Nomads are not OP ( Sarcasm )

[Hvymtlboy]

A screenshot from my latest game as Denmark, 867AD start. The ERE and most of the Middle east are tributaries to the Khazars.

 

[viola]

It looks really goofy on the map, but I continue to think that nomad empires forcing even large empires to be tributaries isn't a big deal.
They just break free after a while and remain fundamentally independent.

... Which doesn't mean nomads aren't OP in many other ways, it's just the tributary thing I don't agree with as a shock example.

 

[The Shacks]

Hrhm.... I suppose I could argue that all those states + china regularly paid nomads large ammounts of gold and bribes that the Nomads themselves CERTAINLY viewed as vassalage/tributary relationship even if the ERE or the Chinese thought quite the opposite *shrug*
(Playing Devil's Advocate)

 

[Hvymtlboy]

I'll be curious to see if any of them break free upon the death of the current Khan, his son is real piece of AI education work.

 

[Apocal]

Hrhm.... I suppose I could argue that all those states + china regularly paid nomads large ammounts of gold and bribes that the Nomads themselves CERTAINLY viewed as vassalage/tributary relationship even if the ERE or the Chinese thought quite the opposite *shrug*
(Playing Devil's Advocate)

They knew what it was, well enough. But they weren't interested in breaking kayfabe and publicly admitting that fact. It wasn't even ideologically possible through a lot of dynasties. Any admission of even an equal relationship between China and the steppe would destroy their legitimacy instantly. Doing that would be like putting on gasoline-drenched boxers before taking a nice stroll through Hell.

 

[Hvymtlboy]

Update : The new Khan ( A tier one seducer that is vengeful, arbitrary, and paranoid ) took the throne with a chaotic succession and ZERO tributaries decided to break free.

 

[CrazyRat]

I see another problem here: apparently even a disastrous war with steppe nomads, and following many years of heavy tributary payments, aren’t enough to knock Byzantines down a peg and introduce some sweet internal chaos (Well, a small incursion from the biggest steppe polity notwithstanding.)

 

[Jia Xu]

The same people don't have to win in every single game. It doesn't have to be the Mongols that conquers huge parts of the world, every time. If this were to happen in every game, it would be a problem. It doesn't, though. If this were to happen in my next game, I would welcome it. CK3 is interesting because of the little stories going on all over the world forming an alternate history. The Khazars living past their expiry date and becoming a great empire sounds like a really fun alternate history, IMO.

 

[DiabloDeVille]

The same people don't have to win in every single game. It doesn't have to be the Mongols that conquers huge parts of the world, every time. If this were to happen in every game, it would be a problem. It doesn't, though. If this were to happen in my next game, I would welcome it. CK3 is interesting because of the little stories going on all over the world forming an alternate history. The Khazars living past their expiry date and becoming a great empire sounds like a really fun alternate history, IMO.

The khazars shouldn't be hard forced to die by 1000ad, but they shouldnt be expanding into the eastern steppe, and conquering much of the near east, a steppe dlc shouldnt just buff the big tags in a start date, but help model why they fell

 

[Jia Xu]

The khazars shouldn't be hard forced to die by 1000ad, but they shouldnt be expanding into the eastern steppe, and conquering much of the near east, a steppe dlc shouldnt just buff the big tags in a start date, but help model why they fell

Why shouldn't they conquer it? If the Mongols can do it, why can't others? No part of this game is on historical rails or anything. I've seen Al-Andalus crushed in 50 years. I've seen Byzantium breaking the Abbasids over its knee and cruising into Mesopotamia. I've seen Ireland conquer Britain. Khazars having a really good run across the steppes wouldn't make a top 20 list of strange things I've seen since launch.

 

[Benismann]

I've seen Al-Andalus crushed in 50 years.

just saying - that's how it's supposed to be historically, im pretty sure.

but also i hate rails, dont do rails please, this is not victoria-hoi, rails weren't even invented yet. I hate that seljuks and genghis khan are spawned out of thin air instead of picking someone already existing in the gamestate and just throwing that content onto them. Granted the genghis khan situation was somewhat improved, but still.

 

[FondMemberofSociety]

just saying - that's how it's supposed to be historically, im pretty sure.

but also i hate rails, dont do rails please, this is not victoria-hoi, rails weren't even invented yet. I hate that seljuks and genghis khan are spawned out of thin air instead of picking someone already existing in the gamestate and just throwing that content onto them. Granted the genghis khan situation was somewhat improved, but still.

I personally would like climate change railroading (which, among other things, historically made maintaining the Tibetan Empire more and more difficult until it collapsed from agricultural decline, civil war and a failed attempt to expand into India b/c the Tibetans suffered from ... low-altitude sickness), but it might make playing in certain regions too "rage against the dying of the light".

 

[naq29]

Any admission of even an equal relationship between China and the steppe would destroy their legitimacy instantly.

The Song dynasty actually had to admit that with the Khitans, Jurchens and Mongols.

 

[GhostDanny]

Hrhm.... I suppose I could argue that all those states + china regularly paid nomads large ammounts of gold and bribes that the Nomads themselves CERTAINLY viewed as vassalage/tributary relationship even if the ERE or the Chinese thought quite the opposite *shrug*
(Playing Devil's Advocate)

Yeah, basically like: we'll pay you 100 gold, if you just go away. You don't have to go home *quick laugh* but you can't stay here...

 

[Hvymtlboy]

For those of us that are really old : "Girl don't go away mad, girl just go away..."

 

[Apocal]

The Song dynasty actually had to admit that with the Khitans, Jurchens and Mongols.

Yeah, some dynasties were forced to. The early Han dynasty vs. the Xiongnu, for example. But hoo-boy, some people were mad about it, so in general, it was seen as a huge humiliation. Taking from Barfield's The Perilous Frontier:

Ideologues at court had long argued that these agreements forced China to pay tribute to the Hsiung-nu, and that they accorded the Shan-yiu and the Hsiung-nu nation equal status with the Han emperor and China. These two features violated the very essence of a sinocentric world order in which all human relations were viewed as interrelated parts in a hierarchy of moral order.

The emperor, in particular, could have no recognized equal as ruler of all under heaven. In theory foreign relations were only proper with nations or leaders thatformally accepted this view in their dealings with China. Formal acceptance of a sinocentric world order was essential since Han court ministers believed that the symbolic order of the universe was a necessary prerequisite for, and a reflection of, temporal earthly order. In their minds a violation of the proper symbolic order, be it in the form of omens, natural disasters, or in the regulated aspects of human behavior, had direct political implications. They were acutely aware of threats against that symbolic order.
...
These letters provoked the rage of Chia I, an official at the court of Han Wen-ti (r. 179-157 BC). He had long opposed the ho-ch’in policy, asserting it was in
direct contradiction to fundamental Confucian principles: "The situation of the empire may be described just like a person hanging upside down. The Son of Heaven is at the head of the empire. Why? Because he should be placed at the top. The barbarians are at the feet of the empire. Why? Because they should be placed at the bottom. . . . To command the barbarian is a power vested in the Emperor at the top, and, to present tribute to the Son of Heaven is a ritual to be performed by vassals at the bottom. Now the feet are put on the top and the head at the bottom. Hanging upside down is something beyond comprehension.”

But they tried to cover that up with the facade of "tribute" being paid and the occupation of a subservient position by the nomads (quoting Barfield again):

Not until 60 BC, during another succession crisis, did the Hsiung-nu empire break up in civil war. It was this war which forced the Hsiung-nu to negotiate a peace with China. The Hsiung-nu had long refused to accept any peace treaty with China because the Han court had insisted that the ho-ch’in system could not be restored and that the Hsiung-nu must enter the tributary system as part of any new agreement.
...
Then, in 54 BC, long after the death of Wu-ti and the abandonment of his aggressive policies, the Hsiung-nu accepted China’s terms. From that time onward no nomadic power on the steppe ever seriously objected to the tributary framework. The reason for this sharp change was the discovery that the tributary system was a sham — demanding mere tokens of submission in exchange for huge benefits. Once the Hsiung-nu understood its operation, they actively supported the tributary system, which allowed them to rebuild their power on the steppe.
...
The Hsiung-nu demanded hostages and tribute from neighboring tribes to insure the continuation of an exploitative relationship that directly benefited the Hsiung-nu. It was beyond their imagination that China might only be dealing in the symbols of formal submission that had little real meaning. To the pragmatic Hsiung-nu, the world of symbols was confined largely to burning towns and taking heads as a sign of hostility. That China might be demanding only token submission in exchange for a huge increase in gifts, regular subsidies and trade was, to quote Chia I’s phrase in a very different context, ‘““something beyond comprehension — like hanging upside down.”
...
Having accepted the framework of the tributary system, the Hsiung-nu immediately set about exploiting it, often showing great sophistication in manipulating Han values to serve their own ends. It was the Shan-yu who controlled the time and frequency of tributary visits, it was he who requested and received special grants of grain, and it was he who received lavish gifts from the Han court with each embassy, while providing his own envoys with only token gifts.

Now imagine something like this in Crusader Kings, in terms of mechanics. You're a nomad on China's border and "pay" tribute but since you're actually strong enough to cause serious problems, you get more -- far more -- than you give. In exchange, China gets to keep legitimacy (or whatever currency drives realm stability) because that's what is really important, the symbolism of the relationship, not the actual substance. It would be a wild thing to have in the game and have to juggle with, in addition to everything else China might bring.