|
Started an 867 Byzantine game and the map has changed a bit from what I remember. The empire seems weaker, but so too are the neighbors and I've been absolutely running wild. I'm twenty years in and I've personally added 27 counties to the empire via conquest or diplomacy. My vassals are starting to get in on it too. Trebizond just conquered too counties in Armenia and republic of Ragusa has conquered at least five Serbian or Croatian counties.
Charlz Guybon fucked around with this message at 09:57 on Jan 6, 2020 |
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 06:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 15:35 |
|
|
I’d like to know why Zaragoza isn’t independent of the Ummayyads in the 936 start. Just once I’d like Galicia, Leon, and Navarra to actually loving survive into the next 50 years instead of being eaten alive every single time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 07:05
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:I have thousands of hours on this game and never saw that happen If you find yourself playing a game where you're enatic for some reason- you're playing someone near Seattle in ATE, say- it's nigh constant. No idea when it was added, but it's been there a good few months at least.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 11:43
|
|
|
Doing pretty well for an 867 start 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 13:39
|
|
|
lenoon posted:Most people could do a map painting challenge and micromanage their family tree to ensure every possible bloodline and all genius/strong etc, there’s just not a lot of fun in doing it. Owning the game in that sense is easier than EU4 Eh, more recent versions and the vassal changes have made it harder to just paint the entire map. The vassal limit means that when you get huge enough big, angry vassals that despise you and rebel at the slightest provocation are inevitable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 17:20
|
|
|
Why is Merv a 5 holding county when it was one of the largest cities on the planet for a significant portion of the CK2 timeline?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 17:50
|
|
|
Anyone else encounter a bug where bloodlines founded by a woman don't pass down patrilineally even when the tooltip says they should?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 18:04
|
|
|
Playing the most recent Muslim queen ruler challenge, something weird happens to the family dynasty screen when you end up playing as the one blood relative heir that exists at the start. It never starts a chain from his portrait. Instead each of his heirs appears independently in a column directly below him. Edit: SirPhoebos posted:Anyone else encounter a bug where bloodlines founded by a woman don't pass down patrilineally even when the tooltip says they should? Does your patrilineal tooltip when you hover over the icon say only a male can pass the bloodline? And is there a separate icon for matrilineal transfer? BigShasta fucked around with this message at 20:37 on Jan 6, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 18:13
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Started an 867 Byzantine game and the map has changed a bit from what I remember. The empire seems weaker, but so too are the neighbors and I've been absolutely running wild. I'm twenty years in and I've personally added 27 counties to the empire via conquest or diplomacy. My vassals are starting to get in on it too. Trebizond just conquered too counties in Armenia and republic of Ragusa has conquered at least five Serbian or Croatian counties. Ugh gross. Stop them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 02:05
|
|
|
I have a few questions on my early start Sicily game where I intend to form Rome and go Hellenic. It is now the 1100s and I had to switch to Catholic in order to get a shot at becoming emperor  . I won a crusade and kept Egypt for myself and family, so that is done. I now have the Immortal Blood of Alexander since I have 100k prestige. So now my questions:1. Should I switch back to Orthodox and "Mend the Schism?" 2. How in the gently caress do I lose the cynical trait on my relatively young ruler? I got it on a botched pilgrimage  . I've already done Scholarship, and am currently Theology focused, but I feel like I became zealous once already on this track. I want Sainthood dammit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 10:24
|
|
|
Dirk Pitt posted:2. How in the gently caress do I lose the cynical trait on my relatively young ruler? I got it on a botched pilgrimage Join a monastic order and wait for the penance mission to pop. One of the random events in it gets rid of cynical. Although apparently after looking at the wiki it may just be from completing the various missions in general so 
Rynoto fucked around with this message at 10:31 on Jan 7, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 10:28
|
|
|
Dirk Pitt posted:I have a few questions on my early start Sicily game where I intend to form Rome and go Hellenic. You very much want to switch to Orthodox and Mend the Schism at a point before going Hellenic, because doing so will disable Catholic crusades, making the world a far, far less dangerous place to be for your pagan empire. And I'd argue that doing so as soon as possible is a good idea, even if you're not on the cusp of converting to Hellenic yet. I gather you already have most of the Muslim lands that you need before being able to reform the Roman Empire? If all that's missing are a few Catholic held provinces, it's a good idea to switch back to Orthodox and Mend the Schism. No more crusades that might create Catholic realms where you don't want them, your bishops don't pay taxes to the pope, and if some of counties you require for the Roman Empire are held by rulers who don't convert to Orthodox, you can just simply holy war them, because they're now heretics.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 10:58
|
|
|
What's the best way to get tier 4 artifacts? I really want China to destroy the giant Arabian empire that's constantly giving me poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 13:26
|
|
|
UrbicaMortis posted:What's the best way to get tier 4 artifacts? I really want China to destroy the giant Arabian empire that's constantly giving me poo poo. Join one of the monastic societies, an event to steal an artifact comes up pretty often, and the crown of thorns is an option
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 15:02
|
|
|
writing magnum opuses (opii?) as a hermetic also gets you tier 4 artifacts if you hit it with over 25 learning, and aside from universal panacea those things are not really worth equipping compared to some more easily accessible books.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 17:38
|
|
|
I decided to try CK2 out again after not playing it for a couple years, and I'm currently trying to rebuild the Roman Empire from the Alexiad start. So far I'm making decent progress in that I've managed to reabsorb Rum and Antioch, while learning how the Imperial Elective system works, pretty cool really. Just wish I hadn't given half of my most productive counties away with the 'Include Lower Titles' check like an idiot. My question though, is what sort of strategy should I be using to defend against a Jihad for Anatolia? I've faced a couple small Shia ones that were easy enough (if extremely annoying) to fend off, but I have a feeling a major Sunni one is inevitable and will be much scarier. My understanding of the Crusade warscore system is that I will basically need to stop them from holding any counties in Anatolia for any length of time, but since so much of it is Mountain terrain, it feels foolish to attack their stacks if they're of roughly equivalent strength to mine. Should I just be spending years shadowing their major armies, re-taking all the lightly garrisoned forts they leave behind while avoiding battle? Also are the Seljuks expected to explode at some point? I think it's been nearly a century and they're going strong owning basically all of the Persia, Armenia, Iraq, Syria, Jerusalem and Egypt. I managed to beat back an Invasion of Trebizond which gave them 10% Decadence, but I think it remains super low. I'm guessing the AI is super diligent about managing that?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 19:01
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
PittTheElder posted:I decided to try CK2 out again after not playing it for a couple years, and I'm currently trying to rebuild the Roman Empire from the Alexiad start. So far I'm making decent progress in that I've managed to reabsorb Rum and Antioch, while learning how the Imperial Elective system works, pretty cool really. Just wish I hadn't given half of my most productive counties away with the 'Include Lower Titles' check like an idiot. My go-to strategy for baiting armies into attacking you on favorable terrain is to split your stack and have them right next to each other. The AI will attack one of them-make sure to move your top generals to that stack. Once the attacking army has it's movement locked, order the other stack to move into the province. Ideally, you should use this tactic when the enemy is deep in your territory, to minimize so you don't have to worry about another monster stack coming out of the FOW.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 19:40
|
|
|
Ah yeah ok, I remember pulling that poo poo a lot in earlier EU4 days. Also, I have a question about Great Holy Wars in general: at the very beginning of my game (from the Alexiad start) a crusade for Egypt was called almost immediately, I think still in 1081. A Jihad was called right after that and took it right back. But checking the wiki (https://ck2.paradoxwikis.com/Crusades,_Jihads_and_Great_Holy_Wars) suggests that a Crusade to Egypt shouldn't be possible before 1090, nor a Jihad possible before 1187 (though maybe I'm misreading the Jihad part and it's possible following any successful Christian Crusade?). Is the wiki wrong, or is something hosed with the Alexiad bookmark?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 20:07
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Also are the Seljuks expected to explode at some point? Most people start on other starts and experience Abassids being very stable. They can deal with decadence revolts. But you probably can keep an eye on them getting it and get involved yourself. Wiki talks about causes for crusade, not directions. Crusades start in 1090 unless Christian countries, most probably Byzantium, are threatened. In your case, Rum Sultanate/Seljuks control Ankyra and it's >900 and so crusades can fire.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 20:50
|
|
|
Coolguye posted:writing magnum opuses (opii?)
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 21:00
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:Most people start on other starts and experience Abassids being very stable. They can deal with decadence revolts. But you probably can keep an eye on them getting it and get involved yourself. Ah yeah ok I was reading that table wrong then, thanks. Also, as an Orthodox power, is there a better way to take land in Syria/Jerusalem than Holy Warring for it a duchy at a time? If I find somebody who actually has a claim on the Kingdom of Jerusalem and press it, I assume they would not become my vassal due to being outside my de Jure territory? Earlier this game I pressed somebody's claim on a Sicilian duchy, but they did not become my vassal despite it being de Jure part of the Byzantine Empire e: VVVV Oh yeah I always forget about that land-press thing. Which I really should not. Does it still generate huge levels of Threat? PittTheElder fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Jan 7, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 21:18
|
|
|
One trick that should work is to make the claimant your vassal before pressing the claim. So you would hand the claimant any landed title below you (even just a random barony works). Then when you press their claim on the kingdom, they stay your vassal as long as the new title isn't higher than or equal to your top level title. If you (or an unruly vassal) don't have spare land to donate, you may have to literally build them a new barony somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 21:55
|
|
|
Coolguye posted:writing magnum opuses (opii?) as a hermetic also gets you tier 4 artifacts if you hit it with over 25 learning, and aside from universal panacea those things are not really worth equipping compared to some more easily accessible books. Strudel Man posted:Opera. Rule I of Latin plurals: if you think it's going to be -ii, it won't.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 02:12
|
|
|
I think you mean plurii
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 02:20
|
|
|
Tippis posted:Rule I of Latin plurals: if you think it's going to be -ii, it won't. it's not hard. ii happens after ius. TRIARII-triarius. if there is not an i before the us then the plural isn't ii
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 02:27
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:it's not hard. ii happens after ius. TRIARII-triarius. Yes, but that requires you to know rules II through XLVII.  Just remember how often you've seen just about whatever be pluralised with -ii, preferably when the word has had zero i:s in it before.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 02:32
|
|
|
Talky posted:One trick that should work is to make the claimant your vassal before pressing the claim. So you would hand the claimant any landed title below you (even just a random barony works). Then when you press their claim on the kingdom, they stay your vassal as long as the new title isn't higher than or equal to your top level title. Never liked this trick cause it feels like a... trick. Maybe it would work better if you could declare "War to make Dude an independent Duke of Dudedukedom" or "War to make Dude my vassal Duke of Dudedukedom" and you can only declare the second one if said Dude agrees, and obviously he'd be more agreeable if it's de jure, he likes you, same faith etc. The other thing is I don't like how alliances work in CK2, almost all of them are limited by marriage. Yes, you can also ally close family or get rare events to ally other people but it feels weird that inter-faith alliances are almost impossible. Anyway, it would make sense if someone who becomes an independent ruler because of you would easily accept alliance at the very least. Or, come to think of it, be a tributary.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 09:31
|
|
|
It's literally the only practical form of conquest available to a Catholic though? The 'trick' part is having him be your vassal beforehand, which honestly is an oversight. If I'm willing to go to war for Schmuck McGee and raise him up from a pauper to a king, I didn't do it out of the kindness of my heart and I expect more than a 'gee, thanks!' out of it. If he swore fealty just then, everybody would be happy with a logical outcome and no 'tricks' would be needed beforehand.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 09:42
|
|
|
Serephina posted:It's literally the only practical form of conquest available to a Catholic though? The 'trick' part is having him be your vassal beforehand, which honestly is an oversight. If I'm willing to go to war for Schmuck McGee and raise him up from a pauper to a king, I didn't do it out of the kindness of my heart and I expect more than a 'gee, thanks!' out of it. If he swore fealty just then, everybody would be happy with a logical outcome and no 'tricks' would be needed beforehand. The most practical form of conquest for Catholic is to amass piety through one of the holy societies and then ask the pope for titles. It's surprisingly easy to get a claim on someone who is young, cynical or, god forbid, a woman.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 10:29
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:The most practical form of conquest for Catholic is to amass piety through one of the holy societies and then ask the pope for titles. It's surprisingly easy to get a claim on someone who is young, cynical or, god forbid, a woman. That's the easiest way now, but before Monks & Mystics, you either had to inherit claims (or titles) through carefully arranged marriages, or press somebody's claim. So mostly you did invite landless claimants, landed them, and then pressed their claim.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 10:53
|
|
|
Eh, probably. I've just recently tried Feudal Catholics post-M&M and was disappointed with how easy it is to be a saintly conqueror. Previously I've played some Republican Catholics and of course, they have their own method of expansion through conquest. Also with some other expansion (China one?..) you can declare wars by paying a lot of prestige. On the surface it looks like CK2 has a much better DLC policy than EU4 but EU4 is never quite that broken by DLC features. With CK2 it feels like new CBs, societies, artifacts and other features all break the game in their own way. Worst of all AI doesn't seem to use those features with any effectiveness.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 10:59
|
|
|
Serephina posted:It's literally the only practical form of conquest available to a Catholic though? The 'trick' part is having him be your vassal beforehand, which honestly is an oversight. If I'm willing to go to war for Schmuck McGee and raise him up from a pauper to a king, I didn't do it out of the kindness of my heart and I expect more than a 'gee, thanks!' out of it. If he swore fealty just then, everybody would be happy with a logical outcome and no 'tricks' would be needed beforehand. You don't need to land them first for dynastic claims, which does help encourage the "marry your offspring into drat near every important family around" style of gameplay.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 12:44
|
|
|
I do wish inter-faith alliances were more tenable a la the king of Trebizond constantly marrying his daughters off to the Turks to survive just one more generation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 15:09
|
|
|
It's pretty bizarre that finno-ugrics in the rear end-end of the arctic can cheerfully marry themselves off to west africans, but christian-muslim marriages between two neighbours is Totally Forbidden.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 16:19
|
|
|
Granted you can turn on interfaith marriage but this makes game not egligeable for achievements and is not supposed to be balanced. I wonder if it handled with at least some malus to interfaith marriages so that you can marry only if you have good relations. But it's strange anyway. People didn't magically decided in 1444 that now we can cooperate in war without being a family.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 19:54
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:Eh, probably. I've just recently tried Feudal Catholics post-M&M and was disappointed with how easy it is to be a saintly conqueror. Previously I've played some Republican Catholics and of course, they have their own method of expansion through conquest. Also with some other expansion (China one?..) you can declare wars by paying a lot of prestige. Yah, if the possible exception of Conclave council, every DLC makes the game a bit easier
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 20:01
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:Yah, if the possible exception of Conclave council, every DLC makes the game a bit easier It's pretty easy to abuse granting of council positions so that you never have civil wars after Conclave and an empowered council. Once you figure that out Conclave flips into that category too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 21:44
|
|
|
That's a good point actually, as the Romans should I be looking to eliminate the council ASAP? At game start they exist but had no powers, which remains the case. If anything it makes it a little easier (my attention wise), since law changes only need 4/7 votes rather than whatever the normal process is. e: There is a faction to Increase Council Power, but I don't understand what they would actually get if they won. Does the Council seize control of one of the ruler prerogatives at random? PittTheElder fucked around with this message at 22:02 on Jan 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 21:57
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:That's a good point actually, as the Romans should I be looking to eliminate the council ASAP? At game start they exist but had no powers, which remains the case. If anything it makes it a little easier (my attention wise), since law changes only need 4/7 votes rather than whatever the normal process is. I've also always wondered this but I'll be damned if they even claw back the ability to weigh in on executions from me. l'etat c'est moi!
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 22:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 15:35 |
|
|
annoying that HIP removes the parthian bloodline from the armenian pahlavunis, they’re one of my favorite challenge runs
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 22:33
|
|
