|
Clanpot Shake posted:Is there ever a good reason to use Gavelkind? You already have an Emperor title and expand rapidly enough to give titles out to your children, plus holding onto a larger demesne.
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 21:45
|
|
only
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 14:48 |
|
|
Alfonso of Leon is obviously the most dangerous one, since he
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 21:49
|
|
|
Clanpot Shake posted:Is there ever a good reason to use Gavelkind? If you're getting bored and want a challenge. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 21:52
|
|
|
My first Indian game is going well, my Hindu king is Zealous so I can't convert and make my Intrigue 21 third son heir instead of my worthless eldest son. Crusader Kings! e: And no, he doesn't seem to be plotting to kill his brothers. Such a disappointment.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
Edison was a dick posted:You have more difficulty conquering other Pagans until you get far enough through the Military Organisation tech. Yeah I thought there may have been other drawbacks. I can handle Gavelkind well, using county conquests and subjugation wars to conquer enough land to hand to my sons or by marrying second sons to women with a bazillion intrigue, but I took over the Kingdom of Frisia from West Francia via prepared invasion and there being some counts and dukes free of the Karlings there. I want to take over some duchies that border Frisia to drift them into Frisia, but that is hard to do if you cannot holy war for a duchy. I am not super interested in painting the map colors myself - I want to play a game putting my family members on the thrones of other countries. Or something. I want to play the game for a while and eventually export a game to EU4; but most CKII games I spool up too fast, get huge, then get bored because I find managing big empires tedious (especially managing vassals and forming armies). Edison was a dick posted:You already have an Emperor title and expand rapidly enough to give titles out to your children, plus holding onto a larger demesne. Playing as Norse and even Romuva Lithuania I have lasted from 867 into the 1100s with Gavelkind just by being smart with the lands I hold, the lands I can conquer, and how many children I have. You can be a King that holds 7-8 counties and 2 duchies yourself and *most* times (but not all based on what people have said in this thread (it has never been a problem for me)) have all of them go to your primary heir IF you provide your secondary sons 3 or 4 counties and a a duchy. This takes some careful management, though, because if you have sons with poo poo-for-stewardship and they cannot directly hold 3 or 4 counties themselves, it sucks. AAAAA! Real Muenster fucked around with this message at 23:10 on Oct 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
Well, even if you reform you don't get great holy wars until about 1100 unless you trigger both crusades and jihads early. Also I am pretty sure when you reform your vassals then get mad about you always having all their boats raised (and other troops too I guess). The only time gavelkind sort of screws you is if your character slips on a banana peel out of nowhere and dies unexpectedly before you've given all your kids land. Then just hopefully either people like you and not your brothers so you can plot them off the face of the earth, or dear old dad left you with a small fortune to go on a stabbing spree.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 00:14
|
|
|
Charlemagne achievements are up, for those that are into that:quote:Holy and Roman:
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 02:05
|
|
|
Lord Cyrahzax posted:Seven Centuries: 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 05:07
|
|
|
Edison was a dick posted:You have more difficulty conquering other Pagans until you get far enough through the Military Organisation tech. This. I lost two wars with the Finns as reformed Norse, one where my Scandinavian Emperor (leading a force of 5k against 1.k finns) lost the battle, was captured, and got hit with a instant 100% negative warscore that subsequently put me 560 gold in the hole. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 06:09
|
|
|
Asked this before, but not sure if anyone picked up on it so here goes: Is there any reason I absolutely should form an empire, beyond making it easier to gather up armies? I may have missed the mark on this, but does importing into EU4 as a kingdom mean I can reform to something akin to a republic in that?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 06:59
|
|
|
What are some good units for your Retinue? I know Light Infantry sucks but I don't know whether to nab some horsemen or stick to heavy infantry. I'm the kingdom of Ireland, if that makes any difference. I do have the option of making some of the special Scottish H.I. as well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 07:25
|
|
|
I've played this game for 700 hours and literally never completed a full game. The closest I got was completing a game from the Alexiad start.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 07:27
|
|
|
I wouldn't recommend playing a full agme unless you have a lot of podcasts to kill, I did a full Old Gods start to the end, uniting the world under one banner. That took about 3 weeks give or take a couple days.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 07:37
|
|
|
Hipster Occultist posted:I wouldn't recommend playing a full agme unless you have a lot of podcasts to kill, I did a full Old Gods start to the end, uniting the world under one banner. That took about 3 weeks give or take a couple days. The only reason I made it through was the fact that I lost the Roman Empire to a claimant and had to claw my way back to the top because I still had a few provinces to get for the chieve. By that time it was 1400 or something so I saw the game out, forgetting that I didn't actually start at 1066.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 08:00
|
|
|
DiseasedTempest posted:What are some good units for your Retinue? I know Light Infantry sucks but I don't know whether to nab some horsemen or stick to heavy infantry. I'm the kingdom of Ireland, if that makes any difference. I do have the option of making some of the special Scottish H.I. as well. Pretty much all the cultural retinues are good. They may not seem like it at first, but some of the more lackluster looking ones get special cultural tactics that really bring up their usefulness. Light Infantry retinues, cultural or otherwise, are pretty much the only really useless ones. The Irish Gallowglass(Heavy Infantry) are pretty badass, use those. I wouldn't really use anything else with them, most of the really good Heavy Infantry tactics rely on having them as the majority of the flank(lessened by the martial of your leader), and the fewer types of units the more likely that you'll get the good tactics for them. Zeron fucked around with this message at 08:08 on Oct 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 08:05
|
|
|
Cool, thanks. I have a bunch of different claims on various things in Scotland/Ireland, but I don't seem to be able to go to war for more than one at a time. Can you only go to war for multiple claims if they're Strong?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 08:14
|
|
|
DiseasedTempest posted:Cool, thanks. Im new and not sure the rules behind it, but I've had 'press all claims' come up before in the declare war list
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 08:20
|
|
|
DiseasedTempest posted:What are some good units for your Retinue? I know Light Infantry sucks but I don't know whether to nab some horsemen or stick to heavy infantry. I'm the kingdom of Ireland, if that makes any difference. I do have the option of making some of the special Scottish H.I. as well. Heavy infantry are basically the best troops in the game, especially when it comes to retinues. Most of the fighting happens in the melee phase, which is where they shine. They're drat good at both defense and offense and have good morale. If you have cultural retinues with cultural buildings that give bonuses to heavy infantry it's time to spam them. Mix in some cavalry to inflict casualties but really you can go very far with a huge blob of heavies. Personally I'm extremely fond of Italian pike retinues. Fuckers never break.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 09:41
|
|
|
As a feudal King is it still ultimately better to build cities in my demesne and hand them off, rather than building castles and holding them personally, in terms of tax income? My memory is telling me this has flip-flopped a few times and I can't remember how things stand now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 09:55
|
|
|
Hipster Occultist posted:I wouldn't recommend playing a full agme unless you have a lot of podcasts to kill, I did a full Old Gods start to the end, uniting the world under one banner. That took about 3 weeks give or take a couple days. I've done at least 5 full Old Gods playthroughs. Yeah, podcasts.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 09:55
|
|
|
Is it known yet what you will need to buy the new DLC to get and what will be patched in for everyone? e: I mean if you aren't playing in Europe what will you gain buying it right away? Arnold of Soissons fucked around with this message at 10:58 on Oct 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 10:16
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:As a feudal King is it still ultimately better to build cities in my demesne and hand them off, rather than building castles and holding them personally, in terms of tax income? My memory is telling me this has flip-flopped a few times and I can't remember how things stand now. If your capital has a lot of holding slots, owning a bunch of castles there can work out to be better because your steward (and also your marshal) can sit there and apply their effects to multiple holdings at once. It's usually better to just hold the capitals of as many counties as possible, though, especially with harsh city taxes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 10:26
|
|
|
 Is this a common bug?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 10:29
|
|
|
Cathulhu posted:
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 10:47
|
|
|
Cathulhu posted:
I think that's pretty rare, but hilarious all the same. That boy could very well be Jesus!
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 10:48
|
|
|
Well I suppose I was a bit mean to Light Infantry, they do have exactly one use. They're so fast that they can meet Archers in close quarters combat before the Archers can really do heavy damage to them. And then everything accompanying the archers rips them to shreds, but hey they have a theoretical use against pure archer retinue armies.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 10:52
|
|
|
OK, last question before I stop playing. I have a claim on a duchy in Scotland, the dude with the claim is an earl of a duke that's my vassal. If I press his claim will he still be my vassal once he's in charge of the duchy?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 11:13
|
|
|
DiseasedTempest posted:OK, last question before I stop playing. I have a claim on a duchy in Scotland, the dude with the claim is an earl of a duke that's my vassal. If I press his claim will he still be my vassal once he's in charge of the duchy? Yes. If he is a vassal of yours, regardless of the layer of separation, he will remain such. As long as you're a king.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 11:22
|
|
|
Cathulhu posted:
"My lesbian lover and I had a kid but the idiot king thinks it's his  "Would love your character to have the Imbecile trait or something.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 11:54
|
|
|
How is babby formed? How Jarlina get pragnent?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 14:09
|
|
|
I have a couple of questions. First, how do you arrange a matrilineal marriage? All the results I got on google show an interface for marriage that apparently doesn't exist in the game anymore and I can't find the option anywhere in the game. Second, is there some place in the ui that will show me possible titles and what I have to do to make them? I know in the first ck there was a place where if you had a county in Ireland, for example, it would show the king of Ireland title, what percentage of the necessary stuff to make it you had, and a list of what you needed to make it. I'm playing a game as Amalfi and I'd like to know how many more counties I need to be king of Sicily.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
Are you playing a Muslim? They don't have the option for matrilineal marriages. Otherwise it should be a checkbox right on the screen to arrange the marriage - you can't miss it. If you want to see the requirements for titles that haven't been created yet, you can view the information on a title itself by clicking the title icon wherever you see it (eg. on the character screen of the person who currently controls it). To get to a title that doesn't currently exist, what you might need to do is find a title that's in the de jure territory of that title and open that one up, then click the "De Jure" checkbox on that screen. Up in the top right corner will be the shields for all the de jure titles that one is under, so you just need to go up there and click on the kingdom/empire you want to create, then on that screen hover over the "Create title" button and it will tell you what you need to control. The Cheshire Cat fucked around with this message at 15:34 on Oct 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 15:31
|
|
|
Zeron posted:Well I suppose I was a bit mean to Light Infantry, they do have exactly one use. They're so fast that they can meet Archers in close quarters combat before the Archers can really do heavy damage to them. And then everything accompanying the archers rips them to shreds, but hey they have a theoretical use against pure archer retinue armies. Your standard archer (Skirmish) retinue is 400 archers and 100 heavy infantry, so even if your opponent is using exclusively those, if you send in mostly light infantry they'll get slaughtered. Light infantry exist solely to pad numbers with useless fluff (you can't build buildings that produce archers without also producing light infantry) and one of the reasons retinues are overpowered is that they allow you to make a light-infantry-free army.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 15:49
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:Your standard archer (Skirmish) retinue is 400 archers and 100 heavy infantry, so even if your opponent is using exclusively those, if you send in mostly light infantry they'll get slaughtered. Light infantry exist solely to pad numbers with useless fluff (you can't build buildings that produce archers without also producing light infantry) and one of the reasons retinues are overpowered is that they allow you to make a light-infantry-free army. Especially if you are England or Wales, in which case you get the single best retinue unit. All archers, very cheap. You often win wars with lots of archers on your side before the melee phase even begins. Archers are the best unit in the game, especially if you organise them to hold the flanks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 16:10
|
|
|
Another Person posted:Especially if you are England or Wales, in which case you get the single best retinue unit. All archers, very cheap. You often win wars with lots of archers on your side before the melee phase even begins. Archers are the best unit in the game, especially if you organise them to hold the flanks. Part of the reason English and Welsh retinues are so good is the Massive Volley tactic they get, plus the raw damage bonus the cultural specific retinues get.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 16:15
|
|
|
Archers are always the best no matter which culture you play. They are just even better as England and Wales. They are the best unit when considering cost, power and availability. If horse archers were more available they would be better, but they aren't so stick to archers if you like winning. The way you should always approach battle is "what can I do to lower the risk of battle as soon as possible?" Assuming you have exhausted other options, such as appointing good commanders, taking out smaller units before they can join the main force, weakened levies by burning down holdings in previous wars and so on, then your next goal should always be to kill as much of the enemy army in the first phase of battle as quickly as you can. This is where archers excel. They are a very cheap unit, typically the second least expensive after light infantry. That would lead you to believe they are the second worst, which is totally wrong. ck2 wiki posted:Light Infantry Looking at these numbers, you would think "wow, those melee numbers for cavalries are good." Well, you almost never need to look at melee numbers. With archers you can reduce the number of the enemy army down to a pathetic number, thus rendering any melee values meaningless for units. When so heavily outnumbered due to losses in the skirmish round, the enemy should likely retreat almost immediately, and if you totally rout a flank then you get a flanking bonus, which will wipe out the centre. When you have a lot of archers on your side and a good commander (Martial above 12) then the game should tend towards picking archer tactics in the skirmish phase, which give them massive modifiers. This will win you wars. And then you need to consider that when sieging a holding, the game will use the skirmish value of troops if you decide to assault. This means archers will completely stomp all over sieges due to high values and raw numbers. Shoot arrows 24/7. e; worth adding, I am saying you should have a predominantly archer army, not a total archer army. Archers can easily turn an army from losing to a force 1.5 times your size into a victory when well managed, but any bigger than that and you are running risks. They will get stomped in a melee phase, understandably. Always have a good fallback of melee units, but focus heavily on archers whenever it is cost effective to do so. Another Person fucked around with this message at 16:40 on Oct 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
Another Person posted:Archer chat I have seen people mention this a couple times so I am doing a playthrough with the sole purpose of being Welsh so I can spam archers. It is still the early 900s but I am the Welsh King of Iseldiroedd (Frisia (Welsh for lowlands)) and my small retinue is already silly. I have 1 unit of 500 archers, 1 unit of 300 pikemen/200 archers, and 1 unit of 400 Heavy Infantry/100 archers in each flank (total 800 archers, 700 non-archers) and I am wrecking everyone. Hipster Occultist posted:This. I lost two wars with the Finns as reformed Norse, one where my Scandinavian Emperor (leading a force of 5k against 1.k finns) lost the battle, was captured, and got hit with a instant 100% negative warscore that subsequently put me 560 gold in the hole. Thankfully in my game, which spawned the post about taking Finland first, I do not really want to be an emperor or to conquer that much land, and I am in the lowcountries so I am ignoring Finland. Traditionally, though, when I go for finland I do it before I reform or after I hit mil org tech 4. Oberleutnant posted:As a feudal King is it still ultimately better to build cities in my demesne and hand them off, rather than building castles and holding them personally, in terms of tax income? My memory is telling me this has flip-flopped a few times and I can't remember how things stand now. As mentioned previously, having extra castle baronies in your capital and then all cities in the rest of your holdings. I like having an inland capital county that has 3 castles and the rest of the slots filled with churches; then the rest of my counties are coastal and are filled solely with cities. I wait to crank up the taxes till after I have all the cities built, though, because if taxes are high the mayors never upgrade the city, thus earning you less taxes in the long run because they do not have the money upgrades built. You can build the money upgrades for them if you want (I usually build at least 1 upgrade in each city I build).
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
Bort Bortles posted:Thankfully in my game, which spawned the post about taking Finland first, I do not really want to be an emperor or to conquer that much land, and I am in the lowcountries so I am ignoring Finland. Traditionally, though, when I go for finland I do it before I reform or after I hit mil org tech 4. You're ignoring Finland? Screw that, it's a duchy. Make it the merchant republic of Finland as your vassal. Owns.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
Having an archer-heavy army also means you can very rapidly assault the living hell out of holdings. If your army has a lot of archers, even at 8:1 or maybe 7:1 over the siege defenders you can quickly win a siege while sustaining negligible losses.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 17:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 14:48 |
|
|
Joshlemagne posted:I have a couple of questions. First, how do you arrange a matrilineal marriage? All the results I got on google show an interface for marriage that apparently doesn't exist in the game anymore and I can't find the option anywhere in the game. There's your problem with matrilineal marriages. Merchant republics can't form them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 17:16
|
|
