|
Darth Windu posted:it be cool if your hair could find the book and plum its mysteries. Only if your hair turns into tentacles 
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 06:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 13:27 |
|
|
dj_clawson posted:I just finished "The Caliphate Strikes Back" and the key is timing. Empires break up over time. You need to slowly take more and more territory from outside the empire as a vassal, then wait for someone else to start a general independence revolt. Don't get in on it if it's not winnable, and by that I mean, odds are heavily stacked in your favor. If you sit out an independence revolt, and it wins, it's not bad because the main empire is now smaller and weaker, and will become more manageable to revolt against. Even having the best succession plan doesn't mean things won't break apart over time, or fall to Decadence revolts, which a dynasty might just hit a succession of. AI dynasties don't last the test of time. Lower Crown Authority factions are therefore also great to back.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 07:59
|
|
|
Am I missing something, or is the only Zoroastrian start in 769 a vassal of the Abbasid empire? You'd think going back in time would make things easier for the Zoroastrians, but apparently nope, the super-early start actually somehow puts them in a worse position than they are after another century of subjugation. Which kind of sucks for me because I like playing Zoroastrian games and was hoping to do one from the new earliest start. Edit: Wait, no, there's a Mazdaki start, also under the Abbasid ruler, further south. And he's not even a duke. Wow. Edit again: And a Manichean further north and east. Well then. This is all rather peculiar. Roland Jones fucked around with this message at 10:50 on Apr 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 10:40
|
|
|
How does Forming the Empire of Italia work? I, as the Umayyad's, conquered Sicily and Italy, and then gave them to my vassals because I was over vassal limit. Do I need ylto own both Kingdoms + a third personally to form Italia or is mere overlordship sufficient?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 13:05
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:Am I missing something, or is the only Zoroastrian start in 769 a vassal of the Abbasid empire? You'd think going back in time would make things easier for the Zoroastrians, but apparently nope, the super-early start actually somehow puts them in a worse position than they are after another century of subjugation. Which kind of sucks for me because I like playing Zoroastrian games and was hoping to do one from the new earliest start. Well you have to remember that this is only a century after the Muslim conquest of Persia. The locals haven't really had an opportunity to reassert home rule (nor would they for a hundred years yet), and Zoroastrian rulers wouldn't have had a chance to get power under the Caliph. But from a gameplay perspective I totally get you, though. Paradox is bound by history v  v
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 13:37
|
|
|
MinistryofLard posted:How does Forming the Empire of Italia work? I, as the Umayyad's, conquered Sicily and Italy, and then gave them to my vassals because I was over vassal limit. Do I need ylto own both Kingdoms + a third personally to form Italia or is mere overlordship sufficient? As long as they're part of your realm you can form it. It's the same as any title.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 14:20
|
|
|
If you search for the title and mouse over "Create" you can probably figure out what's preventing you from forming it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 14:48
|
|
|
I do not bother to try to eugenize/educate up a super-heir anymore because if you succeed the game kills him before or very shortly after he inherits literally 100% of the time. I'm convinced it's hard coded somewhere to do this. Ultimogeniture and Elective both have their charms and I switch back and forth on my playthroughs. Ultimo means most successions are chaotic bloodbaths and you're going to be hit with at least one adventurer every generation; Elective ensures peaceful successions but also often results in very interesting (read: bad) characters coming under your control.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 17:36
|
|
|
It's honestly not "necessary" anymore. With the WoL changes you can manipulate even some of the worst heirs to be at the very least somewhat mediocre.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
Doltos posted:I assassinated her, killed the queen mother who wasn't related to my heir, imprisoned my half brother and executed him, tried to imprison my half sister but she fled, then just bribed everyone to like me again. good work, now you are playing the real CK2 e; yeah, WoL kinda makes a lot of the CK2 Eugenics program unnecessary now, so you can just take any old heir and make something solid
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
Another thing the game does a lot now--it may be intended as a counterbalance to the ease of picking up good traits via focuses--is if your ruler has a list of 4+ good traits it'll pretty regularly take them away from him via abrupt event. I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing, but I do wish the events were more fleshed out rather than just an abrupt "The hours drag on and I'm not as into my work anymore. (You lose Diligent because gently caress you that's why)".
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:Another thing the game does a lot now--it may be intended as a counterbalance to the ease of picking up good traits via focuses--is if your ruler has a list of 4+ good traits it'll pretty regularly take them away from him via abrupt event. I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing, but I do wish the events were more fleshed out rather than just an abrupt "The hours drag on and I'm not as into my work anymore. (You lose Diligent because gently caress you that's why)". That's nothing new, and it's also not restricted to good traits. If you have more than 4 traits it tends to fire events to remove one of them. If your heirs have mostly positive traits, it may seem as if the game was out to remove your good traits. but it removes bad traits just as well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 18:27
|
|
|
Lord knows I've had enough characters with negative traits but positive ones get removed far more often, in my experience. I'll console up and do some more testing though...
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
Creating a republic from a tribal empire seems really broken. I got the Res Publica achievement as the Wendish Empire, but now I have many tribal/feudal vassals under my Great Prince. I have no way of converting them, they were apparently left behind when the new Republic was decreed. They all have a -30 to relations that seems permanent. Also, there seems to be a lot less to do as a Republic. I have to fast forward to raise money to build trade routes, but I'm so under developed as a post-tribal society with no meaningful holdings that this takes a long time. Seems like this game is now dead and the path of transitioning beyond a tribe is an unfinished game experience.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
If your costal you can raid for money. It takes maybe 50-100 years but your vassals will upgrade to join the republic but they are a bit poo poo about long term planning so it helps to build the odd market for them here and there. After that it's a normal republic game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
The Byzantine Empire, a bastion of progessiveness.  e: oh my god, they're making babies. Randarkman fucked around with this message at 19:52 on Apr 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:Another thing the game does a lot now--it may be intended as a counterbalance to the ease of picking up good traits via focuses--is if your ruler has a list of 4+ good traits it'll pretty regularly take them away from him via abrupt event. I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing, but I do wish the events were more fleshed out rather than just an abrupt "The hours drag on and I'm not as into my work anymore. (You lose Diligent because gently caress you that's why)". I think it tends to do that as your character gets older, rather than being down to "You have too many traits, time to lose some". I think of it as my character slowly settling down in his old age.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:Am I missing something, or is the only Zoroastrian start in 769 a vassal of the Abbasid empire? You'd think going back in time would make things easier for the Zoroastrians, but apparently nope, the super-early start actually somehow puts them in a worse position than they are after another century of subjugation. Which kind of sucks for me because I like playing Zoroastrian games and was hoping to do one from the new earliest start. You can start as Chach an independent Persian Zoroastrian count. Chach is right above Bajanid. It's actually the campaign I'm playing right now and I just got the One Who Brings Benefit achievement. This start can be pretty hard so expect a few game over screens. Tanreall fucked around with this message at 19:40 on Apr 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
Tanreall posted:You can start as Chach an independent Persian Zoroastrian count. Chach is right above Bajanid. It's actually the campaign I'm playing right now and I just got the One Who Brings Benefit achievement. This start can be pretty hard so expect a few game over screens. Oh, that's interesting. A Sogdian ruler. And despite being Zoroastrian he's starting in Manichean lands, and just outside of what the game considers Persia. That definitely seems like a challenge. Thanks for the hint, I think I'll try that one sometime.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 21:51
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:The Byzantine Empire, a bastion of progessiveness. CK2, ah, finds a way.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 22:19
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:The Byzantine Empire, a bastion of progessiveness. Well that's to be expected I doubt there is any not female clause on the married pregnancy event. Would probably happen with two dudes or hell even the placeholder ruin characters used in some mods for colonisation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
Is there anything I can do to influence a neighbouring Muslims decadence? a decadence revolt is basically the only thing that will let me expand as a Zunist ruler at the moment, since the Abbasids poke their nose in any holy war I start against my Muslim neighbours. I tried to pick up intrigue to break all the Caliphs decadent family members out of jail, but it seems you can't do that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 01:47
|
|
|
There is nothing you can do about the Abassid blob. gl;hf.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
Ah well, I guess I'll have to be satisfied with stomping them out in my Rome game for now. Speaking of the Roman Empire. Is there any advantages of moving the capital to Rome when you get the chance? Any special events or similar stuff?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 01:56
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:The Byzantine Empire, a bastion of progessiveness. One day I'm gonna get around to making that futanari trait.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 02:09
|
|
|
So I chose the scholarship focus from WoL and the events where I buy the Necromincon and search for the Mad Arab fire over and over and over and over again and the event chain is progressing right. Has this happened to anyone else? It's been a while since I played CK2.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 02:28
|
|
|
Broken Cog posted:Is there anything I can do to influence a neighbouring Muslims decadence? a decadence revolt is basically the only thing that will let me expand as a Zunist ruler at the moment, since the Abbasids poke their nose in any holy war I start against my Muslim neighbours. I tried to pick up intrigue to break all the Caliphs decadent family members out of jail, but it seems you can't do that. Use your diplomat and gifts to get your reputation near 100 with the Abbasids before you holy war a Muslim nation. Then wait for the inevitable decadence revolt to grab some of their land. This is how I reformed the Persian empire with Chach in the 769 start date.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:Oh, that's interesting. A Sogdian ruler. And despite being Zoroastrian he's starting in Manichean lands, and just outside of what the game considers Persia. That definitely seems like a challenge. Thanks for the hint, I think I'll try that one sometime. My favorite thing about that start is it's not even the first time steppe nomads rolled into an occupied persia to reestablish a zoroastrian empire. It's Parthians 2: Electric Boogaloo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 04:47
|
|
|
Broken Cog posted:Ah well, I guess I'll have to be satisfied with stomping them out in my Rome game for now. The only advantage I found is free piety for restoring the Pope immediately afterward for free piety/relations. Only works with Catholic Rome, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 05:53
|
|
|
Are there any mods that I should download for this and are any of them on the steam workshop page?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 05:56
|
|
|
Doltos posted:Are there any mods that I should download for this and are any of them on the steam workshop page? CK2+ has some really good features, but WAY too much going on. I especially hate the additional provinces. Hooni's Rebels and Warmongers is pretty cool, but I gave up on it after discovering that no matter what my education trait, if I educated my own heir he would end up with the Diplomacy education. There are a few smaller mods that are good, like Flogi's Technology and Buildings, Your Personal Castle, and Ancient Religions. The biggest/best mods are Game of Thrones, After the End, Lux Invicta, and Historical Immersion Project. You can only get them from the Paradox forums though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 06:47
|
|
|
Broken Cog posted:Ah well, I guess I'll have to be satisfied with stomping them out in my Rome game for now. Not really. It's at best a handy way to revoke the title from a vassal. However the Pope always fills the barony slots with useless temples, so you're better off staying in Constantinople.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 08:24
|
|
only
|
Doltos posted:Are there any mods that I should download for this and are any of them on the steam workshop page? If you want a randomized or blank(er) slate game, I recommend Shattered World, Life is Tribal, RandomSpawningReligions, and No Kingdoms/Empires (Or its little brother No Empires), all on the Workshop. A few are incompatible with each other, though. Also I recommend making your own mod in order to play around with defines.lua (among other things). You can get a lot of interesting results out of a modded defines.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 08:37
|
|
|
So, can Muslims not get targeted by a decadence revolt if they're at war? The Abbasids in my game have stayed at 100% for at least 5-6 years, just constantly declaring war on their smaller neighbours, so they're in a perpetual state of conflict. If so, that's a really, really poor design decision. Edit: Oh, he finally got a revolt, and it was... 25k troops when the Caliph had 28k standing.  Did they neuter Decadence revolts while I wasn't looking? It's been a while since I played in the Middle East. Broken Cog fucked around with this message at 13:02 on Apr 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 12:39
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:The Byzantine Empire, a bastion of progessiveness. ...pay the gold and make sure it's yours.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 12:52
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:I do not bother to try to eugenize/educate up a super-heir anymore because if you succeed the game kills him before or very shortly after he inherits literally 100% of the time. I'm convinced it's hard coded somewhere to do this. Yeah, playing around with Tanistry at the moment and I understand that my vassals' choices are weighted towards cadet branches and older people, but come on. They always choose the oldest, crappiest tanist possible. As an example I have pressed a kinsman claim to the kingdom of Norge (which has all Norway, Iceland and a couple counties in Scotland) and won, so you'd think that to consolidate power and become great, everybody would vote him as tanist; but no, they're all voting for a 61 year old schmuck whose better stat is 12 martial. Of course it's an advantageous succession law in that there's no game over / title loss unless you run out of dynasty members, but still it makes very difficult to actually play someone decent - let alone good - and almost nullifies the chance to properly groom somebody... you pretty much have to rely on luck. I'm not a fan of that, I want eugenetics in my medieval kingdom damnit 
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 13:11
|
|
|
TorakFade posted:Yeah, playing around with Tanistry at the moment and I understand that my vassals' choices are weighted towards cadet branches and older people, but come on. They always choose the oldest, crappiest tanist possible. As an example I have pressed a kinsman claim to the kingdom of Norge (which has all Norway, Iceland and a couple counties in Scotland) and won, so you'd think that to consolidate power and become great, everybody would vote him as tanist; but no, they're all voting for a 61 year old schmuck whose better stat is 12 martial. You must tightly control you dynasty to cheese tanistry. Never land any family member and make sure that there are only two branches to your family. In both branches you must have only one person continuing the line, every other male member doesn't get to marry. Then you can educate the kids of the other branch yourself, ensuring good heirs. If you spread out your dynasty, it's out of your hands. Also, vassals really, really hate to vote for people of another realm, so unless the Norwegian branch is the only branch left while your family in your realm died out, you will never unite the realms through simple inheritance.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 13:27
|
|
|
Can anyone explain to me what these events that causes the Abbasid Caliph to lose 50% decadence out of nowhere are? He's gotten them three times in a row now, every time knocking him down from 100% decadence to 50%. I've been keeping a close eye on him, since I want to attack when he gets a revolt.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 13:43
|
|
TorakFade posted:They always choose the oldest, crappiest tanist possible. Tanistry saved my life, but it was not without cost. Every time, they choose some crusty old gently caress who dies before the current ruler and they continue to vote for the shittiest old dudes. Not the good ones, but specifically the awful ones that have 4 or less in more than 2 stats.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 13:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 13:27 |
|
|
This has been mentioned before, a long while back, but something it would be really cool to see in a future DLC would be some kind of system for "agents", a la Total War. What I mean by that is that characters like envoys, spies, and generals would be pieces you physically move around on the map, instead of abstracted processes. You could get a lot of gameplay potential out of diplomacy being conducted via characters, especially if your primary means of conducting diplomacy is telling your diplomat what you'd like out of a deal, and having that character negotiate it. If a deal falls through, was it because your envoy's tongue was insufficiently silver, or did he knowingly scuttle the deal for his own personal benefit? You send a powerful duke to negotiate the betrothal of a neighbor king's daughter to your son, and when he comes back, whoops! Looks like the girl was much more interested in the duke's own son. You could eliminate any chance at fuckery by going out and negotiating yourself, but perhaps sending your own character out from the castle makes assassination much, much easier. If you want to go full-bore extreme, you could even have armies be entirely controlled by AI generals that you can only give directives to, unless you personally are in control of the army. The flip side to this is that you, as a vassal, would be able to directly control the army your liege puts you in charge of, which would be neat. Gain opinion with him for following directives, or go on a little adventure of your own with the army you've been foolishly entrusted with. This would open up the possibility of playing unlanded characters, but PDox probably wouldn't go for that since it would be, by necessity, a human-player-only feature; unless certain characters could be born with a "free roam" trait, or possibly given it (a way to integrate knights into the game, perhaps?)
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 13:55
|
|
