251) WAD Pope calling crusades WAY too early

[unmerged(27947)]

Pope calling crusades WAY too early

In my most recent game, it's March of 1069, and the Pope has already called for a crusade. Shouldn't the earliest be much closer to 1100? Not only is it historically inaccurate for the crusades to start so early, but it also has a negative effect on gameplay to start crusade expectations before nearly enough time has passed to be able to make up for the piety loss.

 

[unmerged(12746)]

In my most recent game, it's March of 1069, and the Pope has already called for a crusade. Shouldn't the earliest be much closer to 1100? Not only is it historically inaccurate for the crusades to start so early, but it also has a negative effect on gameplay to start crusade expectations before nearly enough time has passed to be able to make up for the piety loss.

Historically your correct its to early, however CK isnt a historical simulation. The crusade time lengths need to be tweeked down IMHO, and it would be nice to have a little fancier message or effect of the pope calling for crusade, but the randomness is most welcome.

Having defined dates for events can lead to player preperation for that event and thats a negative in my view. I think that crusader expectations are reasonable its just the length of time the crusade runs is the killer.

 

[unmerged(6777)]

Agreed. WAD - this randomness is intended.

The start of the crusade period is determined by hard-coded event that has an mtth value that would favour the event to trigger sometime in the mid 1090's (roughly around the same time as the historic first crusade began in 1097) however the nature of this event system allows the start of the crusades to be as early as the first day of the game and as late as...well...never.

Similarly, the present event (hardcoded) to end the crusades relies on a similar sort of randomness, with a modifer or two thrown in to make things interesting.

The beta team has been discussing the length of the crusade era for some time now, so it is an acknowledged "issue" though I am not certain what precise changes are likely to be made for 1.03.

 

[unmerged(12746)]

Agreed. WAD - this randomness is intended.

The start of the crusade period is determined by hard-coded event that has an mtth value that would favour the event to trigger sometime in the mid 1090's (roughly around the same time as the historic first crusade began in 1097) however the nature of this event system allows the start of the crusades to be as early as the first day of the game and as late as...well...never.

Similarly, the present event (hardcoded) to end the crusades relies on a similar sort of randomness, with a modifer or two thrown in to make things interesting.

The beta team has been discussing the length of the crusade era for some time now, so it is an acknowledged "issue" though I am not certain what precise changes are likely to be made for 1.03.

Well knowing crusade length is on the plate is all one can ask for. When you say "hardcoded" without being to technical what does that mean? Does this mean that its unmoddable at any level? or that its going to happen all we can do is mod the parameters of the event?

 

[GrapeApe]

I had a game when there Crusades did not start until around 1140 or so. I like the randomness but hate the permanancy.

 

[crazy canuck]

I had a game when there Crusades did not start until around 1140 or so. I like the randomness but hate the permanancy.

I agree completely.

The coding may allow for a random end date for the crusade but the end is anything but random. If it were there would be games where the crusade is short. And that does not occur.

I would like to see a system where the chance of a crusade ending increases when any catholic ruler takes territories away from pagans/muslims. Tied to this I would like to end the permanent ability to go to war against a pagan/muslim and restrict that ability to when a crusade has been called.

This would end the current romp through pagan/muslim lands that the game has seemed to devolved to. This would also better simulate the important impetus that the call for a crusade had which in my humble opinion is not now well modelled by the game.

If these changes were made then nations would be highly motivated to go to crusade as soon as they could in order to achieve the territorial and piety rewards (to offset the drop during the call) before the crusade was successfully completed by someone else.

What would be really cool is if there could be crusade calls for specific regions so that when the objectives of the crusade were achieved the crusade would end.

 

[unmerged(12746)]

I agree completely.

The coding may allow for a random end date for the crusade but the end is anything but random. If it were there would be games where the crusade is short. And that does not occur.

I would like to see a system where the chance of a crusade ending increases when any catholic ruler takes territories away from pagans/muslims. Tied to this I would like to end the permanent ability to go to war against a pagan/muslim and restrict that ability to when a crusade has been called.

This would end the current romp through pagan/muslim lands that the game has seemed to devolved to. This would also better simulate the important impetus that the call for a crusade had which in my humble opinion is not now well modelled by the game.

If these changes were made then nations would be highly motivated to go to crusade as soon as they could in order to achieve the territorial and piety rewards (to offset the drop during the call) before the crusade was successfully completed by someone else.

What would be really cool is if there could be crusade calls for specific regions so that when the objectives of the crusade were achieved the crusade would end.

Hey CC how goes it ?

I agree on your expanded idea here with the exception of the ending the ability to wage war against muslims/pagans. You eliminate that and there isnt a whole hell of alot to do...

Maybe there needs to be a penalty for waging wars on pagans and muslims outside of a crusade. Maybe the cost in gold should be higher, transportation fee's might be a reasonable compramise, or mobilization cost. I dont want to eliminate the option of waging a private crusade, at this stage of CK its an essential element if you want to do more then watch the clock.

Up the anty to do so, and maybe make negative gold lower your prestige or piety, this way if you go you have to have the resources to do it, and if you dont you loose something.

 

[Grosshaus]

The original issue about the start date of crusades is WAD, if you guys want to discuss of a better way to portray the crusades in general it's better to do it in general discussions forum.

 

[unmerged(13277)]

In my most recent game, it's March of 1069, and the Pope has already called for a crusade. Shouldn't the earliest be much closer to 1100? Not only is it historically inaccurate for the crusades to start so early, but it also has a negative effect on gameplay to start crusade expectations before nearly enough time has passed to be able to make up for the piety loss.

Mine, in my current game, was called in 1081. I'm at 1223 now. Going 142 years strait of Crusade.
Losing about -6 peity a month with full church donation. I've given up on the piety by now.
Still, taking every option in events that gives peity, i managed to stay at around -300.
I have no intrest in taking any futher muslim provinces, as there seems to be no end to the crusade whatever you do.

 

[Cat Lord]

If it's WAD, we close it.

If you want to discuss it, we have a GD forum...

Cat