Berber invasion of iberia

[dominion]

I don't know the right date but when the moors came in trouble against the armies of christendom, didn't the berbers (i thought a youssef) launch a massive invasion at some point from north africa (marroko)(don't know the year though). Perhaps untrigger with a script an event of an invasion of stacks of moors (berber invasion)?

[Sanderlicious]

I believe you are referring to Abdul Rahman Al Ghafiqi's invasion of Iberia and France. The invasion was effectively stomped on at the battle of Tours by Charles the Hammer.
Really cool event and such, but unfortunately took place 732. Over 300 years before SS's start date.

[JohnGlave]

If you mean the Umayyad conquest of Hispania ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umayyad...st_of_Hispania ), then that happened around 400 years before the early era campaign begins .

Oops Sanderlicious got there just before me (although different event) .

[dominion]

A shame...would have been interesting.

[Sebastos Abdes Pantera]

I agree it would of been interesting.

[RollingWave]

No, he's thinking about this..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almoravid#Southern_Iberia

In 1086 Yusuf ibn Tashfin was invited by the taifa Muslim princes of the Iberian Peninsula (Al-Andalus) to defend them against Alfonso VI, King of León and Castile. In that year, Yusuf ibn Tashfin crossed the straits to Algeciras, inflicted a severe defeat on the Christians at the Battle of az-Zallaqah (Battle of Sagrajas). He was prevented from following up his victory by trouble in Africa, which he had to settle in person.

When he returned to Iberia in 1090, it was avowedly for the purpose of deposing the Muslim princes, and annexing their states. He had in his favour the mass of the inhabitants, who had been worn out by the oppressive taxation imposed by their spend-thrift rulers. Their religious teachers, as well as others in the east, (most notably, al-Ghazali in Persia and al-Tartushi in Egypt, who was himself an Iberian by birth, from Tortosa), detested the native Muslim princes for their religious indifference, and gave Yusuf a fatwa -- or legal opinion—to the effect that he had good moral and religious right, to dethrone the rulers, whom he saw as heterodox and who did not scruple to seek help from the Christians, whose habits he claimed they had adopted. By 1094, he had removed them all, except for the one at Zaragoza; and though he regained little from the Christians except Valencia, he re-united the Muslim power, and gave a check to the reconquest of the country by the Christians.

This happened right before the game starts in SS, or slightly after the game started in vanilla.

The Moors were in fact generally seperated into two aspects, the once on Iberia were effectively independent city states much like the Italian cities, where as strong tribal forces in Northern Africa usually form larger influential dynasties.

When the Iberian city states got into trouble with growing Christian presence they tend to call in the tribal forces to help them out. but the tribal forces in turn would like to subject them to their rule, which was what happened in the Alomravid and Almohad dynasties.

but when their power drop those city states often became independent again... because ... well, who llikes to be ruled by (percieved) barbarians?

[dominion]

So would the game start as in vanilla 1080 or start in 1090 (better) it would be posiible.....there is a thought. And the kingdom of jerusalem was born in 1099 so that is a problem. Well it seems not possible thus. Altough give CS Acre, tortosa, cyprus and a huge stack that is on it's way to conquer jerusalem maybe then....

[RollingWave]

it could, but much like how the 1080 crusader states (the ole templar faction in 6.1 almost never works out) the odds of a Moorish faction starting without Iberia working out seems low

[Sebastos Abdes Pantera]

The Moors would be at a disadvantage. Their holdings in Iberia are wealthy, while in N.Africa only 2 out of the regions (Morroco,Algiers) they hold are productive.

[RollingWave]

The Moors would be at a disadvantage. Their holdings in Iberia are wealthy, while in N.Africa only 2 out of the regions (Morroco,Algiers) they hold are productive.

well actually they would start with 5 settlements in this situation (Marrakesh / Fez / Mellia / Oran / Algier) which is still plenty more than the other Iberian factions. though significant adjustments would need to apply. (starting strength, and probably how the roster works , and Fez most likely need to be changed to a castle, otherwise the Moors start with 1 town, 2 large towns, and 2 cities woefully under populated wooden caslte)

Still, since the current version is using 1100 as starting date. it becomes much less relavant, since by 1095 Yusuf had already subdued most of the independent taifas to the Almoravid rule.

[Ichon]

Yeah Iberia is the only area of the map that seems to work out very well as it is. Moors generally advance very slowly or are checked for first 100-200 turns then as the Christian factions get better rosters and technology they start advancing. Only times I see Moors get rocked too early is a random Crusade or player interference.

[RollingWave]

Well, I think most area tend to work ok, on average the first faction to die out tend to be the Crusader States, which is certainly in line with history. some other events are harder to be represented by the game (such as the decline of Norman sicily, the Almoravids getting overthrown from within, and the rise of Saladin etc)