|
Is there a way to encourage AI kingdoms to form empires? I've only ever seen it happen one time, and I'm kinda bored of pushing around a bunch of collapsing kingdoms.
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 21:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 01:05 |
|
|
How should I decide where to build trade posts? In an unbroken chain across low-value counties, or is it better to control sea zones?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 22:29
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:I'll email Wiz about it but maybe someone can give me a quick fix. I loaded up CK2+ and Venice is not playable in the Old Gods start, because I think the game thinks its a regular republic, not a merchant republic. It works fine in the 1066 start, and any date in the vanilla game. I'm playing that start right now, so it's probably a mod you have active. But you could try checking to make sure that the Duchy of Venezia title exists (if it's just County of Venezia then it won't be a MR).
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 22:58
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:I'll email Wiz about it but maybe someone can give me a quick fix. I loaded up CK2+ and Venice is not playable in the Old Gods start, because I think the game thinks its a regular republic, not a merchant republic. It works fine in the 1066 start, and any date in the vanilla game. I believe the issue is it doesn't have any merchant families generated. If you load up the game as someone else, save, and then reload that save as Venice you should be able to play.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 23:19
|
|
|
TaurusTorus posted:Is there a way to encourage AI kingdoms to form empires? I've only ever seen it happen one time, and I'm kinda bored of pushing around a bunch of collapsing kingdoms. I haven't really tested it, but when I poked around defines.lua I spotted that the AI is told to only ever form one kingdom-level title. Most Empires require multiple Kingdom-level titles to form, which I think means most of them are not able to form empires. Of course they won't destroy any that they inherit/usurp (see: the 1066 clusterfuck of Jimenas in Spain), so it *can* still happen, but it's... unlikely. Dr Creflo A Dollar posted:How should I decide where to build trade posts? In an unbroken chain across low-value counties, or is it better to control sea zones? Not 100% down on Republic mechanics (though I've been playing as them the past couple days) but you want to build them in the highest tax provinces. There are a few things you want to watch out for, though -- what's highest now may not be highest later, so I tend to prioritise those with the largest holding size cap. Also you'll want to consider the possibility for future expansion via seizing the city/county. Also if they're in an area that's constantly at war then note that occupation (even by non-Norse raiders) actually loots the province and reduces tax income; it takes something like 3 years to go from 0% all the way back up to full, which will be noticeable when it happens. Beyond that, I think you want to control sea zones as that boosts trade income. I don't think holding trade zones in contiguous land does anything specifically beyond make the Republic overlays look prettier 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 23:23
|
|
|
Allyn posted:
As far as I know, having the majority of the trade posts bordering an individual sea tile means your republic owns that sea tile. Any sea tile you own gets a slight boost to all of your trade posts in it, while having an unbroken chain of sea tiles back to your capital gains you a significant boost in income for any connected trade post. So yeah, you want as much as much of your trade network as possible connected directly back to your home county and in order to ensure this it's important to have posts in over 50% of the counties for each sea tile you expand into. If you only take one in each while there are no other competitors it won't be a big deal, but all it would take would be another republic building posts in more counties than you for you to lose the sea tile and disconnect a huge chunk of your network, slashing your profits and forcing you into a war to recover it. This is a major issue along the bottleneck around Gibralter, if you intend to move into the Mediterranean as the Hansa etc or the North Sea as Venice etc. Republics are interesting though and I haven't really given them the time they deserve. They play so completely differently to anything else in the game. I got kind of bored because they seemed to recycle the same events over and over again - have any more been added in subsequent patches? I got kind of sick of the clearly Italian republic oriented stuff (like the Romeo and Juliet parody) occuring in non-Mediterranean ones and in general it felt like there wasn't enough to keep it engaging for a full 1066-1453 game, let alone an Old Gods start.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 00:19
|
|
|
Not sure if this is a known issue, but I'm playing a CK2+ game as Jorvik > Norse Pagan England and nobody has formed any Princely/Court/Religious factions against me. Is this working as intended?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 00:39
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:As far as I know, having the majority of the trade posts bordering an individual sea tile means your republic owns that sea tile. Any sea tile you own gets a slight boost to all of your trade posts in it, while having an unbroken chain of sea tiles back to your capital gains you a significant boost in income for any connected trade post. So yeah, you want as much as much of your trade network as possible connected directly back to your home county and in order to ensure this it's important to have posts in over 50% of the counties for each sea tile you expand into. If you only take one in each while there are no other competitors it won't be a big deal, but all it would take would be another republic building posts in more counties than you for you to lose the sea tile and disconnect a huge chunk of your network, slashing your profits and forcing you into a war to recover it. This is a major issue along the bottleneck around Gibralter, if you intend to move into the Mediterranean as the Hansa etc or the North Sea as Venice etc. Right, that's what trade zones are. But from what he posted I figured he meant in neighbouring land provinces rather than neighbouring sea provinces. E.g. as Venice there's no real benefit to going Aquileia & Istria over Aquileia & Ferrara just because they're land neighbours -- all 3 border the same sea province, so they all count towards controlling the sea zone equally. In fact Ferrara has an extra holding slot over Istria, so that would be preferable. I could be wrong and that's not what he meant, though 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 00:44
|
|
|
Allyn posted:Right, that's what trade zones are. But from what he posted I figured he meant in neighbouring land provinces rather than neighbouring sea provinces. E.g. as Venice there's no real benefit to going Aquileia & Istria over Aquileia & Ferrara just because they're land neighbours -- all 3 border the same sea province, so they all count towards controlling the sea zone equally. In fact Ferrara has an extra holding slot over Istria, so that would be preferable. I could be wrong and that's not what he meant, though Yeah, sure, I get what you mean. I was just trying to say that it's kind of in your interests to build trade posts close together land wise just to ensure you have a firm hold on a particular sea zone, rather than building one and moving onto the next immediately and leaving yourself vulnerable. Obviously it makes no difference whether that land zone is directly adjacent to the first, but it usually works out that way anyway (and yeah, it looks prettier). Kind of makes me wish they'd implemented some form of overland trade system though (Novogorod was a major, major republic) and just generally made what they do have more important to everyone in the general game. As it stands republics just seem to play their own little game seperately from everyone else and if you're a feudal ruler you can easily forget they even exist if you don't directly border one. There should be benefits + drawbacks to having trade posts in your counties as a ruler (maybe slightly higher tax revenue + less revolt risk due to the availability of resources vs. this risk of coastal invasions, feudal vassal opinion penalty due to competition for power, religious differences if there are any etc.) and they should play a greater role in the world as a whole - choosing to take loans (I always hated that taking a loan happens at random, especially when you have mercs and that quick cash injection is the difference between winning the war and having your whole invading army collapse into infighting as they go renegade), hire ships/men (with interest rates + prices calculated based on the Doge's opinion of you who would just flat out refuse if he hated you). If you're playing a republic, you could offer loans/ships/men to rulers or they would ask and you would reply, and you'd have to choose who you supported wisely based on whether you thought they'd be able to pay it back or not and whether you valued the opinions of those they were at war with. In fact, the whole mercenary system could just be combined into a general republic relations screen for loans/mercs etc, with maybe a few independent bands left to mix things up a bit. I just really feel that they missed a trick with the whole Republic expansion. SoI did what it said on the tin, LoR gave some pretty cool flavour to the Byzantines to differentiate them from the West (and, of course, retinues), SI was terrible but whatever it was a cheap joke DLC that can be fun on occasion, ToG was just absolutely stunning in scope and I'd have paid most of the asking price just to have the 867 start date. The Republic has a lot of good ideas but just seems to fall totally flat, fails to hold any interested for extended games and misses so many cool opportunities. edit: Also, any word on the next DLC yet? I'm anticipating a Catholic focused expansion with Papal Elections, some sort of Monastic representation, more fleshed out (and maybe playable?) Holy Orders etc. I'd also like to see them expand the actual Crusading aspect, as it does form half the title. As it stands Crusader states rarely seem to get established unless you choose one of the later startdates where they already have a foothold, and even when they do they're essentially dfficult to govern kingdoms with hostile neighbours but otherwise totally indistinguishable from their counterparts in Europe. I want to see a better representation of crusading armies, with some degree of centralised control to make them not be a total joke (but not too much, to preserve their chaotic nature). I'd also like to see more flavour events for established states and more room for survival by political means. And a First Crusade bookmark. Why isn't that there, seriously. And crusades for the Orthodox, they're so underpowered now sandwiched between two hostile blobs with no crusade mechanic which even reformed pagans get. ThomasPaine fucked around with this message at 01:28 on Jul 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 01:17
|
|
|
Does anyone know how I can take over a county after seizing all the holdings? I am playing as an Irish lord and some Norse prick with two counties in Ireland declared war on me and after I hired a mercenary company the war went poorly for him. I've defeated his army, locked up his wife, and successfully sieged all the holdings in both of his counties. But I don't know how to officially take these counties from this guy. If I try to force him to surrender all I get is some prestige.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 01:21
|
|
|
Spaseman posted:Does anyone know how I can take over a county after seizing all the holdings? War is very "polite" in Crusader Kings 2. If a guy declares war on you you cannot get his holdings by winning the war only reparations in gold and prestige. The only way to take his counties is to declare war with a Casus belli which will result in them going to you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 01:30
|
|
|
SpRahl posted:War is very "polite" in Crusader Kings 2. If a guy declares war on you you cannot get his holdings by winning the war only reparations in gold and prestige. The only way to take his counties is to declare war with a Casus belli which will result in them going to you. It's kind of annoying too, because you get peace treaties with them when you win the war. Which is why you should always declare war on everyone first.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 01:32
|
|
|
Spaseman posted:Does anyone know how I can take over a county after seizing all the holdings? You can't. A war's possible outcomes are determined by the CB used by the aggressor. You need to have a claim to that county before you can take it from him. Alternatively, you can force his surrender, wait out the truce (you really dont want to break truces) and start fabricating a claim on the county. If he is Norse and you are Catholic, you should also be able to holy war him for one Duchy at a time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 01:34
|
|
|
Spaseman posted:Does anyone know how I can take over a county after seizing all the holdings? You can't take the county because that county title isn't what the war is about, so you winning just gives you prestige, money (depending on the form of the invasion) and gets rid of the invader's claims on your titles if he has one (not if it's a holy war or pagan invasion, the latter of which it probably is in this case). If you want his counties, you'll have to force him to surrender and then declare a new war for the county you want. If he was Catholic that would get kind of complicated because you'd need to find a claim to it, but seeing as he's an enemy of the faith you can just declare a holy war and take everything he owns within a duchy, getting you the ducal title and any lower lands he or any other non-Catholics own within that de jure duchy (you'll vassalise other christians). If you're a minor count in Ireland be careful though, Holy Wars tend to attract a lot of allies in defence, even if they aren't related to the defender, so you might well end up with half of Scandinavia charging up your beaches if they're not otherwise preoccupied. edit: what the guy before me said. I always felt it a bit daft that you were penalised so heavily for breaking truces against infidels, especially pagans. I guess it would be ridiculous gameplay wise if you could just keep battering them though year after year. ThomasPaine fucked around with this message at 01:39 on Jul 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 01:37
|
|
|
Not sure if I should grab The Old Gods since I pretty much only play the Game of Thrones mod for CK2.KittyEmpress posted:It's kind of annoying too, because you get peace treaties with them when you win the war. Which is why you should always declare war on everyone first. It is especially annoying when I am trying to make the most of a great character and want to wage bloody wars of conquest.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 01:38
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:It's kind of annoying too, because you get peace treaties with them when you win the war. Which is why you should always declare war on everyone first. That's not accurate. It's a unilateral truce that in no way precludes you from immediately turning around and declaring war on your attacker. Incidentally, this is my favorite thing to do in CKII. Playing as Dyre of Kiev, the threat of Hungary looms large for the entire early game. When he finally decides to send his 20k stack up your way, nothing is more satisfying than buying up all the HA mercenary companies, absolutely crushing his stack and then systematically taking apart his Kingdom. Bonus when his depleted levies lead to independence revolts and you can slice up the entire de jure Kingdom without having to wait on a truce to expire.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 01:39
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:It's kind of annoying too, because you get peace treaties with them when you win the war. Which is why you should always declare war on everyone first. As stated above, the peace treaty only restricts the attacker from coming back for another round. It's also only linked to the character - if the dude you have a truce with gets overthrown or has an unpleasant accident you can immediately turn around and grab more land. The "unpleasant accident" option, by the way, is usually the most reliable. 
forkis fucked around with this message at 02:19 on Jul 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 02:14
|
|
|
forkis posted:The "unpleasant accident" option, by the way, is usually the most reliable. This is especially effective against offensive pagans who have a high 'short reign' penalty. Once you start knocking them off, you can often whack half the dynasty in rapid succession. Good times.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 02:27
|
|
|
Out of curiosity, is there any way to get around the "x must not marry an infidel" penalty to arranging a marriage between a Catholic leader and a Muslim bride? You used to be able to do that, and I want to try for a completely ahistorical Muslim Ireland again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 02:59
|
|
|
Anticheese posted:Out of curiosity, is there any way to get around the "x must not marry an infidel" penalty to arranging a marriage between a Catholic leader and a Muslim bride? You used to be able to do that, and I want to try for a completely ahistorical Muslim Ireland again. They really tightened that up with the Old Gods patches. Your best option is character creator.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 03:09
|
|
|
Anticheese posted:Out of curiosity, is there any way to get around the "x must not marry an infidel" penalty to arranging a marriage between a Catholic leader and a Muslim bride? You used to be able to do that, and I want to try for a completely ahistorical Muslim Ireland again. If you have the ruler designer you can just use that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 03:10
|
|
|
Anticheese posted:Out of curiosity, is there any way to get around the "x must not marry an infidel" penalty to arranging a marriage between a Catholic leader and a Muslim bride? You used to be able to do that, and I want to try for a completely ahistorical Muslim Ireland again. Can you invite your future Muslim bride to court then marry her?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 03:11
|
|
|
They'll never accept an invitation because you're not their religion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 03:18
|
|
|
Anticheese posted:Out of curiosity, is there any way to get around the "x must not marry an infidel" penalty to arranging a marriage between a Catholic leader and a Muslim bride? You used to be able to do that, and I want to try for a completely ahistorical Muslim Ireland again. Why, it's so simple! Just wait until the crazy Norsemen subjugate the entirety of Ireland, then convert to your liege's religion, and then as a newly minted Viking, send your fleets raiding in Muslim lands, capture a few likely ladies and make them your concubines, and finally convert to your concubine's religion! 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 03:26
|
|
|
Do you still have to gently caress around with port forwarding when using the metaserver? Both my friend and I tried hosting games through it but both times there was only an error message saying "Game not found".
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 06:40
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:I'll email Wiz about it but maybe someone can give me a quick fix. I loaded up CK2+ and Venice is not playable in the Old Gods start, because I think the game thinks its a regular republic, not a merchant republic. It works fine in the 1066 start, and any date in the vanilla game. There are 4 titles that the main guy needs to have to make sure it works as a merchant republic. They all need to be credited to the same person in their respective history/titles/: b_<can have any name>.txt, in vanilla it usually uses the dynasty's name. It NEEDS to have a "holding_dynasty = <dynasty number>" tag -- that's what tags it as a republic. Liege needs to be d_venice or k_venice. b_venezia.txt c_venezia.txt d_venice.txt or k_venice.txt If it's missing any of these they won't be playable. You don't actually need to have a single other republic family -- the game will auto-generate any that it needs to make sure it hits the limit of 5 families. Also b_venezia needs to be set as a city in history/provinces/356 - Venezia.txt. Although it sounds like this isn't the problem if it's saying it's a non-playable republic, as that would indicate a non-merchant republic city as capital. If you check all those 5 things you'll find where the error is, I'm pretty sure. No quick fix really exists but this should only take you 5-10 mins -- hardest part is going to be finding what the first barony file is called. I don't have CK2+ installed anymore but if you can't find it from that I'll re-download e: the reason I posted this instead of checking for you was because I uninstalled CK2+ from my desktop, where I play CK2 nowadays, but just realised I haven't uninstalled it from my laptop. Durr. Gimme a few mins... e2: okay I have nooo idea, all of this is set... how odd... e3: I found it and I fixed it! Hooray! It's also remarkably simple: the family houses aren't listed anywhere in the common/landed_titles folder, so it wasn't loading them as titles at all, and so their history files weren't being loaded either. All the family houses just need empty entries and it works. Here's a mod to fix it: http://www.mediafire.com/?yonj4rbyg9uxda2 If you don't want another mod cluttering up your launcher then you can legit just copy the file into CK2Plus/common/landed_titles and it should work right off the bat like that. Allyn fucked around with this message at 08:44 on Jul 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 07:47
|
|
|
Haha, my Wizards experiment made the new OP! I just picked up TOG stuff in the sale so I may poke around Wizards again once I learn how this new poo poo works. It was a failed experiment, though, as was my province randomizer (the maps are simply too big to properly path without lowering resolution so much that it defeats the point of even writing the algorithm).
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 08:55
|
|
|
Johan just posted in a thread about the promised August DLC saying "Soon..." 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 10:59
|
|
|
I still don't quite "get" Gavelkind succession. A lot of you seem to have some way of dealing with it, but every time I give these Norse chaps a go, when my character dies all my hard work usually falls apart. Its somewhat frustrating. Is there a guide somewhere on how to deal with the downsides?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 12:04
|
|
|
Tindahbawx posted:I still don't quite "get" Gavelkind succession. A lot of you seem to have some way of dealing with it, but every time I give these Norse chaps a go, when my character dies all my hard work usually falls apart. Its somewhat frustrating. Don't create/usurp any titles equal to your highest one and land any secondary sons with lovely counties you don't want so your heir gets all the good poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 12:09
|
|
|
Tindahbawx posted:I still don't quite "get" Gavelkind succession. A lot of you seem to have some way of dealing with it, but every time I give these Norse chaps a go, when my character dies all my hard work usually falls apart. Its somewhat frustrating.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 12:36
|
|
|
Knuc If U Buck posted:Don't create/usurp any titles equal to your highest one and land any secondary sons with lovely counties you don't want so your heir gets all the good poo poo. It can be even simpler than that -- you can have as many high level titles as you like with as many sons as you like just so long as you always hold no more than a single county. Note that gavelkind is also bugged in the current patch -- if you're holding more than 1 landed title and a change in your succession tree forces the algorithm to backtrack, even if you then immediately divest yourself of all other landed titles, you can still find yourself in a situation where you'll be 'passing' half your titular titles to a character who will not be receiving any land. On succession, and as unlanded characters may not hold titular titles, what actually occurs is the outright destruction of said titular titles.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 12:41
|
|
|
Just got a price drop alert that CK2 is on sale on Gamersgate, but looks like TOG is not included in it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 13:48
|
|
|
Just popped on SteamDB:pre:226665/isdlc: 1 226666/name: Customization Pack 226665/name: Europa Universalis IV Converter
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 14:34
|
|
|
Leb posted:Just popped on SteamDB:  Oh man, I hope it actually works.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 14:37
|
|
|
Leb posted:It can be even simpler than that -- you can have as many high level titles as you like with as many sons as you like just so long as you always hold no more than a single county. Why would I only want to hold a single county?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 14:37
|
|
|
Leb posted:Just popped on SteamDB: I wonder what exactly the "customization pack" is supposed to customize. It'd be rad as hell if there was an official map editing tool.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 14:40
|
|
|
Leb posted:Just popped on SteamDB: Yessssss. What's a customization pack, though, maybe a title creator?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 14:40
|
|
|
Antti posted:Just got a price drop alert that CK2 is on sale on Gamersgate, but looks like TOG is not included in it. Yeah it looks like everything except for TOG is on sale 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 14:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 01:05 |
|
|
Knuc If U Buck posted:Why would I only want to hold a single county? It prevents any other children from inheriting any titles from you, as they need a county to have a duchy/etc. If you are good at managing vassals it's a viable way to deal with gavelkind, but would suck if you got an inbred idiot king who throws his wooden trains at his dukes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 14:41
|
|
