New factions

I've been thinking, and maybe we can expand RTJ more by adding factions and really make it stand out. I've been looking at the information in the unpacker and in the original campaign files and know the normans and saxons already exist (at least partially).

So here are my two faction ideas:

1) Novgorod. They should be very similar to Kiev, in terms of units, buildings etc, but be in an entirely different position. As Kiev is in decline (like Byzantium) Novgorod is rising. Kiev should be more choatic and have less ability, at least at start, to restore itself. The two groups, though, must compete to unify Russia and find a common threat in the Mongols. Granted Kiev is destined to fall and should be a much harder "Russian" faction that can have slightly inferior troops and imbalances to reflect its trouble, while Novgorod is more refined and has less competition.

To build them it will take the Russians already in the game and apply the Novgorod twist. Possibly ultimatly hardier troops from being so far north than other factions and less of a direct Byzantine influence--possibly some Varangian early units like the Danes that change to reflect the maturing Russian culture. Then Kiev could have units more from the steppes and southern area.

2) The Dutch. Granted it would seem they didn't have much a chance o conquer Europe they were still an influence in northern europe (scots are similar). They would give competition for land in northern germany and france and counteract the Dane's ability to eat up Germany. They could be weaker than other kingdoms but MTW is a what if game, why couldn't Dutch independence come sooner? They coul always be conquered by Spain anyhow

I've been thinking about this too. I am no modder, so I have absolutly no idea how to do it.

Let's say I want another middle eastern faction, is it then possible to add this faction by for example "copying" the Turks, give them another name and change their colours? Possible change which units they can recruit, a mix of egyptian and turkish ... and give them Bagdad.

If it is possible, then you could also add the Nederlands and more russians... and even Armenia. Some units already exist as mercs, fx Armenian Cavelry, Flemish Pikemen (Nederlands) etc.

And we could even add the Kingdom of Jerusalem with only ONE region, but able to recruit crusader units.

@Nemo

The problem with factions as we all know is that not all of them were around at the starting date of 1080, and many of them were supplanted by bigger and more powerful factions as the centuries progressed. In the game, for example, the Papal States control Florence...but Florence was a major city state that dominated central Italy and was fiercely independent, especially in the late period, and Genoa was another. I'm not sure if the Dutch require their own faction in 1080, although it would be nice to see some collaboration between the "Flemish Rebels" when Bruges gets attacked (maybe they could send a relief force from Antwerp).

The MTR forum has some interesting ideas on factions (http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=225). The maps that are posted demonstrate the sheer number of possibilities.

One of the things that always gets me is that you can't have a medieval based game without the Ottomans, but they didn't come along until well after the start date in the game...so you have to give the Turkish faction an anachronistical name if you want to make their presence plausible.

What would be your ideal list of 30 factions to include?

@billydilly

A 4th Muslim faction would be entirely possible. Have a look at some of the historical maps out there and decide which Muslim caliphate/emirate you'd include.

mh, yes your right we need more factions. more will come with later versions.
a number like 5 can be added without problems

Can you change name of a faction during the game?

exemple = you create a "crusader state" based in lets say : toulouse
objective is to capture jerusalem once you done it you became kingdom of jerusalem... (and you drop toulouse to france )
If its possible to mod this way = make other faction reluctant to send troop to crusade but if they done it , jerusalem gain control of itµ.
It is road to jerusalem no?

otherwise faction :
bagdad caliphat = work the same way as papal state
pecheneg/cuman

The dutch weren't a own nation during all the medieval time. This would be a faction for, lets say, a "Wars of faith (1530-1700)"-Mod.

The problem with a third nation in the east is few provinces. No hinterland. We would need to expand the map eastwards, add Persia and Afghanistan. Then we could add late abbasides or the Ghaznawides, who would be very similar to the turks.

Originally Posted by MrMerisi

I'm not sure if the Dutch require their own faction in 1080, although it would be nice to see some collaboration between the "Flemish Rebels" when Bruges gets attacked (maybe they could send a relief force from Antwerp).

They wouldn't, and shouldn't, be called Dutch for the period. Flemish will do nicely and be a reflection of the ongoing competition between the Kingdom of France and the Count of Flanders (one of France's most powerful "vassals"). With one trying to consolidate its rule and the other trying to break free.

Not to mention that the Flemish cities (Brugge, Kortrijk, Gent, and near the end Antwerpen) were some of the largest and wealthiest trading cities of the era.

Would it be possible to add the berbers as the next muslim faction give them tunisia and all those other rebel faction give sicily something to worry about.

I think factions should be added because of a unbalance in the game. So berbers would be a very good faction because it keeps Sicily from easily taking Africa, keeps the Moors more in Morrocco/southern spain. However, new provinces would need to exist--possibly some oasis forts in the desert and seperate Tunisia up.

I think Novgorod and Berbers would be 2 good additions that won't clutter Europe and both have a base of units to use.

I doubt that a own faction can keep sicilians from africa if the almohades cant.

yes they might not but they will make it harder. The Almohades in my experiance concentrate most of thier forces in spain so the berbers could work at least in my openion

The Berbers would have to be scripted to ally with the Moors and not fight against them. Also they'd need to be set up to deny Sicily easy pickings in North Africa. As it stands, Sicily seems to get Tunisia a lot.

The Almohads need to be tweaked to hold onto Spain for longer. In every game I play, the AI Portugal/Spain alliance pwns them within 100 turns.

Having religious conversion take much, much longer than it currently does would be a key factor. Right now people convert far too quickly (although I accept some of it because historically people "pretended" to convert rather than face persecution. There should also be an "apostate" factor...i.e. that people convert back to their former religion if the former province owner retakes it.

That sould make the Reconquista as hard and bitter as it was, and should rightly make Middle Eastern holdings much harder to pacify.

Is there something in the game whereby provinces are affected by the religious makeup of their neighbors?

Aragon should be added

Well, the list seems to be:

Berbers (weak slow starting group but can hold have naval sicilian defence ++tons of rep with moors so moors may help em)

Novgorod (competition for rule of Russia with a weak Kiev competition and another orthodox faction)

Flemish --Count of Flanders (so that rich, powerful cities aren't just rebel and to have more competition over northern Europe, landbridge becomes major issue and may need a castle close to it to control French+English+Flemish and possibly even Danes or Scots parading through it)

Aragon (why not, then make Moors stronger to be at odds with 3 catholic factions)

How about Georgia and the Bagdad Caliphat to make things a bit more interesting in the middle east, and to stop Egypt and the Turks from expanding too quickly?

But Berbers also sounds fine. I am not so sure about the Flemmish though... :hmmm:

yeah, without Kongdom of Georgia _king David IV Bagrationi "the Builder") and some muslims emirates, like emirate of Allepo (emir Nejm'ad din Il Gazi) and Khaliphate of Bagdad, the map and game isn't realistic. if we want to perform realistic picture in medieval middle-east political situation, we must add this factions, becouse by this, we give gamers choise to remake realistic history in own comps ! by this game play will be better and full retrospective.

I think you guys should put in Serbia with our main city being Kosovo should be our main city or if you wantto be historically accurate our main fortress and Belgrade or Sarajevo our main city. Though I can't remember if Belgrade and Sarajevo were around back then.

Originally Posted by SuperSerb

Though I can't remember if Belgrade and Sarajevo were around back then.

Belgrade should have been around if not in the 12th century, but in the 14th it was for sure, and perhaps earlier. I`ve read about its siege by the Turks somewhere. It was a fortress. Not sure about Sarajevo.

BTW, Bucharest should be moved a little westwards and renamed Targoviste. It was a far more important Wallachian town.

Keep in mind that this mod may not aim for 100% realism, balance is more important in a game. So lets not go overboard with this k? Suggestions are fine, but there is no guarantee that these will be implemented, and they will not be in soon for a fact.

How about the Abbasid - the Caliph of Baghdad
Abbasid (Abb?s?y?n) is the dynastic name generally given to the caliph of Baghdad, the second of the two great Sunni dynasties of the Arab Empire, that overthrew the Umayyad caliphs from all but Spain. It descended from Prophet Muhammad's youngest uncles, Abbas ibn Abd al-Muttalib. It seized power in 750 and shifted the capital from Damascus to Baghdad. It flourished for two centuries, but slowly went into decline with the rise to power of the Turkish army it had created, the Mamluks. Within 150 years of gaining power across Iran, they were forced to cede power to local dynastic amirs who only nominally acknowledged their power, and had to cede Al Andalus to an escaped Umayyad royal and the Maghreb and Ifriqiya to independent Berber entities such as the Aghlabids and the Fatimids. Their rule was finally ended in 1258, when Hulagu Khan, the Mongol conqueror, sacked Baghdad. While they continued to claim authority in religious matters from their base in Egypt, the dynasty's secular authority had ended. Descendants of the Abbasids include the al-Abbasi tribe who live northeast of Tikrit in modern-day Iraq.

... The Abbasids still maintained a feeble show of authority, confined to religious matters, in Egypt under the Mamluks, but the dynasty finally disappeared with Al-Mutawakkil III, who was carried away as a prisoner of the palace to Constantinople by Selim I where he only had ceremonial role, until his death when the Caliphate title was transferred to Selim I.

The Army
In the 9th century, the Abbasids created an army loyal only to their caliphate, drawn mostly from Turkish slaves, known as Mamluks, with some Slavs and Berbers participating as well.

Source: Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abassid

Another good read: http://www.princeton.edu/~batke/itl/denise/abbasids.htm