|
My poor little central Asian tribe just can't catch a break anymore, whenever we try to pounce on a neighboring province for conquest something goes tits up. I just want to restore the Glory of the Fires 
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 21:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 00:10 |
|
|
So I donno... I want to be shameless here and try to advertise my "Playing with Myself" LP I revived now for the holidays  You know.... if you want to see a dev play the game.... I'm also interested, what do you guys usually do with the Fylkir title? I tend to keep it but with the additions of Charlemagne I'm contemplating giving it away and give it independence or create the custom empire of the Fylkariate for when I convert the game to EU4. Hmm maybe that should have its own set of ideas. Edit: Also yeah yeah I know, norse bias and all that but I really love norse mythology 
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
I've never even thought about giving it away. Without it you can't personally call crusades which is A Big Deal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:I've never even thought about giving it away. Without it you can't personally call crusades which is A Big Deal. Yes but since I'm roleplaying really heavy as its part of a longer story I have to think outside of that. Which is why I am doing the LP because it makes me play so differntly from what I'm used to. Its new territory I haven't been in during my +6k hours of Paradox games making it really entertaining.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
I'm often sensitive to the roleplaying argument, but having the religious head title yourself is so incredibly much better than not that it's hard to do anything else. You can keep moral authority locked at 100 from all the piety you get fighting heathens, and great holy wars not only happen at your discretion, but also against absolutely any kingdom on the map - if the AI holds it, they'll only call them against the kingdoms specifically listed as targets, which often correspond pretty well to the territory you have to hold anyway in order to reform the faith in the first place. Like, Norse great holy wars will target Scandinavia, Finland, Pomerania, Frisia, France , the British Isles, and Germany. Only the last three are really out of your starting area to any meaningful extent, and once they're taken, a vassal Fylkir loses most of its value. If you hold the title yourself, you can just keep pressing on. Great Holy War for Andalusia? Why not?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
Strudel Man posted:Like, Norse great holy wars will target Scandinavia, Finland, Pomerania, Frisia, France , the British Isles, and Germany. Only the last three are really out of your starting area to any meaningful extent, and once they're taken, a vassal Fylkir loses most of its value. If you hold the title yourself, you can just keep pressing on. Great Holy War for Andalusia? Why not? Yeah but the beauty of it is he can just mod new targets for holy wars if he wants to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
Well also I kinda want a norse equivalent of the Papal states when I come to EU4. Also quite important, I'm playing as my real life dynasty and not aiming on anything remotely close to domination, I kind of want to see "how things develop" with small inputs from me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
Strudel Man posted:Gotta get more lunatics in charge, man. They're the best. Sounds like all y'all need Zoroaster.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
I was playing as a merchant republic and noticed I had a -10 relations penalty with my vassals for holding too many duchies, despite only having two of them (or so I thought). After going through my titles, I noticed that I had a third titular duchy title. I ended up destroying it to get under the duchy limit, but now I'm seeing that that title apparently prevents kings from wanting to lead the republic if I ever turn it into an empire. Did I gently caress up, or will I be alright if I never have any king-level feudal vassals? E: Regarding trade zones, does it matter which family controls each zone, or only which republic? Will I still get a bonus to trade income if I have a post in a zone controlled by my republic, or do I have to be the one with the most posts to see any benefit? FeculentWizardTits fucked around with this message at 23:02 on Dec 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
Quick question- In mt Byzantine game the Republic of Pisa won some territory off Rum during a successful crusade. I've been fabricating claims on the county that borders mine and went to war and took it. The problem is that my character is feudal but the county is still republic and thus the top holding is the city rather than the castle with the wrong holding demense penalty. Is there any easy was that I can change the county over to feudal?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 23:18
|
|
|
Inevitablelongshot posted:Quick question- grant the baron (castle holder) the title to the county. He will give out the city to a mayor vassal. The county will become a barony.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
Spakstik posted:I was playing as a merchant republic and noticed I had a -10 relations penalty with my vassals for holding too many duchies, despite only having two of them (or so I thought). After going through my titles, I noticed that I had a third titular duchy title. I ended up destroying it to get under the duchy limit, but now I'm seeing that that title apparently prevents kings from wanting to lead the republic if I ever turn it into an empire. Did I gently caress up, or will I be alright if I never have any king-level feudal vassals? If you're the doge, I think you get a bonus. It doesn't really matter, because your entire objective is to build as many trade posts for your family as you possibly can. I play a lot of merchant republics and I have no idea what you're talking about. What was the name of the title?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:If you're the doge, I think you get a bonus. It doesn't really matter, because your entire objective is to build as many trade posts for your family as you possibly can. I play a lot of merchant republics and I have no idea what you're talking about. What was the name of the title? The titular title was the Republic of Dubhlinn, which I assume was created when I went from tribal to republic. It didn't have any territories/vassals assigned to it. I was already building as many posts as possible, I just wasn't sure how much the location mattered. I noticed the AI was building multiple posts in the same sea tile, but the CKII wiki mentions that it's supposed to be better to have one post in adjacent tiles forming a contiguous series of zones. I wasn't sure if family ownership for a particular tile mattered; the AI seems to be building posts like it does.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
Excelzior posted:grant the baron (castle holder) the title to the county. He will give out the city to a mayor vassal. The county will become a barony. Thanks for that. I also found that by revoking the title of the castle baron and taking it for myself the county reverts to feudal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Spakstik posted:The titular title was the Republic of Dubhlinn, which I assume was created when I went from tribal to republic. It didn't have any territories/vassals assigned to it. You're probably alright. Merchant republics basically never get revolts, and the few that do happen are usually wrong religion/culture people you conquered in independence factions. You shouldn't have to worry about vassal kingdoms. For trade posts, you want to find the best balance between best economic county and closest to land you control. Sometimes it works out really well to build large trade zones like that, but a lot of times, it's not worth it because your trade posts have to outnumber each families trade posts in every sea within the trade zone. For instance, in my viking republic, my family is the only one who built any trade posts along the coast of France and England, so I have a massive trade zone there. But up in between Sweden and Finland where everyone else is building, it's nearly impossible to establish one there, as it's competitive, and a complete mess. I'd have to have 3 or 4 trade posts in really lovely holdings to outnumber everyone else in some seas, and it's not worth losing 3-4 spots in your trade post limit for that. I don't make it a priority to try and place my trade posts where no one else is building, and I still make an obscene amount of money. If it works out that way, cool, but don't go really far out of your way to try and make it happen. Just find the best holding you can that doesn't have a trade post, whose price fits in within your budget, and build away, regardless of where it is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 23:43
|
|
|
HIP is mostly amazing. Mostly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
There's a chance of wounded/maimed/death on that, right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
Shadeoses posted:There's a chance of wounded/maimed/death on that, right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 00:14
|
|
|
What determines duel outcome? I'm Erik the Heathen and I have 20 martial and I keep losing duels to dudes with 6 martial.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
I see the personal combat stat, and I'm a level 3 martial guy fighting naive appeasers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 00:26
|
|
|
Knuc U Kinte posted:What determines duel outcome? I'm Erik the Heathen and I have 20 martial and I keep losing duels to dudes with 6 martial. IIRC Martial doesn't affect duel status. Things like age and character traits like quick/strong/tall do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 00:27
|
|
|
Emanuel Collective posted:IIRC Martial doesn't affect duel status. Things like age and character traits like quick/strong/tall do. That probably explains it since I have a few bad traits. I just find it absurd that a wroth Viking who's been leading a conquering army for 10 years can get his rear end kicked by some noble's nephew.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
Shadeoses posted:There's a chance of wounded/maimed/death on that, right? If it was accurate to real life you'd gain the Wroth trait whenever it happened. A stacking Wroth trait.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
Knuc U Kinte posted:That probably explains it since I have a few bad traits. I just find it absurd that a wroth Viking who's been leading a conquering army for 10 years can get his rear end kicked by some noble's nephew. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timur
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 00:44
|
|
|
Sorry, what's the point of this?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 00:49
|
|
|
Knuc U Kinte posted:What determines duel outcome? I'm Erik the Heathen and I have 20 martial and I keep losing duels to dudes with 6 martial. 1: Double death. Twice as likely if both participants are wroth, a fifth as likely if there's a difference of 4 between their combat ratings. 1: Challenger decapitation. Requires at least 1 more combat rating. 1: Defender decapitation. Ditto. 200: Challenger win. Becomes 30% less likely with each point of combat rating difference. 200: Defender win. Ditto. So if you as challenger have a combat rating of 5 and they have a rating of 2, the weights are 1, 1, 0, 200, 68.6. You have a ~74% chance of winning, 25% chance of losing, and about half a percent each for both people to die or to decapitate your opponent. That is a pretty significant chance of losing, still, if you're going to be dueling a lot of people. Dangerous. And yeah, martial score does not directly enter into it at all. It's all about the personal combat rating. Strudel Man fucked around with this message at 00:52 on Dec 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 00:49
|
|
|
Knuc U Kinte posted:Sorry, what's the point of this? Timur was a fantastic military strategist, but he was also lame, hence Timur the Lame/Tamerlane, and would have gotten his rear end kicked in a straight up duel. The point of referencing him is to reinforce that Martial is not the 'be good at duels' stats.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 00:58
|
|
|
AdjectiveNoun posted:Timur was a fantastic military strategist, but he was also lame, hence Timur the Lame/Tamerlane, and would have gotten his rear end kicked in a straight up duel. The point of referencing him is to reinforce that Martial is not the 'be good at duels' stats. He could still kick most people's asses, imo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:09
|
|
|
Yeah I always thought Martial was primarily your tactical and strategic nous. The fact you can get more men and they have better morale does to an extent imply it also measures your personal martial prowess, but the best solution has seemed to be the addition of duelist/combat traits like GoT does.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:09
|
|
|
Yeah, I can imagine some smirking little nephew dodging around the battlefield until the big angry guy gets tired, then going in for a pretty little kill. Like Game of Thrones without the eye popping. What's elective monarchy like? I only had the options of that, gavelkind or ultimogeniture for my Swedes and I chose ultimo, but I want to know what I missed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
SurreptitiousMuffin posted:What's elective monarchy like? I only had the options of that, gavelkind or ultimogeniture for my Swedes and I chose ultimo, but I want to know what I missed. One of your sons will inherit everything but you don't get to say which. Your vassals will go out of their way to not vote for the one you want.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:19
|
|
|
SurreptitiousMuffin posted:What's elective monarchy like? I only had the options of that, gavelkind or ultimogeniture for my Swedes and I chose ultimo, but I want to know what I missed. It used to be the second best (after Tanistry, which was the same thing but kept it in the family), but was massively nerfed recently. Ultimo is pretty much the best these days.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:19
|
|
|
SurreptitiousMuffin posted:What's elective monarchy like? I only had the options of that, gavelkind or ultimogeniture for my Swedes and I chose ultimo, but I want to know what I missed. Elective has always been my favourite succession type, because you can just pick who your heir will be from any of your dynasty members essentially, though apparently since a recent patch any AI electors will tend to not vote for your nominated heir as much, which is a problem.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:20
|
|
|
SurreptitiousMuffin posted:Yeah, I can imagine some smirking little nephew dodging around the battlefield until the big angry guy gets tired, then going in for a pretty little kill. Timur would be like a boss battle, with multiple stages involving war elephants, catapults and rocket artillery.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:35
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:One of your sons will inherit everything but you don't get to say which. Your vassals will go out of their way to not vote for the one you want. Said it before, but I wish they hadn't tried to 'balance' this so much - That change really drives me nuts, it's so pointless and un-fun. Realms with tense vassal-liege relations already HAD problems with getting the desired candidate elected, as they should have. The old state of affairs was perfectly fine. And I guess retinues going from 'way too good' directly to 'ruinous garbage' sucks, too. Oh well, adventurers got noticed and fixed eventually, so I guess I should try to be patient... 
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:35
|
|
|
Retinues are still good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:37
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:Retinues are still good. They're incredibly expensive to reinforce. I'm actually totally okay with all other changes (retinue size, reinforcement speed, upkeep), but the cost needs to be reduced to be useful to anybody but endgame-empires.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
16,000 strong retinue costs me like 3-4 gold a month for routine maintenance, and between 40-60 when I'm rebuilding it. Not bad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:45
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:16,000 strong retinue costs me like 3-4 gold a month for routine maintenance, and between 40-60 when I'm rebuilding it. Not bad. If you can afford an extra expense of 40 to 60 gold (in addition to your levy costs) for several months, then congratulations: You are one of the aforementioned endgame-empires! Retinues should have some practical use even for a small kingdom.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 00:10 |
|
|
Gimmick Account posted:If you can afford an expense of 40 to 60 gold for several months, then congratulations: You are one of the aforementioned endgame-empires! Not even the year 1050 dog. Republic 4 lyfe. As a smaller kingdom, you can still have a few thousand soldiers without much worry. Just don't overbuild, and if you do, kill some of them off. A 16,000 strong standing army is loving ridiculous, and it should be cripplingly expensive. Volkerball fucked around with this message at 01:57 on Dec 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:54
|
|