map-faction balancing

**kataphraktoi** · 01-09-2007, 10:41

. are the large faction(hre,byzantium,turks,egyptians) going to just demolish the little factions or will there be something stopping them?

Turks are quite powerful between 1050s - 1092 so its only fair to give them a great starting position, however, like most Muslim empires, regionalism is a problem within the empire even in times of greatness. The Turks have to keep an eye out on their Qara-Khanid vassals in Transoxiana who could attack them in the rear while the Turks try and expand to the west.

Egyptians in 1071 is having a rotten time too, rebellions in Syria, Palestine and the Hejaz will keep them occupied, a disobedient Ghulam army in Cairo poses a worry for the current Caliph. Famines also recur frequently in this time period giving EGYPT a very serious problem internally. Yes, they will be quite vulnerable to the Turks.

Little factions in the beginning (like Georgia and Serbia) need not fear bigger factions as they are either scripted as allies or vassals. They're not entirely defensely either considering that the Byzantine troops stationed in the Balkans are crap and the fact that Georgia has a decent army at this time as well.

2. it seems like spain is open to take from the rebels. will castile just easily dominate iberia so quickly?

Southern Spain is in the grip of squabblinh Taifa factions, historically, this does make them open to Christian invasions from the North. However, this weakness led them to historically call in the Moors from Morocco as well, so it works out. Perhaps a scripted landing party of Moorish troops in 1085.

3. are the sahara and arabia provinces because they had no real settlements.

Yes, big useless provinces, anyone would be stupid to take them but smart to use them as places to attack unsuspecting provinces. I suppose if ur the Egyptians and ur keen on capturing the Caliphal base of Baghdad you could take a short cut through the Arabian desrt and pounce on them there. But you'd also have ti fight desert tribes who infest these areas.

**Chuffy** · 01-09-2007, 17:39

Southern Spain is in the grip of squabblinh Taifa factions, historically, this does make them open to Christian invasions from the North. However, this weakness led them to historically call in the Moors from Morocco as well, so it works out. Perhaps a scripted landing party of Moorish troops in 1085.

Instead of doing this why not do what EB does and 'ally' rebel cities with nearby factions? If Castile-Leon defeats one of the Taifa states the AI Moors auto-declare war on them...however the player could maybe have a choice with the advisor popping up "do you want to declare war on the aggressors? Press the show me how button etc..."

**tito** · 01-09-2007, 20:14

can we give the influence to the calife as the pope for the catholique?

**Icefrisco** · 01-09-2007, 20:24

thanks for informing me

on this since it was my major concern with the mod. however, i have another question how will the invasions by the almohad and almoravids be represented?

will moorish armies emerge in spain in 1086,1088, and 1093 to represent the almoravids? for the almohads could moorish armies emerge in spain in 1195(battle of alarcos) and 1212(battle of las navas de Tolosa) to represent their campaigns in spain?

**kataphraktoi** · 01-11-2007, 16:14

Moors will probably have a similar system to the Egyptians.

We have system in place to enact the changing of dynasties, thats why we keep the generic names like the Moors to relfect the Moorish dynasties. Be they Almoravids or Almohads, they were Moors.

Yes, scripted landing parties will be part of the plan, if this can be implemented, it wwould be great, introduces another element to gameplay.

Not too sure of scripted battles though, much easier when its near the start date.

Instead of doing this why not do what EB does and 'ally' rebel cities with nearby factions? If Castile-Leon defeats one of the Taifa states the AI Moors auto-declare war on them...however the player could maybe have a choice with the advisor popping up "do you want to declare war on the aggressors? Press the show me how button etc..."

I've got a guy who made an AI diplomacy mod, I'll have to contact him on details like that.

**Icefrisco** · 01-11-2007, 20:07

playing with the muslims jsut sounds better everyday!

**mayhem87** · 01-11-2007, 20:38

naahh, good old christian fellas rocks ;-). That was written that crusaders could handle superiority of muslims 10 on 1 crusader. So the choice is simple ( but in game they r nearly equivalent and thats not fair

)

**Renown** · 01-11-2007, 21:10

10 on 1? I have to wonder, where on earth do you get your information

www.christiansrockmuslims.com ? or what... because seriously, that is sooo not funny.

Ever heard of Ilghazi? Balak? Imad ed-Din Zengi?

What about Roger of Aleppo? Who was killed along side half the norman knights in the holy land, in ONE battle. A place still known as the Field of Blood.

what about the peoples crusade? Wiped out to almost a man.

Or, even, what about all the other fifty times someone did something stupid, or did something smart, and got paid off for it.

One on one, and I guarantee you the battles between any given crusader or muslim are pretty even.

The main advantage crusader knights had, was when they charged. They 'seemed' invincible, and when they stuck together they usually fought well.

Problems? Their muslem counterparts usually did not give the crusaders a target, and usually broke up the crusading charges and took them down individually where their armor became more of a hindrance than an aid.

Read your history books dude.