|
I quit a game where I was working towards getting imperial administration once because during a couple year regency, my crown authority dropped from high to autonomous vassals somehow. I was loving pissed.
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 02:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 08:04 |
|
|
Volkerball posted:I quit a game where I was working towards getting imperial administration once because during a couple year regency, my crown authority dropped from high to autonomous vassals somehow. I was loving pissed. That is the standard thing that happens anytime there is a regency.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 02:48
|
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:So the OP hasn't posted here in a while and the OP itself is pretty outdated. Perhaps it's time to start a new thread? It would be in flavor to do that now rather than wait until 1453 
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 02:48
|
|
|
Regencies in their current incarnation are a poo poo mechanic and I'll happily ctrl+alt+del out of ironman games to cheese it until my heir comes of age. I mean really, situations like this: Volkerball posted:I quit a game where I was working towards getting imperial administration once because during a couple year regency, my crown authority dropped from high to autonomous vassals somehow. I was loving pissed.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 03:03
|
|
|
Just keep playing and fix it you loving baby. That's the game. You can plan for every eventuality, but if you're cheating past every spanner in the works what the gently caress is the point.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 03:10
|
|
|
moreover, what the gently caress are you going to do after you establish your desired utopic lebensraum, play with your prick for 400 years while nothing happens? CKII is all about the journey, rushing to get there is retarded.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 03:17
|
|
Excelzior posted:moreover, what the gently caress are you going to do after you establish your desired utopic lebensraum, play with your prick for 400 years while nothing happens? Well, if you want a journey, the game could just arbitrarily split your realm in four equal parts every time you reach a certain size because of reasons. Makes about as much sense as a regent being able to completely overhaul the legal groundwork of an empire in a couple years and everybody just being totally OK with that.
|
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 03:19
|
|
|
TheMcD posted:Well, if you want a journey, the game could just arbitrarily split your realm in four equal parts every time you reach a certain size because of reasons. but enough about elective Gavelkind
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 03:21
|
|
|
Knuc U Kinte posted:Just keep playing and fix it you loving baby. That's the game. You can plan for every eventuality, but if you're cheating past every spanner in the works what the gently caress is the point. I'm not really sure how bypassing one crummy mechanic suddenly becomes "cheating past every spanner in the works" but the point in doing it is because regencies are not fun in the slightest. Sitting back for up to 16 years (assuming you're in a regency due to your ruler being too young) watching your realm go to pot while you're powerless to stop it is a load of poo poo, and in cases like Volkerball's you have to spend a substantial portion of the game getting back to where you were before the MTTH system decided to crap on you. It's not "you hosed up, deal with it" it's just "gently caress you." If they expanded upon court politics and actually gave you some sway over what happens during regencies, I wouldn't be so eager to cheese my way out of them, but as is they're too harsh for something that strikes so arbitrarily.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
You can designate a regent. And with certain traits (I know Just for sure) they wont gently caress with your titles/land/crown authority.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
Tinkle posted:You can designate a regent. And with certain traits (I know Just for sure) they wont gently caress with your titles/land/crown authority. That regent will then be replaced "for reasons beyond your comprehension"
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
Spakstik posted:That regent will then be replaced "for reasons beyond your comprehension" Keep all regents marked as special interest so you know if they die. I keep all my honorary titles marked as SI so I can immediately award it when some old fag croaks
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 03:41
|
|
|
Spakstik posted:I'm not really sure how bypassing one crummy mechanic suddenly becomes "cheating past every spanner in the works" but the point in doing it is because regencies are not fun in the slightest. Sitting back for up to 16 years (assuming you're in a regency due to your ruler being too young) watching your realm go to pot while you're powerless to stop it is a load of poo poo, and in cases like Volkerball's you have to spend a substantial portion of the game getting back to where you were before the MTTH system decided to crap on you. It's not "you hosed up, deal with it" it's just "gently caress you." If they expanded upon court politics and actually gave you some sway over what happens during regencies, I wouldn't be so eager to cheese my way out of them, but as is they're too harsh for something that strikes so arbitrarily. I don't care what little pathetic rules you have concerning what is and isn't cheating. Its cheating and it happens rarely enough that I just take in on the chin and carry on. You have like 500 years to fix that crap.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 03:45
|
|
|
Knuc U Kinte posted:I don't care what little pathetic rules you have concerning what is and isn't cheating. Its cheating and it happens rarely enough that I just take in on the chin and carry on. You have like 500 years to fix that crap. You're kind of a little bitch you know that right
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 03:47
|
|
|
Knuc U Kinte posted:I don't care what little pathetic rules you have concerning what is and isn't cheating. Its cheating and it happens rarely enough that I just take in on the chin and carry on. You have like 500 years to fix that crap. The fact that you can overcome it with a lot of effort doesn't make it not a terrible and broken mechanic. It's not even a good one game-wise; if your regency is due to becoming incapable rather than being underage, you either had a really unlucky hit in combat or you lived a very long time, the latter of which is really doing better than getting your dumb rear end assassinated or killed in combat or dead from syphilis because you didn't pay attention to who you were seducing. If that's what's happening, you shouldn't get a worse outcome in the form of your regent (who, as established, may well be the heir who will be getting your lands when you die) destroying your kingdom and likely loving over themselves too because your now-weakened empire is going to collapse and take their job with it. Really, if the regent's actions at least made sense or could be mitigated, then it wouldn't be so bad. However, it can, as people have pointed out, randomly take you from Absolute Crown Authority to Autonomous Vassals, which shouldn't even be possible. It's not "challenging" or anything, it's just dumb. Also, the hell does it matter to you if someone's cheating in their single player game or not? I mean, really.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 04:15
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:The fact that you can overcome it with a lot of effort doesn't make it not a terrible and broken mechanic. It's not even a good one game-wise; if your regency is due to becoming incapable rather than being underage, you either had a really unlucky hit in combat or you lived a very long time, the latter of which is really doing better than getting your dumb rear end assassinated or killed in combat or dead from syphilis because you didn't pay attention to who you were seducing. If that's what's happening, you shouldn't get a worse outcome in the form of your regent (who, as established, may well be the heir who will be getting your lands when you die) destroying your kingdom and likely loving over themselves too because your now-weakened empire is going to collapse and take their job with it. Well getting incapable from being 100 years old really isn't that big a deal because incapable has a huge health hit which combined with already being old as gently caress usually finished people within a couple of months, which isn't enough time for a regent to do much damage. Incapable regencies never last all that long because of that huge health malus, either, unless you're in the unbelievably unlucky circumstance of having a strong military ruler who gets a mace to the head at a young age, which is just one of the risks involved in having a ruler lead armies. Regencies because of incapability are down mostly to bad luck and don't last long enough to be all that bad and regencies due to young heirs are your own fault for not securing a strong heir before you died.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 04:19
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:Also, the hell does it matter to you if someone's cheating in their single player game or not? I mean, really. That poo poo's intensely loving important top Knuc as you can clearly tell
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 04:52
|
|
|
I rarely ever get regencies because I use elective the majority of the time and If I do get a regency rarely anything bad happens because I set the designated regent to a random courtier who is divorced from the kind of politics anyone landed (or soon to be landed) would usually be involved in.  The point isn't that "H-he's cheating... in a singleplayer game!!!"; It's that there's little point in playing if you're just going to cheat your way out of every minor setback.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 04:54
|
|
|
I'm going to use Volk's example as to why regents are loving badly designed. He spends a hundred years getting to where he is to only have it literally nullified by ONE regency that is insanely dumb. I have to wait until the next ruler to change CA laws and some regent can change them allllll the way down to nothing. That is really loving dumb and bad.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 05:03
|
|
|
Odobenidae posted:I rarely ever get regencies because I use elective the majority of the time and If I do get a regency rarely anything bad happens because I set the designated regent to a random courtier who is divorced from the kind of politics anyone landed (or soon to be landed) would usually be involved in. Knuc U Kinte posted:I don't care what little pathetic rules you have concerning what is and isn't cheating. Its cheating and it happens rarely enough that I just take in on the chin and carry on. You have like 500 years to fix that crap. I am not convinced you actually read Knuc's posts. Anyway, it's neither his nor your place to decide what someone should be getting out of a game or how they should enjoy it. Also, High/Absolute Crown Authority to Autonomous Vassals is not a "minor setback". And either way, given that this is a sort of historical simulation game, it should actually make a bit of sense. Why on earth would a regent suddenly lower your crown authority to nothing (in a manner that is, again, normally outright impossible gameplay-wise) when they are a person who is benefiting from that high authority? It's not good gameplay, it doesn't make any sense, it's just bad.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 05:05
|
|
|
Excelzior posted:moreover, what the gently caress are you going to do after you establish your desired utopic lebensraum, play with your prick for 400 years while nothing happens? My computer lags so hard after 200-300 years that I just start thinking of other games I could play in the middle of my current one. Like when I spend a few hours sitting down to play and I move 15 years when I could've played 100 years in the same amount of time from the game start, I don't really have the patience for it anymore. So I'm totally content with short term games. And yeah, the regency mechanic is just boring. You're the first-born son of the last king and there's no question that you're the legitimate heir to the throne, but you can only raise crown authority once in your entire reign, which as a kid, could be 50 or 60 years. Meanwhile, your regent and people who aren't even your regent can drop it 2, 3, or probably even 4 (haven't seen it personally) levels in a few years through a pop up that comes on your screen. Like if I get my rear end kicked in a war, cool. It's frustrating in a game way that I can work with. Regency shenanigans are just frustrating because there's nothing interesting about it and if you're basing your game around going for imperial administration or something like that, it can set you back 100 years, and there's no rhyme or reason as to why it happened. Just one more reason Republics with designated heirs are the one true CK2 government. Knuc U Kinte posted:I don't care what little pathetic rules you have concerning what is and isn't cheating. Its cheating and it happens rarely enough that I just take in on the chin and carry on. You have like 500 years to fix that crap. 
Volkerball fucked around with this message at 05:13 on May 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 05:06
|
|
|
I'd be ok with regencies if they suffered from the same inability to change crown laws more than once. As it is it is absurd that a regent can change crown laws 4 times in the span of a year while an actual ruler can only change it once in their life.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 05:07
|
|
|
I'd just like it to be possible to raise crown authority more than once a lifetime. Took six generations to get me back up to High authority primo from a shithead/pussy regent who left me at autonomous vassals and elective somehow.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 05:08
|
|
|
Funky Valentine posted:I'd just like it to be possible to raise crown authority more than once a lifetime. Rather than a once per ruler thing raising Crown Authority should just come with a large stacking opinion penalty from your vassals every time you do it. So it should be almost impossible to do it more than once or twice instead of being literally impossible to do it more than once because the game just won't let you. Lowering it should be free, though. Doesn't make any sense why it's basically just as hard to give up power as it is to take it. The vassals certainly aren't complaining about it.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 05:14
|
|
|
cock hero flux posted:Lowering it should be free, though. Doesn't make any sense why it's basically just as hard to give up power as it is to take it. The vassals certainly aren't complaining about it. "Stop giving us more personal responsibility for our lands!!!! loving big government..."
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 05:15
|
|
|
Funky Valentine posted:"Stop giving us more personal responsibility for our lands!!!! loving big government..." "I liked it better when the king decided who I could and couldn't declare war on, regardless of my claims" said no noble, anywhere, ever.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 05:26
|
|
|
TTBF posted:I'd be ok with regencies if they suffered from the same inability to change crown laws more than once. As it is it is absurd that a regent can change crown laws 4 times in the span of a year while an actual ruler can only change it once in their life. You can drop to autonomous vassals yourself in one lifetime if you lose a rebellion. You get the option to drop to AV and abdicate in favor of your heir. I assumed regents were making GBS threads the bed with something like that. By definition an incapable ruler puts an existential threat on the throne. High crown authority makes your vassals dislike you more in a situation where they probably dislike you quite a bit, so the Regent does anything he can to keep you from getting ganked while you're helpless. He's just not very good at it. 
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 05:27
|
|
|
Do regents even act all that different according to personalities, skills or opinions? I've heard the big issue is that they just sort of automatically cave to every faction which is why the crown authority drops so much.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 05:29
|
|
|
TheMcD posted:Makes about as much sense as a regent being able to completely overhaul the legal groundwork of an empire in a couple years and everybody just being totally OK with that. This actually sort of makes sense to me. It sounds weird but the vassals are probably a bunch of assholes that wanted lower crown authority anyway, and your regent will quite likely be pulled from that pool of rear end in a top hat vassals, so I could easily see most of them not really having a problem with getting more power. It makes a lot less sense if it's your heir loving up their own future kingdom though, in which case I could see a strong argument for "no that's dumb" even if "idiot puts short-term gain over long-term interest" is quite common. Anyway, while I'm posting I've just started my first game in a while and it's been great. I never usually get any really crazy stuff happening like gets posted in this thread, but this time England pretty much collapsed under the reign of King William II the Bewitched, a reign which many people have criticized as "subpar" and "literally satanic".  80 years later and England is still looking a shadow of its former self. It's been fun so far but I'm terrified of the innevitable great war against the HRE should I ever actually create my own empire.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 05:32
|
|
|
Kaislioc posted:This actually sort of makes sense to me. It sounds weird but the vassals are probably a bunch of assholes that wanted lower crown authority anyway, and your regent will quite likely be pulled from that pool of rear end in a top hat vassals, so I could easily see most of them not really having a problem with getting more power. A bad regent should be able to do some Richard III-rear end poo poo, but if you designate a good regent he should not lose all power to a bad one entirely at random and a bad one should not immediately assume power if he dies unless he did some kind of scheming to get there or is a close relative. If your uncle is a huge shitbag, well okay, then that should be something that can gently caress you if he ends up in control. Louis XIV's bastards got hosed over when the nephew he didn't want in charge won the support of the nobility and got himself recognized as regent, but that took more than getting RNG'd into the job; he was the closest living relative of majority and he was going up against a designated regent who was a bastard.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 05:57
|
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:Do regents even act all that different according to personalities, skills or opinions? I've heard the big issue is that they just sort of automatically cave to every faction which is why the crown authority drops so much. Yeah, it's pretty retarded when you get the "guess what, there's a plot to lower crown authority AND YOUR REGENT'S IN ON IT HAHAHA gently caress YOU" when your Regent is your mother, who has a 100 opinion of you and who personally has nothing to gain and everything to lose. And that definitely does happen. Anyway, just like 2 pages ago we were all bitching about how ultra-stable megablob empires are in this game. Mechanics that make it difficult to hold them together are few; regencies are one of the most prominent ones. I just wish the overall design wasn't so retarded in the name of shoehorning a game mechanic in. I'm not in the  MY IMMERSON faction but there is such a thing as a mechanic that's so unrealistic it's jarring.Although it can actually be pretty hilarious when your mega-empire goes into regency, crown authority almost immediately drops to Low and then the entire realm erupts into a clusterfuck of civil wars as dozens of vassals who have been champing at the bit for generations to get at one another finally break free of their restraints.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 06:48
|
|
|
Playing England in the viking age, with A-C Primogeniture. King dies of smallpox, leaving a single 0 year-old son behind.16 years of regency later, the new king comes of age, marries, has a single hunchbacked daughter, then gets assassinated. 16 more years of regency, the daughter comes of age, marries, then dies in childbirth. In this time, the regents have gone "gently caress YEAH LOWER CROWN AUTHORITY" so we're down to autonomous vassals and basically dealing with constant factions/plots. 16 more year of regency, her son comes of age, marries, has a single son, then dies in battle against peasant rebels. I think that is enough CK2 for the day goddam.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 06:53
|
|
|
On the bright side, your realm will soon be under Seniority succession if it isn't already so that should end the regency problem.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 06:58
|
|
|
They tried to push their Elective faction in one of the few shining moments that I was actually in charge of poo poo, and I beat/arrested all their asses. The guys who want a different succession are all in jail and they can stay there until they either die, or this poo poo sorts itself out. I still don't understand why there's always a Lower Crown Authority faction. I rarely take it above medium but my vassals still get super pissy about any crown authority whatsoever. Bribing them to drop that bullshit just seems to be a King Tax.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 07:06
|
|
|
From the CM start, the Abbasids are ludicrously stable, and by current date (1120 I think?) they control land from Punjab in the east, all of East Africa, all of Hispania, a lot of the Caucasus, and all of Anatolia while currently being in a war for the Kingdom of Greece. Is there some way to fix this? All the cultures within the empire have been wiped out and replaced with Bedouin (or Andalusian) as well.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 07:18
|
|
|
SurreptitiousMuffin posted:I still don't understand why there's always a Lower Crown Authority faction. I rarely take it above medium but my vassals still get super pissy about any crown authority whatsoever. Bribing them to drop that bullshit just seems to be a King Tax.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 07:19
|
|
|
SurreptitiousMuffin posted:I still don't understand why there's always a Lower Crown Authority faction. I rarely take it above medium but my vassals still get super pissy about any crown authority whatsoever. Bribing them to drop that bullshit just seems to be a King Tax. More crown authority means less power for your vassals. It's in their best interest to keep it as low as possible. Imagine how badly you'd want to lower crown authority if your liege cranked it to medium and you couldn't wage war against other vassals. Merdifex posted:From the CM start, the Abbasids are ludicrously stable, and by current date (1120 I think?) they control land from Punjab in the east, all of East Africa, all of Hispania, a lot of the Caucasus, and all of Anatolia while currently being in a war for the Kingdom of Greece. Best way to fix it is to play any post 1066 start date. Muslim blobs in 769/867 very often will become unstoppable unless you're the byzantines or a blob of equal size actively trying to destroy them. 1066 isn't a complete fix, but with the sunni/shia divide between the seljuks/fatimids they're much less frightening. Morzhovyye fucked around with this message at 07:25 on May 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 07:20
|
|
|
verbal enema posted:You're kind of a little bitch you know that right Ooh the big boy can say fag and bitch and cheat at 1 player videogames.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 07:35
|
|
|
I routinely use 'cash' and hire mercenaries when I'm in a tight spot
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 07:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 08:04 |
|
|
Merdifex posted:From the CM start, the Abbasids are ludicrously stable, and by current date (1120 I think?) they control land from Punjab in the east, all of East Africa, all of Hispania, a lot of the Caucasus, and all of Anatolia while currently being in a war for the Kingdom of Greece. Are you averse to cheating (playing ironman)? The quickest fix is a successful decadence revolt or two.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 08:17
|
|