Crusader Kings 2 Thread III: Keeping Up With The Karlings

[Avilan the Grey]

Things are looking up. If only I could die soon...

Spoiler: Going for Lustful wives...

Show

Spoiler: ...What is this blue speck?

Show

Spoiler: What's the point to spread your family? Idiots.

Show

What's the point of intriguing to get your your sons (Well now cousins) to become kings of France and Gallicia respectively... when BOTH of them, somehow, opted to marry Matrilineary. WTH AI?

Oh and having elective monarchy where 90% of all nobles are of my dynasty takes the stress off of things. I would PREFER my son would inherit, but it really doesn't matter.

[Ionbound]

Geheimnisnacht update released today, featuring some suspiciously-ratlike Beastmen that are nevertheless definitely not Skaven.

[Spacewolf]

Geheimnisnacht update released today, featuring some suspiciously-ratlike Beastmen that are nevertheless definitely not Skaven.

I'll probably wait until afew patches for it have come out, my current game has kind of reached it's climax with becoming a demon prince emperor though. (Although the amount of people trying to kill me is ludicrous but I suppose that's what happens if you become a demon in a grail kingdom.)

[Artanis]

So I just had the most hilarious moment of gaining power via dynastic politics...and it did not involve assassination or even my dynasty in any way.

What happened was that I started a Shattered World* game, and a nearby county fell to a peasant rebellion. Said rebel-turned-Count then used his event troops - which outnumbered any three combined armies in an eight-province radius - to bludgeon his way up to five counties.

So instead of fighting a costly war or three, I got buddy-buddy with him and, like a good pal, graciously played matchmaker and set him up with a courtier of mine. Not a totally crappy courtier, either, she was from a decent house and had pretty good stats.

...also, she was 19 with something like 30% worth of fertility bonuses, and he was Gavelkind and had a tendency to lead his troops from the front. His five sons are now too busy fighting each other to keep my armies from getting buddy-buddy with their father's lands




*For those unfamiliar with Shattered World, it makes every county start independent. I also used the option to make everybody tribal, because why not.

[Leecros]

Does anyone think that maybe nomads need a little bit...buffed

Don't hate me, because I know back when Horse Lords first came out, Nomads were ridiculous and two games probably isn't the best thing to go off of...yet in the last two games that I have played, the Steppe Lords have been systematically destroyed by the Feudal lords of Byzantium, or the Persian lords of Khiva.

I'm sure the problem lies in the fact that they're difficult to balance. Once a Nomad faction starts gaining momentum, there's not much that can really stop them...However that rarely, if ever happens. Even when the Mongols finally come.

[Malimar]

I haven't played since a bit after Horse Lords came out, so the situation may have changed with recent patches, but the game where I played as nomads, after a slightly bumpy start, turned out to be one of the easiest steamroll-everything games I've ever played. Conquer, strip all the titles from everybody, pillage all the land, hand completely pillaged land out to clan leaders, buy horde up to maximum, repeat. Turned out to be a failproof strategy. I wound up with most of the Middle East and all of Africa stripped down to bare ground, owned Spain (on a whim I decided to keep Spain feudal instead of pillaging it, so I would have at least some ships to get my horde to Britain if I wanted to) and was working on pillaging France when I got bored.

AI nomads are indeed a load of incompetent buffoons tho.

Hard to balance something that's simultaneously way too easy for players and way too hard for the computer.

[Leecros]

AI nomads are indeed a load of incompetent buffoons tho.

Hard to balance something that's simultaneously way too easy for players and way too hard for the computer.

It's also hard to do it in such a way that it seems fair. If you give the AI independent bonuses...despite the fact that it may/may not need those bonuses...Players are going to cry foul. Suddenly the AI gets the stigma of being a "Cheating" AI and everything goes horribly wrong.


I know there's been many discussions about whether or not the "Lucky Nations" mechanic in EUIV is fair and those bonuses are pretty much just enough to edge out the non-lucky AI's and create some powerful nations for the Late Game.

Part of me sometimes wishes there was something like that in CKII...or something that promotes consolidation of de jure land. Outside of the 1066 starts and especially if you use the Charlemagne start, the map just dissolves into a mess of petty kings fighting over scraps.

[Leecros]

Well, my early Mongol Empire game is going weirdly.

As if to prove my previous post wrong, There has been quite a bit of consolidation. England has formed and is working towards Brittania, Sweden has formed and is working towards Scandinavia. The Holy Roman Empire has formed. The Muslims have almost consolidated Hispania. Heck, even the Russians have a fairly powerful Suomenusko King.

and of course, i have mostly kept the Steppes under Nomad Rule.

The weirdness that has been happening though is in marriage proposals. Despite being distinctly Pagan(Tengri) I have been getting quite a lot of marriage proposals from non-pagans. I've gotten Marriage proposals from several generations Persian Sultans, a few Buddhists, and most recently I got a matrilineal marriage proposal from an orthodox ruler in the Byzantine Empire to his daughter(and Heir) and my uncle.

Personally, I don't mind this. I think that the often rigid limitations on marriage between religious groups doesn't leave room for certain rare circumstances. However, It's very odd that the AI is capable of proposing these marriages, when I cannot send the exact same marriage proposal and expect a positive response(Entirely because "Will not consider offers from infidels").

[tonberrian]

Well, my early Mongol Empire game is going weirdly.

As if to prove my previous post wrong, There has been quite a bit of consolidation. England has formed and is working towards Brittania, Sweden has formed and is working towards Scandinavia. The Holy Roman Empire has formed. The Muslims have almost consolidated Hispania. Heck, even the Russians have a fairly powerful Suomenusko King.

and of course, i have mostly kept the Steppes under Nomad Rule.

The weirdness that has been happening though is in marriage proposals. Despite being distinctly Pagan(Tengri) I have been getting quite a lot of marriage proposals from non-pagans. I've gotten Marriage proposals from several generations Persian Sultans, a few Buddhists, and most recently I got a matrilineal marriage proposal from an orthodox ruler in the Byzantine Empire to his daughter(and Heir) and my uncle.

Personally, I don't mind this. I think that the often rigid limitations on marriage between religious groups doesn't leave room for certain rare circumstances. However, It's very odd that the AI is capable of proposing these marriages, when I cannot send the exact same marriage proposal and expect a positive response(Entirely because "Will not consider offers from infidels").

Do you have Tengri synthesism and can be treated as non-infidel for certain religions?

[Leecros]

I don't think that's a mechanic in CKII. I could be wrong, but I think that's more of an EUIV thing. Honestly Pagans in CKII are pretty same-y with just a bit of different flavor with each.


I mean, I don't even think my Khagan has any kind of sympathies for X Religion traits...

[TheTeaMustFlow]

I don't think that's a mechanic in CKII. I could be wrong, but I think that's more of an EUIV thing. Honestly Pagans in CKII are pretty same-y with just a bit of different flavor with each.


I mean, I don't even think my Khagan has any kind of sympathies for X Religion traits...

Nah, it's not a thing in CK2 - Tengris are just as pagan as any other pagan (though I think they're less resistant to conversion than some).

The marriage thing is basically because you can't send a diplomatic request that is certain to be refused (such as a request to marry outside of religion) - but since the player can choose whether or not to refuse any offer, no matter how outlandish, that restriction doesn't apply to dealing with them (you can also see this in multiplayer, as a player can send such offers to other players).

[Leecros]

i'm sure that is the mechanical reason why it's happening, but it's such a ridiculously silly quirk. A ruler should never send a marriage proposal that they themselves wouldn't accept.

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

i'm sure that is the mechanical reason why it's happening, but it's such a ridiculously silly quirk. A ruler should never send a marriage proposal that they themselves wouldn't accept.

That wouldn't be too hard to code either, just have the AI consider the logic as if it was the player character. Not a bad idea.

[Artanis]

I'm pretty sure there's a mod or two out there that lets religions intermarry.

[OrcusMcP]

Bring out your dead.

The upcoming DLC will apparently make diseases and epidemics more powerful and devastating. Sweet.

[Flickerdart]

I started a Khotan game in the Charlemagne start. Being in the corner of the map is very cute - you get events where the Chinese Emperor whines about tribute, you don't have to guard one side against attackers, and the mountains to the south prevent the Indian kingdoms from beating me up.

But dear lord, it's so frustrating to expand! I have spent so much money building forts and castles in completely empty provinces. My levy size hasn't grown in generations because all I've been conquering is empty land. And Tartaria is by far the largest Empire (requiring something stupid like 8 kingdoms, compared to 3 for most Empires).

[tonberrian]

You'd think after the third time I imprisoned everybody and left them to die in the obliette the petty kings of Sweden would fall into line. I'm not even asking them to do anything - I'm fighting most of my wars all by myself to make me Fylkir. But no, it's time to revolt. Again.

[Corvus]

The next (unnamed) DLC is sounding interesting. The latest dev diary mentions new mechanics for the rise and fall of prosperity in a province based on war (or lack there), plagues, careful management of the province and more.

[Artanis]

So I'm on an After the End* playthrough, and things have gotten...interesting. I started as the Duke of Soo (in Michigan's Upper Peninsula), using the Ruler Designer to make myself Ursuline**. I was getting seriously hemmed in by increasingly large pagan blobs of varying sizes along the southern coasts of the Great Lakes until a Crusade was called for New England. I went from "modern Michigan's northern coasts" to "that, plus everything between Connecticut and Canada"

Suck it, Kingdom of Ohio!


Kinda mad that I can't usurp a Republic's duchy though. I really wanted to use my son to turn the St. Lawrence into ALL THE MONEY



*For those unfamiliar with After the End, it's a mod where you play in a post-apocalyptic New World starting in 2666.

**Basically Catholic, but run by females instead of males. What can I say, I can't live without the ability to base succession and councilors/commanders on merit instead of gender.

[Valley]

Suck it, Kingdom of Ohio! .[/SIZE]

Finally Michigan gets back at them for the Toledo War!

[Rockphed]

Finally Michigan gets back at them for the Toledo War!

What was it John Quincy Adams said? "Never has one side had the right so on their side while the other side had all the power."

[Aotrs Commander]

So, considering picking CK2 up in the steam sale. Pack containing expansions to Rajas of India is £30-ish, Charlemagne is an obvious additional buy, becaue of th starting data changes, as is Way of Life; what about Horse Lords and Conclave (since those as well would be pushing into the £40-50 range)?

(By comparison, I spent about £35 on EUIV last toime around, all but last two expansions.)

[SZbNAhL]

So, considering picking CK2 up in the steam sale. Pack containing expansions to Rajas of India is £30-ish, Charlemagne is an obvious additional buy, because of the starting data changes, as is Way of Life; what about Horse Lords and Conclave (since those as well would be pushing into the £40-50 range)?

(By comparison, I spent about £35 on EUIV last toime around, all but last two expansions.)

I'd say it depends on what kind of game you're planning on playing. Horse Lords as a non-nomad is pretty pointless (unless you really want to launch tribute wars or trade on the silk road, I guess), while Conclave improves* internal real/vassal politics but makes it harder to sweep vassal-management under the rug and just conquer stuff if that's your thing.

*In my opinion; some other players have different opinions and I do not intend to present my views as facts.

[Aotrs Commander]

I'd say it depends on what kind of game you're planning on playing. Horse Lords as a non-nomad is pretty pointless (unless you really want to launch tribute wars or trade on the silk road, I guess), while Conclave improves* internal real/vassal politics but makes it harder to sweep vassal-management under the rug and just conquer stuff if that's your thing.

*In my opinion; some other players have different opinions and I do not intend to present my views as facts.

A great feal of my interest in CK2 (aside from somehow getting Glitterhoof to spread horse minions across the map like that one chap did...!) is as a prequel to EUIV world conquest and seeing how far I get can through that; so yeah, conquest would be among my priorities.

[OrcusMcP]

So, considering picking CK2 up in the steam sale. Pack containing expansions to Rajas of India is £30-ish, Charlemagne is an obvious additional buy, becaue of th starting data changes, as is Way of Life; what about Horse Lords and Conclave (since those as well would be pushing into the £40-50 range)?

(By comparison, I spent about £35 on EUIV last toime around, all but last two expansions.)

I like Conclave, personally, makes the vassal game more dynamic. Horse Lords I'm more "meh".

[Artanis]

So, considering picking CK2 up in the steam sale. Pack containing expansions to Rajas of India is £30-ish, Charlemagne is an obvious additional buy, becaue of th starting data changes, as is Way of Life; what about Horse Lords and Conclave (since those as well would be pushing into the £40-50 range)?

(By comparison, I spent about £35 on EUIV last toime around, all but last two expansions.)

If there are any "must-buy" DLCs, I would say Conclave, Legacy of Rome, and Way of Life. For more detail:

I really like Conclave. Many complaints I've seen about Conclave are actually about features that came with the associated free patch anyways. IMO, Conclave is well worth getting, but would be better turned off until you've got a handle on the core gameplay.

I consider Legacy of Rome to be A Big Deal because it adds retinues. That's about all it adds unless you're playing as the Byzantines, but seriously, retinues are awesome.

Way of Life does one thing, and one thing only, but IMO that one thing massively improves the game.

Regarding Charlemagne, the earlier start date is a minor factor at best for me. I find Viceroys and custom kingdoms/empires to be far more meaningful.

Sons of Abraham doesn't change gameplay all that much, but adds significantly more depth for the Abrahamic religions (especially Catholics) and lets you play as a Jew. Might as well get it if it's on sale.

Sunset Invasion is a silly side project that the Paradox guys did in their spare time. It's kinda fun, but doesn't really add anything unless you're really into alternate history or you want the Americas to have better tech when you convert to EU.

As for the rest, most of what they add came with the free patch anyways, so basically all they do is unlock the ability to play certain types of characters. As such, there isn't much reason to have Sword of Islam, The Republic, Rajahs of India, The Old Gods, and Horse Lords unless you're playing as one of the characters that they unlock*. In particular, I honestly find turning on Horse Lords to be an outright worse experience when I'm a non-nomad.



A note of general advice for your first game of CK2: start as the Duke of Munster (in Ireland) in 1066**. That's basically Tutorial Island.


*Muslims, Merchant Republics, people in India, Pagans/Zoroastrians + the 867 start date, and Nomads, respectively.

**Seriously, make sure it's 1066 if you want Tutorial Island. Trying to play in Ireland on one of the earlier start dates is just going to end up with Vikings repeatedly burning down your EVERYTHING.

[Avilan the Grey]

As long as you stay away from Sunset Invasion (IMHO)...

[Aotrs Commander]

As long as you stay away from Sunset Invasion (IMHO)...

Ehh, I kinda liked that concept. Hell, I woud have snapped the chance to have played as the Aztecs in CK2 and done it myself (since doing it in EUIV is a bit of a bugger...!) But anyway, I will 9% likely getting the collection set at minimum, which has pretty much everything up to Charlemagne included.

[Artanis]

Well crap.

Anybody know when/if event-based hordes eventually lose their event troops? Because in my After the End game, I just got kicked out of New England by a horde with more troops than the next eight largest militaries combined

[Malimar]

Well crap.

Anybody know when/if event-based hordes eventually lose their event troops? Because in my After the End game, I just got kicked out of New England by a horde with more troops than the next eight largest militaries combined

IIRC: Most event-spawned troops in the base game eventually despawn (after like 10-20 years, usually), but it's because they get an event that despawns them. You can set disband_on_peace in the spawn_unit command, which makes the troops despawn if the war they're connected with ends, but you can't set a duration; you can only do that by adding another event that uses the disband_event_forces command. So it depends on whether the makers of the mod added that second event.