Page 17 of 66 FirstFirst ... 78910111213141516171819202122232425262742 ... LastLast
Results 321 to 340 of 1309

Thread: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

  1. #321

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    From what I've read:


    - Epirus was both vassal of Venice and of the Latin Empire.
    (in 1212 Michael Doukas even fight alongside the Latins against Strez Bulgarian army).
    But a proper "Client State" status may be too much for a kingdom who often back on his word to the emperor ?

    - The principality of Antioch was a Latin Empire vassal too.
    (Since 1204 when Bohemond IV pay homage to Marie of Champagne to her husband ).

    - Latin Empire and the Sultanate of Rum seem to be Allied at that time.
    (The Rum was allied with Antioch too).

    - It seem Trebizond was not anymore a Latin Empire vassal in 1212.
    (it is more or less during this period that David Komnenos appears to give up power and the Latin Emperor opted for an Latin-Rum alliance against Nicaea).

  2. #322

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    @Ashe @Frozenmen: excellent work! I copied all the notes to a text file to keep them at hand. In light of some contradictory notes on alliances and vassalage, we'll have to decide which factions are going to be client states / vassals of whom, and who just has a non-aggression pact, alliance or good relations. Too many vassals for everyone will turn a lot of factions into mini Sassanid clones and it would be best to avoid that.

  3. #323
    FrozenmenSS's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Silistra,Bulgaria
    Posts
    1,014

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Ashe View Post
    From what I've read:


    - Epirus was both vassal of Venice and of the Latin Empire.
    (in 1212 Michael Doukas even fight alongside the Latins against Strez Bulgarian army).
    But a proper "Client State" status may be too much for a kingdom who often back on his word to the emperor ?

    - The principality of Antioch was a Latin Empire vassal too.
    (Since 1204 when Bohemond IV pay homage to Marie of Champagne to her husband ).

    - Latin Empire and the Sultanate of Rum seem to be Allied at that time.
    (The Rum was allied with Antioch too).

    - It seem Trebizond was not anymore a Latin Empire vassal in 1212.
    (it is more or less during this period that David Komnenos appears to give up power and the Latin Emperor opted for an Latin-Rum alliance against Nicaea).
    Now the Latin empire probably abandoned Trebizond from 1213 onwards because of defeats from Nicaea and the Sultanate of Rum.David Komnenos died13 December 1212.And after that we can be 100% sure that Trebizond didnt had an overlord. So being client state or client state to the Latin Empire is the best way to make start of the Campaign. Also Latin Empire and the Sultanate of Rum being allied and Rum at war with Trebizond will make the already diplomacy complicated for the Mod. Ingame - Non-aggression pact between Latin Empire and the Sultanate of Rum makes more sense.

    Now The principality of Antioch I haven't researched,but ingame being vassal to the Latin Empire it wont help a bit with its own fight vs the Islamic factions so I think being independent is the best compromise.

    Epirus was in 1212 only vassal/client state of Venice and was only nominally.And Being the war with Bulgaria was a bit later - not at the start of 1212.


    Here are some comments where me and Caucasian Iberia talked on the Trebizond issue in another thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Caucasian Iberia View Post
    Empire of Trebizond:


    (Tributary State to Kingdom of Georgia) Interesting fact: Georgian historians called Trebizond Empire : "PONTUS".
    King: Alexios I of Trebizond - age: 30 (Created Trebizond Empire in 1204 by the help of his aunt Queen Tamar)
    Prince: David Komnenos - Brother of Alexios. Komnenos dynasty. Died in 1212
    Prince: John I of Trebizond - Son of Alexios I Age: Unknown
    Prince Manuel I of Trebizond - Son of Alexios
    princess: Name unknown - daughter of Alexios I, age: Unknown

    The Empire of Trebizond was vassal to the Latin empire in 1212 both Trebizond waged war with the Latins vs Nicaea in Asia Minor But in 1214 Peace was signed.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty...mphaeum_(1214)


    Second:in the Siege of Sinope in 1214 it was writen that Alexios I of Trebizond had sons who became Adults
    Prince: John I of Trebizond - Son of Alexios - age probably 14-18
    Prince Manuel I of Trebizond - Son of Alexios - age probably 14-18




    David Komnenos died in 1212/3


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komnen...I_of_Trebizond
    Quote Originally Posted by Caucasian Iberia View Post
    Dont get it rude. I really dont want to insult anyone. But it is nonsense, you are wrong.
    I study caucasus and Middle yeast history, cultures, ethnology and religion.
    Alexios I was son of Rusudan (sister of Tamar) his father and grandfather died in Constantiople rebelion and Rusudan took Alexios and David to her sister and both brothers rise in Didube palace in Tbilisi.
    Tamar conquered those cities including sinope and the siege of sinope in 1212 was done by Seljuks (Town was Trebizondian already).
    Trebizond was created by Georgia to make buffer zone from Seljuks and was tributary state of Georgia until 1235 when Mongols arrived. Trebizond had few wars with Seljuks and Latins.
    Here is some sources you can read about Trebizond:
    William Miller: The last Greek empire of Byzantine era.
    Hewsen Robert H.: The province of Trebizond.
    Ivane Javakhishvili: History of Georgian Nation.


    there is lots of reliable sources and wikipedia who claim what i said to you. Where you find Trebizond as tributary of Nicaea?


    Quote Originally Posted by FrozenmenSS View Post
    @Caucasian Iberia - here are my sources - so make your mind.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Komnenos


    For their assistance, David rewarded the Latin Empire with shiploads of corn and hams.Then, considering how Laskaris had encouraged Sultan Kay Khusrau I to besiege Trebizond in 1205 or 1206, David petitioned the Latin Emperor to include him as his subject in his treaties and correspondence with Laskaris, and to treat his land as Latin territory. In the words of William Miller, "It was his interest to prefer a nominal Latin suzerainty to annexation by the Nicaean emperor.
    William Miller, Trebizond: The last Greek Empire of the Byzantine Era: 1204-1461, 1926 (Chicago: Agronaut, 1969), p. 17


    Vassiliev commented that the lack of reference to David Komnenos in the Treaty of Nymphaeum (1214) was evidence that his former suzerain had no further use for him and abandoned him in order to gain a peace with Theodore.
    A. A. Vasiliev, "The Foundation of the Empire of Trebizond (1204-1222)
    http://www.jstor.org/stable/2846872


    More recently the truth of his fate was rediscovered: a marginal note written at Mount Athos records David Komnenos died as a monk of Vatopedi monastery on 13 December 1212.


    So from 1205/6 to 1212/3 Trebizond was vassal(client state) of the Latins not to Georgia.But this doesnt make Trebizond not to have trade and non aggression pact to simulate this with Georgia.


    Georgia already got 3 vassals and in save position and no major enemies to the west and north,but the Latin Empire is fighting on 3 Fronts - Bulgaria,Epirus and Nicaea in 1212ad.1 Ally/vassal/client state will help the Latins and Trebizond to negate the rush of the 5 regioned Sultanate of Rum and the wars vs Bulgaria,Epirus and Nicaea.

    Quote Originally Posted by Caucasian Iberia View Post
    i am sorry but David Komnenos never was a king of Trebizond. Alexios I was king of Trebizond. He was great person and respectable commander made few successful campaign to west against turks and Nicaea in help of Latins due to his close relations to latin emperor. BUT he was not a King, Ruler of Trebizond Empire was Alexios I.
    William Miller, Trebizond: The last Greek Empire of the Byzantine Era: 1204-1461, 1926 (Chicago: Agronaut, 1969), p. 17 ---> continue reading this book not stop on 17th page.
    also read this: The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, VOL1, NY-Oxford 1991, p63
    Toumanoff: "on the relationship between the founder of the Empire of Trebizond and Georgian Queen Tamat" Speculum 15, 1940, p 299-312
    Kuršanskis, «Trébizonde et la Géorgie», p. 238 - here is link on the page ---> http://www.persee.fr/doc/rebyz_0766-..._num_35_1_2073


    Tamar made Trebizond Empire by invadind in Former Byzantine territory, She made her nephew to Rule the kingdom, significant part of Population was Georgians, most of the populations was Greek. and you think that if David was Vassal to latin empire so was Alexios I or whole trebizond, when there was much more powerful Kingdom over there borders who created that kingdom?

    Quote Originally Posted by FrozenmenSS View Post
    @Caucasian Iberia the sheer fact that Trebizond was asking for help from the Latins and not from the Georgians speaks for itself.if Georgia was aiding Trebizond with its cue full time we wouldnt have heard about asking for help from the Latins...


    It was probably only an initial help from Georgia when creating the Trebizond state as it was common always when there was such a political moves the acting side like georgia wasnt helping full time the political entity that created... It always wanted to do it the most economical way and dont get bogged down in the problems of its newly created puppet/allied state.


    Its the same in todays time.Look at Syria today or Communist Afghanistan in 1979.Or Vietnam for the USA. The Russians were forced to help the Syrian army 4,5 years after the start of the Civil war there.They saw that the Syrian state was failing apart and loosing town after town.Why they didn't helped at the beginning in 2011?? Because they didnt wanted to get bogged down in a war that they cant gain any dividends and that war will only drain their Military strength.they were saving time as much as possible before they were forced to join the war in Syria guard their interests in the region.


    After the fall of Sinope in 1214 this was probably the moment when Georgia started acting in defense of Trebizond from the Sultanate of Rum.


    We know exactly when they became vassals and when they were abandoned from the Latins against their foes.Also the ruler and the second man in the state were 2 brothers.In this Medieval Period - the 13th century it was common brothers to rule their country jointly as co-rulers and having 1 unified strategy ,but it was always 1 over the other nominally.One of them(it wasnt always the elder one who was the ruler,but who was the more abled for the exact job)was the military commander and the other more of the diplomat and working on the internal politics developing the country.There were even cases of not 2 ,but 3 brothers,sometimes switching their political posts. In this Case it was Alexios the ruler and David as the man on the ground leading the armies.


    So from 1205/6 to 1212/3 Trebizond was vassal(client state) of the Latins not to Georgia.But this doesnt make Trebizond not to have trade and non aggression pact to simulate the close relationships with Georgia.

  4. #324
    nnnm's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    UAE
    Posts
    1,236

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    8) Sultanate of Rum
    Ghiyath ad-Din Kaykhusraw I - died in 1211 ,Father
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaykhusraw_I

    Izz ad-Din Kaykaus I - Ruler - 32 years old - son of Kaykhusraw I - place him with a 8 units with 75% health army in Malatya
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaykaus_I

    Ala ad-Din Kayqubad I - 24 years old - son of Kaykhusraw I - Civil war Rival of Izz ad-Din Kaykaus I - place him with a 5 units with 50% health army in Ancyra
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kayqubad_I

    Kayferidun Ibrahim - son of Kaykhusraw I - Civil war Rival of Izz ad-Din Kaykaus I - place him with a 5 units with 50% health army in Iconion

    other Nobles:
    Tughrilshah - Civil war Rival of Izz ad-Din Kaykaus I

    Manuel Maurozomes
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manuel_Maurozomes

    There may be more info for the Sultanate of Rum,but i didnt had time to dig around for more.
    in 1212 it should be Ezz Ed'Din Kykawas be besieging Ala'Eu Ed'Din not the other way around because the siege of Kayseri didn't even last because Kykawas managed to make a deal with Leo of Armenia and because Kykaws have more support and in fact most high ranking Amirs support his rules and they were called him and brought him from Maltiyyah in 5 days or less and after Leo retreated in night, both Mu'Ghyth Ed'Din and Ala'Eu Ed'Din (uncle and brother) feared that the other will turn on him and use him to get in terms with Kykawas and both of them in the next night retreated. after that he gatehr his supporters and sieged his brother in Koniyah for several months till he surrender.

    ------------
    I'm not sure if the date is correct but I think Antioch was vassale to Armenia at the start of the mod but I know Armenia was vassal to Rum Seljuks
    Last edited by nnnm; February 20, 2016 at 08:41 AM.



  5. #325

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by FrozenmenSS View Post
    Now the Latin empire probably abandoned Trebizond from 1213 onwards because of defeats from Nicaea and the Sultanate of Rum.David Komnenos died13 December 1212.And after that we can be 100% sure that Trebizond didnt had an overlord. So being client state or client state to the Latin Empire is the best way to make start of the Campaign. Also Latin Empire and the Sultanate of Rum being allied and Rum at war with Trebizond will make the already diplomacy complicated for the Mod. Ingame - Non-aggression pact between Latin Empire and the Sultanate of Rum makes more sense.


    Now The principality of Antioch I haven't researched,but ingame being vassal to the Latin Empire it wont help a bit with its own fight vs the Islamic factions so I think being independent is the best compromise.


    Epirus was in 1212 only vassal/client state of Venice and was only nominally.And Being the war with Bulgaria was a bit later - not at the start of 1212.




    Here are some comments where me and Caucasian Iberia talked on the Trebizond issue in another thread.



    Hi.
    First, here is some recent historian works on which I base my suggestions:
    http://www.academia.edu/8344877/_La_...ple_1206-1216_
    http://www.cairn.info/publications-d...ilip--1370.htm




    - For Epirus it seem that Michael Doukas swear allegiance many time to the Latin Empire (the first time maybe since 1208 or 1209) but does not hesitate to break it each time and make war against him.


    The fist time in 1210 and then in 1211-12, but this time with an ally (Stręz an independent Bulgar prince).
    During the conflict Michael would have swear allegiance 4 time (and Stręz 3) but like i say before he break it as many times.


    Finally Strez seeks the support of the Bulgarian Tsar Boris and attack again the kingdom of Thessaloniki (around May-June 1212) but was beaten by the Latins and Michael who who fought to their side at this point of the war.


    (And overflowing a bit of the frame i can also say we known that there will not be anymore Epirote attack before 1216, after the death of the two leaders, Henry and Michael).




    On the other hand in 1210 Michael Doukas also recognized himself as the vassal of Venice.
    But we have to keep in mind that the "Partitio terrarum imperii Romaniae" located Epirus in the part of the Latin Empire granted to Venice.


    So there are no problem to have a Grec who rule a province for Venice and to be in the same time a vassal of the Emperor which is nominally the suzerain of those Venetian lands.




    Latins probably view Epirius like a uncooperative vassal and Epirus probably sees himself like an independent kingdom who have to deal with a powerful neighbor.
    But how to retranscribe this In Game ? Maybe an "Non-Agression pact" is enought.






    - For Antioch, off course the modders have to wait to see really how the campaign look to make their decisions.


    But historicaly at this time Antioch was more threatened by the Christians of Armenia (which claimed the principality) and Jerusalem (who support Armenia) than the muslims (antioche and the Rum was allied against Armenia), since the campaign map offer three separate crusader-kingdoms I think we can take the opportunity to offer three way to play.
    But does a "client-state" In Game status would be useful ? I don't know.






    - For Trebizond, the texts I read do not extend too much on trebizond.


    For the author David Komnenos died in 1212 but as a monk in a monastery located in the Latin part of the Empire.
    Does that mean it was no more co-rulers of Trebizond with his brother ? But since when ? And what does that mean to vassalage link with Latins ?


    There is also said the Latin-Rum alliance, by deduction, was signed in 1209, does it possible to keep Trebizond as vassal and in the same time have their Seljuks enemy as allied ?


    I confessed to not having the answer.

  6. #326

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    Seem i can't edit my post.

    Here is the right link I wanted to post:
    http://ugent.academia.edu/FilipVanTricht

  7. #327
    Ltd.'s Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Carpathian basin - Székelyország
    Posts
    1,137

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    Thanks for the link.
    Also, you have to have at least 25 posts in order to be able to edit your posts, I think.

  8. #328
    Ciruelo's Avatar Tiro
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    You won't guess
    Posts
    212

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    Can someone tell me why is Leon an emergent faction and not a base one?

    This a post I put on the suggestion thread some months ago

    Please, give Emerita Augusta (Badajoz/Merida) to Almohads! or at least to Leon. It was the last king of Leon who conquered Merida and Badajoz, just before the unification with Castille. The Iberian peninsula in 1212 should looks like this:



    Giving Emerita Augusta to Almohads and Saragossa to Castille, you respect the shared borders between the iberian kingdoms at that time. The "Reconquista" is a very important period in the iberian history, it's important to be accurate at least in the shared borders.

    The iberian peninsula just before the unification between Leon and Castile

    Last edited by Ciruelo; February 25, 2016 at 12:51 PM.

  9. #329

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    Reading this thread starting from page 10 is like reading a novel. I feel really cross-eyed from reading these walls of text. Good stuff though.

  10. #330

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    @Ciruelo: more starting factions means more work. Also, Castille without a border at the sea looks really weird. Plus also, the kingdoms were more or less united not that long after the mod's start so I suppose it is a small sacrifice on the altar of gameplay.

    @Sly: it's a novel where the narrator seems to have the least storytelling power

  11. #331

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    I'm going to play the out of this mod. Can't wait dudes!
    Last edited by lolIsuck; February 26, 2016 at 09:12 AM. Reason: Censor bypassing




  12. #332

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by jan_boruta View Post
    @Ciruelo: more starting factions means more work. Also, Castille without a border at the sea looks really weird. Plus also, the kingdoms were more or less united not that long after the mod's start so I suppose it is a small sacrifice on the altar of gameplay.
    "United" is too much of a statement. Leon, for one, never joined the Castile-Navarre-Aragon alliance against the Almohads, because of Leon's bitter rivalry with Castile. Nevermind that Ferdinand III of Castile inherited Leon shortly after, it was not a sign of political closeness, it was a random result of dynastic dynamics. Aragon, for one, still resented Castille for having taken Molina, Soria and Medinaceli (a sizable chunk of land they just took from the Muslims) from Aragon in the aftermath of Alphonse the Battler's death.

    As for Saragossa to Castile... no. Castile took it after Alphonse the Battler's death but the Aragonese noblemen, with the aid of Raymond Berengar of Barcelona, took it back a few years later, which settled Aragon's final frontiers in the west. I know the borders in the map look wonky, but it's better to lay a balanced playground than having half accurate borders but inaccurate holdings. The map is what it is and I think it can't be modded at all.
    "Déu és beure bé, menjar fresc i llevar-se a les deu"
    (God is to drink well, to eat fresh and to wake up at ten)
    ------ from the Catalan "Inquisition Trials Archive"



    Cčsar de Quart
    Europe 1200 Team Member


  13. #333

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    Are they others who think the North west of France is all messed-up ?

    IMHO, first there is the settlement of Paris that is really weird and also, it would be more historically correct to divide the two actual provinces of North West (Rouen and Paris) in three between the three historical provinces that are Normandie, Bretagne and Ile de France, like in Medieval II.
    (The Attila map is just a non sense: Bretagne only joined the Kingdom of France in 1532 whereas on the Attila map, Bretagne + Anjou are together and Ile de France, which is the historical heart of France is not even existing, divided between the regions of Rouen, Paris and Dijon).

  14. #334
    KAM 2150's Avatar Artifex
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Gdańsk, Poland
    Posts
    11,103

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    You can't edit campaign map.
    Official DeI Instagram Account! https://www.instagram.com/divideetimperamod/
    Official DeI Facebook Page! https://www.facebook.com/divideetimperamod

  15. #335
    Ciruelo's Avatar Tiro
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    You won't guess
    Posts
    212

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by jan_boruta View Post
    @Ciruelo: more starting factions means more work. Also, Castille without a border at the sea looks really weird. Plus also, the kingdoms were more or less united not that long after the mod's start so I suppose it is a small sacrifice on the altar of gameplay.
    So the emergent faction of Leon is just a renamed recoloured Castille?

    In any case, Badajoz should belong to Almohads at the begining, not Castille.

  16. #336

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    timurids is gonna be part of the map?

  17. #337
    KAM 2150's Avatar Artifex
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Gdańsk, Poland
    Posts
    11,103

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    There were no Timurids at this time.
    Official DeI Instagram Account! https://www.instagram.com/divideetimperamod/
    Official DeI Facebook Page! https://www.facebook.com/divideetimperamod

  18. #338

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    yes but if this map spans to early gunpowder 1350 that the time that timurids arrivied in paskistan and the west part of pakistan in already on the map so...

  19. #339

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    They probably could be made into a faction spawned in an event like in Medieval 2 - at least I hope it would be possible.

  20. #340
    Ciruelo's Avatar Tiro
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    You won't guess
    Posts
    212

    Default Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Campaign Map Master Thread

    Please, give Badajoz to Almohads, for the sake of the Reconquista and historical accuracy

Posting Permissions

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