MTW Pocket Mod: Factions

[ULC]

Understood. For the Ghana/Mali problem, I am in fact modding a MTW2 map for use within MTW, and this should help in that regard. As to the Other factions, maybe some good criteria would be the following to see if it gets added and to prevent the runaway effect:

1) Faction must be unique
2) Faction must have been A "world" player in politics
3) Faction must have existed longer than a century
4) Faction must not create overcrowding (i.e. 4 surrounded by 4 or more factions.)

[The Unknown Guy]

And Venitians? The problem I can see with this is that, like the Iberian Peninsuala the Italian city states thing warrants a mini campaign to itself. Alot of small one or two province factions would just add more weak factions to be swallowed up. Venice would be difficult in that many of their key territories were small areas not represented as provinces, this would mean adding many extra provinces to do that.

The problem I see with Separating Genoa and Venice is that it would make them too weak. Particularily Venice. So it can't be made quite "Historical" (there would be Florence and others to deal with). However, if it came to that, maybe it could be split into Venice and Genoa, with Venice getting the alps provinces and Florence, and Genoa getting Genoa, Corsica, and Sardinia? Plus, having Genoa and Venice start off as more developed to offset their lack of provinces
EDIT: how about elective monarchies, whether an addittional italian faction gets added or not? Doges were elected.

Nasrid Granada only (Personally I think the Medieval Iberian situation would merit a smaller map, like the VI map to do the thing some justice.)

I don't know if a "small map" campaign, but certainly more provinces would be in order: as it is now the "glorious Reconquista" usually ends up in less than fifty years, one or other way...
BTW: methinks Navarre would merit a place among the northern kingdoms, along with Aragon and Portugal :p
PD: (more about units, but on the same topic: My experiments nerfing Spanish Jinettes: raising the upkeep to 90 gp/turn per unit sort of controlled their spamming)
BTW: What is the conceptual rooster for Granada as of now? (Also, is there a flag? I know that nowadays it's shield is a Pommengranate, but I don't know how "historical" that is)

On the naming of "The Empire of Nicaea": doesn't it look a bit ugly? I mean, chances are that it retakes Constantinople as one of it's first moves. Personally, I think that they should remain dubbed as "Byzantines". I would support the Trapisond faction idea, but I think that would be faction spamming a bit too much, considering the province layout on that zone.
(on this same topic: I tried to alter the default Byzantine flag into something more akin to the "Basileus Basileon" flag (as in MTW2), but failed due to very small sprites being required)

[caravel]

The problem I see with Separating Genoa and Venice is that it would make them too weak. Particularily Venice. So it can't be made quite "Historical" (there would be Florence and others to deal with). However, if it came to that, maybe it could be split into Venice and Genoa, with Venice getting the alps provinces and Florence, and Genoa getting Genoa, Corsica, and Sardinia? Plus, having Genoa and Venice start off as more developed to offset their lack of provinces
EDIT: how about elective monarchies, whether an addittional italian faction gets added or not? Doges were elected.

The whole Italian situation is even more complicated than the Iberian one. Genoa and Venice were much smaller than the provinces in the game, basically only city states, and for a large part of the early and high eras most of Italy was part of the HRE, so in early and High I would compromise a bit and perhaps have Genoa, Venice and Pisa, the three most important of the time. When it comes to late it gets much more complex and personally I just don't think it can be done. For Venice a lot of the Mediterranean islands need to be added as they made up most of their territories, and for the rest the provinces of Italy in the game are not correct.

I don't know if a "small map" campaign, but certainly more provinces would be in order: as it is now the "glorious Reconquista" usually ends up in less than fifty years, one or other way...
BTW: methinks Navarre would merit a place among the northern kingdoms, along with Aragon and Portugal :p

Navarra is viable but would be a one province faction. Historically Navarre was there for the duration of the game's time frame but lost a lot of territory over the centuries. The problem with this is, that if Navarra are added then why not Wales? Why not Bohemia? What about Savoy, or the Hafsids? It goes on and on. There are simply too many factions to include.

PD: (more about units, but on the same topic: My experiments nerfing Spanish Jinettes: raising the upkeep to 90 gp/turn per unit sort of controlled their spamming)
BTW: What is the conceptual rooster for Granada as of now? (Also, is there a flag? I know that nowadays it's shield is a Pommengranate, but I don't know how "historical" that is)

No idea of the Roster for Granada as yet, as I haven't thought about it. They will probably need their own cavalry anyway.

On the naming of "The Empire of Nicaea": doesn't it look a bit ugly? I mean, chances are that it retakes Constantinople as one of it's first moves. Personally, I think that they should remain dubbed as "Byzantines". I would support the Trapisond faction idea, but I think that would be faction spamming a bit too much, considering the province layout on that zone.
(on this same topic: I tried to alter the default Byzantine flag into something more akin to the "Basileus Basileon" flag (as in MTW2), but failed due to very small sprites being required)

I will not be using the name "Empire of Nicaea" and have never had the intention of using it. If Trebizond were added then it may be necessary though.

I wouldn't worry too much about flags. The sprites are indeed so small that you can't achieve any detail, so small coats of arms are just a waste and lack definition. It is better to use something symbolic of the faction with an associated colour if possible. The historicity of the faction flags is something that I'm not overly concerned with, the ability to tell them apart and their visual clarity is. On a coat of arms for example it is better to take the key feature, separate it and make it a single colour and superimpose this on a background coloured to roughly represent the faction in some way.

[ULC]

A stretch, but would it be possible to use the MedMod map permission? It has excellent province distrubution, which could make previously unstable factions more stable (particulary for the Italians). I understand if you don't want to, but I think it would give you a better base from which to begin your own map at least.

Originally Posted by Cambyses II
I will not be using the name "Empire of Nicaea" and have never had the intention of using it. If Trebizond were added then it may be necessary though.

Not neccassarily; just make Trebizond the "Empire of Trebizond".

[caravel]

A stretch, but would it be possible to use the MedMod map permission? It has excellent province distrubution, which could make previously unstable factions more stable (particulary for the Italians). I understand if you don't want to, but I think it would give you a better base from which to begin your own map at least.

The problem with using the medmod map is that I'd still be editing just as many provinces in order to remove the ones we don't want. Also the Pocket Mod would end up as being called a mod that is "based on medmod", which I don't want. I am prepared to do the graft, and sit down and reposition borders and add a few provinces if people will only supply the maps and info for reference.

Not neccassarily; just make Trebizond the "Empire of Trebizond".

I was thinking more of "Empire of Nicaea" and "Empire of Trebizond"? As they are at present I would leave it as "Byzantine", though both of the former are actually more accurate. It would be nice to divide up Greece and add the "Despotate of Epirus" also. In the Early and Late eras they could be renamed as "Eastern Roman Empire", just to get rid of the "Byzantine" word, because, as I've argued, countless numbers of times, "Byzantine" is the name applied to the Eastern Roman Empire by latter day scholars and historians. The Eastern Romans did not ever refer to themselves as "Byzantine", which means "of Byzantium" and thus "Empire of Byzantium". This actually means in simple terms: "Empire centred on the old city of Byzantium". Byzantium, first renamed as "New Rome", was known as Constantinople after the death of Constantine, it's founder, so in reality historians have applied a name for convenience and differentiation with the Western Roman Empire, a name that has stuck, but is not necessarily accurate. This is why I would have no hesitation of losing the Byzantine name.

[Belisario]

I tried to alter the default Byzantine flag into something more akin to the "Basileus Basileon" flag (as in MTW2), but failed due to very small sprites being required

Don't worry, the new Byzantine flags and shields are flying to Cambyses II PC!

As far as Byzantines are concerned, I don't support their split into three factions in high and late. If you add the Empire of Trebizond you musn't forget the Georgian Kingdom (particularly Queen Tamar of Georgia was instrumental in the establishment of the Empire of Trebizond), and if you add the Despotate of Epirus you musn't forget the Bulgarians (remember the figure of King Kaloyan) and the Serbians (remember King Stephan Dushan). We run the risk to go in a spiral of multiple possible factions and we must be cautious.

If you are interested in new factions I propose to follow the example of the ever-mentioned MedMod of WesWhitaker. He begin his mod for the late era, then launched the early era, and the high era was not released. Well, we need a bit of order here: Early, High, and Late .

I am ready to listen your proposals for new factions in the early era and begin graphic shields work.

Cheers

[ULC]

I already have suggested my ideas and thier refinements to Cambyses II, although he has not commented on my second post, so I have no idea what to suggest or where I should go. My original proposals are at the top.

[caravel]

Understood. For the Ghana/Mali problem, I am in fact modding a MTW2 map for use within MTW, and this should help in that regard.

I'm not sure how that would work. The M2TW/RTW maps are angular tiles maps and not really suitable for MTW. Also a map of that scale would be a waste because there are simply not enough available provinces inside MTW's hardcoded limit to take advantage of a bigger map. You'd have a lot of dead zones. It's one of those things that we have to live with.

As to the Other factions, maybe some good criteria would be the following to see if it gets added and to prevent the runaway effect:

1) Faction must be unique
2) Faction must have been A "world" player in politics
3) Faction must have existed longer than a century
4) Faction must not create overcrowding (i.e. 4 surrounded by 4 or more factions.)

1) Unique as in not effectively the same faction under a different dynasty?
2) That criteria effectively rules out the Taifa Kingdoms, Navarra, and Nasrid Granada among others.
3) I agree with this, which is why I'm not really prepared to try and represent the shorter Taifa period in Spain between the Almoravids and the Almohads.
4) This is not so much a concern. If the faction is an important faction I don't mind it being surrounded by three or four neighbours.

[ULC]

Some ideas I have thought up as of right now:

1) Cambyses II mentioned that the Trebizond faction would be identical to the Nicaean one. I think this could be solved by simply by changing the unit rosters, so that one has a more western feel and the other a more eastern feel. On a side note, I suggest using the original Byzantine faction for Trebizond, and the new one for Nicaea.

2) Just using the Genoese Sailors for the Italians could solve the Archer problem. They could have the following stats: 2 Charge, 2 Attack, 0 Defense, 1 Armor, 2 Morale. This could also help the AI, as it seems confused as to whether to build the sailors or vanilla archers (who I think should be called foresters, as they wear a uniform almost identical to a woodsman, with an actual “professional” archer available to catholic factions later). They could even be renamed “Italian Light Infantry” (and obviously the Italian Infantry would become something else).

3) Make the Gothic units (Sergeants, Foot Knights, Knights) into an Imperial line for the HRE. Turn the badly named “Lancers” into “Gothic Knights”. The Imperial units could be available from High to Late, have high building requirements, and be the cream of the crop. I have the following suggestions for unit stats for the units: “Imperial Guard” (Gothic Sergeants) – 60 man unit, Elite, Disciplined, good speed (they use gothic armor, which supposedly was very light and durable, compared to conventional armor of the day), 2 Charge, 3-4 Attack, 5 Defense, 4-6 Armor, 4 Morale, Bonus attacking Cavalry, AP attack. “Imperial Men-At-Arms” (Gothic Foot Knights) – 60 man unit, Elite, Disciplined, decent speed, 4 Charge, 4-6 Attack, 5-6 Defense, 4-7 Armor, 6-8 Morale, AP attack. “Imperial Knights” (Gothic Knights) – 60 man unit, Elite, Disciplined, Elite, Impetuous, Bodyguard, good speed, 6 Charge, 4-6 Attack, 6-8 Defense, 6-10 Armor, 8 Morale, AP attack, dismounts into “Imperial Guard”.

4) Why NOT include the Scots? I think the English need a thorn in their side, and the Scots could do it. They don’t have to be very strong, just annoying. If you want, make them unplayable. But if you do make them playable, a few unit suggestions: Scottish Pikemen (Robert the Bruce used these BEFORE the Late period), Highland Rabble (or some other suitable name: An excellent way to make use of the peasant unit, with of course better stats). You could even convert some units from the Viking campaign for use within the normal campaign. On the plus side, there is already a pre-made Scottish faction!

5) If I can import the map from MTW2, then we would need some graphics (units, shields, colors, etc.) for the Mali and Ghanaian Empires. I still think that it should be done, considering the importance of Timbuktu. Anyway, any volunteers? (I think we could give them the Sahara; yes I know, very ahistorical, but come on, why not? I'd love to see Africans overrun Europe).

6) On the previous subject, the expanded map plus the addition of the Ghanaian or Mali Empires might curb the Spaniards from using the North African coast as a Crusade “Gateway”.

7) On Crusades and Jihads: Is there anyway to change the Zealousness of a province? I’ve seen far to many Jihads die before reaching the objective province.

8) On the “Islamic” UM and MS, why not give them to the Sicilians too, if not exclusively? This could reflect the fact that the Sicilians had quite the mixed culture.

9) On the Criteria for factions, it was hastily thought up. Sorry if it was confusing or self-contradictory.

10) You don't really need to add the Tuetonic Order to add the Lithuanians: They would be effectively fighting 2 German factions. Just leave it as is. It also wouldn't make sense to have the Tuetonic Order conquer the HRE and the Russian steppes, as they are apt to do in XL and BKB.

Don’t worry, I will be back every now and then to harass you with more insane, loony, useless, and vexatious ideas. I will never go away, unless of course a final version of the Pocket Mod is ever produced.

[caravel]

Some ideas I have thought up as of right now:

Sorry, YourLordandConqueror, I completely missed this post!

1) Cambyses II mentioned that the Trebizond faction would be identical to the Nicaean one. I think this could be solved by simply by changing the unit rosters, so that one has a more western feel and the other a more eastern feel. On a side note, I suggest using the original Byzantine faction for Trebizond, and the new one for Nicaea.

If we were to add Trebizond, why the use the original Byzantine faction for them and not for Nicaea? Could you define "eastern feel"?

2) Just using the Genoese Sailors for the Italians could solve the Archer problem. They could have the following stats: 2 Charge, 2 Attack, 0 Defense, 1 Armor, 2 Morale. This could also help the AI, as it seems confused as to whether to build the sailors or vanilla archers (who I think should be called foresters, as they wear a uniform almost identical to a woodsman, with an actual “professional” archer available to catholic factions later). They could even be renamed “Italian Light Infantry” (and obviously the Italian Infantry would become something else).

Most western european archers were foresters and hunters anyway, hence the "peasant tunic" look, so your idea is a good one.

3) Make the Gothic units (Sergeants, Foot Knights, Knights) into an Imperial line for the HRE.

How would three types of units constitute a royal line? Also since gothic armoured units belong near the end of the late era, they could not be added in early.

There is also an unused "Gothic Men at Arms" info pic which could perhaps be used for the third level (late) of men at arms.

Turn the badly named “Lancers” into “Gothic Knights”.

Lancers are currently the "Knights of Calatrava", an order type Knight trainable only in Castile. This is not that much of a problem as I do have another unit icon (Late Ghulam Bodyguards) which is a knight in Gothic Armour that I can use if necessary. The info pic will have to be a duplicate of Gothic Knights, Lancers or Late Royal Knights though.

There is also an unused "Gothic Men at Arms" info pic which could be used for the third level (late) of men at arms. (I believe CA initially intended to add Feudal, Chivalric and Gothic levels for the three eras but it didn't happen.)

The Imperial units could be available from High to Late, have high building requirements, and be the cream of the crop. I have the following suggestions for unit stats for the units: “Imperial Guard” (Gothic Sergeants) – 60 man unit, Elite, Disciplined, good speed (they use gothic armor, which supposedly was very light and durable, compared to conventional armor of the day), 2 Charge, 3-4 Attack, 5 Defense, 4-6 Armor, 4 Morale, Bonus attacking Cavalry, AP attack. “Imperial Men-At-Arms” (Gothic Foot Knights) – 60 man unit, Elite, Disciplined, decent speed, 4 Charge, 4-6 Attack, 5-6 Defense, 4-7 Armor, 6-8 Morale, AP attack. “Imperial Knights” (Gothic Knights) – 60 man unit, Elite, Disciplined, Elite, Impetuous, Bodyguard, good speed, 6 Charge, 4-6 Attack, 6-8 Defense, 6-10 Armor, 8 Morale, AP attack, dismounts into “Imperial Guard”.

The naming is a concern to me. Firstly there were no "Imperial" units as the HRE was neither Holy nor Roman nor an Empire (how many times have you heard that one?) but more so a confederation of Germanic (eastern Franks) states. "Gothic" is simply a style of armour.

4) Why NOT include the Scots? I think the English need a thorn in their side, and the Scots could do it. They don’t have to be very strong, just annoying. If you want, make them unplayable. But if you do make them playable, a few unit suggestions: Scottish Pikemen (Robert the Bruce used these BEFORE the Late period), Highland Rabble (or some other suitable name: An excellent way to make use of the peasant unit, with of course better stats). You could even convert some units from the Viking campaign for use within the normal campaign. On the plus side, there is already a pre-made Scottish faction!

Yes, there is a pre made faction but like any other it's too early. The units from VI would be wrong for the 1087 - 1453 campaign. The clansmen are also wrong in that they wear kilts, a 16th century garment. Other types of units would be needed.

5) If I can import the map from MTW2, then we would need some graphics (units, shields, colors, etc.) for the Mali and Ghanaian Empires. I still think that it should be done, considering the importance of Timbuktu. Anyway, any volunteers? (I think we could give them the Sahara; yes I know, very ahistorical, but come on, why not? I'd love to see Africans overrun Europe).

Unfortunately ahistorical means it's not going into the Pocket Mod, sorry. Timbutu is simply too far south to be on the map, and extending the current map would not be possible as the engine does not allow enough extra provinces.

I have other plans for the Sahara already. I would support your ideas regarding the extension of Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia and the removal of the existing Sahara province. Particularly Morocco, roughly equivalent in the game to the kingdom of Fes, doesn't actually cover Marrakech at all.

6) On the previous subject, the expanded map plus the addition of the Ghanaian or Mali Empires might curb the Spaniards from using the North African coast as a Crusade “Gateway”.

The removal of Cyrenacia and the cutting in half of North Africa should curb the Spanish expansion.

7) On Crusades and Jihads: Is there anyway to change the Zealousness of a province? I’ve seen far to many Jihads die before reaching the objective province.

In the vanilla game Inquisitors and Grand Inquisitors increase the zeal of Catholic provinces, and Imams do the same for Muslim ones. Orthodox have no equivalent. In the Pocket mod I have altered to this to Imams and Cardinals increasing zeal. The zeal increase factor is also much less, as per Noir's recommendations. Zeal is not the core issue with failed Jihads, it is troop quality within the Jihad.

8) On the “Islamic” UM and MS, why not give them to the Sicilians too, if not exclusively? This could reflect the fact that the Sicilians had quite the mixed culture.

Possible.

9) On the Criteria for factions, it was hastily thought up. Sorry if it was confusing or self-contradictory.

10) You don't really need to add the Tuetonic Order to add the Lithuanians: They would be effectively fighting 2 German factions. Just leave it as is. It also wouldn't make sense to have the Tuetonic Order conquer the HRE and the Russian steppes, as they are apt to do in XL and BKB.

Historically I can't imagine a Grand Duchy of Lithuania without a Teutonic Order. It would just be wrong adding one without the other, like adding Byzantines without Turks or English without French.

Don’t worry, I will be back every now and then to harass you with more insane, loony, useless, and vexatious ideas. I will never go away, unless of course a final version of the Pocket Mod is ever produced.

Keep the ideas coming, but try to remember that i cam trying to be as historically accurate as possible.

[ULC]

Originally Posted by Caravel
If we were to add Trebizond, why the use the original Byzantine faction for them and not for Nicaea? Could you define "eastern feel"?

Trebizond was still ruled by the Comnenos dynasty. I would have though thats were most of the power shifted. What I mean by eastern and western feel is the style of play. One could make more use of Horse archers, good tactics, guerilla warfare, etc., while the other could have more direct approach, similar to haw the catholics go to war.

Originally Posted by Caravel
How would three types of units constitute a royal line? Also since gothic armoured units belong near the end of the late era, they could not be added in early.

I didn't mean a royal line, sorry if I confused you. What I meant was that they would be the exclusive units to the germans, representing thier most trained and professional soldiers. "Imperial" can be ignored or replaced, it was their only to tie them closer in with the "Holy Roman Empire" theme. I didn't want them availabe during the early period, and high was just a possability, But definetly during the late (hey, by the way, has anyone noticed that the sword the GFK are wielding looks like a pre-zwiehander?)

Originally Posted by Caravel
Lancers are currently the "Knights of Calatrava", an order type Knight trainable only in Castile. This is not that much of a problem as I do have another unit icon (Late Ghulam Bodyguards) which is a knight in Gothic Armour that I can use if necessary. The info pic will have to be a duplicate of Gothic Knights, Lancers or Late Royal Knights though.

Sorry, thought you were going to give all Catholic factions access to it.

Originally Posted by Caravel
Yes, there is a pre made faction but like any other it's too early. The units from VI would be wrong for the 1087 - 1453 campaign. The clansmen are also wrong in that they wear kilts, a 16th century garment. Other types of units would be needed.

I would problably argue this do death normally, but I concede to your opinion (and historical accuracy).

Originally Posted by Caravel
Historically I can't imagine a Grand Duchy of Lithuania without a Teutonic Order. It would just be wrong adding one without the other, like adding Byzantines without Turks or English without French.

Why not remove the French? Really though, Lithuania was extremely important, and I think we need to have them be thier owwn faction jsut for the sake OF historical accuracy. Think of this; if they had not existed, the wouldn't have been a Wdalysaw Jogaila, the Tuetonic Order would have never been defeated, Poland would ahve been conquered by the Germans, maybe even the Rus princes would have been toppled! Such a travesty to history cannot be allowed. Not to mention they had the largest land empire in europe during the 13th and 14th centuries.

[caravel]

Trebizond was still ruled by the Comnenos dynasty. I would have though thats were most of the power shifted.

A good point. I think you may be right.

What I mean by eastern and western feel is the style of play. One could make more use of Horse archers, good tactics, guerilla warfare, etc., while the other could have more direct approach, similar to haw the catholics go to war.

Homelands should take care of that. Trebizond is closer to provinces that can train steppe mercenaries. Some new units may be added also, or exisitng ones renamed. Homelands for steppe units may have to be extended, as at present they don't provide enough coverage.

I didn't mean a royal line, sorry if I confused you. What I meant was that they would be the exclusive units to the germans, representing thier most trained and professional soldiers. "Imperial" can be ignored or replaced, it was their only to tie them closer in with the "Holy Roman Empire" theme. I didn't want them availabe during the early period, and high was just a possability, But definetly during the late.

Well those units are already HRE only, apart from the Gothic Knights which are all factions. I have to rethink the Gothic issue, because a) I'm not entirely convinced this type of armour was very widespread during the game's time frame, and b) I'm not sure about them being available to every faction. I'm thinking moreso the French, Germans and Italians only.

Sorry, thought you were going to give all Catholic factions access to it.

Well this is another thing I need to rethink. The Knights of Calatrava are really too early for the Lancer units armour (both man and horse) so I need some more input on this. The Lancers may be a good subsitute for Gothic Knights for those factions that cannot train the Gothic Knights.

Why not remove the French? Really though, Lithuania was extremely important, and I think we need to have them be thier owwn faction jsut for the sake OF historical accuracy. Think of this; if they had not existed, the wouldn't have been a Wdalysaw Jogaila, the Tuetonic Order would have never been defeated, Poland would ahve been conquered by the Germans, maybe even the Rus princes would have been toppled! Such a travesty to history cannot be allowed. Not to mention they had the largest land empire in europe during the 13th and 14th centuries.

Agreed, in principle but I still think we can get carried away here with adding factions.

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

Sorry to interrupt here, yet may I suggest, should you wish to not include certain factions, that you make a "virtual faction", pardon me if there is a correct word for this sort of this, in their place. The concept it that such provinces which would be controlled by a borderline in/out of list faction could have highly powerful rebels in them that, although they may not do any conquering, they are very tough to take over - compensating for their discoordination.

Sorry, cheers!