All SS did for me was make turns excruciatingly long as I waiting for the computer. YMMV, of course. No mods, too complicated.
Rapier42, don’t worry about being crap, it’s just a bit of fun, no-one will care if you lose a battle or two.
LOUNE, you’ve never experienced fighting panzerphants? You have missed out.
No keen on Russia at all though. Does anyone have a serious objection to playing a Venetian campaign? I just have a thing for medieval Italy.
I agree with no mods: the ones that have been explained to me don’t seem to add anything I would like except the ability to start at a given year, which might appeal to me in a solo game but which we’re not doing here 
I’m putting in a personal request for no Venice- I’m in the middle of a campaign with them currently. Hungary is really, really, good in my experience (good mix of Eastern cavalry and Western heavy armor) and I’d vote for them over Russia, even.
That’s really unfortunate. Vanilla just has too many game-ruining bugs and broken ancillaries/vices/virtues that make strategic play on the campaign map too shallow for my liking. I hear you about the long turns, though - and I won’t even make fun of your computer!
I suppose if there’s still interest, I’d be up for a few decades on the throne. Not particular about the nation - you use spear militia and mailed knights for most of the early game regardless of who you’re playing. Italian factions have especially nice militia - if there are a lot of new players somewhere in Bootland would make things easier for them since you can pump troops out of your cash cow coastal towns.
The name “Mr Kobayashi” is apropos for the situation we’re in now
I could go for any race in the south or east except the Moors and the Byzantines. I don’t want to play the english, french, germans, scots, danes, Spanish, or Portugese, but I could go for Venice, Milan, Hungary, Russia, Poland, or if we must, Turkey, Egypt, or Sicily.
Now, the reason I wouldn’t vote for Sicily is because, being a naval power, they sort of have an “expand or die” to them, in that if you expand slowly and not win right away you’ll be paying too much for your naval power and get swamped by those with better income. And if you try to expand right away the first guys will have all the fun
I downloaded the Stainless Steel mod, ut couldn’t get the damned thing to work. Even uninstalled the game and reinstalled it.
Stupid computers.
I have no preference as to the faction. That doesn’t change my gameplan up any in the beginning.
Did you read the install guide on the forums? Did you really read them? There are step-by-step procedures that should let you install the modification. You don’t even need to stop playing vanilla - but you do need the expansion. It merely adds a line to the drop-down launch menu. If you’re not too disgruntled I’d suggest at least trying it out. The changes are dramatic, from battles to campaigns to units to general traits and the AI actually beats you once in a while. The role-playing aspect is nice, if you’re into that sort of thing - a militarily gifted son might be sent to the nearest fortress for an education on war (lending movement points, command, etc.) while a more administrative mind may go into that new University you just built to learn the nuances of collecting taxes or recruit a useful governing cabinet. So, er, yeah. Obviously I really like the mod. It also significantly increases the recruitment costs, but also battlefield effectiveness of heavy cavalry. Finally, they’ll charge properly and inflict the damage they should. It’s fun routing entire archer units with a wall of descending lances and armored horsemen.
Otherwise, I’m in. Give the kingdom to somebody good for the first few seasons, the opening land grab is crucial for securing defensible fronts.
Ok; I propose we play a Polish campaign. Lots of room for expanding into the wealthy German cities and opportunity to engage the Mongols and Timmies should they emerge to the north of the Caspian and steamroll the Ruskies. Yes? No?
I looked like crazy. I saw Stainless Steel 3.3 and then 6.2, but I didn’t need 3.3 if I had 6.2, or some such nonsense.
I’d appreciate a link to the instructions.
I’m down.
Sure: 5/25 dead/alive sovereign, Hard/Hard?
ETA: by Sure, I mean “Poland? Sure!”
Count me in too.
Giddyup! I can has start?
P.S: I won’t take the blame for the fall of our great pole empire. I refuse to. Even if I’m the one who over extended us, even if I’m the one who gets defeated by the danish. I refuse to take the blame. Let it be known.
Dobrze! The 5 turns if king dies, 25 turns if he don’t it is. Might I suggest Very Hard campaign rules/Hard battle rules? Long campaign, manage all settlements, no battle time limit.
I propose that our victory conditions include the destruction of the Mongols and Timurids, as well as conquering the Holy Roman Empire and Russia (bit of preemptive revenge for Polska, there…).
Order of play; Least Original User Name Ever has nailed his colours firmly to the idea of going first, which I have no problem with. Anyone desperate to go second? I’m not particularly fussed when I go.
Once we’ve confirmed who’s playing and in what order, we can swap emails via PM then get the show on the road in a new thread chronicling the triumphs and tragedies of the Kingdom of Poland.
Na Zdrowie!
Let’s keep it at Hard/Hard. Some of the less-skilled Dopers are probably put off by Hard/Hard as it is.
Fair enough. The campaign AI can be cripplingly stupid at times, so I usually bump up the difficulty to compensate.
I wouldn’t mind not going second, due to the holiday season. But wouldn’t mind if I were second, either, if we were to just shake our names in a metaphorical hat and pick.
Aight. I’ll go third, then.
So, here we go. Add your name to the bottom of the queue if you’re interested.
Least Original User Name Ever
Ludovic
Mr. Kobayashi
appleciders (wanted to go at the end of the rotation, so make that move when yo add yourself to the list)