|
PittTheElder posted:The Roman Empire would need an exception to this whenever that rework comes, they had had a long standing centralized and universal taxation structure going. Maybe tie it to an innovation, since England did manage to get one set up. I’ve mentioned this before, but I think the Byzantines in a rework should model the transition from the much more republican empire of the early period, when landed rural nobles held little power, into the much more feudal late empire where Magnates effectively were the power. Maybe the empire has republican vassals who give money but few troops, and the byzantines have restricted access to mercenaries, so they’re incentivised to just give their neighbours money to go away. Or they can start giving the magnates power, converting the republican lands into feudal holdings, giving them the troops they need to resist outside pressure.
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2020 17:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 04:17 |
|
|
When did that transition even happen though? I'm reading some Kaldellis right now, and he's pretty insistent it hasn't happened by the First Crusade.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2020 17:43
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
One of the things the PhD student mentioned in his CK3 video is that historically, the "feudal contract" worked like current clan vassals. That is, the amount of taxes and levies a vassal contributed depended on their opinion of their liege. And I will say that managing a large clan empire is pretty challenging! Try playing the Abbasids in the 867 start, for example.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2020 17:57
|
|
|
Holy drat is it ever easy to get wrecked on a bad succession. Seemed like I was on track working my way to convincing my vassals to adopt Premogeniture so I wasn't worrying about succession too much when welp, 60 year old king dies and the empire is split. Ok not toooo bad. Just one small kingdom in the hands of a half brother. I can get that back, and then the new king randomly dies at like 30-40 and then that kingdom is split, and now the AI absolutely piles on. Suddenly wars against the split off kingdom I'm dragged into, plus Mercia invading, and another english duke invading, and two more French dukes invading far away lands (byebye). Of course once I get a bit of a grip on things my own vassals rise up to distract me. I was able to craft some alliances with some reasonably powerful french dukes to bail me out and holy poo poo do I ever owe them, but even still I lost like 4-6 counties and my military has been wrecked. By the end instead of having all 18+ prowess knights I was fielding an army with only a couple in the teens and single digit knights. Femtosecond fucked around with this message at 20:58 on Dec 23, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2020 20:55
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:The simplest change would honestly be to just up the character random mortality rate. Far too many people are ruling till 80, meaning you're always playing heirs who are established in their own right by the time of succession. Let's get some more child rulers in there, should stir things up a bit. Diseases should be way deadlier IMO. PittTheElder posted:When did that transition even happen though? I'm reading some Kaldellis right now, and he's pretty insistent it hasn't happened by the First Crusade. Wasn't Basil II famous for breaking the backs of the magnates and redistributing their lands?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2020 21:07
|
|
|
Vichan posted:Diseases should be way deadlier IMO. Basil did do this but landowners had power in the more classical sense rather than the Fuedal sense. Which for game purposes kind of makes them irrelevant. If CK2 had more internal politics you could make them a faction you have to appease.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2020 21:56
|
|
|
Vichan posted:Wasn't Basil II famous for breaking the backs of the magnates and redistributing their lands? I'm just working my way through Kaldellis' account of his reign now, but I doubt that actually happened. Romanos II's actions get painted that way too, but that's a projection from western authors familiar with those struggles in Frankish Europe, which is organized different at fundamental levels. If there is a parallel it's in the Church, which has all the same issues of acquiring land in perpetuity and removing it from more direct control by European monarchs or the Roman state.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2020 23:14
|
|
|
The distance from capital mechanic would be good. Also allowing for moving capitals. So you can keep *light* control over a large empire if your court is on the move or *strong* control over smaller empires with a static capital. For stationary capitals, you can expand *strong* control with secondary capitals but polyarchies would have entirely predictable consequences similar to gavelkind where the empire shatters and you have to civil war to put it back together but then since it is too large again, set up multiple capitals to keep it together, repeat. All while keeping an eye on your borders since opportunists at the edge of your empire will grab bits-and-pieces where they can. Or maybe just sack and claim Constantinople while your armies are bogged down in Cordoba or Lhasa. That would completely destabilize your empire so you'd have to choose between setting up an Empire-in-Exile in Trebizond or establishing an itinerant capital in Assam where your army is and using that as a new based of operations. It'd be tricky to implement, but there should also be a revanchist option. You might not have a claim on a territory but your great-great-great grandmother was a princess and that territory is now ruled by a completely different dynasty so you can "restore" the old order.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2020 22:53
|
|
|
with a distance from capital thing you could have a decision like "royal tour" where you "visit" some further flung places which would increase control, but there'd be the dice roll of random events (eg. bandits)
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2020 23:12
|
|
|
Femtosecond posted:with a distance from capital thing you could have a decision like "royal tour" where you "visit" some further flung places which would increase control, but there'd be the dice roll of random events (eg. bandits) Your incestuous brother in law throws the host’s child out of a window which leads to your weakest bards being given a Star Wars trilogy
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2020 23:42
|
|
|
Also usurpations while you are away. I feel it's a shame that they don't have a "King John" trigger where you are away on a war of a long duration and when you return most people recognize your "regent" as the rightful king. Bigger empires and bigger wars make this more likely to happen, though the trigger would have to be at least somewhat dynamic. Related, also maybe some problems for rulers who extend their reign by cloistering themselves with the religious focus at the end of their lives resulting in them having de facto abdicated to a monastery (if/when they implement societies in CK3 this can also be a malus for being a long time participant) so their de jure heir's powerbase is messed up. Likewise some different "Fredrick II" scenarios, like forced partition as part of gaining certain titles, "crowned in absentia" for Elective systems (possibly related to distance-from-capital) resulting in a clusterfuck, "feudal contract dispute" where kings of Sicily rule their vassals like *this* but Holy Roman Emperors rule their vassals like ~this~.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2020 23:45
|
|
|
Any idea why the befriend scheme quite often results in "becomes closer to being your friend" instead of actually befriending, even when the scheme has 100% success chance?
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2020 23:54
|
|
|
Distance from capital is a good idea but players will get frustrated from having to re pacify Aquitaine for the fifth time. They already don’t like partition.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2020 00:14
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Distance from capital is a good idea but players will get frustrated from having to re pacify Aquitaine for the fifth time. Well, maybe, but I'm always surprised that I can wander off on pilgrimage and have no ill-effects from my absence (I don't even pick a regent!), or personally lead my army through twenty-two offensive wars and still have things going smoothly at home. It would really depend on how it's implemented! The game right now as it is is difficult for me, on Easy, and it was honestly a bit of a relief when, upon retaking the empire title from my character's cousin's son after a couple decades of work, I didn't have as much to keep an eye on as I had had before, and if it had been because he couldn't keep control of the border territories that's no different from "for whatever reason he surrendered in every single peasant rebellion and to every single independence faction". My problem now isn't "well it's easy, no point in keeping playing", it's "well, I've consecrated and strengthened my bloodline, I have a hall of heroes in Plock, I've reformed my religion, I've united the West Slavs, but if I want to unite all Slavs the Byzantine Emperor is going to smash my face in and that's just not fun; what else can I do". Even not-recognized-by-the-game goals like "hold all five Slovianskan sites personally" are ruled out (for me) by the Byzantines to my south and the Norsemen to my north.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2020 00:35
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Distance from capital is a good idea but players will get frustrated from having to re pacify Aquitaine for the fifth time. Those players are wrong. Partition is awesome and there needs to be more of it. I could see making these options an option with both being ironman compatible because "people who care about achievements" and "map painters" have significant overlap. Like, one of my favorite memories from CK2 was during a heavily modified game and the Yazidis kept revolting. When I conquered them they were a republic. I appointed a ruler of their culture who was orthodox (and absolutely secretly Yazidi) as was the style of the time. For a while every civil war they'd convert back and declare independence. Eventually they settled down and more-or-less converted to Orthodox but when I was trying to convert the whole Empire to Bogomilism first cynically because I was a woman and then enthusiastically because I was that assassinated empress's younger sister who idolized her and missed that it was just a political ploy, they really took to the religion *hard*. So I spread them around during various civil wars, etc. When she died and there was a regency all hell broke lose and the Yazidi took over most of Anatolia. After losing an independence war and anticipating the civil wars that were going to come I had to triumphantly restore Rome as the capital of my empire. Not because I was about to lose Constantinople, no, this was a good thing. Great memory, great times. VinylonUnderground fucked around with this message at 01:47 on Dec 25, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2020 00:41
|
|
|
Midgetskydiver posted:Any idea why the befriend scheme quite often results in "becomes closer to being your friend" instead of actually befriending, even when the scheme has 100% success chance? There’s a hidden relationship called ‘potential friend’ — that’s the outcome you got. In general, the more friends you already have, the more likely you are to only make ‘potential friends’. If you want the befriend scheme to definitely succeed, you need to already be potential friends, say by giving them a gift. Having played with a mod that had distance from capital mechanics (Maryannu), it’s sorta gamey? It’s honestly a little overpowered as a vassal because you can just swear fealty to a big kingdom and pay almost zero taxes and levies while getting all the vassal benefits. And if you’re playing a liege you get very little from new vassals. It doesn’t really change the fact that you don’t have much to do once you’re an emperor.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2020 16:39
|
|
|
scaterry posted:Having played with a mod that had distance from capital mechanics (Maryannu), it’s sorta gamey? It’s honestly a little overpowered as a vassal because you can just swear fealty to a big kingdom and pay almost zero taxes and levies while getting all the vassal benefits. And if you’re playing a liege you get very little from new vassals. It doesn’t really change the fact that you don’t have much to do once you’re an emperor. I mean I would think that in that situation the "vassal benefits" can be less valuable since it will take so long to deploy troops in distant regions, but even that depends on having neighbours that are willing to attack your liege for your stuff (and maybe faster ticking war score or other ways to make large realms challenging to hold on to) Even there though mods that implement such mechanics should account for that, maybe make it so lieges are less likely to accept fealty for land that's more trouble than it's worth? You're right that it doesn't change the core issue: the only remaining goal once you're the big dog in your area is to stay on top, and there isn't much challenge or interest in doing that because internal strife is the only real issue and that's only rarely going to be a problem. Making empires less directly powerful (fewer troops/gold from vassals, especially distant ones) can help within the existing paradigm of the game by making internal strife and successions more dangerous, but the real thing to hope for is a genuine advance in giving powerful players something new and fun to do in the process of holding that realm.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2020 18:11
|
|
|
What are some good far eastern starts? I'm bored with Europe and not ready for Africa again, I kinda want to do interesting stuff on the other end of the map and then maybe get wrecked by Mongols.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2020 02:39
|
|
|
The Ferghana Valley looked like it had a bunch of good counties at least, should put you right in ol' Chinggis' way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2020 02:51
|
|
|
disaster pastor posted:What are some good far eastern starts? I'm bored with Europe and not ready for Africa again, I kinda want to do interesting stuff on the other end of the map and then maybe get wrecked by Mongols. Bost in the earliest start is a really fun game. You start as a single province vassal count and last of the Zunbils. You also have claims to a lot of Afghanistan but almost no power so the start of the game is slowly building your power, taking over rivals and hollowing out your liege's kingdom. Once you take over convert to a religion with human sacrifice and start trying to build up the massive amount of piety you need to convert to Zunism and then sacrifice your enemies to the sun. A full Zunbil run is actually so enjoyable it is the only time I have ever managed to completely conquer the map in any CK game. e: plus you are so close to India that spreading your culture will let you get elephants and the pet personal battle elephant relatively easily. ElectronicOldMen fucked around with this message at 04:40 on Dec 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2020 04:31
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:The Ferghana Valley looked like it had a bunch of good counties at least, should put you right in ol' Chinggis' way. ElectronicOldMen posted:Bost in the earliest start is a really fun game. You start as a single province vassal count and last of the Zunbils. I'll give these a look, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2020 04:50
|
|
|
disaster pastor posted:What are some good far eastern starts? I'm bored with Europe and not ready for Africa again, I kinda want to do interesting stuff on the other end of the map and then maybe get wrecked by Mongols.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2020 05:04
|
|
|
ElectronicOldMen posted:Zunbil That one's kind of wild because your liege's kingdom is extremely unstable. And then if he dies early, you'll probably get shoved into Kabulistan, which immediately gets wardecced on all sides.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2020 05:30
|
|
|
ElectronicOldMen posted:Once you take over convert to a religion with human sacrifice and start trying to build up the massive amount of piety you need to convert to Zunism and then sacrifice your enemies to the sun. I think I'm missing something here, because the religions with human sacrifice would all be like 75,000+ piety to convert to themselves?
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2020 15:27
|
|
|
If I'm a petty king of two duchies and have two sons will each inherit one on my death? Gavelkind, obviously.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2020 15:33
|
|
|
Yep
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2020 15:34
|
|
|
disaster pastor posted:I think I'm missing something here, because the religions with human sacrifice would all be like 75,000+ piety to convert to themselves? You can create a heresy of your current religion, and keep everything the same except adding Human Sacrifice, which will make it pretty cheap to convert to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2020 15:49
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:You can create a heresy of your current religion, and keep everything the same except adding Human Sacrifice, which will make it pretty cheap to convert to. In this start, though, you're Ash'ari, and Human Sacrifice isn't available if you try to form a new faith starting there:  As far as I can tell, the available faiths with Human Sacrifice in the 800s are Ásatrú, Bidaism and Khyarwé Bön, all of which are unreformed (so on top of the other difficulties, that's a 500% piety cost increase to try to convert to them).
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2020 15:55
|
|
|
well, you can convert to an eastern religion, then create a heresy with human sacrifice. Or you can educate your heir to become one of those faiths. another way to get lots of piety is to stack church building cost/time reduction and spam churches. conquer/revoke counties just to build churches in them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2020 19:03
|
|
|
disaster pastor posted:In this start, though, you're Ash'ari, and Human Sacrifice isn't available if you try to form a new faith starting there: The trick I used in my Zunist world conquest was to seduce someone with Khyarwe Bon (which also has the benefit of having esotericism) invite them to court and have them raise my child. So no conversion cost. And since Khyarwe Bon is unreformed it makes eventually converting to Zunism much easier, though still difficult.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2020 22:39
|
|
|
Also every religion should have a unique tenet similar to Sun Worship for Zunists. While I believe the modular design of religions is a better base for the game in the long run, the lack of unique identity can make them all feel rather similar compared to CK2 at the moment. I am hoping that the first mini expansion is nothing but a huge amount of unique doctrines, cultural techs and region specific events just to make the world seem more alive and differentiated.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2020 23:06
|
|
|
 I don't know if they were talking about Eoavva's mother, sister, half-sister, or aunt; it wasn't daughter, because Eoavva didn't have any kids at that point. If I hadn't been nearly dead of stress I would have opted for betrothing the mystery to somebody just to see who it ended up being! Meanwhile, speaking of people named Eoavva, I started a game in West Kiilt as a 70-year-old man named Eoavva, because I really like getting to see all of my rulers' childhoods, but if I just started as a kid, I wouldn't have a heir, while if I was the kid of someone who died after a couple years of gameplay, I'd have a sibling or something as an heir.  He lived to be 98! Gaivvas wasn't even his first son, never mind his first child! (His first child was a daughter and his first son died in prison after being captured in battle.) At one point King Eoavva's wife and both of his concubines were all pregnant at the same time, which led to this marvelous event:  (Gyða was his wife, Valdava his second concubine.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2020 01:39
|
|
|
 I'm a genius!  Oh no!
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2020 05:04
|
|
|
Technowolf posted:
Duke Andre was weak
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2020 05:21
|
|
|
Trevor Hale posted:Duke Andre was weak He was actually my Marshal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2020 05:37
|
|
|
Clearly you should replace him with your daughter.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2020 05:48
|
|
|
Finally had time to play this after a couple of months. Picked my game up back as Kingdom of Romanga. Noticed that the Byzantine Empire had exploded and never put itself back together, so I investigated that. Looks like a Coptic Nubian inherited the throne. But why wouldn't the dukes just civil war/assassinate until the an Orthodox Greek is back on top? How does the whole thing fall a part and almost every dukedom go there separate way? This was especially annoying to me because I discovered upon my heir inheriting that she had converted to Orthodoxy, which I just rolled with of course and now we have no holy sites.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2020 04:02
|
|
|
Technowolf posted:
The coolest twist on this storyline for me was having my duelist daughter return to my court years later disfigured/masked, disabled, and insane.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2020 20:06
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Finally had time to play this after a couple of months. Picked my game up back as Kingdom of Romanga. Noticed that the Byzantine Empire had exploded and never put itself back together, so I investigated that. Looks like a Coptic Nubian inherited the throne. Also, I enacted High partition. While I do keep about half of the counties, which is appreciated, it still splits up the two kingdoms. <_<
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2020 01:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 04:17 |
|
|
I'm attempting to do a "Last of the Zunbils" run like somebody posted about earlier in the thread, and so far its been fun! Over a hundred and fifty years I managed to wrest control of the starting Duchy from my liege, use the Buy Claim ability of my extremely rad, scholarly, and long-lived ruler to eat the Duchies of two of my fellow vassals, throw off the oppressive Persian rule and create my own Zunbil kingdom. Great! Now how the heck do I start working towards resurrecting the Zuni religion? We're all Ash'ari Muslims, so do I need to start by reforming the faith and adding a Syncretism of some sort? Also my scholarly liberator ruler managed to luck into Witchcraft in his late 50s and had enough time to convert 60% of the House members and form a Coven. I hope that doesn't gently caress up the ability to ressurect Zunbil a hundred years down the road!
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2020 20:15
|
|