The Holy Land

[SinerAthin]

Hey ho!

I'm currently playing as Norway. After conquering Norway and establishing a solid economy, I decided to venture down into the Holy Lands for some conquest, but I guess I never quite imagined what kind of opposition I'd meet.

All my five settlements are being attacked turn after turn with whole stacks of the enemy. The reqruitment of new replacement troops is really taking its toll and though I'm holding ground, the expense of defending my settlements is starting to whittle me down, and to further add to the misery, they even called a Jihad on Jerusalem, and the sheer amount of dead muslims outside my walls at the moment are threatening to turn into a mound of corpses tall enough for the invaders to climb over their dead and right onto the city walls!

I feel that my power in these lands is dying a slow death...

Anyone else ventured to the Holy Lands as an European faction? How did that go?

[the Commissar]

That is more or less what historically happened though. The place is just too far away to supply via ships, and unless you own the rest of the world you won't be able to keep sending troops down there. Eventually the endless stack spam will prevail. Or your borders in Europe will become undefended and your allies will betray you. Or you will keep losing money and will have to withdraw.

A strategy that works relatively better than directly going for Jerusalem is simply attacking Nile delta first. If you don't think you can hold them, Sack ( or even better, exterminate ) Cairo, Alexandria and Damietta and destroy the buildings there. That should cripple the Fatimids. If you think you can hold onto that place, even better. It should make a great staging point for your conquest of holy land. Without taking out their economy, they will just keep sending more men to your walls. While it won't end the threat, it will make it a little bit easier to cope with.

Persians on the other hand, are not so easily taken care of. They will have a very strong economy and will probably be leading the production. You will just have to adjust to whatever they throw at you.

[SinerAthin]

That is more or less what historically happened though. The place is just too far away to supply via ships, and unless you own the rest of the world you won't be able to keep sending troops down there. Eventually the endless stack spam will prevail. Or your borders in Europe will become undefended and your allies will betray you. Or you will keep losing money and will have to withdraw.

A strategy that works relatively better than directly going for Jerusalem is simply attacking Nile delta first. If you don't think you can hold them, Sack ( or even better, exterminate ) Cairo, Alexandria and Damietta and destroy the buildings there. That should cripple the Fatimids. If you think you can hold onto that place, even better. It should make a great staging point for your conquest of holy land. Without taking out their economy, they will just keep sending more men to your walls. While it won't end the threat, it will make it a little bit easier to cope with.

Persians on the other hand, are not so easily taken care of. They will have a very strong economy and will probably be leading the production. You will just have to adjust to whatever they throw at you.

Fortunately, I'm Norway, and I've got a good rep in Europe, best with pope so my mainland is pretty safe xD

Actually, the stack spam seems to have lessened. Maybe once the Jihad is finished I'll start conquering the Fatamids, or create a peace to build up in strenght. Maybe even gift a settlement to a war like nation and have them send their stacks against the Fatamids

[Navajo Joe]

SinerAthin,

You have the classic case of expanded too quickly without the supply lines, you stated you had five settlements. It appears Jerusalem is one, what are the others? When I control the Holyland as a Catholic Crusader, I make sure I have Jerusalem, Gaza and Acre. If I was you I would reduce the number of settlements to max 3, really based on garrisioning the settlements adequately. Before you vacate destroy any Barracks, Stables and Archery buildings, you don't want them to have access to these, basically scorched earth policy

[Gogolometro]

Suggestion, spam priests like mad. The catholic church must prevail about that damn muslims fattys. Dont go out of settelments, keep inside the army. You have a very bad heat handicap, they got bonus in desert. Ask periodicaly crusades. Bribe, assasinate, infiltrate the egiptians. Recruit all mercenary available, especially HA. Don go in desert to fight with desert archers, and arab cavalry/infantry. Use crossbows, axes, the best spera available to kill their generals. You can hold place there, even can let to get Jerusalim back, and crusade after that city.
Ussual, like north faction as Norway I will invade Scotland, Ireland and England. I will ally or assimilate danes. I go to take the control of Baltic and Hamburg, not going in Huly Land. Because you have a blonde nation, experimented with axes and snow blitz, not some hot summers lovers like italians or spaniards.
Other clue, I discovered before go there, is better to conquer Greece, richer, fast assimilation and can be the logistical train for future Levant invasion.

[SinerAthin]

Ironically, 80% of all my battles have been fought IN the desert xD

I'm just such a cavalry freak ^^

I control Jerusalem, Acre, Gaza, and those two other settlements in the Northern part of the Nile. I can't really afford sitting around in my castles, as I can only afford the two armies there, so while the other is fighting off Jihads in Jerusalem, I use my second to patrol between the three cities to the West, so that when one settlement is besieged, they can instantly come to aid it.

And also, I secretly uncovered a weapon that's lately given me a huge advantage: The Mangonel, that big baby just tears the Muslim armies apart with a rain of fire xD my kill ratio went from 10-1 to 20-1, so it's safe to say that it's served me well xD

Actually, I think I've even stopped the Jihad, as it seems to have finally run out of maniacs to throw at me, and now there's really no other threat other than Egypt who's just trying to show me that they can be the world's biggest d**ks.

I think I'm winning ground here xD

[sbroadbent]

The key to holding the holy land is to take out the Fatimids key settlements. Gaza, Cairo, Alexandria. You severely cut into their income and their troop production allowing you some level of security. Then you just need to look north and repel any invasions once the Khwarez roll into the middle east.

As a northern European power, the middle east won't be generating you a ton of money as corruption will cut into a large chunk of that, so the reasons to hold it will be more for whatever goals you are working towards. I'd gift/trade the settlements to the Templars presuming they are still around, and let them deal with the Fatimids, which they may be better equipped to deal with.

[caralampio]

I too find that holding on to the Holy Land is quite hard. It's a logistics problem- You can't support your armies from the local cities (you simply can't rebuild them at the rate that the neighbors attrite you). The only way is making peace with Egypt so you can consolidate prior to starting to expand again.

Making peace is a little hard, but usually they'll accept if you give them a region. They will usually attack again eventually but at least you'll get a breather.

[SinerAthin]

Ohh, those Templars are still kicking, and they have more than enough teeth.

I just called a Crusade and guess who showed up? Stack full of crusaders crushed the settlement lying between me and the Fatamids, so now I have a considerable buffer zone as well!

Back in Norway, I've had an economical boom as my cities are churning out more gold than ever before, more than enough to supply for my army, AND all my building projects.

Aside from some tough resistance from the Egyptians in the western Nile where I'm currently killing their stacks around Alexandria, and cutting down the (what I believe) are the last remnants of the Jihad in Jerusalem, the East is slowly falling to the West xD


Also, I really must say: I invested in some Ballista towers in Jerusalem, and OH MY, those are insane! Hardly any rams reaches my gates at all, most of their army is butchered trying to scale the walls by my Hospitallers or slaughtered by the arrows and those towers fire huge javelins with the accuracy of a sniper and force to impale several men into the thick mobs!

Are the Cannon towers even better? :O

[Ichon]

Ballista towers are a good investment for any city likely to be a Crusade or Jihad target for sure. Never seen them stop a ram though... what unit size are you playing on?

And yes, cannon towers are better but the enemy could have their own artillery at that stage as well.

[SinerAthin]

Ballista towers are a good investment for any city likely to be a Crusade or Jihad target for sure. Never seen them stop a ram though... what unit size are you playing on?

And yes, cannon towers are better but the enemy could have their own artillery at that stage as well.

Normal, I prefer quality over Quantity xD

And well, just help the towers out a bit with a few direct fire arrows and watch the heathens burn ^^

Also, most of their Jihading armies consists only of Infantry and Cavalry. Only one of them had any artillery, but those were just some trebuchets.

I'm getting those Cannon towers! I doubt that was the last Jihad I'll ever see. I've really pissed them off now!

[Chyeaaaa111]

Give the Pope whatever city is most attacked in turn for an alliance and military access. I could go on about how it will be the best thing you've ever done and all the reasons why, but I'll let you find that out on your own

[bɑne]

Fyi: If you follow Chyeaaaa111 advice and later on the settlement is lost to the enemy you will suffer a reputation hit when you reconquer it.
This isn't specific to the papal ex settlements - happens everytime you retake a settlement you previously gave away in a diplomatic deal, no matter if it changed hands in the meantime.

[SinerAthin]

Heh, I don't think that'll even be necessary.

The Fatamids are in ruin and literally begging me for a peace treaty!

My forces have annihilated the muslim defenders, slain the noble descendants of Muhammed, stormed the holy city of Mecca, torn down the Kaaba and eradicated the city.

They only have two strongholds left, but they'll fall as soon as I replenish the numbers of an eager gold star army xD

It has been a long and hard journey, but finally the East is becoming mine ^^

But whew, I still have 47 regions left to conquer on my world domination! Perhaps I can finally go for England. I have noticed that the Scots under William Wallace have completely conquered England, but they're just some ragtag band of maniacs wearing some silly loincloths. Should be easy enough.

[Chyeaaaa111]

Fyi: If you follow Chyeaaaa111 advice and later on the settlement is lost to the enemy you will suffer a reputation hit when you reconquer it.
This isn't specific to the papal ex settlements - happens everytime you retake a settlement you previously gave away in a diplomatic deal, no matter if it changed hands in the meantime.

I would agree that it is not a good idea normally, except with the Pope. He never loses and gets all of Christendom to go ape on the Muslims. Everytime I've done this, he creates quite the empire in the region.

[sbroadbent]

Fyi: If you follow Chyeaaaa111 advice and later on the settlement is lost to the enemy you will suffer a reputation hit when you reconquer it.
This isn't specific to the papal ex settlements - happens everytime you retake a settlement you previously gave away in a diplomatic deal, no matter if it changed hands in the meantime.

And if you happen to decide that you wish you hadn't given away the settlements to the Pope in the first place, your reputation will hit rock bottom when you get yourself excomm'd retaking them both...


On a related note, I was looking through the file descr_faction_standing, and if I understand what I read correctly, if you give away a settlement that later rebels which you then take from the rebels, you don't get hit by the rep penalty. Specifically the "and not TargetFactionType slave" under the Condition. The Slave faction being the rebels. Am I reading this correctly? This was found in two places, one under a General heading, the other under Dishonest Transgressions. What's the difference between the two, as the only difference seems to be one has greater penalties?

Interestingly enough, if you steal back a settlement from someone, you get a bonus from that factions enemies, as they apparently like you more that you took something away from their enemies.

1) General
Trigger 0051_T_Stole_Back_Settlement
WhenToTest Transgression

Condition TransgressionName = TC_STOLE_BACK_SETTLEMENT
and not TargetFactionType slave

FactionStanding global -0.3
FactionStanding target_faction normalise -0.5 5
FactionStanding target_allies normalise -0.5 25
FactionStanding target_enemies normalise 0.5 50


2) Dishonest Transgressions
Trigger 0051_T_Stole_Back_Settlement
WhenToTest Transgression

Condition TransgressionName = TC_STOLE_BACK_SETTLEMENT
and not TargetFactionType slave

FactionStanding global -1.0
FactionStanding target_faction normalise -1.0 5
FactionStanding target_allies normalise -1.0 25
FactionStanding target_enemies normalise 0.8 50

[gluteus maximus aurelius]

I did the same as you but played as Denmark, taking Gaza, Jerusalem and Acre straight away and then suing for peace. This didn't last long though and they attacked, leading me into calling a Crusade on Cairo. Luckily for me, the European armies from the previous Crusade hadn't gotten very far and so came running back to attack the Fatimids. I was then able to take Cairo, Damietta and Alexandria easily enough, and the Fatimids were pretty much harmless after that, with no major cash coming in and no real recruitment centre. I then took some of the cities by the Red Sea and gave them to my Templar allies to aid them in their quest to subdue the Turks.

[merlinuscdxx]

And if you happen to decide that you wish you hadn't given away the settlements to the Pope in the first place, your reputation will hit rock bottom when you get yourself excomm'd retaking them both...


On a related note, I was looking through the file descr_faction_standing, and if I understand what I read correctly, if you give away a settlement that later rebels which you then take from the rebels, you don't get hit by the rep penalty. Specifically the "and not TargetFactionType slave" under the Condition. The Slave faction being the rebels. Am I reading this correctly? This was found in two places, one under a General heading, the other under Dishonest Transgressions. What's the difference between the two, as the only difference seems to be one has greater penalties?

Interestingly enough, if you steal back a settlement from someone, you get a bonus from that factions enemies, as they apparently like you more that you took something away from their enemies.

descr_faction_standing excerpt

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

1) General
Trigger 0051_T_Stole_Back_Settlement
WhenToTest Transgression

Condition TransgressionName = TC_STOLE_BACK_SETTLEMENT
and not TargetFactionType slave

FactionStanding global -0.3
FactionStanding target_faction normalise -0.5 5
FactionStanding target_allies normalise -0.5 25
FactionStanding target_enemies normalise 0.5 50


2) Dishonest Transgressions
Trigger 0051_T_Stole_Back_Settlement
WhenToTest Transgression

Condition TransgressionName = TC_STOLE_BACK_SETTLEMENT
and not TargetFactionType slave

FactionStanding global -1.0
FactionStanding target_faction normalise -1.0 5
FactionStanding target_allies normalise -1.0 25
FactionStanding target_enemies normalise 0.8 50

Looks like section 1 is for when you take a diplomatically given settlement back after it has changed hands, and section 2 is for when you take it back from the faction you sold/gifted it to (notice the larger rep hit in the 2nd entries- hence the heading "dishonest transgression").

[ediko]

My advice would be a tactical retreat from there.