I'm rather disappointed how limited you are with representing the Mongol military and khanate system in Khan of the Steppes DLC

[ray243]

A big part of Genghis Khan's success is his reorganisation of mongol and nomadic society into decimal-military units based less on prior tribal ties but organised into strict command hierarchy, where life is divided into aravt, zuut, minghan and tumen.

It's a form of social-military hierarchy, but is less based on the land you own but the men/herd within that particular unit and division. But this is almost impossible to represent in CK3 with the new DLC as everything is still tied to landed-titles with no correlation to the size of forces each commander might have control over.

But armies and their commanders are not distinct units or entitles in CK3, despite the fact that we have landless adventurer mechanics. We could have instead a more hierarchy of nomad tribes, where each tier of landless-adventurers/nomads commands a distinct level of men in that division, and report to a higher landless adventurer.

So your zuut- 100 men = count-tier nomad leader ( controlling 100 cavalry/men) , minghan = duke tier nomad leader (1000 men), and tumen = king-tier nomad leader (10,000 men). Instead, what we get is just a big army leader by the Khagan himself while all the other nomadic tribal organisation is just messy and all over the place with little to no direct ties to how it's integrated into a military system.

Ultimately, it still feels like this is the nomadic government giving you a sense of it being too tied to feudal mechanics, and having ranks and tiers of lower-level nomadic vassalage be not adjusted, or adapted to your nomadic society.

Yes, you can give herd to your vassals, but there's no real way to organise your nomadic vassals in a more well organised manner.

 

[naq29]

Army units as adventurers is an interesting concept.

 

[ray243]

Army units as adventurers is an interesting concept.

It would work better and be more reflective of nomads. But also in general makes being a general more meaningful as it means you're given control of one of the realm's armies.

With nomads the herd is what sustain and provide for the different divisions for food , supplies etc. With sedentary governments that depends more on taxation or salaries.

This can also work for China as well if they need to hire more mercenaries from the steppes.

 

[ray243]

Sometimes I wonder what those that disagreed with this actually wants in terms of depicting the nomads.

 

[vyshan]

I think the big issue is that the military system in ck3 atm is just levies + MAA. and levies on the steppe are the same as in the jungles of south asia and in Ireland in arabia. Levies are levies. Further there aren't military systems to reflect different styles of fighting throughout the world. A military rework is something I am hoping for in the future.

 

[sreckom92]

Nobody has their military represented properly. Not the Mongols, not the Arabs, not the Romans, not the English, not the French...
Warfare in CK3 is just very simple.
This is an overarching problem with the game, and it's not something that concerns Mongols only.

 

[tokinoha]

Nobody has their military represented properly. Not the Mongols, not the Arabs, not the Romans, not the English, not the French...
Warfare in CK3 is just very simple.
This is an overarching problem with the game, and it's not something that concerns Mongols only.

It is stupid that HRE have only 7000 soldiers in 1066.

 

[DiabloDeVille]

It is stupid that HRE have only 7000 soldiers in 1066.

And matilda always breaking free

 

[ray243]

I think the big issue is that the military system in ck3 atm is just levies + MAA. and levies on the steppe are the same as in the jungles of south asia and in Ireland in arabia. Levies are levies. Further there aren't military systems to reflect different styles of fighting throughout the world. A military rework is something I am hoping for in the future.

I'm really not a fan of how they tried to have a work around with the converting levies to MAA for nomadic government. The MAA is really counter to how nomadic society organise military forces. Especially the Mongols.

Nobody has their military represented properly. Not the Mongols, not the Arabs, not the Romans, not the English, not the French...
Warfare in CK3 is just very simple.
This is an overarching problem with the game, and it's not something that concerns Mongols only.

It comes from the issue of starting the game as feudal levies and then giving us retinues and levies to work on it, and each military system is based on such a variation instead of truly independent armies and manpower organisation.

I had hope landless adventurers meant playing as nomads means you can get a gameplay that's based around manpower than land. For nomads, land is plentiful and people are often fighting more over manpower and following than strictly over lands.

It's the same for warfare in SEA as well.

 

[DiabloDeVille]

I'm really not a fan of how they tried to have a work around with the converting levies to MAA for nomadic government. The MAA is really counter to how nomadic society organise military forces. Especially the Mongols.



It comes from the issue of starting the game as feudal levies and then giving us retinues and levies to work on it, and each military system is based on such a variation instead of truly independent armies and manpower organisation.

I had hope landless adventurers meant playing as nomads means you can get a gameplay that's based around manpower than land.

If instead of conquering all the lands yourself, you made people your tributaries, then you could have them be called to arms for each war, but then theyd still fight along tribal lines rather than use the decimal system. But the decimal system seems more an ideal than the reality, before and after the mongol empire, as they werent the progenitors of the system. Whether there being 98 or 93 in a base unit due to disease and attrition, or how tribal lines did remain, as a unit deserting could result in their tribe being massacred

For nomads, land is plentiful and people are often fighting more over manpower and following than strictly over lands.

It's the same for warfare in SEA as well.

Is there a meaningful difference between fighting over good pasturelands with raiding if you dont have it, and fighting over claims to rich counties with raiding if you dont have the power to annex?

 

[ray243]

If instead of conquering all the lands yourself, you made people your tributaries, then you could have them be called to arms for each war, but then theyd still fight along tribal lines rather than use the decimal system. But the decimal system seems more an ideal than the reality, before and after the mongol empire, as they werent the progenitors of the system. Whether there being 98 or 93 in a base unit due to disease and attrition, or how tribal lines did remain, as a unit deserting could result in their tribe being massacred

The issue is more how you go about assigning commands and divisions of armies to say your children' and allowing them to build a powerbase with the men under their command. Or a more meritocracy system where non tribal leaders get given a tumen and become a strong supporter of the ruling clan.

Is there a meaningful difference between fighting over good pasturelands with raiding if you dont have it, and fighting over claims to rich counties with raiding if you dont have the power to annex?

Yes, somewhat. In SEA, warfare tends to avoid mass casualties if possible because acquisition of manpower is desired over acquisition of land.

 

[stratigo]

I mean I’ve always thought that vassals should contribute MaAs to a liege’s force instead of just sending the peasants. Heck I’d love for wars to involve calling vassals in separately instead of raising their useless levies

 

[DiabloDeVille]

The issue is more how you go about assigning commands and divisions of armies to say your children' and allowing them to build a powerbase with the men under their command. Or a more meritocracy system where non tribal leaders get given a tumen and become a strong supporter of the ruling clan.

The player will already be far more meritocratic than irl, by default you have the best general assigned to lead your armies, you can easily assign councillors by highest skill regardless of religion or culture.

Yes, somewhat. In SEA, warfare tends to avoid mass casualties if possible because acquisition of manpower is desired over acquisition of lland.

How do they avoid these mass casualties compared to other societies?

 

[ray243]

The player will already be far more meritocratic than irl, by default you have the best general assigned to lead your armies, you can easily assign councillors by highest skill regardless of religion or culture.

Yes, but you can't grant amount of soldiers/men directly to your generals etc. Yes you can transfer herds to your children and retinue and vassals, but it will be more useful if it's not just 'give 500 herd' per click.

How do they avoid these mass casualties compared to other societies?

More aimed at capturing prisoners of war, and also more aimed at almost ritual battles between leaders.

So in CK3 terms, bigger impact of you lose a pitched battle for warscore than land captured.