I did a search an all I found was a guy who sai that vikings did not exist at the time the game covers, which is indeed very wrong. There where large fleets who sailed to england and demanded ransom to leave them alone. And they did receive it! So how will they be handeled?
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Uhm. No there were no vikings.
There are Kingdoms like Norway,Sweden,Denmark and non-Christian tribes but no Vikings.
There are Kingdoms like Norway,Sweden,Denmark and non-Christian tribes but no Vikings.
By the time the game starts Viking activity has fallen well within range of what I assume are the rules of the game. Sweyn Estrithson's attempts on the English throne, for example, sprang from a very ordinary dynastic dispute and were mounted on a grand scale. The only area I can think of where low-intensity Norse raiding remained a major factor is the Irish Sea.
But yeah, it would be nice to know how the game handles 'stateless' raiders / pirates.
But yeah, it would be nice to know how the game handles 'stateless' raiders / pirates.
And my reply would be...yes there were. Plundering fleets raised by jarls and send out to demand a new version of "danelaw". It was much more organised but it still was vikings. The old way of plundering stopped in 1050 but only to be replaced by a moer organised way. It was not invasions, it was threatening nations with invasions and thereby receiving a whole lot of money.
So in other words.
A well orgonized state(LIKE A KINGDOM!) launched pillaging expeditions.
ergo
No vikings.
A well orgonized state(LIKE A KINGDOM!) launched pillaging expeditions.
ergo
No vikings.
No not a kingdom, a jarl. A jarl does not control a kingdom. The vikings decided to get together in large numberes and use the fact that people feared them because of their history, to demand gold. But it was not the kingdoms who send them.
I can't think of a time independent Viking bands ever came close to reestablishing the Danelaw after 1066?
ups wrong word. I meant "danegæld" . The ransom for not attacking. Kinda like protection money, only you dont protect them.
But in CK you never play a kingdom. You play a dynasty which might happen to control a kingdom so if a "Count" decides to threaten or go plundering that would be in the game .
ok, much better. Thanks for the answer. I just hope that it will be possible to raise an army, place it in a fleet, sail it to england and demand moeny to leave them alone.
Don't think we know much about the diplomatic options yet. Paradox hasn't really put in threaten option before and not sure if they will for CK.
The Scandinavian kingdoms in 1066 weren't more organized than in the beginning and height of the Viking age. But yes, the later Viking raids were little different from a regular invasion.AlexanderG said:
Styrbiorn said:
Oh yes they were. Just compare the statesmanship of Cnut with the ravages of the Alfredian age.
You must remember that Styrbjörn is talking about Sweden, not their more developed Scandinavian neighbourssnuggs said:
But there were other people around the Baltic that picked up the habit of going on viking raids. That went on long after 1066, and the victims were the original vikings themselves. Probably one of the main reasons that for example Stockholm (first mentioned in the mid-thirteenth century) was founded was to stop these new vikings getting into Lake Mälaren where important trading routes had developed. This probably also increased the interest of the kings of Denmark and Sweden (the victims) to go on crusades among the Baltic tribes.
Styrbiorn said:
Well, Sweden didn't really exist in 1066... but at least Denmark was a lot more organized than it had been 100 years earlier.
What I speak of was really pretty much the same metod as the viking meccenarys. It was because of their reputation that they were feared. So that was used in many other ways.
Denmark wasn't that organised. A jarl decided almost as much as the king, some jarls even went to war without the kings accept.
At some point it was germans who ruled jutland. A count of Holstein. He was killed by the folk hero Niels Ebbesen (not Peter). I'm looking forward to see how they handle the scandinavian version of monarki, and the fact that in the beginning of the game the majority was pagans.
Denmark wasn't that organised. A jarl decided almost as much as the king, some jarls even went to war without the kings accept.
At some point it was germans who ruled jutland. A count of Holstein. He was killed by the folk hero Niels Ebbesen (not Peter). I'm looking forward to see how they handle the scandinavian version of monarki, and the fact that in the beginning of the game the majority was pagans.
AlexanderG said:
I can tell you that. There was a dane who was jarl of south jutland, he went to war without the kings acceptance at invaded a part of N germany. There he became king and startede wearing the modern clothes. In denmark he decided to call himself "hertug" means count instead of jarl and ohh boy he was hated. Jarls are much more primitive. They lived in farms not castles.