1354 VS 1370 Start Date for High Era Campaign

[Tears of Destiny]

The previous thread Found Here is what started this madness.

You now have two choices, Have the new High Era Campaign start on the year 1354, or 1370.

Keep in mind not only will I be looking at the Poll results, but also the arguments posted in this thread. I will weigh both, so just because one is outdoing the other % wise in votes does not mean I will choose it.
Better chance of your "voted year" being chosen if you provide a good argument for it.

This will be a short poll, results will be used within seven or so hours.

GamePlay Changes:
1354:
40% to 60% of Europe's population is now dead.
You will be recovering from The Black Death (Now passed), low populations in most centers (But high % increase due to the empty room! ).
You have a short period to prepare for the Timurid invasion.
Timurids are a Horde Faction with massive troop reinforcements as turns go by.

1370:
Population centers still recovering from Black Death (Now Passed), but a lot of damage has receded.
Timurids will be playable (With one starting territory).
Timurids are not a horde faction, still have massive troop reinforcements as turns go by.

[bɑne]

So the other topic can be closed?

[Tears of Destiny]

So the other topic can be closed?

Oh certainly, I just reported it after giving up how to edit a poll to be closed (Must be thinking of a different forum). The entire previous thread can be closed, thank you!

[Medkirtys]

Um, shouldn't this be Late campaign, and Late should be high. I mean curretly, we should have Early And High, and the new one( this) should be late. Amirite

[Tears of Destiny]

Um, shouldn't this be Late campaign, and Late should be high. I mean curretly, we should have Early And High, and the new one( this) should be late. Amirite

Good point, but seeing as "Late" is an already established Campaign option, I am not going to request the entire SS team to rename their mod that I am sub-modding.

This may be renamed in the future, but currently it is called High Era Campaign (Just to confuse you, is it working? ).

Regardless, High Era Campaign sounds better then "1370 sub-mod" so if it is name changed, I will have to think of something suitably... "spiffy."

[Ichon]

Are you going to basically change just the factions names and a few units along with descr_strat building and pop levels or also try to make map changes?

I really think SS map could use a few changes but apparently it is quite difficult to do.


Assuming just faction name changes and perhaps a few units for flavor then the 1370 date makes more sense to me for 2 main reasons.

1. East

Ottomans are in Balkans in strength which gives them a chance to fight the strong Mameluks of 1370 and either Ilkhans or Timurids and emerge as historically poweful as Ottmans were. Also at this point Byzantines can control Adrianople, Constantinople and maybe Trebizond and maybe even start as vassals of Ottomans. Venice, Bulgaria, and Ottomans took the rest of Byzantine empire at this point. Timurids also are playable which gives some fun potential for expanding a small empire in the east vs Khanates and eventually the Ottomans or Mameluk. Georgia is also the last Christian land in the east and could be the new really hard campaign starting as vassals of Ottomans. This way Ottoman player is also faced with challenges of where to expand- crush the vassals of Byzantine/Georgia first or fight dangerous Mamelukes or go into Europe towards Vienna or even land in Italy earlier than historically.

2. West

Iberia- Aragon has complete control of eastern Med at this point with Sardinia, and Sicily both firmly under control. Meanwhile the 100 years war is affecting Castile and Portugal as England allies with Portugal and France with Castile...

Giving Portugal access to some English mercenaries and Castile to French or even start game with those nations allied and small armies in Iberia. Kingdom of Naples was ruled by a French house but could be represented as strong rebels or Naples very strong rebels while Aragon or Venice controls Bari for game play reasons.

[Tears of Destiny]

Are you going to basically change just the factions names and a few units along with descr_strat building and pop levels or also try to make map changes?

I really think SS map could use a few changes but apparently it is quite difficult to do.


Assuming just faction name changes and perhaps a few units for flavor then the 1370 date makes more sense to me for 2 main reasons.

1. East

Ottomans are in Balkans in strength which gives them a chance to fight the strong Mameluks of 1370 and either Ilkhans or Timurids and emerge as historically poweful as Ottmans were. Also at this point Byzantines can control Adrianople, Constantinople and maybe Trebizond and maybe even start as vassals of Ottomans. Venice, Bulgaria, and Ottomans took the rest of Byzantine empire at this point. Timurids also are playable which gives some fun potential for expanding a small empire in the east vs Khanates and eventually the Ottomans or Mameluk. Georgia is also the last Christian land in the east and could be the new really hard campaign starting as vassals of Ottomans. This way Ottoman player is also faced with challenges of where to expand- crush the vassals of Byzantine/Georgia first or fight dangerous Mamelukes or go into Europe towards Vienna or even land in Italy earlier than historically.

2. West

Iberia- Aragon has complete control of eastern Med at this point with Sardinia, and Sicily both firmly under control. Meanwhile the 100 years war is affecting Castile and Portugal as England allies with Portugal and France with Castile...

Giving Portugal access to some English mercenaries and Castile to French or even start game with those nations allied and small armies in Iberia. Kingdom of Naples was ruled by a French house but could be represented as strong rebels or Naples very strong rebels while Aragon or Venice controls Bari for game play reasons.

EDIT:
Son of a gun, I lost my response and only have your quote!

Basically I will tweak faction access to certain units to better reflect the time changes. I will rename certain factions, remove certain others (NOT adding new ones, at least not until this is a polished product). I am refusing to add new units until this is abolished product, as 1 I am not experienced in that department and 2 I am not in the mood to chase after Bugs in both the unit department and the map department at the same time. 3 Extensive changes to starting territories will be made.

[amadee]

a 1350 campaign would be totally awesome. btw the Timurids are not ment to be playable, they are there to be your biggest nightmare!

[Meneth]

There's precedence for this naming.
For custom battles, there's Early->Late->High.

Anyway, I voted for 1370 as the ability to play as the Timurids is certainly a plus, and population won't be quite as low.

[ly0_ly0]

Definetely 1370!

[RO Citizen]

I say 1370. If you'd start in 1354, it would be too hard, and you'd probably end with only 2 factions after a few years: you and the Timurids.

[RuleBritannia]

I like the idea of fighting off massive hordes of weak infantry with a handful of quality units from plague-stricken nations. 1354.

[PedroL]

My opinion is - 1354

[Gogolometro]

I think 1354 is a good date, because you will need to work a bit for power and thats very good, but Ichon have it a very good argumentation so I am inclined to his points of view.

[JorisofHolland]

I'm afraid I can't choose.

Apart from starting positions, the choice is between well developed settlements without population on the one side and well developed settelments with a bit more population on the other? Definetly 1354, then. But 1370 had the better starting positions.

[Tears of Destiny]

I'm afraid I can't choose.

Apart from starting positions, the choice is between well developed settlements without population on the one side and well developed settelments with a bit more population on the other? Definetly 1354, then. But 1370 had the better starting positions.

Is is a difficult choice for many apparently.

Not too many differences, but enough to make some stop and think.

Currently, I find myself leaning towards 1370 due to the starting positions.

In an hour or three, I will choose and write up my WIP.

[PedroL]

Map 1354-1358

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Need more info:
http://books.google.pt/books?id=jrVW...201354&f=false

[Medkirtys]

But the question, how the AI will cope with that?

[Gromovnik]

I want the campaign start set as late as possible, so it's 1370 for me.

[Silesian_Noble]

I vote for 1354. In 1370 Poland and Hungary were joined with a personal union which is not good for the gameplay. I mean the union lasted just about 13 years or so and Polish-Hungarian (or rather Hungarian-Polish, as the king was of Hungarian origin) domain would be a superpower. Hmmm... from the other hand the union started in november 1370 so you could still make two separate kingdoms in early 1370 - Hungary and Poland...