Official Suggestions thread (Some suggestions organised into the first post)

[SOF]

My suggestion was to give the (independend) Vikings controll over the Shetlands and Orkney plus parts of the Hebrides, and make them declare war on Norway once the kingdom has been united. As King Harald seems to have launched an attack on these independend Jarldoms to crush any possible resistance after he united Norway. Do you have any backup for your proposal?

Mainly on a game play stand point. The Orkney's, though basically de facto independent were tied to Norway more so than the Isles. Having the Vikings go to war with Norway upon unification could work but as the AI without heavy scripting can't manage to run Naval invasions what would really come of this. Having instead the Norwegian Jarldoms have starting places in the Orkneys they can duke it out there and end up in wars with Alban, Islesmen or other armies provided Land bridges are thrown in. Less 'historically accurate' yes, but more exciting gamewise.

I suppose the generic Vikings could work as the Kingdom of the Isles but I just think it more interesting to have a proper playable faction rather than linking all the raiders under a single faction.

That's a thorough list and afaik the team intends to add some smaller factions in future. The only addition to that list I wan't make, is a West-Slavic faction to the east of the East-Frankish Empire. That would increase the campaign gameplay for Denmark and the EFE; plus it would increase cultural diversity, ontop of being able to play a Slavic faction of course. The Obotrites, located in Mecklenburg and Holstein, are a feasible option.

But what would a West-Slavic player do? I always think the litmus test for TW factions is that they have aspirations for expansion, either because they did historically or are in a situation that would give them reason to expand. No West Slav type really make sense in a North Sea centric setting and the Magyars seem a good enough mechanic for messing up the eastern fringes of Danish and East Frankish lands.

[Z'nbnz]

Organised suggestions into the first post, this took me ages to do so any rep you could spare would be much appreciated

Well done! I would +rep you, but unfortunately I'm the only one with a green plus sign.
If I find a solution I will. +rep

[Heathen Storm]

I remember in the beta - before the Viking faction was added with a base in Norway - once you united Norway and conquered from Tingvalla to Halogaland, you received the ancillary "King of Norway" and Harald Tanglehair became Harald Fairhair. I noticed since you added the extra region in Norway, it has stopped giving that ancillary. You should definitely implement that again, minus the extra inaccessible region

[Casual Tactician]

Mainly on a game play stand point. The Orkney's, though basically de facto independent were tied to Norway more so than the Isles. Having the Vikings go to war with Norway upon unification could work but as the AI without heavy scripting can't manage to run Naval invasions what would really come of this. Having instead the Norwegian Jarldoms have starting places in the Orkneys they can duke it out there and end up in wars with Alban, Islesmen or other armies provided Land bridges are thrown in. Less 'historically accurate' yes, but more exciting gamewise.

I suppose the generic Vikings could work as the Kingdom of the Isles but I just think it more interesting to have a proper playable faction rather than linking all the raiders under a single faction.

My understanding is that the map will be enlarged both in size and scale, so your idea of land bridges – which I like – might not be doable in most areas, even between Orkney and the mainland. If that’s the case I’ll stick to my proposal, but if they are possible, then your idea has indeed favourable elements that could enhance the campaign game-play in that area.
Without a base on the British Isles the united Norway faction (controlled by the AI) has more or less only two possible directions to expand: either Denmark or Britain. So if united Norway has war declared on by the independent Vikings via script, it could at the same time be scripted into an alliance with the Danes, which would make it more likely for them to invade the British Isles (and perhaps outright scripting a Norwegian invasion is possible).

But what would a West-Slavic player do? I always think the litmus test for TW factions is that they have aspirations for expansion, either because they did historically or are in a situation that would give them reason to expand. No West Slav type really make sense in a North Sea centric setting and the Magyars seem a good enough mechanic for messing up the eastern fringes of Danish and East Frankish lands.

The Obotrites were quite expansionistic and a military force to be reckoned with. They fought wars with both the Danes and at times also their Frankish “allies”, and at one occasion even conquered and burned down Hamburg. But your right that they don’t really blend into tLK’s main theme, the Viking invasion of Britain, though as the map is as it is, they are a possibility. They could get Reric – which ought to be replaced by Ilow, as it was destroyed in 808 by the Danes – and Jumne as starting settlements.


Inspired by SOF’s extensive list of factions on the British Isles and in Scandinavia and the following short “discussion”, I have a new drastic suggestion (it’s more a game of thoughts, than a real suggestion though):

Radical focus on the British Isles and Scandinavia (note: only a game of thoughts!)
a) Dump all continental factions (save the Danes) and trim the map, and/or have less and larger provinces in mainland Europe; have any remaining areas there controlled by the rebel faction only
b) Add scripted incursions of Franks and Slavs – both mimicked by the rebel faction – into Denmark every now and then, to give the Danes a hard time; Franks and Slavs would be the Danes’ “Magyar-threat”
c) Severely enlarge the map (now focused on the British Isles and Scandinavia) both in size and scale, and add new provinces to these regions
d) Add new factions to the British Isles and Scandinavia; SOF’s list has many good options, and I have on top of these some further possible factions to choose from: petty kingdoms of Gaels and Picts in modern Scotland, more independent Norse Jarldoms (e.g. Dublin) and perhaps petty kingdoms in both Norway (on the north coast and hinterland) and Denmark (as it was not fully united until the late 10th century*) [EDIT-2: a Cornish faction is also a plausible option]
e) Extend tLK’s timeframe a little and script a large invasion by the Normans (which could be a non-playable, emerging faction) around 1066CE [EDIT-1: Although unhistoric, perhaps even script the Norman invasion for the mid/late 900rds for the sake of campaign game-play; and as history is rewritten form the moment you first click on "next turn", it is imaginable that the Norman invasion could occur earlier to a certain extent]
Conclusion: more focus on the British Isles and the Viking invasions, which seems to me is thought to be the main theme of tLK // an even more exiting, detailed and diverse depiction of the struggles of Dark Age Britannia, Ireland and the Viking homeland // perhaps this focus on the BI & SC is easier for the devs to handle modding-wise (?)




* only a wikipedia article again:

Various petty kingdoms existed throughout the area now known as Denmark for many years. Between c. 960 and the early 980s, Harald Bluetooth appears to have established a kingdom in the lands of the Danes which stretched from Jutland to Skåne.

[Ubermomo]

(Particularly the Bretons to rescue their cousins in Devon and Cornwall).

Devon wasnt home of the native Britains, there were alot more Saxons in Devon, this can be proven by the fact that during the Viking invasion of Wessex and during the time of Alfred the Great a large Saxon army from Devon was raised and defeated a Viking army.

[Dominick]

Sticky this thread and make it official? xD (Suggestion )

[SOF]

Devon wasnt home of the native Britains, there were alot more Saxons in Devon, this can be proven by the fact that during the Viking invasion of Wessex and during the time of Alfred the Great a large Saxon army from Devon was raised and defeated a Viking army.

Devon was the core of the West Welsh Kingdom of Dumnonia which was only subjugated by Wessex in the latter part of the 8th century, Cornwall becoming a Kingdom of its own at that point and lasting longer. With increased stresses brought on by the Viking invasions, Devon was far from a pacified province and was the site of a number of campaigns and rebellions during the first half of the 9th century and apparently the population of Exeter continued to be Briton/West Welsh into the 10th century (or so a wikipedia Footnote would suggest).

Devon as a rebel province with a heavier Briton cultural numbers seems perfectly reasonable for suiting both historical and gameplay needs.

[SOF]

My understanding is that the map will be enlarged both in size and scale, so your idea of land bridges – which I like – might not be doable in most areas, even between Orkney and the mainland. If that’s the case I’ll stick to my proposal, but if they are possible, then your idea has indeed favourable elements that could enhance the campaign game-play in that area.
Without a base on the British Isles the united Norway faction (controlled by the AI) has more or less only two possible directions to expand: either Denmark or Britain. So if united Norway has war declared on by the independent Vikings via script, it could at the same time be scripted into an alliance with the Danes, which would make it more likely for them to invade the British Isles (and perhaps outright scripting a Norwegian invasion is possible).

I agree scripting to could work as well. I suppose more the core of my point in the Orkneys is to get the Norse Factions more involved in Britain (other than the generic Vikings) which I think throwing a settlement each to the major Norwegian Jarldoms would do. Whatever way works best I'm all for it.

The Obotrites were quite expansionistic and a military force to be reckoned with. They fought wars with both the Danes and at times also their Frankish “allies”, and at one occasion even conquered and burned down Hamburg.

Quite true and if this were say a more Baltic centric setting I would love to see them as a faction

Radical focus on the British Isles and Scandinavia (note: only a game of thoughts!)

An idea not without merit but I think a bit limited. Now I loved old Viking Invasion for Medieval TW, which essentially did just that, though adding the inner Scandinavian warfare would be new, but I always felt it failed to make show the entire dynamic of Viking Age politics in the North Sea world. By having the continental end, particularly with the expanded factions I mentioned before, you can hit upon all the sort of cool sorts of campaign goals you want.

As a Norse faction player you can strive to create the Empire of Sven and Cnut or forge your own Kingdom as an adventurer on the continent (Normandy or I suppose if you were ambitious take a more rooted faction and move and be your own Rorik or Gotfried in Frisia). As a non-Norse player all factions have the struggle to achieve cultural hegemony under their King with the constant threat of marauding Norsemen and then construct their own fictional Empires. If you added the West Franks, Breton, and Flemish adds depth. All the continental factions developments were very much influenced by the actions of the Norse and as the TW series gives the player an awesome way in which to pursue their own history why not a greater series of possibilities. What if the Norse incursions so weakened Wessex an ambitious Breton Duke tried to restore the fortunes of his cousins, or Flemish Count playing the animosity of the two Frankish Kingdoms against one another to make his line head of one or both, or why must the Normans always aim for the throne of England when the proper maneuvering could acquire that of the Franks?

To me a slight bit more of the continent would be more interesting history and gameplay wise than less.

But now I think my faction moving idea has inspired me to take a Hordaland campaign off on a 'who need Norway' tangent.....

[Ubermomo]

Devon was the core of the West Welsh Kingdom of Dumnonia which was only subjugated by Wessex in the latter part of the 8th century, Cornwall becoming a Kingdom of its own at that point and lasting longer. With increased stresses brought on by the Viking invasions, Devon was far from a pacified province and was the site of a number of campaigns and rebellions during the first half of the 9th century and apparently the population of Exeter continued to be Briton/West Welsh into the 10th century (or so a wikipedia Footnote would suggest).

Devon as a rebel province with a heavier Briton cultural numbers seems perfectly reasonable for suiting both historical and gameplay needs.

My family are Anglo saxons that orginate from Devon, i would be interested to know more about the Welsh kingdom that existed there and the anglo saxons that moved in.

[Casual Tactician]

By having the continental end, particularly with the expanded factions I mentioned before, you can hit upon all the sort of cool sorts of campaign goals you want.

(...)

To me a slight bit more of the continent would be more interesting history and gameplay wise than less.

Actually I agree with you on this. All I would like to see is a much larger scale and thus bigger map, but that has luckily already been announced by the team. As you said, having the continental factions adds much to the campaign game-play. Possibly the map could be extended a little southward to include the Normandy hinterlands, as that area around Rouen does look rather narrow. The idea of focusing on the British Isles and Scandinavia was only a game of thoughts, imagining the eventuality that the team may have been pondering, if portraying the continent was too much work for too little effect.

With all this talk of factions around, I’ve compiled a list of factions with various possible new ones. As a base for this compilation I used SOF’s list from one of his earlier posts. The factions already in tLK 3.05 are in black, possible new ones that don’t need a southward extension of the map are in blue and new one’s that would need a more than slight extension to be represented fairly correct are in brown. The possible new factions also have links to wikipedia articles in order to have a look at their history etc.

EDIT: added "County of Flanders"

Viking factions:
Vikings
Kingdom of Denmark
Jarldom of Hordaland
Jarldom of Vestfold
Kingdom of the Isles – >info1 ; >info2(with lots information on Vikings in Ireland and other parts of the British Isles)

Anglo-Saxon factions:
Kingdom of Wessex
Kingdom of Mercia
Kingdom of East Anglia
Kingdom of Northumbria

British factions (non-Anglo-Saxon):
Kingdom of Alba
Kingdom of Gwynedd
Kingdom of Cornwall – >info
Kingdom of Strathclyde – a Celtic faction aka “Alt Clut”; in NW England and SW Scotland >info
Kingdom of Fortriu – a Pictish faction; situated in Central/NE Scotland >info

Irish factions:
Kingdom of Connacht
Kingdom of Munster
Kingdom of Ulster – situated in NE Ireland >info
Kingdom of Leinster – situated in Eastern Ireland >info

Mainland Europe factions:
Normandy
Kingdom of the East Franks
Kingdom of the West Franks >info
County of Flanders >info
Friesland – de facto independent region of Middle Francia; ruled by Danish Vikings >info
Kingdom of Brittany – after the Battle of Trans-la-Forêt 939 referred to as Duchy >info
Obotrite Confederacy – Slavic faction in NE Germany i.e. Holstein and Mecklenburg >info


Possibly my favourite of the optional new factions is the Viking Kingdom of the Isles. A) because of the interesting history of Vikings in that area, and B) because it would introduce a playable Viking faction in the British Isles. Territories held by it around 865 may include Dublin & surroundings, the Isle of Man, parts of the Outer Hebrides, Orkney/Shetlands and the north-eastern tip of Scotland. Alternative names could be: "Vikings/Jarldom of the Isles", "Kingdom of Laithlind" or "Kingdom of Dyflin. Historically more correct might be to have two small Viking kingdoms - in Dublin/Ireland and the Isles/Scotland. But one combined kingdom (or the Isles/Scotland kingdom excluding Dublin/Ireland) might be more favourable regarding the campaign game-play.
Here are short quotes referring to the Viking Kingdom of Laithlind, which may be a term for the Northern British territories ruled by Norwegian Vikings and a Viking King of Dublin, son of the King of Laithlind:

It is now thought that these early raids were launched directly from southwest Norway, and that during the period of calm (814–820) the Norwegian Vikings were occupied in northern Britain, laying the foundations of a new kingdom referred to in Irish sources as Laithlind (later Lochlainn). Laithlind was once thought to be in Norway but it is now identified with Viking settlements in the British Isles, especially those in Scotland and the Isle of Man. [>source]

A year later, in 853, a Viking warlord called Amlaíb (Old Norse: Óláfr) came to Dublin and made himself king — the first in the fledgling city’s history — receiving hostages from the Vikings and tribute from the Irish.
(…)
According to another entry in the Fragmentary Annals, Ímar and Auisle were Amlaíb's brothers, all three being sons of Gofraid mac Ragnaill the King of Laithlind.
Ímar became Amlaíb's co-regent in Dublin around 857. Auisle was co-regent from about 863 until his death in 867. [>source]

That said the Strathclyde and Cornwall Kingdoms and perhaps a Pictish and a third Irish faction (Ulster seems quite poweful) would also be a great addition for the British Isles imo – as soon as the map is enlarged to make more room for further realms that is.

[diadok]

I have increase movement of ships (to see if it help AI to invade more) and i discover than fleets have their movement very reduced when they got troops. Is it intentionnal ?

In my opinion, if fleets with troops could move faster, AI would make more naval invasions.

[Coeur de Lion]

Now I even have some suggestions to the suggestion-thread, nothings impossible ehh? I'll put them in this spoiler, so they don't get in the way of the proper suggestions...

General: "Traits" could be named "Traits and Ancillaries". And you could perhaps in the future give some of the sub-section inside the spoilers their own section/spoiler, as I guess it won't take long until some of them become very long and confusing. Probably pushing at an wide open door with this idea, sry.

So, here are some posts/suggestions that might be worth considering to include in the OP. Some are only concernde with minor issues, but others are quite interesting imo - and I don't necessarily mean my own suggestions in this list (although they are naturally highly sophisticated and unequaled in both quality and style ??). Possible that you missed some suggestions, which would be understandable as this thread has become quite a bulky read, or were primarily concernde getting the first release up and running. Anyhow, here they are:

UNITS - post #10
CULTURE - post #12 has interesting ideas on Iceland's culture
CULTURE - post #20 also regarding Iceland
UNITS - post #33 possibly more a bug report though
UNITS - post #37 ditto
TRAITS - post #45
UNITS - post #76 (the part in the Edit)
MIXED - post #84 (6., 8., 9.; and perhaps 11. and 12. for MISC)
MISC - post #96 (2. suggestion)
MIXED - post #99 (1. and 2.)
CAMPAIGN GAME-PLAY - post #104 suggesting a new faction
UNITS - post #108 (first part) suggesting slinger units
CAMPAIGN GAME-PLAY post #116 (section "Viking starting provinces")
CAMPAIGN MAP - post #123
CAMPAIGN GAME-PLAY post #130
UNITS - post #134 (section regarding the Fryd unit)
-----
Note: Didn't take the post above this one (i.e. #139) into account. Looks like you'll have some work coming round the corner keeping this up to date.

PS: , Coeur de Lion!

Casual, I can always rely upon you for suggestions. I didn't include some posts because they were simple opinions rather than being supported by evidence or backed up by some theory of some sort. While my judgement may not be right all the time, I'm trying to sift out those suggestions that require a little more elaboration.

Keep them coming, I'm sure the team are loving all the feedback!

Sticky this thread and make it official? xD (Suggestion )

Maybe not a bad idea after all the brain-storming that has gone on in this thread!

[danova]

Coeur de Lion, Casual Tactician!
Your suggestions are realy good and helpfull!
.

[Starknight]

Accent fix

-French accent-
-Norman
-Free Estates of France

-German-
-East Franks
-Maybe Denmark
-Northumbria

-Scottish/Irish accent-
-Alba
-Munster
-Connacht
-Not Wales

-English-
-Wessex
-East Anglia
-Mercia
-Wales or give Wales a Latin accent

[Ubermomo]

Accent fix

-Wales or give Wales a Latin accent

Why would Wales have a latin accent?

I have a question rather than suggestions.

It is said that Mercia and East-Anglia were Anglian kingdoms, so why do they have Saxon huscarls?

[Celtichugs123]

Accent fix

-French accent-
-Norman
-Free Estates of France

-German-
-East Franks
-Maybe Denmark
-Northumbria

-Scottish/Irish accent-
-Alba
-Munster
-Connacht
-Not Wales

-English-
-Wessex
-East Anglia
-Mercia
-Wales or give Wales a Latin accent

We know.

[One-Eye]

there are some great new ideas. many of them started SOF and here is my little input"

Land Bridges Between the Isles and Britain and Ireland:
With weak AI ability to move by naval means having most of these places passable by normal movement involves them better in the game.

I think now it is good. the Anglo-Saxons did never naval invasions to Ireland. also Irish was not active in England in these times. Scots also had no influence in Ireland. only what is important is if Viking factions are able to do naval invasions.

Give each Norwegian Jarldom a province in the Orkneys:
The Orkney had strong ties to Norway and this would represent local Jarls throwing in with a certain Jarldom they back for the struggle to unite the Norway. This also brings in more conflict in the north, with land bridges between Norwegian Factions and those of the British Isles.

are you sure? the isles were invaded by Jarls (Kings) of petty kingdoms in Norway when Harald Fairhair conquered their kingdoms, so I think it is good when they start as rebels. maybe add more troops them.

Larger Map:
This applies both to scale and number of provinces. Iceland is rather pointless as without a strong AI that does naval things (a part of the TW series that has always been a problem) the area is just a safe zone for a human player and rather boring.

the map is fine, I think. (and look fantastic). maybe reduce the movement points for armies/generals/agents?

about Iceland (and rest of map). I played Viking Invasion II for RTW/BI and here is interesting thing - unrest in settlements with different culture. maybe this could help - when human player take settlement in Iceland (Iceland could has own culture?) it will be not so easy to hold it.

More Factions and Alteration of Faction Grouping:
Currently there are some regions of the map missing interesting faction additions. Right now the Saxon held part of England is a very nice mix of wars, regions changing hands, and challenges for the player, elsewhere not so much. To combat this, create more factions on the edges or those overly rebel regions. Here is my general idea of the ideal factions and cultures I would like to see:

there are mainly all important factions. also do not forget - more factions = harder balance of mod, worst caltulation for AI... but I have some ideas about some factions.

Norse
Danes - add them from start settlement in today Oslo area. Danes ruled this area and this could helps to bring war between Danes and Norwegian kingdoms - they were huge rivals.
Jarldom of Vestfold
Jarldom of Hordaland
Vikings
Kingdom of the Isles - agree! but not from start. add it to script, so this Kingdom could incepts if any condition will be execited. (maybe when any of Viking faction will invade Ireland and hold settlement here and no Irish faction holds Dublin).
Jarldom/Kingdom of Lade - again not from start but add it to script. after any Norwegian faction conquer all settlements in Norway, (but unification as is in mod will be not execited) the Jarldom of Lade could be established, so settlements in Jarldom of Lade area will "change" to new faction.

Briton
Kingdom of Gwynedd
Kingdom of Strathclyde - again agree. but again maybe not from start, just only "scripted" faction. could be established if Scots will not holds some settlements to any time.
Duchy of Brittany

Gaelic
Kingdom of Munster
Kingdom of Connacht
Kingdom of Lienster
Kingdom of Ulster - 100% for it from start! Uí Néill was the most powerfull in Ireland in this time era.
Kingdom of Alba

Saxon
Same

Frankish
East Franks
West Franks
County of Flanders - and again scripted faction. could be "established" when Magyars take some settlements from Franks (and Normans or Vikings raid Frankish area?)
Duchy of Normandy

With these additions I think the overall strategy of the game would be better. A four faction race in Ireland would be more challenging and interesting for the player. Ulster could if it wanted expand through the Isles into Britain as well as fight for the High Kingship of Ireland but would have to contend with the Islesmen. Strathclyde would have a rough go as an AI faction but it is always fun to have a player controlled faction that has such a great uphill fight. Playing as a continental faction you face far more strong factions. Normandy, Flanders, and Brittany are the little guys that can take advantage of the weakness of the West Frankish Kings or look to expand into southern Britain (Particularly the Bretons to rescue their cousins in Devon and Cornwall).

title "High King of Ireland! and some advances would be great.
four factions for Ireland could be too much. all the more when there will be also Kingdom of Dublin (Isles).
Brittany is a little off map.

Unit Diversity:
I love the skins and what not but certain factions, Celtic and Irish in particular are way too similar. Irish, Caledonian, and Welsh had similarities but a greater diversity than present. The ubiquitous nature of the Armored Warband, Arras Axemen, and Celtic Nobles is both boring and doesn’t full represent the difference between these factions. Until full release I don’t know how this will actually shake down, but currently rather dull.

hm, diversity. Viking Invasion II has one nice idea - each faction has its own "special" unit...

Again great work gents

100% agree!

I do not know much about modding. I wrote here only ideas which are able to do in M2TW engine. if Danova and TLK team will like some of my inputs, or if there will be any guys fascinated with this mod and have any skill in modding PM me. I have more ideas...

[Casual Tactician]

Coeur de Lion, Casual Tactician!
Your suggestions are realy good and helpfull!.

You asked for it danova! So here are some rough ideas I had on unit balancing, that I’d like to add to this brainstorming-potpourri-thread:

Hardy and very_hardy attribute for cavalry units
Atm no cavalry unit has these attributes; here are some ideas for assigning hard and very_hardy:
- give 50%+ of “light” cav (horsemen with armour 0 to 4) hardy or very_hardy
- give 50%+ of “medium” cav (horsemen with armour 5 and 6) hardy, and perhaps one or two very_hardy
- give 50%+ of “heavy” cav (horsemen with armour 8+) hardy, and perhaps-perhaps one or two very_hardy
Factors which of these cavalry units could get hardy/very_hardy (other/more factors possible):
- unit/faction was historically known for swift and untiring cavalry
- unit/faction was historically known for high quality mounts / good horse breeding

Enhanced distinction between javelin units
Some javelin units have 2-4 javs and others 8 javs, but all have the ap-attribute. Maybe units with fewer javelins could have the ap-attribute more often than units with more javs. I guess a good javelin that can penetrate armour more easily (such as the Roman pilum or the Iberian solifernum) would be more costly and difficult to produce, and therefore rarer.
And as it seems there's no unit with the prec-attribute. Maybe a handfull of javelin units with fewer javs could be equipped with that feature.

Increased stat_charge_dist value for all units
Atm cavalry units have 45 and most infantry units 30 (some 20 or 40, and huscarls 55!??). What about giving cavalry on average 80 and infantry units 50-70. Not so much for realism, but because it makes handling battles different. Most of the time (at least when the battle is in full play and has turned into a gigantic, bloody melee) you don’t want your units to slop around and doing some sight-seeing before they start smashing the enemy. An increased charge distance could give the battles an extra touch of dynamism and make them more intuitive to handle.

Horse Archers & Skirmisher Cavalry
Maybe Celts/Picts/Gaels could have one or two light horse archers. They had some in MTW Viking Invasion iirc. And perhaps add one or two further javelin cav units (atm there is only one?).

Ideas for archer units
What about removing the ap-attribute from all archers and in exchange for that they could get an extra +20 range and possibly extra +5 or +10 ammo? That wouldn't necessarily make them any weaker. The rationale of this idea is:
- The ap-attribute doesn’t have much effect regarding lightly or medium armoured units, but a severe one on highly armoured units (i.e. generals, elites…), although these in particular were actually fairly immune to missile fire / arrows in these days.
- The English longbow is famous for it’s devastating effect on the French knights, but that was not until the 14th century; and I’m not sure if bows had such a devastating effect in the Dark Ages, or were used in such masses as by the English in the Hundred Years’ War.
- Without the ap, but with better range and additional ammo, archers wouldn’t become weaker overall, but their pros and cons would change somewhat. They would be able to pepper down volleys from a larger distance and for a longer time. At the same time the casualties amongst heavy armoured targets would be less (due to removed ap), whereas the casualties amongst the lightly armoured targets – which aren’t really affected by the ap-ability much anyway – would increase because of earlier and prolonged volleys (due to more range and ammo). Archers would qualitatively cause the same damage, just to different units - more killed light warriors/soldiers, but less dead elites.

Here’s a rough comparison (unit attack, range, ammo):
Saerhwyr 9, 180, 25 >>> 9, 200, 30-35
Charlemagne Longbowmen 9, 170, 25 >>> 9, 190, 30-35
Hladir Bowmen 9, 160, 25 >>> 9, 180, 30-35
Norman Archers 5, 150, 25 >>> 5, 170, 30-35
Huntsmen 5, 130, 25 >>> 5, 150, 30-35
Norman Crossbowmen 9, 110, 25 >>> 8, 120, 25, ap (with a little less attack but more range; most important for them is that they would keep their ap – and would be the only badass “tank buster” missle unit)

[Casual Tactician]

there are some great new ideas. many of them started SOF and here is my little input" (...)

Why do you want all these interesting factions to be non-playable from the start? Creating emerging factions and implementing all the scripts to make them appear as you describred it, will also be quite some work for the team. And it would be a shame not to have them available for players. Besides, historically all these factions were already present at the mods start date. The (independent) Vikings conquered/settled in the Isles, Ireland and parts of Scotland from the late 8th century onward and had established their rule long before Norway was united. Also Strathclyde didn't pop out of thin air suddenly and having the County of Flanders in from the beginning is justifiable imo. Upps... sounds a little aggresive maybe, but actually I'm just terribly anxious the team will meet your desire - and then all these possible factions would be lost to the cold, heartless AI and no player will ever shape their faith as they deserve!

[Xoxoman]

Scripted invasions of the Danish brother Rorik and Harald in Frisia Holland; they did establish their own county there (Suggestion)