A new feature

[Copperknickers]

Hi, an idea for EB 2. I was wondering if you incorporate the crusade desertion feature to add in the deathg of your troops when marching over treacherous terrain?

[antisocialmunky]

Would be nice for sieges.

[hellenes]

I dont know how this would be implemeted but here is the idea:
Make ALL armies "Crusades"/"Juhads"...so you dont "make" troops in an unrealistic "RTS" like fashion...
Like if a Roman general wants to launch an attack on a settlement or wants to reqruit an army he asks the Senate (insert Pope but invisible somewhere on the corner of the map) for armies...this way you may have a realistic legion that has desertion...
For other factions it would work in a similar way...
This way you may provide an overhaul to teh idea of the campaign and make it faaar more realistic than the RTS like upproach...

[I Am Herenow]

But then how would you recruit soldiers, after you had used up your starting armies?

[hellenes]

But then how would you recruit soldiers, after you had used up your starting armies?

You dont...you just keep launching "Crusades"/"Jihads"....

[antisocialmunky]

I think its limitted to one per faction.. and you would need a few popes... and I think there can only be one pope. This sort of thing would be interesting if we could have more than one per faction and limit non-crusade troop movement to your own territory.

[fahrenheit]

I don't mean to pop your idea balloon but there are many flaws with this idea. (Assuming my knowledge about the MTW2 Papal system is correct.)

1. We could only do this for one faction, since there is only one pope.
2. There would be no way to restrict it, as the game function is meant to help you conquer the holy lands easier. Changing it to restrict your armies would be unrealistic and seemingly impossible.
3. This would only allow you to attack someone else once every few years.
4. The pope is supposed to be invincible, if he dies someone else takes his spot. If his only city is taken he becomes a horde. Doing this means the senate would forever live, even if Romani was destroyed.
5. If every army was a crusade/jihad army then the people would desert if the army sat around for awhile.

[hellenes]

I don't mean to pop your idea balloon but there are many flaws with this idea. (Assuming my knowledge about the MTW2 Papal system is correct.)

1. We could only do this for one faction, since there is only one pope.
Jihads dont need that.
2. There would be no way to restrict it, as the game function is meant to help you conquer the holy lands easier. Changing it to restrict your armies would be unrealistic and seemingly impossible.
I meant to avoid the unrealistic and dumbed down "RTS" recruitment. Because this way you assemble armies and not whenever you want...Which means slower expansion...
3. This would only allow you to attack someone else once every few years.
Exactly thus making the game more challenging and realistic.
4. The pope is supposed to be invincible, if he dies someone else takes his spot. If his only city is taken he becomes a horde. Doing this means the senate would forever live, even if Romani was destroyed.
Jihad?
5. If every army was a crusade/jihad army then the people would desert if the army sat around for awhile.
Thats the point.

Some constructive commentary...

[antisocialmunky]

It might be interesting to give certain factions Jihads and stuff like Gaul to show tribal chieftains gaining a large following and raising am assive peasant army to drive out invaders. It'd also make mass desertion more plausable if its a bunch of peasants.

[fahrenheit]

Some constructive commentary...

Jihads dont need that.
Jihads only work with the Muslim faction. Or whatever we rename it to.
And it can only be called on a population with a significant amount of Muslim people.

I meant to avoid the unrealistic and dumbed down "RTS" recruitment. Because this way you assemble armies and not whenever you want...Which means slower expansion...
There are other, better ways to do this. Increase money cost, lower movement, etc. But trying to limit armies to crusades/jihads is impossible.

Exactly thus making the game more challenging and realistic.
No, you could only have one army. As in, one general and a mass of units. That is not only not historically accurate but it is also extremely difficult.

This would mean that you could send one army (say for example) north to fight Audei. Then when Epeiros comes knocking on your door you have to wait and twiddle your thumbs. It wouldn't matter how much money you have, or even how many soldiers you have, you would have to wait for the crusade time to restart in order to attack them.

Jihad?
Jihad would be the most likely if we used this, but it could only work with factions of the same religion.


Thats the point.
Thats unrealistic and not historically accurate.

[antisocialmunky]

Jihads dont need that.
Jihad?
Jihad would be the most likely if we used this, but it could only work with factions of the same religion.

Bringing in from the culture/religion/government thread, if we did use government type as our 'religion.' We could make confederation = muslims and give them Jihads to give thme the feature I mentioned above.

[fahrenheit]

Bringing in from the culture/religion/government thread, if we did use government type as our 'religion.' We could make confederation = muslims and give them Jihads to give thme the feature I mentioned above.

Everything is still being debated, and maybe crusades/jihads feature will be implemented into the game. But limiting recruitment of armies to only jihads/crusades is impossible. I'm not against the idea all together, but what the OP and a few other people are asking is a nightmare to modders and players alike.