MP - Balance of Power

[unmerged(6788)]

In EUII, one of the main preocupations of MP games was the BoP... So, there were a couple of nations that people had to chose to secure the BoP (France, England, Austria, Spain...)

I even think that in the last betas of EU there was a special atention to MP...

How about CK?
What dynasties will be essencial to pick?
I think that (at least) one in:
- Iberia, Italy, Bitish Isles, France, Scandinavia, The Byzantines, Germany and Eastern Europe (and another in the Med?).
(this gives 8-10 players !!)

And What scenario?
1066 or the 3rd crusade?

 

[unmerged(12746)]

Originally posted by Aranha
In EUII, one of the main preocupations of MP games was the BoP... So, there were a couple of nations that people had to chose to secure the BoP (France, England, Austria, Spain...)

I even think that in the last betas of EU there was a special atention to MP...

How about CK?
What dynasties will be essencial to pick?
I think that (at least) one in:
- Iberia, Italy, Bitish Isles, France, Scandinavia, The Byzantines, Germany and Eastern Europe (and another in the Med?).
(this gives 8-10 players !!)

And What scenario?
1066 or the 3rd crusade?

This is a good question. Being an HOI MP player I can relate to the BOP issue, having players play minors in south america sucks.

But CK dosent seem to be centered around military conquest. The game is centered around your family dynasty and prestige. So really the best measuring stick for that will be titles, and claims to thrones. EUII and HOI were more military, economic and finicial based as to who was a major. So its going to come down to who has the most titles at start, but a minor nation can become more powerful faster if played by a human because conquest isnt the only measure of power.

This "Prestige" is fairly new concept in Paradox games, you might start off as Duke of Normandy and technically have more claims and titles then anyone and be more powerful. But one mistep and you might loose papal favor, or cause others to have a CB against you and then your not a major anymore. From what I read though, and like most period games a strong economy will normally bring power particularly in MP. If you have cash you can do more. Gold is always a key to MP you can do so much with it, although I am not sure if via the game mechanics you can purchase land and titles, you can certainly buy players actions and therefore in MP the Economic position of a nation may be more of a gauge in the BOP.

my 2 cents.

 

[Havard]

I'm thinking it will be more important to balance an area, like... not leave one player alone in a corner without someone there to keep check on him/her. Supposedly it'll be harder than EU to hold a large, wide-spread country tigether over time...

A few things will be interresting to see though:
- How well can the possible power of the HRE be controlled?
- What about France? They were by far the richest kingdom in Europe for this period (before the HYW) - hwo to check that?

These are not specific for MP though...

 

[unmerged(15867)]

Originally posted by Havard

A few things will be interresting to see though:
- How well can the possible power of the HRE be controlled?

Well, in real life it was easy. Support one of multiple rebels inside of HRE and voila. HRE was not centralised state and rebels were IIRC daily routine.

Once when German emperor was preparing army for invasion of Poland, Saxons (IIRC) thinking that he in reality is preparing an army to deal iwth _them_ and invasion of Poland is just a pretext, rebelled immedietely

(yeah, give us script language syntax and i bet the forming CK community can find more usch charming events to keep major players in check)

 

[unmerged(485)]

Originally posted by Havard
I......
- What about France? They were by far the richest kingdom in Europe for this period (before the HYW) - hwo to check that?

These are not specific for MP though...

And of course the posessions which Henry II had may not leave French control in this game, so France may be the power to be looked up to.

 

[Mettermrck]

Originally posted by Sonny
And of course the posessions which Henry II had may not leave French control in this game, so France may be the power to be looked up to.

Thinking of the Third Crusade, if Richard and Philip go on Crusade, does this prevent them from declaring war back home? And will other countries be so prevented? I'm thinking of the imbalance of 'wars of opportunity'.

The French King is away, so the mice will play! Anjou attacks...

 

[Havard]

Originally posted by Mettermrck
Thinking of the Third Crusade, if Richard and Philip go on Crusade, does this prevent them from declaring war back home? And will other countries be so prevented? I'm thinking of the imbalance of 'wars of opportunity'.

The French King is away, so the mice will play! Anjou attacks...

Declare war on anyone away on crusade was a nice way to get excommunicated...

 

[Mettermrck]

Originally posted by Havard
Declare war on anyone away on crusade was a nice way to get excommunicated...

Ah good point. I was just thinking that in this game, the balance of power will not be the "raison d'etat" we're used to between states. The measures of power are so much different because there's more intangibles. The sacred and the secular...titles, marriages, connections. It will require a different mindset.

 

[unmerged(12746)]

Originally posted by Havard
Declare war on anyone away on crusade was a nice way to get excommunicated...

Good point, but whats the penalty? What will be the penalties for loss if prestige and piety? Dissent? Economic collapse? Loss of vassals?

In terms of MP its got to be something tangable to effect the resources the player has to execute game functions. If its just a loss of measurement points of status (like victory points in EUII) thats not going to stop warmongering.

 

[Havard]

Originally posted by Odin1970
Good point, but whats the penalty? What will be the penalties for loss if prestige and piety? Dissent? Economic collapse? Loss of vassals?

In terms of MP its got to be something tangable to effect the resources the player has to execute game functions. If its just a loss of measurement points of status (like victory points in EUII) thats not going to stop warmongering.

The penalty of an excommunication? Massive loss in prestige, piety and the Christian world get a CB on you. How does that sound?

 

[unmerged(12746)]

Originally posted by Havard
The penalty of an excommunication? Massive loss in prestige, piety and the Christian world get a CB on you. How does that sound?

That sounds appropriate, but in an MP setting other then the CB whats the tangable penalty? Maybe I am defering to my HOI MP expirence to much, as combat wont be as crucial but if I loose piety and prestige if it dosent increase dissent, lower troop morale and alianate my vassals I dont really care. I havent seen in the FAQ any write ups about warmongering, but I havent looked in awhile so maybe its been updated.

MP is normally a competition against the other human with the AI playing a bit role. Maybe BB like in EUII will be an effect, but if I warmonger and nothing hurts my tools to do so via game penalties for such actions whats to stop me? An alliance of other human players maybe, but with no penalty to my overall dynasty in way of loss of revenue, or troops morale loss, I havent been penalized really at all, and makes my warmongering even harder for the human player to check unless I over extend.

Basically I think it comes down to what will be the effects of loss of prestige and piety and how you can get them back. If its just a number to measure preformance then in MP its not as big a factor.

 

[Havard]

Hopefully a drop in your prestige/piety plus an excommunication will make a few vassals maybe reconsider who they have sworn fealty to...

 

[Mettermrck]

Originally posted by Havard
Hopefully a drop in your prestige/piety plus an excommunication will make a few vassals maybe reconsider who they have sworn fealty to...

I think being excommunicate would hurt one severely in MP or SP. Prestige is part of it, as your diplomacy would decrease to nil (unless you possessed a rather persuasive army a la Henry IV). Loyalty is another. I don't know how CK will handle revolts, but if a King is excommunicate, then nobles would be more likely to revolt. Neighboring kingdoms would now morally justified in invading your lands and seizing pieces of it (we act in the name of the Pope!).

It should effect income too, I think. With the blessings of the Church withheld, there'd be a nervousness in all walks of life. Tithes would decline, trade might lessen. Fewer people would want to travel through your unholy kingdom - less pilgrims, less income, etc.

 

[Drakken]

Originally posted by Mettermrck
Thinking of the Third Crusade, if Richard and Philip go on Crusade, does this prevent them from declaring war back home? And will other countries be so prevented? I'm thinking of the imbalance of 'wars of opportunity'.

The French King is away, so the mice will play! Anjou attacks...

Richard and Philippe went together to the third Crusade justly because of that, because they both feared that the other would seize their lands while they are in the Crusade.

D.

 

[unmerged(485)]

Originally posted by Mettermrck
................

It should effect income too, I think. With the blessings of the Church withheld, there'd be a nervousness in all walks of life. Tithes would decline, trade might lessen. Fewer people would want to travel through your unholy kingdom - less pilgrims, less income, etc.

Hopefully you are correct. As Odin states, though, in MP it is a different game - points be damned. So there needs to be something to make a ruler wary.

However, take the case of Frederick II - a few excommunications, but he still did as he pleased. Surely he would have liked the help of the Hospitallers in the Levant, but he still went about his merry way without them.

 

[Mettermrck]

However, take the case of Frederick II - a few excommunications, but he still did as he pleased. Surely he would have liked the help of the Hospitallers in the Levant, but he still went about his merry way without them. [/B]

This will be one of the more exciting concepts of the game...Emperor versus Pope. Think about it...this gave covers this trend from Canossa itself in 1077! Then we got Barbarossa, Frederick II. It will be interesting to see how the game will measure Papal versus Emperor power. Issues like lay investiture, etc.

 

[unmerged(485)]

Originally posted by Mettermrck
This will be one of the more exciting concepts of the game...Emperor versus Pope. Think about it...this gave covers this trend from Canossa itself in 1077! Then we got Barbarossa, Frederick II. It will be interesting to see how the game will measure Papal versus Emperor power. Issues like lay investiture, etc.

I certainly hope it is a big part of the game - especially the early game. If the Pope is not powerful in some way then the game won't reflect the times very well. The constant vying for papal approval or conflict with a pope or anti-pope is one of the more interesting aspects of the period.

 

[unmerged(12746)]

Originally posted by Sonny
I certainly hope it is a big part of the game - especially the early game. If the Pope is not powerful in some way then the game won't reflect the times very well. The constant vying for papal approval or conflict with a pope or anti-pope is one of the more interesting aspects of the period.

It should be a part of the game but from what I have read the Pope's power lays in excommunication thus giving others a CB on you.

Thats really it as far as papal power goes from what I have seen. In MP specifically unless the human players enforce it it shouldnt be to hard, with some game expirence, to handle the AI trying to enforce or acting on a CB.

But whats more important is, and I am sure someone will correct me here if I am wrong but after 1066, traits, births, and names will be randomly generated. So hoping for Pope A to enact action B on date C isnt going to happen nescessarilt along historical lines which will make charecter events random as well. Making yet even harder for a Human player to make an action for a future gain because each time you play, assumably your never going to have the same game with the same dynasty.

"On Family and Dynasty:
- Historical characters are for 1066, after that dynasties breed random children ~ sergei"


Quotes from the FAQ. So really after 1066 new births are random Richard and Phillip may not even be born, or any child near thier historical traits in that time, for thier respective dynasties. So this is where things become even muddier. Save for events your not going to be able to count on having a leader born at a given day and time with certain traits, its all going to be random and this makes the MP piece even harder.

 

[unmerged(485)]

Originally posted by Odin1970
.................

But whats more important is, and I am sure someone will correct me here if I am wrong but after 1066, traits, births, and names will be randomly generated. So hoping for Pope A to enact action B on date C isnt going to happen nescessarilt along historical lines which will make charecter events random as well. Making yet even harder for a Human player to make an action for a future gain because each time you play, assumably your never going to have the same game with the same dynasty.

...........

Which to me is one of the strong points of the game - so much replayability. And for those who write AARs it must seem like a dream!