Greetings friends, 'tis I, Doomdark, your faithful purveyor of hopes and dreams!

This month, I shall speak of those who know no loyalties and would shamelessly sell their services for money. No, I don't mean prostitutes. No, not politicians either. I am speaking, of course, of mercenaries! Brave, yet prudent, these companies of professional soldiers were the closest thing to standing armies around for much of the Crusader Kings II period. In the game, there are a number of predefined mercenary regiments that can be hired by anyone with sufficient funds (though not heathens and infidels - there are limits, even for soldiers of fortune.) As long as they get paid, they will fight loyally, and, unlike regular levies, they even reinforce, albeit slowly. They do not come cheap however, and woe to the lord who cannot pay their fee. At best, mercenaries who do not get paid will simply abandon their employer. At worst, they will defect to the enemy. Some disgruntled but enterprising condottieri might even attempt to seize land to call their own (as, for example, the Victual Brothers actually did with the island of Gotland in the Baltic Sea.)



Yes, mercenaries can seize territory, at which point they start acting like regular states. This brings us to the in may ways similar, but rather more pious, knightly orders. These humble soldiers of God can be hired not for gold, but for Piety. However, they will not fight brothers of the faith, and they will request ownership of the holdings that they seize (acceding is a very pious act). Landed mercenaries will retain their standing army, though it will no longer reinforce (eventually, it might thus be lost), and everyone will have a Casus Belli on them. Landed Holy Orders can still freely call on their main force, however. (If lost, they can raise it again through a special decision.) Similarly, the Byzantines have access to the Varangian Guard, which is treated much like a "vassal" mercenary force.



Should a mercenary regiment or a Holy Order lose its last holding, it will return to being a landless entity available for hire.



Here's a bonus screenie of what occupation looks like in the terrain map mode.



That's all for now. Next month, plots and intrigue (unless I change my mind!)

Henrik Fåhraeus, Associate Producer and CKII Project Lead

 

[Logos88]

It'd be nice to see a vengeful bastard turn towards mercenary work, taking any job that pits him against his father.

I was expecting a pretender with now land but some spare money can buy an army to boost their ambition

 

[Lord Blekinge]

WOW, this DD has blown me away. I really like the mechanics of hiring mercenaries, though I imagine you can disband them? If so, would it be like Rome where you have to pay them off? As for the holy orders, will they claim land if your King is in command of the siege?, or will the land be yours? Will the names of provinces change depending on who owns the province? or will it be like EU3 where you can rename provinces yourself?

 

[RedRooster81]

Or as Francesco Sforza with Milan, to give a much more known example.

It would be cool if someone like Sforza could rise to power--born a condottiero's bastard, married into a prominent family, given power by Milan's senate. And then he established his dynasty.

 

[EightDeer]

Given that the Mercenaries and Holy Orders screens display the type of soldiers you get, does that mean army composition is actually going to matter in CK2?

 

[Negru Voda]

Given that the Mercenaries and Holy Orders screens display the type of soldiers you get, does that mean army composition is actually going to matter in CK2?

I think army composition always "mattered", just nobody bothered to care (cause it was something that could be affected in a very abstract manner, through the power balance between the "pops")

 

[Tamerlan]

Looks great. I hope we'll be able to code some devious events based on the presence of mercenaries (location in province, simple fact of having some actively in service).

 

[Drachenfire]

I am very excited by this update as well.

The Welsh Princes of Gwynedd, Powys, and Deheubarth owe their survival in no small part from their ability to hire Norse-Gaels mercenaries from Dublin (for Gwynedd) and Waterford (for Deheubarth) to supplement their armies in the face of vast Norman armies which all but conquered the country between 1081-1100. With Norse-Gaels mercenaries, Gwynedd, Deheubarth, and Powys resurfaced in 1100 after nearly 20 years of incessant warfare with the Normans. Once England conquered the east coast of Ireland the Welsh princes were checked and denied manpower in their defense of their independence.

And later of corse, Owain Lawgoch, direct descendent of Llywelyn the Great, lead a mercenary force usually in the employ of the King of France, and later of the King of Castile.

I hope that Irish mercs will be available for the Welsh player, and that Welsh mercs will be available for the French player (if Wales is conqured by England )

 

[Me_]

Why is the region north of Poznanskie called Gnieznienskie? Gniezno is much further south.

Also is that Plock region that is not even by Vistula River supposed to be named after the city of Plock, located much further south-west?

Edit: in fact the entire Polish map seems very wrong. How did Opole end up where it is?

 

[A_Dane]

This would appear to like.. force me to buy this, one of my biggest issues with the old game seems to have been solved, holy orders :O

 

[Cèsar de Quart]

The Catalan Company, among other historical mercenary companies and holy orders. I almost cry, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. That was brilliant!

No, you're not the only one!

Still, given that Muslim armies were mainly made of mercenaries (most of them Muslim mercenaries, but still), there should be a workaround.

Christian armies work through Feudal recruitment and, as the centuries go by, mercenaries.

Muslim armies recruit town levies, sometimes, if the government has the alliegance of the wildest tribes, this tribe auxilia, usually in the form of cavalry, and a lot of mercenaries.

I'll put an example: in the XIVth Century, Castile and Aragon competed in a very curious race: who could offer more mercenaries to the kings of North Africa. Morocco and Fez were left to Castile and Aragon kept Tlemecen, Oran, Tunis and Algeria.

These mercenaries were serving as the Moorish kings palace guard and also as bureaucrats of sorts, especially the officers. This companies were mostly like a way of taking the Moorish king hostage of the Iberian kings while the Moorish king was happy with his band of invincible Western sergeants and knights. The companies were always led by an important or trusted Iberian nobleman.

A form of colonialism. And these mercenaries had no trouble fighting for the Muslims. No mercenary ever had.

 

[Comrade Chaos]

Will these Mercs be somewhat better at fighting in some cases, as they make their living from it?

 

[unmerged(15623)]

Still, given that Muslim armies were mainly made of mercenaries (most of them Muslim mercenaries, but still), there should be a workaround.

Perhaps I have understood something horribly wrong, but when I think of medieval Islamic armies I think of religious voulenteers, levies of various froms (urban, semi-feudal, tribal allies, and there were probably some jund remnants still in the early period) and slave soldiers. There were plenty of paid free soldiers as well, but I though that in Islamic world this was typically handeled on individual basis rather than by contracting groups (at least when it comes to hiring soldiers of more "settled" origin).

 

[RedRooster81]

I agree with Cesar about mercenaries and religion. In many cases it did not matter, especially in Iberia and as he points out North Africa. My favorite case is Enrique IV of Castille, the brother of Isabel the Catholic, who kept a bodyguard of a thousand Moorish cavalrymen. I agree that states at peace could be engaged to provide fighting men to their neighbors at war. If you have no claims on your Christian neighbor, why not lease your own mercenaries to the Muslim or Pagan state that is fighting him? (We do have the Ck event "Your friend has hired a regiment of mercenaries to fight for you.") Location should also matter. In CK1, mercenaries always appeared in the capital, even if you needed them desperately at the front. EU3 allowed you to hire mercenaries in the cities you captured, so I think the same should be true of CK2.

There should be limits, though. Hiring 20,000 Bedouin horsemen to help you conquer Mecca seems wrong to me. I do think that Muslim mercenaries need to be fully fleshed out, too, with as Cesar says, the tribes offering their services for a price and with wavering loyalty. We will have hordes and tribes, won't we? Otherwise the Christian conquest of North Africa and Arabia gets way too easy. If Castille can hire 25,000 Templars, an equal amount of mercenaries, and his own levy troops, then Morocco should have equal resources, at least potentially.

@Drachenfire: Good to see you back on the forum. I like your idea of Welsh mercenaries in service to France or Castille. My hope is that mercenary leaders can have their own ambitions like other characters. In this case, he could entreat the King of France to help him reconquer Wales, in time.

@EightDeer: I hope army composition matters more this go around. Having a force heavy in archers should mean something; hiring two thousand archers should give you an edge that a levy of 2000 light infantry does not. Your own levies should be a mixed bag, but their composition should depend on the kinds of baronies in your realm and some other factors, too, that you should be able to control. There should be a way to encourage light cavalry or archers or heavy infantry and it should not be cultural and only so much historical.

 

[unmerged(320454)]

Excellent diary.
1) Number of mercenaries is not excised or is there a limit?
2) Will attach conditions mercenaries, for example an increase in pay?
3) Will there be some nuances of a set of hired troops AI and how often he will do it?
Need to make a map correctly in the correct location and do the normal trees.
Will we see that something new at E3?

 

[EightDeer]

I think army composition always "mattered", just nobody bothered to care (cause it was something that could be affected in a very abstract manner, through the power balance between the "pops")

Not really. In CK1, all that mattered was having a high-Martial leader with a big army. For example: When fighting an enemy army composed mostly of Heavy/Light Cavalry, it didn't make any difference if your army was mostly Archers and Spearmen, a balanced, combined-arms type force or the same Cav-horde your enemy was.

 

[Sinbuster]

Knightly orders are simply a must for this period so excellent work in that regard. Keeping in mind these are alpha screenshots, why the innacuracy on the map once again? I suppose it wouldn't be a new Paradox release without whinging about the map, but the CKII map is much smaller than that of HOI so why not produce it with an eye towards accuracy? I'm sure you'll cut down the thread count on the forum by a hefty margin should you do so.

All the same, keep up the great work.

 

[Thormodr]

The map definitely looks nice. Most beautiful map done by Firaxis ever. As mentioned, it wouldn't be a Paradox game without people getting upset about the map. Lol.

Mercenaries and Holy Orders sound really good. Very good addition to the game methinks.

 

[unmerged(63836)]

Great DD but I have to agree with criticism regarding map of Poland/Prussia - it is pretty terribly inaccurate. 'Jaćwięż' province has exactly same meaning in Polish as neighboring Yatviagi province (Yotvingians), not to mention that Sudovia is also alternate name for same thing. Also - Marienburg in 11th century? Truso would be a better name. I hope that this is WIP (looks like CK1 rip of provinces), because it would be a shame if CK2 would shine in many elements of game-play, graphics and mechanics, but suck when it comes to historical accuracy (even on a basic level).

 

[FreeMayk]

Map is more 'live' then any of paradox games(except Knights of Honor).
With more work and with a bit of fixes(province accuracy) will be great!

I am very optimistic about CK 2!

All best

 

[Fiftypence]

Great DD but I have to agree with criticism regarding map of Poland/Prussia - it is pretty terribly inaccurate. 'Jaćwięż' province has exactly same meaning in Polish as neighboring Yatviagi province (Yotvingians), not to mention that Sudovia is also alternate name for same thing. Also - Marienburg in 11th century? Truso would be a better name. I hope that this is WIP (looks like CK1 rip of provinces), because it would be a shame if CK2 would shine in many elements of game-play, graphics and mechanics, but suck when it comes to historical accuracy (even on a basic level).

Remember the game covers several hundred years, and within that period Marienburg was, overall, far more important than Truso, even if it didn't exist in 1066. Ideally the map should be designed so as to be applicable for the entire time period, not just for the 1066 scenario.