Started as Galicia. Made myself King of Galicia but ended up getting usurped by Leon. Long story short, built up a faction, reclaimed Kingdom of Galicia. My uncle succeeded with a claim on the Kingdom of Leon, which I also had, and so I went to war and picked up the Kingdom of Leon as well. To finish it all off, I had picked up enough duchies off of the Mulism emirates that I created the Kingdom of Portugal, making it my primary title. Changed succession law from gavelkind to primogeniture at this time as well.
Everything was going swimmingly. I was watching succession crisis after crisis in neighboring Castille, vassalizing any lords who managed to break away. Then I noticed that my eldest son is only inheriting the Kingdom of Portugal and Galicia titles. The Kingdom of Leon is going to my 2nd eldest son. What gives? I thought with primogeniture everything would go to the eldest?
What are my options for fixing this? I don't want my kingdom to split in two.
Each Kingdom/Empire will have its own laws, did you change the succession laws in Galcia and Leon as well as Portugal? If you go into the Law menu you can switch between your various titles with the shields above your successor's portrait.
Started as Galicia. Made myself King of Galicia but ended up getting usurped by Leon. Long story short, built up a faction, reclaimed Kingdom of Galicia. My uncle succeeded with a claim on the Kingdom of Leon, which I also had, and so I went to war and picked up the Kingdom of Leon as well. To finish it all off, I had picked up enough duchies off of the Mulism emirates that I created the Kingdom of Portugal, making it my primary title. Changed succession law from gavelkind to primogeniture at this time as well.
Everything was going swimmingly. I was watching succession crisis after crisis in neighboring Castille, vassalizing any lords who managed to break away. Then I noticed that my eldest son is only inheriting the Kingdom of Portugal and Galicia titles. The Kingdom of Leon is going to my 2nd eldest son. What gives? I thought with primogeniture everything would go to the eldest?
What are my options for fixing this? I don't want my kingdom to split in two.
Each Kingdom/Empire will have its own laws, did you change the succession laws in Galcia and Leon as well as Portugal? If you go into the Law menu you can switch between your various titles with the shields above your successor's portrait.
Wow, I had no idea. Thank you! Now to convince all my unruly dukes that my new king is just fine.
Started as Galicia. Made myself King of Galicia but ended up getting usurped by Leon. Long story short, built up a faction, reclaimed Kingdom of Galicia. My uncle succeeded with a claim on the Kingdom of Leon, which I also had, and so I went to war and picked up the Kingdom of Leon as well. To finish it all off, I had picked up enough duchies off of the Mulism emirates that I created the Kingdom of Portugal, making it my primary title. Changed succession law from gavelkind to primogeniture at this time as well.
Everything was going swimmingly. I was watching succession crisis after crisis in neighboring Castille, vassalizing any lords who managed to break away. Then I noticed that my eldest son is only inheriting the Kingdom of Portugal and Galicia titles. The Kingdom of Leon is going to my 2nd eldest son. What gives? I thought with primogeniture everything would go to the eldest?
What are my options for fixing this? I don't want my kingdom to split in two.
Each Kingdom/Empire will have its own laws, did you change the succession laws in Galcia and Leon as well as Portugal? If you go into the Law menu you can switch between your various titles with the shields above your successor's portrait.
Wow, I had no idea. Thank you! Now to convince all my unruly dukes that my new king is just fine.
Imprisonment, Oubliette, Assassination, Castration and Blinding work wonders, in my experience.
Or, I guess you could be nice to them, but where's the fun in that?
I picked up CK2 in that humble bundle (along with the rest of the big kahuna bundle.....), and I'm trying to learn how to do...things. I played some EU3 so I know some basics of paradox games but - it has an alert at the top saying I have some unlanded sons. How do I land them? Do I need to just pick a territory and assign them, or do I need to oust somebody else?
0
Options
Sir CarcassI have been shown the end of my worldRound Rock, TXRegistered Userregular
I picked up CK2 in that humble bundle (along with the rest of the big kahuna bundle.....), and I'm trying to learn how to do...things. I played some EU3 so I know some basics of paradox games but - it has an alert at the top saying I have some unlanded sons. How do I land them? Do I need to just pick a territory and assign them, or do I need to oust somebody else?
It means they need to hold a title of some sort. I'm not sure if you can make them a Baron to satisfy it, but Count or Duke will. You can either give them one of yours, or remove one from another vassal and give them that. That will make your other vassals unhappy, though.
I wouldn't worry a whole lot about the icon at the top if you don't have a lot of titles, but if you do, I'd give them each a Count title.
All unlanded sons do is lower the monthly prestige you get based on your holdings so I wouldn't do much unless you're really low on prestige. They might also hate you a bit more because you're not giving them any land, but this is really not that big a problem.
On the other hand if you do give your sons land they will leave your court. This wouldn't be a problem but it means that they get their own choice of wife (usually they pick a bad one), and events (they end up getting bad traits more often than not). You want to keep your sons as high quality heirs as possible so landing them is often a bad idea for those reasons.
All unlanded sons do is lower the monthly prestige you get based on your holdings so I wouldn't do much unless you're really low on prestige. They might also hate you a bit more because you're not giving them any land, but this is really not that big a problem.
On the other hand if you do give your sons land they will leave your court. This wouldn't be a problem but it means that they get their own choice of wife (usually they pick a bad one), and events (they end up getting bad traits more often than not). You want to keep your sons as high quality heirs as possible so landing them is often a bad idea for those reasons.
In my Portugal game, I went Primogeniture pretty early on. Then each of my kings had like 4 sons, all of whom I distribute counties and duchies to, thinking "Let's keep it all in the family!"
Right?
Wrong. Now, on each succession, I have like 2-3 brothers and 2-3 uncles all deciding that they would be a better ruler. I can typically avoid full blown succession crises but one or two will rise up. They get crushed.
My most recent policy is to imprison whoever rises and revoke their duchy titles, giving them to loyal courtiers. Is there any downside to letting all my uncles, brothers, and younger sons sit without lands, ignoring their constant pleas?
So how does westernize work in EU4? I'm playing as poland in the techs I am behind keep fluctuating despite the fact one of mine is at 3 still. Does it use my highest tech?
All unlanded sons do is lower the monthly prestige you get based on your holdings so I wouldn't do much unless you're really low on prestige. They might also hate you a bit more because you're not giving them any land, but this is really not that big a problem.
On the other hand if you do give your sons land they will leave your court. This wouldn't be a problem but it means that they get their own choice of wife (usually they pick a bad one), and events (they end up getting bad traits more often than not). You want to keep your sons as high quality heirs as possible so landing them is often a bad idea for those reasons.
In my Portugal game, I went Primogeniture pretty early on. Then each of my kings had like 4 sons, all of whom I distribute counties and duchies to, thinking "Let's keep it all in the family!"
Right?
Wrong. Now, on each succession, I have like 2-3 brothers and 2-3 uncles all deciding that they would be a better ruler. I can typically avoid full blown succession crises but one or two will rise up. They get crushed.
My most recent policy is to imprison whoever rises and revoke their duchy titles, giving them to loyal courtiers. Is there any downside to letting all my uncles, brothers, and younger sons sit without lands, ignoring their constant pleas?
It's pretty great if you just keep putting them down for a generation or two. Free loyalty bonuses once the claims expire.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
All unlanded sons do is lower the monthly prestige you get based on your holdings so I wouldn't do much unless you're really low on prestige. They might also hate you a bit more because you're not giving them any land, but this is really not that big a problem.
On the other hand if you do give your sons land they will leave your court. This wouldn't be a problem but it means that they get their own choice of wife (usually they pick a bad one), and events (they end up getting bad traits more often than not). You want to keep your sons as high quality heirs as possible so landing them is often a bad idea for those reasons.
In my Portugal game, I went Primogeniture pretty early on. Then each of my kings had like 4 sons, all of whom I distribute counties and duchies to, thinking "Let's keep it all in the family!"
Right?
Wrong. Now, on each succession, I have like 2-3 brothers and 2-3 uncles all deciding that they would be a better ruler. I can typically avoid full blown succession crises but one or two will rise up. They get crushed.
My most recent policy is to imprison whoever rises and revoke their duchy titles, giving them to loyal courtiers. Is there any downside to letting all my uncles, brothers, and younger sons sit without lands, ignoring their constant pleas?
It's pretty great if you just keep putting them down for a generation or two. Free loyalty bonuses once the claims expire.
Yeah if you can withstand the initial succession crises/civil wars if they do occur you get some nice relationship bonuses after the two generations (somebody verify this) after which point your uncles'/brothers' successors lose their claims to the primary title. I think it's +15 or +25 for being of the same dynasty and +25 for having crushed a major revolt. Your dynasty also has a higher prestige as a result.
For example in my recent Rurikid Grand Prince game the first generation was a semihistorical mess of relatives declaring war on each other, assassinating each other, and generally being horrible in order to forge a Russian kingdom. This of course settled down once most of the initial claimants to each Duchy were dead, but it took a solid century or two for me to incorporate all of them. If you think Portugal is fun, fighting the Mongols off with your stupidly inbred divided Russian kingdom is even better.
All unlanded sons do is lower the monthly prestige you get based on your holdings so I wouldn't do much unless you're really low on prestige. They might also hate you a bit more because you're not giving them any land, but this is really not that big a problem.
On the other hand if you do give your sons land they will leave your court. This wouldn't be a problem but it means that they get their own choice of wife (usually they pick a bad one), and events (they end up getting bad traits more often than not). You want to keep your sons as high quality heirs as possible so landing them is often a bad idea for those reasons.
In my Portugal game, I went Primogeniture pretty early on. Then each of my kings had like 4 sons, all of whom I distribute counties and duchies to, thinking "Let's keep it all in the family!"
Right?
Wrong. Now, on each succession, I have like 2-3 brothers and 2-3 uncles all deciding that they would be a better ruler. I can typically avoid full blown succession crises but one or two will rise up. They get crushed.
My most recent policy is to imprison whoever rises and revoke their duchy titles, giving them to loyal courtiers. Is there any downside to letting all my uncles, brothers, and younger sons sit without lands, ignoring their constant pleas?
It's pretty great if you just keep putting them down for a generation or two. Free loyalty bonuses once the claims expire.
Yeah if you can withstand the initial succession crises/civil wars if they do occur you get some nice relationship bonuses after the two generations (somebody verify this) after which point your uncles'/brothers' successors lose their claims to the primary title. I think it's +15 or +25 for being of the same dynasty and +25 for having crushed a major revolt. Your dynasty also has a higher prestige as a result.
For example in my recent Rurikid Grand Prince game the first generation was a semihistorical mess of relatives declaring war on each other, assassinating each other, and generally being horrible in order to forge a Russian kingdom. This of course settled down once most of the initial claimants to each Duchy were dead, but it took a solid century or two for me to incorporate all of them. If you think Portugal is fun, fighting the Mongols off with your stupidly inbred divided Russian kingdom is even better.
Ok, I will keep them around. I think I have dealt with 2 big crises so far, with a 3rd looming. Perhaps after this they will settle down. And now that I think about it, I was noticing some messages recently as my older Uncles have died off, saying that their heirs did not inherit a claim on my assorted kingdoms.
Crusader Kings won me over when 4 years into my first reign, I was assassinated by my ambitious daughter-in-law who had super-high intrigue (that's good right? she'll give it to my son!) She was discovered during the attempt so NOW I became a guy who needed to imprison his wife for killing his dad. Then a revolt started.
Crusader Kings won me over when 4 years into my first reign, I was assassinated by my ambitious daughter-in-law who had super-high intrigue (that's good right? she'll give it to my son!) She was discovered during the attempt so NOW I became a guy who needed to imprison his wife for killing his dad. Then a revolt started.
I was Dublin! It should have been simple.
I've told this story before, but in my first ever Crusader Kings II game I started out as a Scottish Duke with the family name of MacBeth (thanks to the ruler designer).
-I got the hang of how to move troops around when revolts against my king kept popping up. He was terrible at putting them down, I didn't like being sieged and forced to sit around doing nothing, so I spent about thirty years putting down my fellow dukes and acting as the Chancellor for my king. When my king finally died, I was made the regent for his four year old son. I soon noticed that my new king's heir was none other than me. So, I learned how to murder people.
-King Malcolm MacBeth only had one son, and he married him to an lustful attractive genius Byzantine Princess. She was apparently too much woman for the Crown Prince, who took a vow of celibacy. King Malcolm MacBeth was momentarily at a loss; fortunately, the lustful princess herself soon provided a solution to the king, he gave her a good tumble, and the Crown Prince soon has a legitimized bastard brother. The current Crown Prince abruptly became superfluous, and was downsized.
-Keeping oddly true to the narrative, King Malcolm MacBeth's wife pestered him to be more ambitious from the start. In the end, she took exception to the king's bastard and plotted the death of an innocent child. The king was shocked, horrified that she would do such a thing, and imprisoned her, and then executed her for her vile, vile plot. He then married a certain pious young widow from Byzantium.
-Later in that game, Agnotic-Cognatic Primogeniture created problems when a woman inherited, a woman who had married in the standard fashion. Facing a potential game-over, I solved the problem in the traditional family way, murdering my way through a half dozen claimants to get to a family member that could safely inherit.
-I had a child ruler go through to the "regent is trying to kill her" events. Those are pure win, and the first time I went through them I was on the edge of my seat.
-I had wars with England, alliances with France, pesky family members in Ireland trying to make claims at my throne, Norway not willing to give up its holdings (and I learned a valuable lesson about how NOT to attack while failing to take the Orkney Islands). I got excommunicated a few times, and at the time that the game ended I had murdered my way into a marriage with England that was going to put a MacBeth on the throne of both countries, had the game lasted another decade or two after 1453.
The problem with the Civilization games is that if Gandhi or Napoleon pisses you off all you can do is try to conquer him. With Crusader Kings II, I could say "Fuck you, it's murderin' time," and kill anyone who pissed me off. I fell in love when I realized that.
Meanwhile, playing EU4 tonight, I got the achievements for Traditional Player, Sweden Is Not Overpowered, and This Navy Can Take It All. I think that I'll be trying an Austria game next.
Civics is not a consumer product that you can ignore because you don’t like the options presented.
So after my Castile game got thrown wildly off course by France, I decided to play as France for a while, figuring I'd enjoy the flipped table and pick up the achievement for consolidating all of France's territory. Everything was going fine, I was crushing multiple armies left and right, and then I won a huge war and wasn't paying attention - I fully annexed a junior member of the war instead of vassalizing them and didn't realize it. So when 30 seconds later I also annexed a huge chunk land around Holland, I instantly went to 260% overextension.
So that game became somewhat cathartic, in a different way than I intended, because I then got to watch France implode in a major way. There were so many rebels that they eventually wore down France's army and were all able to force their demands. By the time I realized it was inevitable, I just sat back, turned it up to speed 5, and enjoyed the show. I finally stopped once France was split into about 10 different countries and all of the territory that was still France's was occupied because there about 5 or 6 different active wars still going on.
Helpful tip to anyone that hasn't encountered it yet - don't go too far over 100% overextension, because things turn ugly really quickly. There are an almost absurd number of negative events that fire at a rather rapid pace, plus it'll push up your revolt risk everywhere by a large amount.
My France isn't nice to look at. I wanted to absorb Burgundy, but they kept running away to the North East, so now France stretches almost all the way to Denmark in the North, but in the South it doesn't even have its modern borders.
Still working on my first game as Portugal and the damn BBB attacked me for no reason other than to give a bunch of my African holdings back to Mali. The off culture/religion provinces didn't do them much good but it was annoying that they did it pretty much out of spite.
There is apparently a bug in one of the events that gives you money as an option, and it calculates the amount based on your income. The bug lies in how it calculates the money - it bases it off of your yearly income, but it apparently does it by multiplying the amount of money you received in the previous month by 12. So when the event fired right after I sued for peace with Mali...
Needless to say, I think I'm going to be having some fun with this game.
When I started playing this I modified the settings file to allow windowed mode, not knowing at the time that it disabled achievements. I have since uninstalled the game and deleted the entire settings folder, saves and all, made a fresh install, and started a new game and it *immediately* shows as being an edited save file, disabling achievements.
Fuck that. I don't even know what the point of policing achievements is in the first place, but to have windowed mode break achievements, even after a reinstall? That's some serious bullshit.
I've been trying to work towards Three Mountains, but the game doesn't want me to succeed. I'm getting shitloads of rebellions for no discernible reason, and every bumfuck backwoods island is spawning 25k+ armies of crack troops.
It's getting kinda ridiculous. I have somewhere in the neighborhood of 200k rebels in my lands, while I have the largest army in the game at 50k.
The rebels in this game are completely fucked up numbers-wise.
I love it when a colony started coring just goes and Jackels, Vultures into 70k rebel stack.
Today, I discovered that after a certain point, they stop naming ships. I had Frigates just named Light Ship in my armada, with no ship names. This may be from having an armada of over 500 ships. And on that note, England is OP once it starts rolling. I turned off game music to to play to the sounds of Rule, Britannia.
Civics is not a consumer product that you can ignore because you don’t like the options presented.
Forming Malaya was the most anti-climatic thing. I go from my beautiful Majapahit red to poop brown. Oh well, I managed to westernize. I am still way behind even my neighbors because the Indian tech group is faster. But at least my infantry can wreck house. Spain and France are knocking on my door, they grabbed the Philippines and Papua New Guinea from me. I'm trying to bide my time, both of them seem to be allied with each other and most of the HRE, its totally crazy.
You know what bothers me about the game, it isn't the rebels. It's the peace treaties.
Let's looks at my England game. I started that game by immediately giving France four provinces, just keeping Calais for myself. I was thinking that I had got myself out of that French mess. Then France promptly declares war on me again five years later. They eat Brittany and take all of its provinces, destroy my armies in the field. They can't get to Calais because of the Big Red Blob in the way. They're at 20% war score, I'm willing to give them my cores, they want me to release Scotland. So, we sit there for a while.
And sit there.
And sit there.
I tried a few more landings, and I got down to -66% warscore.
France gets a little more insistent with their demands. Release not just Scotland, but also Cornwall, and Ulster, and pay them all of the money.
I sit back, blockade their ports, let my manpower fully retore itself. I build up a hefty force, with army funding set to minimum. I fund rebels in France. And the French slowly start to crumble. When I see that they're struggling with rebels, I attack. I swat down their army. Burgundy and Aragon join in with their own wars. I siege down all of their provinces. The peace gives me back all my cores (I sell the southern ones to Aragon), frees Brittany, frees other nations as well. Suddenly France is down to five provinces.
If they were willing to be reasonable earlier, this could have been prevented.
Shadowhope on
Civics is not a consumer product that you can ignore because you don’t like the options presented.
Having extra bird mana should let you haggle them down to more reasonable things. Although its extremely strong for the player as well so I guess thats why they left it that way.
Having extra bird mana should let you haggle them down to more reasonable things. Although its extremely strong for the player as well so I guess thats why they left it that way.
Diplomatic points are used to give yourself a better peace treaty. Like, you declare war trying to get Acadia, but in the peace treaty you take Micmac and Epekwitk as well (small rant: if they're going to use Epekwitk instead of Abegweit, they should use Mi'kmaq instead of Micmac!). You'll need Diplomatic points to improve your winnings. But I don't recall using them to make it easier for the the other party accept my defeat.
Civics is not a consumer product that you can ignore because you don’t like the options presented.
Posts
Each Kingdom/Empire will have its own laws, did you change the succession laws in Galcia and Leon as well as Portugal? If you go into the Law menu you can switch between your various titles with the shields above your successor's portrait.
Wow, I had no idea. Thank you! Now to convince all my unruly dukes that my new king is just fine.
Imprisonment, Oubliette, Assassination, Castration and Blinding work wonders, in my experience.
Or, I guess you could be nice to them, but where's the fun in that?
Only in CK2
It means they need to hold a title of some sort. I'm not sure if you can make them a Baron to satisfy it, but Count or Duke will. You can either give them one of yours, or remove one from another vassal and give them that. That will make your other vassals unhappy, though.
I wouldn't worry a whole lot about the icon at the top if you don't have a lot of titles, but if you do, I'd give them each a Count title.
On the other hand if you do give your sons land they will leave your court. This wouldn't be a problem but it means that they get their own choice of wife (usually they pick a bad one), and events (they end up getting bad traits more often than not). You want to keep your sons as high quality heirs as possible so landing them is often a bad idea for those reasons.
Steam: CavilatRest
In my Portugal game, I went Primogeniture pretty early on. Then each of my kings had like 4 sons, all of whom I distribute counties and duchies to, thinking "Let's keep it all in the family!"
Right?
Wrong. Now, on each succession, I have like 2-3 brothers and 2-3 uncles all deciding that they would be a better ruler. I can typically avoid full blown succession crises but one or two will rise up. They get crushed.
My most recent policy is to imprison whoever rises and revoke their duchy titles, giving them to loyal courtiers. Is there any downside to letting all my uncles, brothers, and younger sons sit without lands, ignoring their constant pleas?
As Poland I really wouldn't bother, your penalty isn't that bad.
edit: I am bad at math. But what I'm trying to say is that if you're 8 or more techs behind in sum then you can westernize
It's pretty great if you just keep putting them down for a generation or two. Free loyalty bonuses once the claims expire.
ah well i already waited this long might as well finish it i gues.
Yeah if you can withstand the initial succession crises/civil wars if they do occur you get some nice relationship bonuses after the two generations (somebody verify this) after which point your uncles'/brothers' successors lose their claims to the primary title. I think it's +15 or +25 for being of the same dynasty and +25 for having crushed a major revolt. Your dynasty also has a higher prestige as a result.
For example in my recent Rurikid Grand Prince game the first generation was a semihistorical mess of relatives declaring war on each other, assassinating each other, and generally being horrible in order to forge a Russian kingdom. This of course settled down once most of the initial claimants to each Duchy were dead, but it took a solid century or two for me to incorporate all of them. If you think Portugal is fun, fighting the Mongols off with your stupidly inbred divided Russian kingdom is even better.
Steam: CavilatRest
Ok, I will keep them around. I think I have dealt with 2 big crises so far, with a 3rd looming. Perhaps after this they will settle down. And now that I think about it, I was noticing some messages recently as my older Uncles have died off, saying that their heirs did not inherit a claim on my assorted kingdoms.
I was Dublin! It should have been simple.
I've told this story before, but in my first ever Crusader Kings II game I started out as a Scottish Duke with the family name of MacBeth (thanks to the ruler designer).
-I got the hang of how to move troops around when revolts against my king kept popping up. He was terrible at putting them down, I didn't like being sieged and forced to sit around doing nothing, so I spent about thirty years putting down my fellow dukes and acting as the Chancellor for my king. When my king finally died, I was made the regent for his four year old son. I soon noticed that my new king's heir was none other than me. So, I learned how to murder people.
-King Malcolm MacBeth only had one son, and he married him to an lustful attractive genius Byzantine Princess. She was apparently too much woman for the Crown Prince, who took a vow of celibacy. King Malcolm MacBeth was momentarily at a loss; fortunately, the lustful princess herself soon provided a solution to the king, he gave her a good tumble, and the Crown Prince soon has a legitimized bastard brother. The current Crown Prince abruptly became superfluous, and was downsized.
-Keeping oddly true to the narrative, King Malcolm MacBeth's wife pestered him to be more ambitious from the start. In the end, she took exception to the king's bastard and plotted the death of an innocent child. The king was shocked, horrified that she would do such a thing, and imprisoned her, and then executed her for her vile, vile plot. He then married a certain pious young widow from Byzantium.
-Later in that game, Agnotic-Cognatic Primogeniture created problems when a woman inherited, a woman who had married in the standard fashion. Facing a potential game-over, I solved the problem in the traditional family way, murdering my way through a half dozen claimants to get to a family member that could safely inherit.
-I had a child ruler go through to the "regent is trying to kill her" events. Those are pure win, and the first time I went through them I was on the edge of my seat.
-I had wars with England, alliances with France, pesky family members in Ireland trying to make claims at my throne, Norway not willing to give up its holdings (and I learned a valuable lesson about how NOT to attack while failing to take the Orkney Islands). I got excommunicated a few times, and at the time that the game ended I had murdered my way into a marriage with England that was going to put a MacBeth on the throne of both countries, had the game lasted another decade or two after 1453.
The problem with the Civilization games is that if Gandhi or Napoleon pisses you off all you can do is try to conquer him. With Crusader Kings II, I could say "Fuck you, it's murderin' time," and kill anyone who pissed me off. I fell in love when I realized that.
Meanwhile, playing EU4 tonight, I got the achievements for Traditional Player, Sweden Is Not Overpowered, and This Navy Can Take It All. I think that I'll be trying an Austria game next.
3DS: 0963-0539-4405
Everyone remembers their first.
So that game became somewhat cathartic, in a different way than I intended, because I then got to watch France implode in a major way. There were so many rebels that they eventually wore down France's army and were all able to force their demands. By the time I realized it was inevitable, I just sat back, turned it up to speed 5, and enjoyed the show. I finally stopped once France was split into about 10 different countries and all of the territory that was still France's was occupied because there about 5 or 6 different active wars still going on.
Helpful tip to anyone that hasn't encountered it yet - don't go too far over 100% overextension, because things turn ugly really quickly. There are an almost absurd number of negative events that fire at a rather rapid pace, plus it'll push up your revolt risk everywhere by a large amount.
3DS: 0963-0539-4405
Steam: CavilatRest
Still working on my first game as Portugal and the damn BBB attacked me for no reason other than to give a bunch of my African holdings back to Mali. The off culture/religion provinces didn't do them much good but it was annoying that they did it pretty much out of spite.
Needless to say, I think I'm going to be having some fun with this game.
3DS: 0963-0539-4405
Fuck that. I don't even know what the point of policing achievements is in the first place, but to have windowed mode break achievements, even after a reinstall? That's some serious bullshit.
It's getting kinda ridiculous. I have somewhere in the neighborhood of 200k rebels in my lands, while I have the largest army in the game at 50k.
The rebels in this game are completely fucked up numbers-wise.
Today, I discovered that after a certain point, they stop naming ships. I had Frigates just named Light Ship in my armada, with no ship names. This may be from having an armada of over 500 ships. And on that note, England is OP once it starts rolling. I turned off game music to to play to the sounds of Rule, Britannia.
Let's looks at my England game. I started that game by immediately giving France four provinces, just keeping Calais for myself. I was thinking that I had got myself out of that French mess. Then France promptly declares war on me again five years later. They eat Brittany and take all of its provinces, destroy my armies in the field. They can't get to Calais because of the Big Red Blob in the way. They're at 20% war score, I'm willing to give them my cores, they want me to release Scotland. So, we sit there for a while.
And sit there.
And sit there.
I tried a few more landings, and I got down to -66% warscore.
France gets a little more insistent with their demands. Release not just Scotland, but also Cornwall, and Ulster, and pay them all of the money.
I sit back, blockade their ports, let my manpower fully retore itself. I build up a hefty force, with army funding set to minimum. I fund rebels in France. And the French slowly start to crumble. When I see that they're struggling with rebels, I attack. I swat down their army. Burgundy and Aragon join in with their own wars. I siege down all of their provinces. The peace gives me back all my cores (I sell the southern ones to Aragon), frees Brittany, frees other nations as well. Suddenly France is down to five provinces.
If they were willing to be reasonable earlier, this could have been prevented.
Diplomatic points are used to give yourself a better peace treaty. Like, you declare war trying to get Acadia, but in the peace treaty you take Micmac and Epekwitk as well (small rant: if they're going to use Epekwitk instead of Abegweit, they should use Mi'kmaq instead of Micmac!). You'll need Diplomatic points to improve your winnings. But I don't recall using them to make it easier for the the other party accept my defeat.