with my shipping. After one abortive attack of their on Naples, they decide to sit back, build a level 3 castle in Sicily and build up a two-stack army of mostly Mil Serges, with a smattering of archers, spears, the King's and prince's RKs. In Malta are two more RKs and one spear unit.

Just as I'm accumulating forces for an attack on Sicily, I lose a ship to them which, it transpires, was blocking a move they wanted to make, in preference to Naples. Greece was briefly under-garissoned but safe as long as my ship was in the way. They EMPTIED Sicily, giving me a freebie on the next turn, to invade Greece with both stacks. I abandoned my half-stack, to avoid a siege and give more choice over troop mix to counter attack. Possibly five of my provinces contributed but I think I obliterated them without any of my reinforcements ever having to play an active role.

Their king was still quite young and reported to be heirless when the elimination message popped up. I thought that was the end of them. I let the Maltese be, mainly due to one too few ships leaving a toss-up between restoring sea trade and a risky invasion venture plus it would have diverted troops I needed elsewhere.

Within very few turns, the Sicilians are back. 5 full stacks - more than double their previous maximum army size. Mix of RK's, mounted serges, FMAAs, very few spears, not one MS or UM in sight. They seige out what was once part of their own army, demolish the port and I'm thinking I won't be able to spare enough men to tackle that lot until the very end of the conquest (last stop before the Pope). Heck, I don't even think there's enough room on the map to place the 5+ stacks I'm going to need to take that lot on with any hope of winning.

I thought they'd be broke, with an income of 330 and a maint in the thousands but, somehow, they're now up to 80% farms and have rebuilt the port. Something fishy there....

I don't mind the concept of re-emergence one bit. It's the manner in which it is executed which kind of sucks. How come they can come back with great units but they never bother to mobilise these types before they get eliminated? Okay, it needs good troops to stand a chance of the re-emergence properly re-establishing at least part of the faction's previous holdings but 5 stacks is way OTT for a puny island held by a tiny garrison. Once it has succeeded, why can the AI never disband units it can't possibly afford to maintain?

Or, simpler question, why can't it disband units at all? Such as units made obsolescent by the various training buildings which it does have the sense to put in place.

[littlebktruck]

Sounds rough. I've learned through a couple of my games that leaving rebel provinces of eliminated factions close by is not very wise.

[dgfred]

Do you have MTW *and* VI, or just the regular Medieval?

Just regular , I've only had the game about 2 months.