• 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.

Numahr

Lux Invicta Lord Spiritual
87 Badges
Oct 18, 2004
2.021
481
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Semper Fi
  • Sengoku
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Pride of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Hearts of Iron 4: Arms Against Tyranny
  • Divine Wind
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
OK so we start understanding how it works. Now we are left with thinking about implementation... For once I'll argue that it should not be related to religion but rather to culture for game start. Still, it is not so clear as many LI cultures are not clearly defined as to what they really represent. I can foresee the whole debate about tribal versus Carolangian Germans revive...

So anyway I am just intending to open the debate. For most cases like Africa or the steppes, it will be easy to solve. Then I guess some 'regional specialists' should work on specific areas to determine where feudal systems stop and where tribes start. I could volunteer, for example, for the Iranian-Central Asian area. The main contentious areas being rather in the West: Germany - Central Europe, Iberia, North Africa, British Isles...

Thoughts?
 
For the British Isles, I think it may be better that it is related to religion, there at least. Things like druidism should probably be under tribal, while more developed areas with Roman influence should remain feudal.
 
In Spain there are no "tribes" left, I don't see how they could. There's just no way in the world the Alans, the Sueves or the Asturs survived as tribal nations for almost a goddamn thousand years, especially being surrounded by big, organised, functional states like the Caliphate of Cordoba or the Visigothic kingdom. It makes no sense at all. The Sueves and the Basques, either they adopted state-like structures and became fully fledged kingdoms, or died (which is what happened: the visigoths adopted Roman models of administration superimposed to their military structured society and crushed the still-semi-tribal Alans; the Sueves were on their way to become the Kingdom of Suevia, but the Visigoths were stronger too in this case).

As for Germany, too, I just can't see how the same tribes Caesar, Tacitus or Jordanes describe survived into 1066 with their tribal nomadic structures intact. We can discuss nomadic peoples, but "tribes", well, what does that mean? As Numahr said, I rather think of the Saxons and the rest as tribal super-structures or ethnies that the Carolingians either organised or forced to organise (just like the Romans "created" the Goths and the Franks by being their neighbours, putting influence on them and fighting them, basically). The Saxons are the Saxons of Widukind, but they very well may have adopted Carolingian-like structures. Moreso, they are way too powerful not to have done so. The Poles did it, the Czechs did it, the Lithuanians did it, the Bulgarians, Serbians, Croatians, Magyars, all did it between 800 and 1000. One could argue that the Saxon monarchies that Widukind federated were already late-Roman-esque kingdoms in their own right, no Charlemagne needed.
 
Was there a debate about those Germanic cultures anyway? I believe it's pretty much clear that the Germans are, exactly that, the post-Carolingian Germans and the Tiudiskas/Theudish are the tribal ones.

In Europe, I think there are some clear places for Tribal realms. Ireland, everything north of Hadrian's wall (OK, maybe not Scotland). Not sure about Iberia though; everything is pretty seems Romanized and "civilized" at this point I believe. Even the Lusitanian remnants. Maybe the Sueves of Galicia and the pagan Visigoths at Asturias, but that would be some thinking I guess, you could make a case for them being the Visigoth Kingdom's own continental Saxons; the unruly and stubborn pagans who refuse to leave their old ways behind and properly integrate into the realm, but I don't really know.

West Africa and Bantu Africa should almost completely be tribal except some focuses like probably the Mandinka, or one of the culturally advanced Bantu realms (forgot which one as that)... for North Africa... that's difficult. There we could divide them using religion I guess; Berber pagans are tribal, while Berber Christians or Muslims are feudal, but I'm not sure it was the completely case IRL (IE: All Muslim Berbers being a true part of the local government, rather than a collection of tribes). The Saharan Berber tribes should definitely be tribal though.

Most steppe Khanates should be tribal I guess (though I'd leave that to your discretion, Numahr), as should Scandinavia. And some other places on the map probably; the Middle East comes to mind as well. Focuses of civilization like Saba or Bagdad are definitely "feudal", but the more remote areas seem like a good candidate for tribal realms.

In the end, there are some very well marked areas on who's tribal and who's not, but I believe that we will have to go case-on-case in some areas.
 
I see Cèsar's points, still, I believe that we shouldn't go completely by historical precedent (yes, I hate determinism :p)... it may feel more "historically correct", to call it something, but I think that gameplay wise it would be much more entertaining and interesting to have some tribal realms surrounded by larger groups of civilized ones.
 
I just don't think there's any reason to make Lux Invicta less civilised or more tribal than our real 1066 was. In fact, I'd argue that it might mean more civilisation and further! In 1100, half of Scandinavia was not very different from Northern Germany. Northern Germany wasn't Italy, but it certainly wasn't tribal. Were tribals the Obotrites? The Poles? The Hungarians? If the Magyars of the year 1000 are not tribals, then the Theudiscs are not either.

It may be fun, yes... but I don't know. Better wait and see if it's really fun to play as, or to be neighbor of, a tribal nation. Maybe they missed the mark completely, maybe they nailed it. If they did nail it, which tribals were they aiming for? The 900's Magyars? The Golden Horde, provided you can equate nomad with tribal (I don't agree, but for game purposes, there you go)? The Arabs under Muhammad?

Maybe the tribal mechanic can be adapted to represent something entirely different than "uncivilised tribes", as detrimental as this term may be.
 
Don't forget that the devs said that tribals could have feudal vassals, and presumably vice-versa.
 
Some times I wish we had an earlier start date so I could end discussions with a magical "but it's 800!" argument :D.

Now seriously, the thing is that most realms in those areas you mention are already tribal (as in, tribal titles), since Shaytana's time. The Saxons, the Polabians, the Sorbs and a whole lot of other West Slavic realms. As said in other discussions about the evolution of religions and how they "should" by now have moved towards a monotheistic trend, LI is stuck in some kind of time stopping anomaly, there's no other explanation, otherwise cultures like the Galatians, the Sarmatians and such would be long gone and melted into the nearby cultures with bigger populations or cultural strength.

As you said, we should wait until we get to test it, but I don't think that a society being "tribal" automatically means "uncivilized".
 
you know the romans hellenistics and indohellens in southeast africa, india and near tibet.. perhaps some of them have lost communication with their homelands long enough to adapt to their locales and went tribal. it would make them unique - otherwise it's just another alexandros-ammonite hellen duchy, just located somewhere else.

also, i dunno if a tribe can be inherited by a feudal or vice versa but i suppose not. if so, then a tribal Mogadishu (Eritrea adalia) can't inherit neapolis in day 4 like it constantly does in my games.
 
One of the few areas -not- tribal in West Africa should probably be the Phoenician settlement built by Hanno. Speaking of which, that place needs religious text in the current version, has none.

Yeah, probably that's going to be the only non-tribal realm (...speaking of which; Why is it feudal? I remember turning it into a republic... ) in West Africa besides the Aboisso republic.

Hadadi has decription in the SVN, nothing great though. If you want some flavour tough, it's basically worship of the Phoenician god Baal Hadad infused with local Serer shamanistic practises.
 
Yeah, probably that's going to be the only non-tribal realm (...speaking of which; Why is it feudal? I remember turning it into a republic... ) in West Africa besides the Aboisso republic.

Hadadi has decription in the SVN, nothing great though. If you want some flavour tough, it's basically worship of the Phoenician god Baal Hadad infused with local Serer shamanistic practises.

Maybe someone decided it should be only under the control of Hanno's descendants? Still odd. Some of these republics should probably have the basic one point in technology required to establish trade-posts (in their capital), mainly those which ancestrally would have it, like the Phoenician heir republic there. That way people who should have early trade posts would establish them in relatively short order.
 
Maybe someone decided it should be only under the control of Hanno's descendants? Still odd. Some of these republics should probably have the basic one point in technology required to establish trade-posts (in their capital), mainly those which ancestrally would have it, like the Phoenician heir republic there. That way people who should have early trade posts would establish them in relatively short order.

The problem is that the starting technology pre-Charlemagne DLC was dependant on very strict 4 configurations; Christian, Muslim, Byzantine and "Other" (which is basically, everything else). Most realms in LI enter in the last category, so modifying that configuration made everyone too ahead in tech. According to the patch notes, technology can now be apparently configured like if it was history (like the character's or title's one), so expect the realms that should be advanced to actually be advanced.
 
I can't speak for most places but I get the feeling that people west of the Nile should be tribal aka the practisers of the Isis, Set and Dulfukian faiths. While the people huddling the Nile such Makuria and Alodia should be feudal with more tribes in Ethiopia's coast eg the Mahremites and such. Not sure about the Solomonid realms however.
 
The problem is that the starting technology pre-Charlemagne DLC was dependant on very strict 4 configurations; Christian, Muslim, Byzantine and "Other" (which is basically, everything else). Most realms in LI enter in the last category, so modifying that configuration made everyone too ahead in tech. According to the patch notes, technology can now be apparently configured like if it was history (like the character's or title's one), so expect the realms that should be advanced to actually be advanced.
now that I like. it'll make random buildings a bit more plausible as well :rofl:
 
The problem is that the starting technology pre-Charlemagne DLC was dependant on very strict 4 configurations; Christian, Muslim, Byzantine and "Other" (which is basically, everything else). Most realms in LI enter in the last category, so modifying that configuration made everyone too ahead in tech. According to the patch notes, technology can now be apparently configured like if it was history (like the character's or title's one), so expect the realms that should be advanced to actually be advanced.

That makes sense though. Weird, though, I thought it was already like that-- Game of Thrones has no technology tree available and just has that one point available in each "Free City" to allow trade posts to be established.
 
Let's reignite this thread and start putting together a list of titles to set as having tribal holdings:
Scandinavia: I think the Ragnarokic d_halogaland is a shoe-in. Iceland and Greenland should probably be tribal. Republics (d_bergen, d_gotland) are out. The rest? Should all be tribal? All but solar/christian variants?
Ireland: all but the republic in d_ulaid? Only the Druidics on the west coast, or those plus Forn Sidrics, excepting d_ulaid?
Africa: everything Sahara and south, except Nile valley and the Phoenician colony in whereveritis, plus some other colonies on the east coast?
India: tribal around the Hindu Kush and Himalayas, Tarim Basin, Tibetan plateau? Or should Tarim Basin be civilized, reflecting its importance as a trade center?
Central Asia: tribal north and east of the Amu Darya and Syr Darya valleys?
 
I'm guessing we're defining it by specific *realms* then instead of a broader geo-cultural ruleset? (then again, defining by realms might be necessary due to the LI-unique fragmentation we have ^_^ )
 
Well, at base, the b_ titles, in and of themselves and as capitals of higher titles, determine the government type. There might be some cases of government realms (like republican d_gotland under tribal k_gotland) but in the main most tribal realms probably won't start with any cities or castles, and most feudal realms won't start with any tribal vassals.
 
I'd like some explanation on how the tribes work or what do they intend to represent exactly. Are they gonna be a representation of tribal confederations, like the Ghassanids, the Kara Kithan or the Huns? Or do they serve to represent something else too? I'm a bit lost, I haven't played the last patch at all.