Crusades in the SSHIP

[eyelurker]

By the hell these Crusader are relentless. They keep sending wave upon wave of army for about 15 turns now and defeating a whopping 30 crusader armies and they still going at it.

I'm seriously consider auto win these pests. I don't want to battle the crusader over and over and over again. I win the battle anyway.

[Jurand of Cracow]

Frankly speaking, I'd think that the best strategy is just to let the first army take your city, and then fight another day.
I reacall playing as the Romaioi - when the Muslims targeted Constantinople, it was pretty much end of the game.

[eyelurker]

Frankly speaking, I'd think that the best strategy is just to let the first army take your city, and then fight another day.
I reacall playing as the Romaioi - when the Muslims targeted Constantinople, it was pretty much end of the game.

Well reputation is no longer a problem but retaking a non core province will still count on my agressiveness. Also it will interrupt the "coring" which require uninterrupted 200 years of rule (i know the game will already end but it weigh on my mind) Yeah if i don't want to fight i just auto win, after winning enough battles to make Crusader field of blood i think i deserve some break.

[Jurand of Cracow]

Well reputation is no longer a problem but retaking a non core province will still count on my agressiveness. Also it will interrupt the "coring" which require uninterrupted 200 years of rule (i know the game will already end but it weigh on my mind) Yeah if i don't want to fight i just auto win, after winning enough battles to make Crusader field of blood i think i deserve some break.

In general - I agree that crusades may be too much (but I don't know this part of the game, and maybe I'm wrong).
The fundamental goal of the game is to limit the number of battles, so it's worrying even more.
Coring (yeah, the EUIV is eactly the source of the idea I had to implement this mechanism) depends on the settlement. For settlements that are indeed historical "core" of a faction, it is usually speeded up, eg:

log ------ (.E.) Damascus Integration Process ------------------------------------------------------

if I_EventCounter Damascus_turns_in_our_realm < 560


if I_EventCounter FL_weak_on_the_throne == 0 ; natural integration process but not with a Usurper (thus not during a civil war either)
inc_event_counter Damascus_turns_in_our_realm 1
end_if


if I_EventCounter FL_is_crowned_ruler == 1 ; if the owner's faction FL has the crown
inc_event_counter Damascus_turns_in_our_realm 1 ; integration is faster
end_if


if I_EventCounter FL_policy_thinks_of_his_people == 1 ; if FL pursues a conducive policy
inc_event_counter Damascus_turns_in_our_realm 1 ; integration is faster
end_if


if I_EventCounter faction_turn_zengid > 0 ; core province of this faction
and I_EventCounter FL_weak_on_the_throne == 0
and I_EventCounter Damascus_turns_in_our_realm < 200
set_event_counter Damascus_turns_in_our_realm 200 ; no integration is needed
end_if


if I_EventCounter faction_turn_egypt > 0 ; core province of this faction
and I_EventCounter FL_weak_on_the_throne == 0
and I_EventCounter Damascus_turns_in_our_realm < 200
set_event_counter Damascus_turns_in_our_realm 200 ; no integration is needed
end_if
end_if

[eyelurker]

In general - I agree that crusades may be too much (but I don't know this part of the game, and maybe I'm wrong).
The fundamental goal of the game is to limit the number of battles, so it's worrying even more.

I say it's Crusade and probably Jihad where the battles goes off the chart(not always, i don't battle as much as Zengids but that probably influence by it's still early turns)

Against normal faction, i usually deals about 1 army per 2-4 turns sometime 2 army especially at the start of the war. If i cripple the faction enough they will simply become very passive at least for Jerusalem and Seljuk where they can only use one stack to guard their territory. They could and sometime attack with it but needless to say it's an ai gamble and if fail my counterattack will be go unopposed

[dnzunlu]

Frankly speaking, I'd think that the best strategy is just to let the first army take your city, and then fight another day.
I reacall playing as the Romaioi - when the Muslims targeted Constantinople, it was pretty much end of the game.

Yes this is the best strat, but it can be annoying when it's an important city like Constantinople and they sack it to when they take it.

If you do try to defend against a crusade, I can attest that it will take at least 30 turns to finish, and that is including all the full stacks I nullified by assasinating generals or marrying them (which became a problem as my royal dynasty became the most insane mix of various European bloodlines, and my faction leader ended up becoming an Arpad patrilineally).

I think this issue is unattested by most people because they don't play in the Mid East, so for them Crusades are just a mechanic to take some cities for free. For me, the best solution would be to disable the mechanic entirely or severely limit it. For example only one crusade can be declared on a faction in a game, or it can only happen every 150 turns and so on. We already know that Jihad as it is represented in MW2 is completely inaccurate. And there is already a Crusader Kingdom at the start date. Plus, it is accurate for crusades to become increasingly unimpactful as the game date progresses. So, for me, disabling the mechanic entirely is a valid solution.


Oh and also, the crusades/jihad mechanic as it stands doesn't synergize with the reputation mechanic at all. What's the point of me maintaining good reputation if it can be ruined by 10+ factions declaring war on me suddenly, destroying my trade income, and taking many turns just to establish peace with everyone again because I have to send a diplomat all the way to Denmark now. This is probably the most important reason why it should be disabled.

[Macaras]

I think the problem with crusades is that the generals don’t die, so AI has to continue over and over adding units to a crusading general army, even if they are defeated already. If player is careful to kill the crusading general in the battle and through assassins, it’s not endless by any means. After few initial turns ai will not send any more crusades or jihads, just replenishes the generals already crusading. Usually the big factions will send two or three stacks, the small factions one. After that the jihad/crusade fails. Of course everybody from the other religion declares war on you etc so it’s very difficult, so sometimes it’s easier to let the city be taken over as then reconquer it, it’s not impossible for a strong faction to defeat crusade.

Regarding the other factions declaring war, it doesn’t destroy player’s reputation. On the contrary if you kill the crusading general and release the captives you get rid of a crusading army(if they don’t border your region) and get a big rep boost. The trade etc suffers as in any other war. If the diplomat is too far it’s rather a problem of having just one diplomat which I personally don’t like either..

[dnzunlu]

I think the problem with crusades is that the generals don’t die, so AI has to continue over and over adding units to a crusading general army, even if they are defeated already. If player is careful to kill the crusading general in the battle and through assassins, it’s not endless by any means. After few initial turns ai will not send any more crusades or jihads, just replenishes the generals already crusading. Usually the big factions will send two or three stacks, the small factions one. After that the jihad/crusade fails. Of course everybody from the other religion declares war on you etc so it’s very difficult, so sometimes it’s easier to let the city be taken over as then reconquer it, it’s not impossible for a strong faction to defeat crusade.

Regarding the other factions declaring war, it doesn’t destroy player’s reputation. On the contrary if you kill the crusading general and release the captives you get rid of a crusading army(if they don’t border your region) and get a big rep boost. The trade etc suffers as in any other war. If the diplomat is too far it’s rather a problem of having just one diplomat which I personally don’t like either..

Frankly, I don't think sniping generals is a good solution to this problem. Also tell me this, how am I supposed to kill the generals AND release captives? It's either one or the other unless you very meticilously try to snipe generals before they rout or shoot them with arrows which is just wayy to metagaming.


IDK if you ever received a crusade but seeing as there are a very large amount of catholic factions, each of them sending 2-3 stacks is a major annoyance. I doubt this is a real problem if you are always playing France or England or something and you get very rarely a jihad with max 5 factions participating. If you are in the Mid East, you are bound to take major Crusade targets like Jerusalem, Acre or Constantinople and then you are cooked for the rest of the game because you will participate in at least 3 world wars.

[Macaras]

Frankly, I don't think sniping generals is a good solution to this problem. Also tell me this, how am I supposed to kill the generals AND release captives? It's either one or the other unless you very meticilously try to snipe generals before they rout or shoot them with arrows which is just wayy to metagaming.

Just winning the battle and killing the general whatever way possible, just make sure he doesn't rout.. And after the battle you release the captives. Since the crusading general is dead, the rest of the army disbands. In regular war they would be sent right next to your frontier, but if the crusading faction is far, there is a big chance you just got rid of one complete army with one victory.

IDK if you ever received a crusade but seeing as there are a very large amount of catholic factions, each of them sending 2-3 stacks is a major annoyance. I doubt this is a real problem if you are always playing France or England or something and you get very rarely a jihad with max 5 factions participating. If you are in the Mid East, you are bound to take major Crusade targets like Jerusalem, Acre or Constantinople and then you are cooked for the rest of the game because you will participate in at least 3 world wars.

Here you are right, usually I play christian factions (KoJ, Georgia, Byz) and jihads are smaller than crusades. But how to make ai send less armies - I don't know.. We already limited the amount of units by raising their price, in vanilla there was much more armies and also player would lose reputation just by having a war declared on him, these are the things we could improve. I read there is a way of making crusades less frequent, may be that will improve the game a little, I don't know if its a good idea though?

[Menethil22]

I usually have to reload to prevent crusade against Damascus and Aleppo. The Zengid ai can't deal with it. I wish there is a way to make less faction join crusade (like Spain usually send away an army and the moors will screw them). Or reduce the amount of turn to 15-20 atleast from 30.

[eyelurker]

I think the problem with crusades is that the generals don’t die, so AI has to continue over and over adding units to a crusading general army, even if they are defeated already. If player is careful to kill the crusading general in the battle and through assassins, it’s not endless by any means. After few initial turns ai will not send any more crusades or jihads, just replenishes the generals already crusading. Usually the big factions will send two or three stacks, the small factions one. After that the jihad/crusade fails. Of course everybody from the other religion declares war on you etc so it’s very difficult, so sometimes it’s easier to let the city be taken over as then reconquer it, it’s not impossible for a strong faction to defeat crusade.

Regarding the other factions declaring war, it doesn’t destroy player’s reputation. On the contrary if you kill the crusading general and release the captives you get rid of a crusading army(if they don’t border your region) and get a big rep boost. The trade etc suffers as in any other war. If the diplomat is too far it’s rather a problem of having just one diplomat which I personally don’t like either..

The general don't die seems to become a problem. Maybe it hasn't reach 30 turns yet because my turns feels very long but the Crusade doesn't seem to end.

What i mean by not ending is that the ai no longer sent army to the target (in my case Tripoli) but the incoming crusade mission stills looming. Honestly if that means that's a way for me to bypass the crusade i wouldn't mind at all.

Also for some reason if i use Jihad my reputation drops and it has happens twice now. I don't the sepecific reason, maybe because i declare war on faction that i just make ceasefire with or maybe because i sent like 3-4 jihad which somehow decrease reputation

[Jurand of Cracow]

I think this issue is unattested by most people because they don't play in the Mid East, so for them Crusades are just a mechanic to take some cities for free. For me, the best solution would be to disable the mechanic entirely or severely limit it. For example only one crusade can be declared on a faction in a game, or it can only happen every 150 turns and so on. We already know that Jihad as it is represented in MW2 is completely inaccurate. And there is already a Crusader Kingdom at the start date. Plus, it is accurate for crusades to become increasingly unimpactful as the game date progresses. So, for me, disabling the mechanic entirely is a valid solution

Frankly speaking, I share this opinion. I think the historical "small crusades" are best simulated by additional units (and money) spawned / increasing recruitment at the disposal of KoJ, while the "big" crusades should be restricted to happen not more frequently than 100 turns. They would be big and rare events. I don't know how to code it, but I'd guess it's possible.

[DaGrenadier]

I agree with this sentiment, In my Zengid campaign im barely holding on to Aleppo because the crusader states are sending in stack after stack of elite units. The crusader states alone seem to be able to recruit a ridiculous amount of various knightly order units

[Jurand of Cracow]

I agree with this sentiment, In my Zengid campaign im barely holding on to Aleppo because the crusader states are sending in stack after stack of elite units. The crusader states alone seem to be able to recruit a ridiculous amount of various knightly order units

the amount of the Military Orders' units is will be slightly lowered in the next release, partially because there'll be just one building of this type. And then it will be reviewed more.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[kostic]

Fewer AI-led crusades would be a good thing.
If it were possible to also limit the number of Catholic factions participating in a crusade, that would be fantastic ! (it seems to me that there are 15 factions capable of going on crusade. For example, there should be a maximum of 5 factions that send armies, except in the case where the player has a Catholic faction; in this case, he would have the possibility of participating as a 6th faction)


Indeed, the number of armies would then be limited. It would be less confusing on the map (congregation of large Catholic armies around their target) and the player would not be worn out by repelling too many crossed armies.

[eyelurker]

I'm not playing as Roman but one thing i'm looking forward is the fourth crusade hoping it will weaken them.

That didn't happen and Roman are still strong and stable.

[Jurand of Cracow]

there're no scripted crusades/jihads in the SSHIP.

[eyelurker]

there're no scripted crusades/jihads in the SSHIP.

Less crusades and more scripted invasion since you cannot crusade fellow christian in game. Still good to know.