Medieval 2: Total War for Independence

[Askthepizzaguy]

CAMPAIGN RULES

The new objective is to eliminate all factions by a certain turn/date and reduce the size of your own empire to one province, while holding no more than X number of provinces. The goal being to promote religious freedom, regional autonomy, eliminate dictatorship/monarchy/aristocratic governments, and end all wars.

I want the rebels, independents, and heretics to win the game. No more Pope, no more forced conversions, no more exterminations, sackings, or long term occupations of non-native lands. No Mongols, no Timurids, no factions remaining, no royalty of any kind.

All provinces will be autonomous states with their own laws and freedoms. I will bring about the liberation of the world!

Game: Lands to Conquer, or Vanilla (any versions) M2TW

Rules:

1. No killing of Heretics.

2. No recruiting of Priests/Imams.

3. No usage of Assassins for assassination missions. Sabotage of buildings is ok. Except churches.

4. No crusades or jihads.

5. No sacking, pillaging, or exterminating. You are here to free people, not slay them or steal from them.

6. No killing of prisoners. Remember, many are forced to fight for tyrants. They are not your enemy. Tyranny itself is the enemy.

7. Destroy Mongols, Timurids, and all other factions, except the Papal States since they cannot be destroyed.

8. Reduce the size of your empire to one province by the end of the game.

9. No more than 10 provinces at a given time with a SINGLE military unit garrisoned. This means you MUST attempt to let the eleventh province rebel by removing all troops.

10. You must destroy all nations by a certain date. *to be determined by my first play through to ensure realism*

11. If a province does not wish to rebel, then they are voluntarily part of your nation. However, you may never garrison it or raise taxes.

12. You must lower taxes to minimum after your tenth province is taken.

13. Your 'nation' throughout most of the game will be ten provinces at most. All others are independent colonies which are allied with you but provide no military assistance and can leave at any time.

14. You must help bring about religious freedom by encouraging heresy, but not necessarily killing priests. That is also forbidden. Religious freedom means exactly that.

15. You must eventually allow your own nation to gain independence by eliminating military and taxes from all ten provinces, excepting basic militia in your capital for defense, in order to meet victory conditions.

16. No state religion means no building of churches. You may allow existing churches to continue, but you cannot build them.

17. Since the Papal States cannot be eliminated, and killing the Pope violates religious freedom, you may allow Rome to remain the Papal State, as long as the Pope does not invade other lands. If he does, you must reclaim it for the rebels. No Papal empire.

18. You may not modify the game, use codes, or otherwise act unsportsmanlike towards the AI, you know what I mean. Play fairly or don't play. Use your discretion as to what constitutes unfair play.

19. In order to make it even more challenging, you do not have until time expires to meet these victory conditions. As stated before, a certain turn or year is the deadline. A good deadline would be 20 turns after the Timurids arrive. Unless of course I cannot meet such a deadline myself.

HINT: you might want to migrate your nation towards the Timurid/Mongol area to provide a stable base to fight them off by the victory deadline.

The toughest part of this challenge is fielding enough liberator troops to defy the Mongols without an empire of your own, after having liberated the entire world. Money and troops will be scarce.

HINT: Pick a faction which starts in a good strategic position.

20. Meet these special victory conditions by the deadline, save the screenshot, and post it here, along with a screenshot of the faction info screen which shows turn number, regions held, battles won/lost, etc. If playing victory conditions by a certain date, you do not have to eliminate the Aztecs.

21. This post will be updated when I meet victory conditions to give a definite realistic target date. I trust you will abide by the rules....

22. Finally, be sure to post which version of what game. No mods besides Lands to Conquer.



After playing the ruthless murdering blitzkrieg god, I have now decided to become the champion of the people. I hereby renounce my dastardly ways.



....for now.



__________________
Easy rules:

You have until the time limit expires. No deadlines. But, you MUST kill the Aztecs as well.

[Barbarian]

Oh, nice plan. But it seems that it will take more time than till the arrival of timurids, to make this real.
So, the main task is to make all map into rebel lands, isn't it? However, it will be required to set taxes to very high for a short time, to make the province rebel.

I am not sure that I agree with all points, but I like the main idea, and I might try it.

I also like to set rules for myself, when playing total war games, but usually they are some minor ones like "never use mercenaries". Or, for example, I release all my prisoners in kingdoms Britannia campaign - fight your enemy, but respect him, and be honorable.
In Rome: Total war, playing as Greeks, I took only settlements, which were owned by Greece historically, like Athens, and then stopped expanding (why should I take lands, which are not mine?) and only fought defensive battles.

All of that makes the game more challenging and interesting.

18. You may not modify the game, use codes, or otherwise act unsportsmanlike towards the AI, you know what I mean. Play fairly or don't play. Use your discretion as to what constitutes unfair play.

that's a good statement

[phonicsmonkey]

good luck pizzaguy, in your quest to create Medieval 2: Total Anarchy

[Daveybaby]

Dont take this the wrong way, but youre insane.

In a good way, obviously.

[ReiseReise]

What about capturing rebel provinces? You didn't mention it (maybe because it was too obvious to you). They are already liberated and should therefore be off limits.

11. If a province does not wish to rebel, then they are voluntarily part of your nation. However, you may never garrison it or raise taxes.

Just to clarify: i am required to remove garrison and raise taxes to max to encourage a rebellion, but if the province still won't rebel, I cannot use that to my advantage by raising taxes. Did I get that correct? What if one of the local murderous tyrants is trying to capture the city and massacre the freedom-loving masses, must I leave the innocent undefended?

14. You must help bring about religious freedom by encouraging heresy, but not necessarily killing priests. That is also forbidden. Religious freedom means exactly that.

I disagree with this point. Priests are agents of tyranny, their only purpose to bolster the hegemony of their evil masters by brainwashing the masses who have already chosen their preferred method of worship. The masses are to be given religious freedom, their tyrannical masters are not to be given freedom to impose their belief system upon others.

Along the same vein:
4. No crusades or jihads.

Understood, but should I stand idly by while others set out half way across the world to impose their religion upon unwilling innocents? Perhaps (non-excommunicated) Catholic factions should be required to make a whole-hearted effort to take the Crusade target first (using a non-crusading army) in order to end the Crusade, and likewise for Muslim factions and Jihads. This may be difficult but it should be attempted. If taking the target is not feasable, every effort should be made to hinder the movement of the marauding Crusaders/Mujahedin when they pass through your lands.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

What about capturing rebel provinces? You didn't mention it (maybe because it was too obvious to you). They are already liberated and should therefore be off limits.

11. If a province does not wish to rebel, then they are voluntarily part of your nation. However, you may never garrison it or raise taxes.

Just to clarify: i am required to remove garrison and raise taxes to max to encourage a rebellion, but if the province still won't rebel, I cannot use that to my advantage by raising taxes. Did I get that correct? What if one of the local murderous tyrants is trying to capture the city and massacre the freedom-loving masses, must I leave the innocent undefended?

14. You must help bring about religious freedom by encouraging heresy, but not necessarily killing priests. That is also forbidden. Religious freedom means exactly that.

I disagree with this point. Priests are agents of tyranny, their only purpose to bolster the hegemony of their evil masters by brainwashing the masses who have already chosen their preferred method of worship. The masses are to be given religious freedom, their tyrannical masters are not to be given freedom to impose their belief system upon others.

Along the same vein:
4. No crusades or jihads.

Understood, but should I stand idly by while others set out half way across the world to impose their religion upon unwilling innocents? Perhaps (non-excommunicated) Catholic factions should be required to make a whole-hearted effort to take the Crusade target first (using a non-crusading army) in order to end the Crusade, and likewise for Muslim factions and Jihads. This may be difficult but it should be attempted. If taking the target is not feasable, every effort should be made to hinder the movement of the marauding Crusaders/Mujahedin when they pass through your lands.

After taking your tenth province, you must lower taxes to minimum in all provinces. if provinces do not rebel with no garrison, then you are not supposed to be the evil conqueror by raising taxes and destroying public order buildings. That's for occupiers, not liberators.

Consider each province that does not rebel with zero troops to be a voluntary ally in your liberation campaign. After all, you have no military presence in their homeland. They were instructed when you took the town that they were now free of being the slaves of any faction. If they should choose to thank you with a mere pittance of taxes (lowest possible) then consider it a thank you.

Eventually, with no garrison or taxes, the province will grow and grow more restless, and then declare its independence.

As to the point about not killing priests: The philosophical reasons are my own. See spoiler for details.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

It is true that I personally do not believe in the message they spread. I am a Deist, meaning a non-affiliated believer in a kind of god. I have no church or holy book and consider 'revealed' religions to be the fiction of man. However, due to my belief that morality and righteousness is hard coded into the universe by a universal objective standard of logic, reason, and justice, one cannot simply kill everyone one disagrees with.

However, a people oppressed by a tyrant king forced to labor and even kill in his name, those are a people enslaved who wish to be free.

Incidentally I dont believe in offensive warfare either, but this is just a game and I am taking dramatic liscence.

This is why the liberators of the world cannot simply crucify all the priests. It turns one into the enforcer of atheism, much like an Inquisition, which is precisely the sort of crime that the fundamentalists commit and is the very reason I oppose religious hegemony.

That said, they are free to speak their faith and spread it, but I will not help or hinder their progress. People are free to choose for themselves. Hence, freedom of religion. Logic and science happen to be the main component of my religion, and I encourage people to voluntarily reject superstitions. But I am not the master of the universe nor do I have all the answers, therefore enforcing MY viewpoint at the point of a sword would be equally ridiculous and immoral.

I consider Scientology, for example, to be the finest example of a brainwashing, ruthlessly cynical, dangerously corrupt cult. However, that is my OPINION and I cannot force it on others.

No offense meant to practicing Scientologists themselves. It is the message I consider invalid, not the people who spread it.

No crusades of jihads means we do not believe in anything remotely resembling a Holy Land. All lands are equally holy to the native peoples of that land.

No land should be conquered by invaders, but you cannot stop that from happening in this game, it is impossible. But yes, if you see a crusading army attacking a land that was not theirs to begin with (in other words, the only valid crusade is a defensive crusade... Cordoba for example should rightfully be retaken by the Catholics, but by that point in history, Jerusalem had been Muslim for generations and is no longer a Catholic state, therefore it would be like Great Britain retaking India simply because it once owned it... stupid).

If you see an offensive crusade or jihad against a neutral party, you could make an effort to stop the invaders if possible, or liberate that territory before they conquer it. Thus, causing a war with your nation for attacking your protectorate states. Be liberators and defenders if possible. Or let it rebel and let the rebels fight for their own homelands, and assist them if possible (a better idea).

_________________________

The rules for the war for independence are in the original post. What precedes was my philosophical reasoning behind the campaign, which no one is required to agree with.

[Barbarian]

Thats a bit confusing. If you let crusaders to take their cities back, that means, you are not against major religions, like Christianity. However, you told that every faction must be destroyed. That includes also any small catholic and muslim factions, which probably live peacefully and never go into jihads or crusades. Maybe they are happy to live the way they do, sharing the same religion, not being rebels and infidels, who each has his own religion?
In that case, you are a tyrant, who uses force to make them live in rebellious way. That doesn't sound like a war for independence.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Thats a bit confusing. If you let crusaders to take their cities back, that means, you are not against major religions, like Christianity. However, you told that every faction must be destroyed. That includes also any small catholic and muslim factions, which probably live peacefully and never go into jihads or crusades. Maybe they are happy to live the way they do, sharing the same religion, not being rebels and infidels, who each has his own religion?
In that case, you are a tyrant, who uses force to make them live in rebellious way. That doesn't sound like a war for independence.

I am not sure you are articulating what you meant to say very well. Honestly you could have made that a little clearer.

If a people take back cities that were once theirs from invaders, that's only natural. What isnt natural is holding some 500 year grudge. Spain had only recently been invaded by Muslim conquerors, however Jerusalem had been an Arab state for some time. I hope that makes things clearer.

As to another thing you said: A tyrant... who uses force to make them live in a rebellious way...? You mean someone who frees people from the yoke of oppression and grants them the rights of sovereignty, self-governance, and self-determination, as well as religious and personal freedom?

So the medieval kings and sultans who made laws forcing people to convert to a particular faith, obey ridiculous laws under penalty of death, granted no inalienable rights, perpetuated slavery, violence against women, forced bodily mutilation, and mandated conscription into armies to fight against people who had done them no harm, those kings and sultans and so forth were not the dictators and tyrants I claim they are?

I see. It all makes sense now. Those who raise up arms in self defense and fight for human liberty, progress, and freedom from oppression and religious persecution, THOSE are the tyrants, not the mass murderers, rapists, pillagers, exterminators, and brutal dictators themselves.

And spreading an ideology of freedom from hate and oppression and tyranny by liberating people from their vile rulers, that is the same as oppressing them.

Interesting viewpoint. I'm not sure many would agree with that. But high points for originality and creativity.



To put it another way, I wholeheartedly disagree with your assessment, but this is a forum for debate and I enjoyed reading it.

[Joh]

Hi gents,

You people really take things seriously, don't they? Chill out.

If I understood it correctly, Barbarian has a point there. If people are happy in their kingdom with their nice king who gives them plenty of food, throws entertainment at them and asks for low taxes, why should I even consider saving them from this "horrible" fate? Why should I impose them NOT having any king? Maybe they like him.

For the sake of the argument (and obviously blowing the reasoning out of proportion), hell, I myself willingly imposed a wife on me , and even though I am in practice subjugated , I would not like you "liberating" me from her .

However, for the sake of the challenge, it is perfectly understandable, indeed necessary, to make these regions rebel. Period. Let's not enter a philosophical discussion here about right and wrong, good and evil, etc, just leave that to the news (which of course will change views depending on location).

Anyway, I do not understand rule 13 about the 10 provinces. If I low taxes and they want to be allies, fine. You mean 10 troop producing settlements? Should they be permanent, i.e., defined and maintained through the campaign, or are temporary?

Regarding rule 14, I agree with respect to priest or imams. Respect the people, but attack the system. It is going to be very difficult to establish heresy as the dominant believe that way though.

Capturing rebel settlements is not allowed because of the spirit of the challenge. Free people can not be liberated.

Fighting crusades/jihads is only allowed when they target rebel lands. Whether the people are subjugated by one tyrant or another is of no importance to us. However, free people should be defended.

Cheers and relax, it is but a game.

[Yaropolk]

I would add

15. You may not build military buildings (e.g. town watch) in non-castle territories beyond your "10" limit. If you capture a territory with a military building you may leave it. If you give up one your 10 and take another territory as part of your nation, you don't have to destroy what's already built in the territory you are giving up

[Askthepizzaguy]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Hi gents,

You people really take things seriously, don't they? Chill out.

If I understood it correctly, Barbarian has a point there. If people are happy in their kingdom with their nice king who gives them plenty of food, throws entertainment at them and asks for low taxes, why should I even consider saving them from this "horrible" fate? Why should I impose them NOT having any king? Maybe they like him.

For the sake of the argument (and obviously blowing the reasoning out of proportion), hell, I myself willingly imposed a wife on me , and even though I am in practice subjugated , I would not like you "liberating" me from her .

However, for the sake of the challenge, it is perfectly understandable, indeed necessary, to make these regions rebel. Period. Let's not enter a philosophical discussion here about right and wrong, good and evil, etc, just leave that to the news (which of course will change views depending on location).

Anyway, I do not understand rule 13 about the 10 provinces. If I low taxes and they want to be allies, fine. You mean 10 troop producing settlements? Should they be permanent, i.e., defined and maintained through the campaign, or are temporary?

Regarding rule 14, I agree with respect to priest or imams. Respect the people, but attack the system. It is going to be very difficult to establish heresy as the dominant believe that way though.

Capturing rebel settlements is not allowed because of the spirit of the challenge. Free people can not be liberated.

Fighting crusades/jihads is only allowed when they target rebel lands. Whether the people are subjugated by one tyrant or another is of no importance to us. However, free people should be defended.

Cheers and relax, it is but a game.

Tis true, the philosophy is off-topic.

And I may not be making myself clear here myself; it is not monarchy itself which is the blame for the oppression of the middle ages.

In my opinion, there is little difference between direct democracy, representative democracy, a Republic, an oligarchy, a theocracy, a one-party state, a government of a few leaders, or a government with one sole leader.

Whether the one person in charge or the general populace (if they are in charge) are competent and ethical is the point in that case. However, no matter the style of government, there is something missing.

Inalienable rights. Guaranteed freedoms, such as freedom of speech, religion, the right not to be detained without a warrant, trial by a jury of peers, etc. And all the rest.

Whether the government is a benign dictatorship or a benign republic, so long as the rights of people are upheld, people are still considered free.

In this time period, no government had free people. So consider the purpose of liberation in this context, freeing people from oppressive governments of any style (theocratic, monarchies, republics, etc) and allowing the people to choose their own constitution of laws and whichever government they choose.

I hope that makes sense. But in any case it wouldnt have to... it is beside the point. The challenge is to make the map rebel/independent.

Cheers!

[Askthepizzaguy]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I would add

15. You may not build military buildings (e.g. town watch) in non-castle territories beyond your "10" limit. If you capture a territory with a military building you may leave it. If you give up one your 10 and take another territory as part of your nation, you don't have to destroy what's already built in the territory you are giving up

Since one isn't going to be stationing garrison troops or recruiting troops in that region, in MY opinion it makes little difference. If you want to help that province grow by spending your florins on a more or less useless troop facility, so be it.

It may improve public order. Go ahead and build it. But you cannot use it for military means.

The point of the 10 province rule is, to be clear, establishing a home base that is large enough to combat every major power including the Mongols, but without defeating the spirit of the mission which is to LIBERATE the map, not force people to help you liberate it, thereby oppressing them yourself.

A fair number of provinces is 10.

[Galain_Ironhide]

I for one am waiting to hear how you have faired thus far.

Have you started on this journey yet? Also have you got any screen shots to show us yet?

Inquisitve to know.

[Askthepizzaguy]

I for one am waiting to hear how you have faired thus far.

Have you started on this journey yet? Also have you got any screen shots to show us yet?

Inquisitve to know.

Alas, I have begun college courses for the next semester, so it may take time. But yes, I intend to take on my own challenge and post the screenshots here.

Anyone else up for it? Or am I the only one?

[Joh]

I would love to have a go at it, but between work, wife, kid and Stainless Steel (not necessarily in that order) there is very little time left.

Also, probably the Turks would be the best faction to try it, and I just finished a vanilla campaign with them. Could consider the Eggys though. Taking all settlements in middle East will boost your economy for the challenge.

Take care

[Dragunija]

Nah,but i will be waiting teh screens.

[Ramses II CP]

I've been messing with some other games (Infidelity!) but I'm going to make a run at this sometime soon. I had a similar thought previously of using the Mongol or Timurid Horde with no training of troops allowed to cause worldwide rebellion, leaving Europe a smoking hole, but the 'issues' with hotseating to the Horde made it too akward to work with.

I'll probably take France, since I haven't played a full campaign with them. 'Viva la Revolution!'

[Askthepizzaguy]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I've been messing with some other games (Infidelity!) but I'm going to make a run at this sometime soon. I had a similar thought previously of using the Mongol or Timurid Horde with no training of troops allowed to cause worldwide rebellion, leaving Europe a smoking hole, but the 'issues' with hotseating to the Horde made it too akward to work with.

I'll probably take France, since I haven't played a full campaign with them. 'Viva la Revolution!'

I'm finally going to take a crack at it myself.

I'm thinking... an Italian state.

Possibly Sicily, since they are the weakest AND they look as if they would be allied to the independents, being grey and all.

You are taking France, which would be my first choice. But they are powerful to begin with, so I am upping the difficulty on myself.

Would you think of doing an AAR on your French war for independence?

[Ramses II CP]

I'd love to, though not in the same depth as the Danish campaign. Keeping it down to 10 provinces keeps the family small, which helps, but it still gets complicated trying to describe so many battles.

I'll take screenshots and try to make a post every, say, twenty turns.

I immediately thought France because I can fairly early on develop an economic heartland to support wide ranging military actions.

Just to be clear, I can attack and occupy rebel cities, right? I want to take Rennes and ally with the English to bottle them up. That way I have a trading partner while I dismantle the rest of the world. First target: Iberia.

Oh, and I expect to be using a lot of spies as well. Plenty of 'The Watcher' kings in my future.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Sicilian War for Independence

PREVIEW

The year is now 1120 ad. All of Italy welcomes the Sicilians as liberators. With the fall of Rome, and Papist supremacy in the region shattered, the people are overjoyed to hear that the new Sicilian King, Simon the Benevolent, has met with the council of nobles and agreed to draft a Constitution guaranteeing the rights and freedoms of all who reside within the borders of Italy.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

For now, King Simon remains the sole leader of Italy, however, he has done away with the royal bloodlines. Sicily will be a constitutional monarchy, but the king will be chosen from the nobles, who will be elected by each province within the nation. The current king will choose his own heir from among the candidates elected by the people, based upon merit.

A constitutional royal meritocracy has been born!

The people of Italy are excited to learn about government and law, because the best and brightest among them are now capable of being elected Governor of their province, which would put them in line for the throne of Italy! Never before have the common people been so uplifted by the wise and generous rule of a sovereign king!

It matters not that the Italian King has been excommunicated by the previous Pope, because the Italian people have already repelled invading forces from Milan, Venice, France, the Holy Roman Empire, expelled the Papal army, the Moorish invaders, and brought peace and stability to Italy.

The King has decreed that all people will have freedom of speech, freedom of religion, free press, the right to petition, the right to assemble, the right to keep and bear arms, and the rights to be free of unreasonable search and seizure; cruel and unusual punishment; and compelled self-incrimination.

With peaceful relations established with the Moors, Turks, and the Egyptians, it seems clear that the true aggressors in Europe are the Catholic Kings, who have been corrupted by a Pope who wishes to impose through force the rule of the Catholic church. The Pope has even called a crusade against Antioch, providing Catholic France an excuse to invade Italy. The entire affair is a ruse to get the pious men of Europe to invade Italy with Papal approval. The Pope is a manipulator of souls and must be removed from power.

The wise and benevolent leader of Italy has been most kind, understanding, and merciful to those he has bested on the battle, freeing all prisoners and allowing citizens of the cities he has taken to retain their freedoms, rights, and possessions.

Word has spread to all of Europe of the events taking place in Italy. A Renaissance of the human spirit has weakened support for the oppressive Papacy and the Kings and dictators of Europe. Peasant revolts and uprisings have taken place within Christendom, demanding rights and freedoms the same as the Italian people!

A wave of immigration has also taken place, with refugees of other nations seeking sanctuary within the borders of Italy. The price of citizenship is to learn the Italian language, perform civil service for the Italian government, and take a citizenship test as well as swear and oath of loyalty.

The Muslim people have also sought refuge within Italy's borders, and with the freedom of religion decree, their faith is now free to spread. Small religions have also popped up along the landscape, and many are considered heretical by the church. There is also a wave of areligious sentiment among the educated class, and many people are turning away from the church and finding their own way.

Needless to say, the rulers of Europe are not pleased. Almost every faction is at war with us, but the Kings of Europe do not have the support of the people. Their armies fight, but their hearts are not in it. Every peasant seeks liberation by Italy's armies, and those who surrender on the battlefield are granted immediate amnesty and given land in exchange for service to Italy.

However, the Kings are not willing to give up. A massive propaganda campaign is now being waged to paint King Simon as the Anti-Christ, and the fundamentalist crazies of Europe are still willing to fight us in the name of God.

Fortunately for them, our King spares even those who hate us and wish to kill us. However, those who believe in killing the free people of Italy or our King are banished from the realm. The King believes very much in the ideas and principles of Christianity which says to turn the other cheek; love and forgive thy enemy. While not a Catholic, his spiritual strength gives hope to the people of Italy who fear damnation by the Pope. They are beginning to see through the lies of the corrupt Papacy and embrace the true message of Christ. It is an irony that King Simon is not a Catholic, yet by his example, people are embracing their faith!

The King sees greatness in the people of Europe. He has taken upon himself the task of freeing those who seek to be freed, leading a band of volunteers and free men to liberate the oppressed. No man will be forced to participate in the King's quest.

For the immediate future, the King seeks to strengthen the economy of Italy, and bring peace and prosperity to his own people. When he has amassed the political and economic wealth necessary, he will wage an offensive against the French invaders. For now, the war will be defensive, since we are in a vastly superior position.

Also, the seas must be made free for trade. Our Muslim friends seek trade and passage, and neither will happen with continuing Venetian, HRE, and Byzantine blockades and piracy. The Royal Italian navy must liberate the Mediterranean!

Our tasks are clear. The Royal Italian Army will defend the northern border, while the Navy clears the seas to the south. Our remaining resources will be reinvested into the Italian economy to prepare for public order and military concerns, as well as bolster trade. Patience and peace will pay off.

Our freedom of religion creed will cause disorder within our cities, indeed. People are still too narrow minded to accept other religions. But our revolution will inspire tolerance and universal respect for human life. This Italian Renaissance will be a beacon of light for all of the world to see!

==============================
The actual campaign will be posted in its entirety when it is finished.

Stay tuned for more updates and previews. I hope to finish the entire campaign and meet victory conditions for all to see!

[Askthepizzaguy]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I'd love to, though not in the same depth as the Danish campaign. Keeping it down to 10 provinces keeps the family small, which helps, but it still gets complicated trying to describe so many battles.

I'll take screenshots and try to make a post every, say, twenty turns.

I immediately thought France because I can fairly early on develop an economic heartland to support wide ranging military actions.

Just to be clear, I can attack and occupy rebel cities, right? I want to take Rennes and ally with the English to bottle them up. That way I have a trading partner while I dismantle the rest of the world. First target: Iberia.

Oh, and I expect to be using a lot of spies as well. Plenty of 'The Watcher' kings in my future.

You can attack rebels up to your tenth province. After that, leave them alone.

You establish your nation's borders, then respect the independent states.

I have estabished Naples, Palermo, Ajaccio, Cagliari, Florence, Rome, Venice, Milan, Genoa, and Bologna as my 10 provinces of the Italian Nation. All others will not be permitted garrisons or greater than minimum taxes, and granted unchallenged independence.

[Ramses II CP]

My first post is up here:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...28#post1804628

Your last post leads to an interesting point; I thought the rules had it that taxes nationwide had to go to low, not just in new territories. Right now I have taxes at low across the whole countryside, which isn't a big disadvantage in the long run as population growth will make up for any lost revenue, but I probably just read the rules wrong.

Two more minor matters; To get Pamplona to rebel I converted it from a fort to a village. I was worried the Spanish would take it back before it rebelled as they were sort of wandering around in the area. I presume that's okay?

Also towns in the 10 province nation are only permitted a single company for a garrison, right? That's the main reason I used a marriage alliance with the English; they'd be constantly sniffing after my cities otherwise.

I've got to write up the next 10 turns and then it'll be about time to launch the war against Germany. Going to be interesting to see how long I can keep the Pope on the hook when I won't join his crusades or give him territory.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

My first post is up here:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...28#post1804628

Your last post leads to an interesting point; I thought the rules had it that taxes nationwide had to go to low, not just in new territories. Right now I have taxes at low across the whole countryside, which isn't a big disadvantage in the long run as population growth will make up for any lost revenue, but I probably just read the rules wrong.

Two more minor matters; To get Pamplona to rebel I converted it from a fort to a village. I was worried the Spanish would take it back before it rebelled as they were sort of wandering around in the area. I presume that's okay?

Also towns in the 10 province nation are only permitted a single company for a garrison, right? That's the main reason I used a marriage alliance with the English; they'd be constantly sniffing after my cities otherwise.

I've got to write up the next 10 turns and then it'll be about time to launch the war against Germany. Going to be interesting to see how long I can keep the Pope on the hook when I won't join his crusades or give him territory.

Agreed, it was written rather ambiguously.

Do as you wish with the taxes within your nation, unless you seek to be ever more magnanimous by reducing your homeland taxes to the minimum as well. That will make your quest more difficult, but I applaud you for taking on such a challenge. The people of your nation will forgive the increase in taxes, as there is a war for independence going on, and their own rights and freedoms are guaranteed by your brave fighting men.

You can convert a settlement outside your nation from a castle to a villiage, but NOT from a village to a castle, as the public order bonus would be cheating, giving you additional, if limited florins for as long as the castle is uncaptured and loyal.

You may garrison your homeland as much as you wish, until you grant them independence to meet victory conditions.

I congratulate you for accepting the challenge!

I must warn you, ransoming is supposed to be against the rules. If the opposing party were to decline the ransom, you would have the blood of prisoners who surrendered under a flag of peace on your hands. Although, if they agree to pay, you are safe. I would avoid that tactic and release prisoners. Better for your chivalry anyway than a mere few florins.

Salute!

[Ramses II CP]

Ahh! I wasn't clear on the ransoming bit either, I just assumed. I haven't had any rejected yet, or made much money (Not as much as I lost from taxes being down, maybe 2.5k at most) so I'll start releasing them and write in it as a new proclamation or some such.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Ahh! I wasn't clear on the ransoming bit either, I just assumed. I haven't had any rejected yet, or made much money (Not as much as I lost from taxes being down, maybe 2.5k at most) so I'll start releasing them and write in it as a new proclamation or some such.

It is an honourable trade-off... no ransoming, but some taxes to fund your wars.

Your citizens, after all, are free to leave and live in your liberated independent states, where they will pay taxes only to their local government. Anyone in your nation is agreeing to voluntarily contribute.

It is a wise and fair administrator who uses taxes for a worthy cause, but allows those who do not wish to contribute to become independent.

I even admit in my Sicilian campaign I have ransomed. However, I realize now the error of that tactic, and fortunately, no prisoners have been killed. I have sworn never to ransom again.

[Old Geezer]

I think you should include a landing on the moon as a necessary victory condition.

[Ramses II CP]

The only problem would be the sheer number of turns you have to click through to get there. I already can't imagine clicking through to the Timurids, much less the Aztecs.

edit: 'There' being, obviously, the moon launch.

[Redz " Preatorian Knights"]

good luck.... i can see how piss off you are with the pope!!

[Askthepizzaguy]

I think you should include a landing on the moon as a necessary victory condition.

What means this? You think the victory conditions I laid out are impossible?
Ramses and I are well on our way to disproving that theory. It was my idea and he's making more progress than me.

The only problem would be the sheer number of turns you have to click through to get there. I already can't imagine clicking through to the Timurids, much less the Aztecs.

edit: 'There' being, obviously, the moon launch.

I admit I am not looking forward to fighting the Timurids, especially with the sheer amount of heresy by then draining my cities.

Still... challenging!!! It's what I need to stay interested in the game.

I've NEVER had the HRE give me so much trouble before.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Playing using this style has taught me an invaluable method of seige warfare!

I have just discovered how to take by force a city with a garrison of equal strength as my own, on LTC vh/vh.

A crucial weakness in the strategy of the AI is abandoning the walls early. They seem to rely on the strength of the city center for unlimited morale.

The problem: Not every soldier in a massive stack can fit inside the city center.

Solution for the attacker:

Take the walls quickly with seige towers and ladders. Massive infantry is required. The enemy will be overwhelmed, at least in that confined area. Next, take your generals and heavy cavalry and storm the broken gates, forcing anyone in the vicinity to rout. If you need infantry support, send them through first.

Rout anything you can, and slay them before they get to the city center. You will now have a slight numbers advantage (crucial).

Next, You must position your forces in guard mode outside the city center and attack them with arrows and crossbow bolts (and artillery, if applicable).

They will sally forward to attack you, putting you in the superior defensive position. With their backs to the wall and getting picked off by force, they must attack or die without a fight. They cannot conquer your forces in the tight city streets with your forces on guard mode and your general safely behind them. It is impossible. Rally constantly and you cannot fail unless your general dies.

Slaying their general with heavy spearmen is a moderate priority with a detachment of expendable forces for that mission. If you can, the enemy will break easier and tire from it. Returning to the city center under fire over and over....

You must have more archers and heavy infantry to win, and keep your general alive. Since your forces were equal to begin with, make sure you slay enough infantry/archers on the walls first.

You can defeat superior garrisons in this way as well, if you are brilliant.

I now know what I must do to take the world with my inferior Sicilian militia forces... since I will never be able to greatly overwhelm my foe as I always have, I have removed the most critical trump card from my own arsenal. This playing style has forced my generalship skills to vastly improve.

Beware, for askthepizzaguy has truly become a fearsome seige expert. None can stop me now, except conceivably a brilliant human player of equal strength in a superior tactical position. Bwahaha!

Seriously, try this War for Independence challenge. You will be FORCED to improve your game. I highly recommend it.