View Poll Results: Which campaign style is preferred?

Voters
8. You may not vote on this poll
  • Both an 1194 and 1224 start date

    1 12.50%
  • Just the 1224 start date with historically accurate factions

    5 62.50%
  • Just the 1224 start date with all factions already present plus new ones

    2 25.00%
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: SS 6.4 BGR V submod poll

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Default SS 6.4 BGR V submod poll

    After a couple of months thinking about it, carrying out some research, and watching how the development of SS 7.0 and BGR V were progressing, I've finally decided it might be worthwhile afterall for me to create a submod for BGR V (been there and done that with unrealistic goals when it comes to modding). Since it is a Late era campaign only, and the default Late era isn't exactly historically accurate, I'm split between both an earlier start date of 1194 and a 1224 start date, or just a 1224 start date.

    In the case of both start dates, there would be different factions for each, and it would be more historically accurate. In 1194, no Teutonic Order (and not emergent either to free up space), but Sicily could still exist. The Mongols might take too long to turn up, I don't know (likely with 12 turns per year). I can fit in extra factions like Sweden from BftB, and I'll look into the factions certain renowned beta submods are incorporating. 1224 is the historically accurate foundation of the Teutonic Order as a state, so that fits in very nicely as a start date (moreso than 1220), but no Sicily, and with a focus on historical accuracy, the Holy Roman Empire may be overpowered (unless in the hands of the player). In either start date, no real difference in the units (I plan to remove certain redundant or plain silly units so slots are freed up for the extra factions' rosters).

    In the case of just having the 1224 start date, it's not so clear. There are certain factions I really like, hence the pull of an 1194 start date, but it's extra work and I'm only one man. It'd save a lot of effort just having one start date. The focus could be a little less on historical accuracy (I really like Norman Sicily - I'm English and have never been to any other countries save France and Belgium, so not really being nationalistic here, although I do love my Normans...). Since Norman Sicily is already in, I could construct an alternate history around why they still remain (along with family trees based on the real ones). I'd only need to add factions rather than remove/change (with 1194, no Teutonic Order and possibly wasting space with the Mongols also), and tweak the units. It'd be less work (still lots, but less than both start dates combined).

    I'm wondering what other people think of these choices (hence a poll).
    Last edited by Kaidonni; May 21, 2012 at 01:59 PM.

  2. #2

    Default Re: SS 6.4 BGR V submod poll

    Only one vote...

    The main reason I am asking is because if I go for only 1224 and keep all current factions, I have some serious thinking to do as regards Sicily itself and game balancing. I'd have to think up some alternate history because otherwise the Holy Roman Empire is going to have far too much land - all of southern Italy and Sicily, central Europe - Frederick II was extremely powerful. I don't think it'd do to have Sicily owned by the rebels either. This means an alternate history on how Sicily came to be independent from the HRE at this time (either by Frederick II not having such a good time as Holy Roman Emperor and being left with only his Sicilian possessions, or by Tancred di Lecce and his descendants not faring so badly - i.e. Tancred not dying and William III not being castrated and having his eyes gouged out by Heinrich VI ).

  3. #3

    Default Re: SS 6.4 BGR V submod poll

    Still nothing at all? I'm asking how people feel about mixing some alternate history in with a modification that is trying to be largely historical. Surely that warrants some sort of response (even if it is being slapped in the face with a trout for just thinking about it)?
    Last edited by Kaidonni; May 23, 2012 at 04:56 PM.

  4. #4

    Default Re: SS 6.4 BGR V submod poll

    I never noticed this earlier and been rather busy last few days but with BGR V it would be a shame to go into alternate history. Why not just have HRE start with more rebel regions- you can give HRE the lands of the Hohenstaufen and some imperial free cities while the rest of HRE is rebel? It would be maybe even better to have FL as Hohenstaufen in Sicily with majority of HRE armies in Bavaria and the Heir as a Habsburg in Bavaria as well. Then HRE would spend the first 20 turns capturing rebel regions at least while a few rebel regions would likely fall to Poland, Norway, France, Scotland and they would start fighting each other instead of ganging up on HRE as usually happens. A scripted French invasion of Naples followed by a scripted invasion by Aragon could then follow.
    Last edited by Ichon; May 23, 2012 at 05:24 PM.

  5. #5

    Default Re: SS 6.4 BGR V submod poll

    There's another possibility (apart from only giving the Germans the hereditary Hohenstauffen lands) - perhaps a start date closer to 1300, with Frederick III ruling over Sicily? Maybe too late, I don't know...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •