You play as a feudal lord between 1066 and the early 1400s; it's pretty great. Common problems (and solutions) include murder, assassination, rebellions, invasions, excommunication, imprisonment and wedding planning.
sub topics include:
matrilineal marriage and you
crusades around the world in 80 days
i didnt know framing that maid would do that
cousin on cousin incest: the when and whys of courtly love.
101 ways assassination can solve your problems!
I had an ambitious Duchess who was always upset and often plotting one thing or another, but she never gave me a good excuse to get rid of her without taking an opinion hit.
She murdered my wife! And it's very odd that the game does not allow you to imprison your wife's killer without an opinion penalty.
But I kept ordering assassinations until one of them worked; all the public botched assassinations were a problem with my other vassals for years but I was sick of that Duchess, and it was worth seeing her buried.
The easiest way (thought it take a lot of time), is to raise all her levies and move them far away from you (to like, the middle easy or something). Eventually her "Levies raised too long" penalty will be so high she'll revolt, and with her levies so far off, either they'll take forever to get back or she's disband them and take a near-100% attrition loss before she can raise them again. You, in the mean time, can raise your personal levies and stomp her. Other vassals don't care, and when the revolt is over, you can banish or execute her.
I feel like this is borderline exploit although I can see it actually playing out.
Another exploit is how truces work. I ignore all truces by raising the heir of the trucemaker up to the level where I can attack them. Assassinations are the name of this game.
0
mrt144King of the NumbernamesRegistered Userregular
I'd really like to have something like 15 children from 4 wives or something so I have a huge sprawling dynasty.
I've had about 350 total members of my dynasty by 1320. About 170 them are alive today, and about 50 of them have title to at least one holding in my empire. It's good to see centuries of hedonism pay off!
I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
0
mrt144King of the NumbernamesRegistered Userregular
I'd really like to have something like 15 children from 4 wives or something so I have a huge sprawling dynasty.
I've had about 350 total members of my dynasty by 1320. About 170 them are alive today, and about 50 of them have title to at least one holding in my empire. It's good to see centuries of hedonism pay off!
Hella jealous. My max was 70 something thanks to this being my first serious game and also I think I had 30/70 boys/girls.
Also marrying cousins just makes your family tree really bloated.
0
mrt144King of the NumbernamesRegistered Userregular
Like I'm really happy with my nearly 3000 prestige score but it could be so much higher.
I'd really like to have something like 15 children from 4 wives or something so I have a huge sprawling dynasty.
I've had about 350 total members of my dynasty by 1320. About 170 them are alive today, and about 50 of them have title to at least one holding in my empire. It's good to see centuries of hedonism pay off!
Hella jealous. My max was 70 something thanks to this being my first serious game and also I think I had 30/70 boys/girls.
Also marrying cousins just makes your family tree really bloated.
That's a rough ratio.
My family tree's gigantic. I have to scroll for about half a minute to reach the far edge.
I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
king michael 'the ironside' I of germany keeps trying to excommunicate me
don't make me come over there and punish you. your name makes me laugh but i will only overlook so much treachery
If you have no valid children it can kick back up to a dynastic parent or liege, I think. Maybe to a sibling, uncle or aunt who has claim, too?
Although I don't know this stuff for sure because I usually switch to elective monarchy in every kingdom and bribe people as necessary.
Whats so good about elective monarchy? it just selects the strongest heir among potential heirs?
Pretty much. But since holdings equal voting strength, it's quite easy to ensure your favored successor takes the throne....instead of that idiot first born you can't even believe came from your own loins. It also keeps your vassals happy because they all think they can become king. It is a balance though, if you make him too strong and he's got the ambitious trait, you're gonna have issues.
Basically you just make sure to grant your chosen son the most holdings out of any other voters. What sucks is that you have to give each of your sons land or you take a penalty and they get uppity. Usually if that happens and I have some random plot half way across the world from a crusade or whatever, I'll dump the son off out there so he can't cause any trouble. If things go real bad I can just grant them independence and laugh as they're immediately invaded a couple of months later.
If you have no valid children it can kick back up to a dynastic parent or liege, I think. Maybe to a sibling, uncle or aunt who has claim, too?
Although I don't know this stuff for sure because I usually switch to elective monarchy in every kingdom and bribe people as necessary.
Whats so good about elective monarchy? it just selects the strongest heir among potential heirs?
Pretty much. But since holdings equal voting strength, it's quite easy to ensure your favored successor takes the throne....instead of that idiot first born you can't even believe came from your own loins. It also keeps your vassals happy because they all think they can become king. It is a balance though, if you make him too strong and he's got the ambitious trait, you're gonna have issues.
Basically you just make sure to grant your chosen son the most holdings out of any other voters. What sucks is that you have to give each of your sons land or you take a penalty and they get uppity. Usually if that happens and I have some random plot half way across the world from a crusade or whatever, I'll dump the son off out there so he can't cause any trouble. If things go real bad I can just grant them independence and laugh as they're immediately invaded a couple of months later.
Having a title = 1 vote. Having 10 titles = 1 vote. You get a vote and if its tied your choice wins so if you can pare it down to you, your son and 2 others you're fine, but anything larger nope
If you have no valid children it can kick back up to a dynastic parent or liege, I think. Maybe to a sibling, uncle or aunt who has claim, too?
Although I don't know this stuff for sure because I usually switch to elective monarchy in every kingdom and bribe people as necessary.
Whats so good about elective monarchy? it just selects the strongest heir among potential heirs?
Pretty much. But since holdings equal voting strength, it's quite easy to ensure your favored successor takes the throne....instead of that idiot first born you can't even believe came from your own loins. It also keeps your vassals happy because they all think they can become king. It is a balance though, if you make him too strong and he's got the ambitious trait, you're gonna have issues.
Basically you just make sure to grant your chosen son the most holdings out of any other voters. What sucks is that you have to give each of your sons land or you take a penalty and they get uppity. Usually if that happens and I have some random plot half way across the world from a crusade or whatever, I'll dump the son off out there so he can't cause any trouble. If things go real bad I can just grant them independence and laugh as they're immediately invaded a couple of months later.
Having a title = 1 vote. Having 10 titles = 1 vote. You get a vote and if its tied your choice wins so if you can pare it down to you, your son and 2 others you're fine, but anything larger nope
Most liked heir (well person, but you need it to be your heir)
Non heirs can be elected? That is reason enough not to do it.
It's a risk, but it has been a very manageable risk for me. Vassals often vote along with your decision if they like you.
And there are two huge upsides:
1) You can designate a dynastic heir who also stands to inherit juicy foreign titles.
2) No one can press inheritance claims against you on behalf of a relative, because your relatives only possess the right to be candidates in the election.
kedinik on
I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
you can also abuse elective monarch by having a kingdom/empire with no ducal level titles
Do the "too many elective titles" and "too many duchal titles" penalties only apply to other electors, or does this trick at least make your counts upset?
I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
If you have no valid children it can kick back up to a dynastic parent or liege, I think. Maybe to a sibling, uncle or aunt who has claim, too?
Although I don't know this stuff for sure because I usually switch to elective monarchy in every kingdom and bribe people as necessary.
Whats so good about elective monarchy? it just selects the strongest heir among potential heirs?
Pretty much. But since holdings equal voting strength, it's quite easy to ensure your favored successor takes the throne....instead of that idiot first born you can't even believe came from your own loins. It also keeps your vassals happy because they all think they can become king. It is a balance though, if you make him too strong and he's got the ambitious trait, you're gonna have issues.
Basically you just make sure to grant your chosen son the most holdings out of any other voters. What sucks is that you have to give each of your sons land or you take a penalty and they get uppity. Usually if that happens and I have some random plot half way across the world from a crusade or whatever, I'll dump the son off out there so he can't cause any trouble. If things go real bad I can just grant them independence and laugh as they're immediately invaded a couple of months later.
careful on that last one tho. i think i once had those invaders i thought would finish off my prick son end up incorporating him and his holdings, and his inheritances, into their empire, so their kids ended up perilously close to succession. if i had ended up with a baby king or a really old king and had the first son die or be assassinated...
Yeah, that all encompasses about 10 minutes of gameplay.
Only ten minutes because it takes that long to get all your dukes to join your plot to see your wife dead.
Yeah, a button that invites all that would agree would be so time saving.
I would personally like an "Order End All Plots" button.
There is so much intraimperial murder once you have 50+ vassals.
Seriously, I just stopped intervening on plots that didn't affect dynasty members.
Quick Question. So the game ends if your dynasty ends, correct? I know EU3 is more about playing the state than a dynasty but i'd love to be of the same dynasty but with a different last name. De normandie is old and tired.
Basically unless its a plot that actually affects somebody I need I never interfere
Because it means that now my most murderous underlings will be spending years plotting to kill my steward's son's best friend's 2nd cousin, instead of plotting to kill ME.
Even better they might screw up the attempt, in which case they'll make lots of enemies
I believe in designing my kingdoms so that my vassals all distract each other while I get rich taxing them all at 10%
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
Most liked heir (well person, but you need it to be your heir)
Non heirs can be elected? That is reason enough not to do it.
It's a risk, but it has been a very manageable risk for me. Vassals often vote along with your decision if they like you.
And there are two huge upsides:
1) You can designate a dynastic heir who also stands to inherit juicy foreign titles.
2) No one can press inheritance claims against you on behalf of a relative, because your relatives only possess the right to be candidates in the election.
Also just because you might lose the top title for a generation doesn't mean you're game over, you can still play on with your home duchy or whatever lower titles you have while you plot to kill the new king and take your spot back.
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
you can also abuse elective monarch by having a kingdom/empire with no ducal level titles
alternatively have your primary title be something small with few duchies (i.e: kingdom of wales) and make no other kingdom titles. then you have fewer/no electors depending on how you set it up but can still have ducal titles for convenience.
Shameful pursuits and utterly stupid opinions
0
mrt144King of the NumbernamesRegistered Userregular
But not forming duchies or kingdoms for the entire purpose of securing elective monarchy to function nearly identical to any well assassinated i mean managed agnatic cognatic primogeniture realm seems like a lot of work for no claims/strongest possible heir you choose/picking up juicy foreign titles winning.
no risk of getting kinslayer or having issues because you've murdered all but one of your sons who then died
its not that hard to set up, depending on how you've expanded. if you do a lot of holy wars for expansion you won't get ducal titles unless you want them (or your vassals consolidate on their own, which can take hundreds of years)
also part of the reason i'm doing this is because i'm going to turn the kingdom of england into a titular title because its funny to me
Shameful pursuits and utterly stupid opinions
0
mrt144King of the NumbernamesRegistered Userregular
I guess it just seems like an inefficient way of managing an empire. Youre spending money and assassinations on way more people, not setting up duchies which give you troops and tax.
I guess it just seems like an inefficient way of managing an empire. Youre spending money and assassinations on way more people, not setting up duchies which give you troops and tax.
of course ive been very lucky with my game
There are lots of ways to manage it. Some are just choosing more fiddly options than others. One not yet mentioned is combining elective monarchies with arch-bishropics/priesthoods. As long as you make sure you raise your favored heir, it's easy to load them up with traits church vassals like. And since your current ruler also went through that process as a child, the church vassals also really like you. Occasionally you have to do some games building a temple in a county, revoking the county, and then assigning it to the new church vassal before making them a duke but the bonuses to opinion from church vassals can get so high they don't really care.
This is what I've been doing in my Norse Sweden game so far. It's probably a really good thing with the current ruler as my sons seem to love getting pneumonia or forming hosts that then fail a conquest. One had the misfortune of trying the latter against a Greek Orthodox duke. He came back a eunuch when he was released. My chosen heir is a generation down from them and more competent due to the quick trait and has a genius son that will succeed him.
Sometimes I'll switch dynasties mid game if my heir is of a different one. Like in my old Wales game, my second son was married maternally to the Queen of Scotland and had alot of kids. First son dies, Kingdom of Wales will now pass to my grandchildren. Well I see a glorious chance to unite the two kingdoms, so the two young children have, well lets call them "accidents" Now when I die, my second son will take the throne, and when he dies Scotland, Ireland, Wales, and most of Brittany will be united against the English scum!
It didn't feel gamey to my, because dynasties rarely mattered and there is now way to transition between them or create new ones (Like how the House of Anjou and Normandy became Plantagenet).
0
Wooden SpoonGreat for SaucesRegistered Userregular
I picked this up during the sale this weekend; I've been looking forward to playing for a while now. Anything I need to know after absorbing the tutorial? I know there's a lot to it, so I plan to just toss myself in somewhere. Is Ireland still a good starting point?
Sometimes I'll switch dynasties mid game if my heir is of a different one. Like in my old Wales game, my second son was married maternally to the Queen of Scotland and had alot of kids. First son dies, Kingdom of Wales will now pass to my grandchildren. Well I see a glorious chance to unite the two kingdoms, so the two young children have, well lets call them "accidents" Now when I die, my second son will take the throne, and when he dies Scotland, Ireland, Wales, and most of Brittany will be united against the English scum!
It didn't feel gamey to my, because dynasties rarely mattered and there is now way to transition between them or create new ones (Like how the House of Anjou and Normandy became Plantagenet).
Well you can play however you want, but you could pretty much marry into any title like that, the AI will almost always accept any marriage where it retains the lineage and the suitor is still fertile
Ireland is good in 1066. The Old Gods start will likely get you swamped with Vikings.
Also, treat your first few games with a Dwarf Fortress "losing is fun mentality". Paradox tutorials tell you how to do somethings and not others, and never instill when you should do something. Learn from your mistakes.
Also savescum (abuse the save system) your first few games. It will help learn what are the consequences of certain actions. When I started, I'd save at some decisions just to see what all the options did.
+2
mrt144King of the NumbernamesRegistered Userregular
I'd like to dedicate this post to Bad Luck Brian Moments in CK2:
Your ruler has 20 Intrigue so you have ridiculous base chance on any plot, like 65%
Nobody likes you and everybody loves everybody but you.
The loneliest plots ever are with this guy.
I picked this up during the sale this weekend; I've been looking forward to playing for a while now. Anything I need to know after absorbing the tutorial? I know there's a lot to it, so I plan to just toss myself in somewhere. Is Ireland still a good starting point?
The tutorial leaves a lot of important stuff unexplained, but the tooltips are pretty good and there are some decent CK2 wiki sites.
Inheritance and vassal/liege relationships can be pretty complicated and hard to wrap your head around, at least at first.
kedinik on
I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
I'd like to dedicate this post to Bad Luck Brian Moments in CK2:
Your ruler has 20 Intrigue so you have ridiculous base chance on any plot, like 65%
Nobody likes you and everybody loves everybody but you.
The loneliest plots ever are with this guy.
Maybe he would have more friends if he murdered fewer people?
I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
I'd like to dedicate this post to Bad Luck Brian Moments in CK2:
Your ruler has 20 Intrigue so you have ridiculous base chance on any plot, like 65%
Nobody likes you and everybody loves everybody but you.
The loneliest plots ever are with this guy.
Maybe he would have more friends if he murdered fewer people?
fucking hippy
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
1066 Ireland is basically the tutorial...Spain grants almost instant action, but at the risk of easily losing the game within the first few years if you fuck up, or are just unlucky.
As an example my Spain game started with Galicia, and due to bad decisions I was quickly overrun by invading muslims and lost over half of my holdings. Which left me to sit in my castle for years of game time upgrading buildings and hoping the AI wouldn't finish me. Eventually I broke out and ended up building Portugal, but it was a long wait.
0
mrt144King of the NumbernamesRegistered Userregular
Ireland is good in 1066. The Old Gods start will likely get you swamped with Vikings.
Also, treat your first few games with a Dwarf Fortress "losing is fun mentality". Paradox tutorials tell you how to do somethings and not others, and never instill when you should do something. Learn from your mistakes.
Also savescum (abuse the save system) your first few games. It will help learn what are the consequences of certain actions. When I started, I'd save at some decisions just to see what all the options did.
I've only been save scumming for 2 things:
Seeing what crown changes would produce in terms of heir eligibility.
Obvious bonehead moves like forgetting to build stuff when I could, raising armies in the wrong county during an invasion, not making changes to the crown that I wanted to but forgot about.
Posts
I feel like this is borderline exploit although I can see it actually playing out.
Another exploit is how truces work. I ignore all truces by raising the heir of the trucemaker up to the level where I can attack them. Assassinations are the name of this game.
Whats so good about elective monarchy? it just selects the strongest heir among potential heirs?
Non heirs can be elected? That is reason enough not to do it.
I've had about 350 total members of my dynasty by 1320. About 170 them are alive today, and about 50 of them have title to at least one holding in my empire. It's good to see centuries of hedonism pay off!
Hella jealous. My max was 70 something thanks to this being my first serious game and also I think I had 30/70 boys/girls.
Also marrying cousins just makes your family tree really bloated.
That's a rough ratio.
My family tree's gigantic. I have to scroll for about half a minute to reach the far edge.
don't make me come over there and punish you. your name makes me laugh but i will only overlook so much treachery
Pretty much. But since holdings equal voting strength, it's quite easy to ensure your favored successor takes the throne....instead of that idiot first born you can't even believe came from your own loins. It also keeps your vassals happy because they all think they can become king. It is a balance though, if you make him too strong and he's got the ambitious trait, you're gonna have issues.
Basically you just make sure to grant your chosen son the most holdings out of any other voters. What sucks is that you have to give each of your sons land or you take a penalty and they get uppity. Usually if that happens and I have some random plot half way across the world from a crusade or whatever, I'll dump the son off out there so he can't cause any trouble. If things go real bad I can just grant them independence and laugh as they're immediately invaded a couple of months later.
Yup. Among others, any duke of the kingdom/empire is eligible for election so you have to have people like your heir more
Having a title = 1 vote. Having 10 titles = 1 vote. You get a vote and if its tied your choice wins so if you can pare it down to you, your son and 2 others you're fine, but anything larger nope
Ahh, good point.
It's a risk, but it has been a very manageable risk for me. Vassals often vote along with your decision if they like you.
And there are two huge upsides:
1) You can designate a dynastic heir who also stands to inherit juicy foreign titles.
2) No one can press inheritance claims against you on behalf of a relative, because your relatives only possess the right to be candidates in the election.
Do the "too many elective titles" and "too many duchal titles" penalties only apply to other electors, or does this trick at least make your counts upset?
Well you could die and then die again a week later while everyone still hates you because of all the new ruler penalties
careful on that last one tho. i think i once had those invaders i thought would finish off my prick son end up incorporating him and his holdings, and his inheritances, into their empire, so their kids ended up perilously close to succession. if i had ended up with a baby king or a really old king and had the first son die or be assassinated...
Basically unless its a plot that actually affects somebody I need I never interfere
Because it means that now my most murderous underlings will be spending years plotting to kill my steward's son's best friend's 2nd cousin, instead of plotting to kill ME.
Even better they might screw up the attempt, in which case they'll make lots of enemies
I believe in designing my kingdoms so that my vassals all distract each other while I get rich taxing them all at 10%
Also just because you might lose the top title for a generation doesn't mean you're game over, you can still play on with your home duchy or whatever lower titles you have while you plot to kill the new king and take your spot back.
its not that hard to set up, depending on how you've expanded. if you do a lot of holy wars for expansion you won't get ducal titles unless you want them (or your vassals consolidate on their own, which can take hundreds of years)
of course ive been very lucky with my game
There are lots of ways to manage it. Some are just choosing more fiddly options than others. One not yet mentioned is combining elective monarchies with arch-bishropics/priesthoods. As long as you make sure you raise your favored heir, it's easy to load them up with traits church vassals like. And since your current ruler also went through that process as a child, the church vassals also really like you. Occasionally you have to do some games building a temple in a county, revoking the county, and then assigning it to the new church vassal before making them a duke but the bonuses to opinion from church vassals can get so high they don't really care.
This is what I've been doing in my Norse Sweden game so far. It's probably a really good thing with the current ruler as my sons seem to love getting pneumonia or forming hosts that then fail a conquest. One had the misfortune of trying the latter against a Greek Orthodox duke. He came back a eunuch when he was released. My chosen heir is a generation down from them and more competent due to the quick trait and has a genius son that will succeed him.
Steam Profile
3DS: 3454-0268-5595 Battle.net: SteelAngel#1772
when theyre my 3rd and 4th son
It didn't feel gamey to my, because dynasties rarely mattered and there is now way to transition between them or create new ones (Like how the House of Anjou and Normandy became Plantagenet).
Wooden Spoon on Steam
3DS: 1005-8709-0277
Well you can play however you want, but you could pretty much marry into any title like that, the AI will almost always accept any marriage where it retains the lineage and the suitor is still fertile
Also, treat your first few games with a Dwarf Fortress "losing is fun mentality". Paradox tutorials tell you how to do somethings and not others, and never instill when you should do something. Learn from your mistakes.
Also savescum (abuse the save system) your first few games. It will help learn what are the consequences of certain actions. When I started, I'd save at some decisions just to see what all the options did.
Your ruler has 20 Intrigue so you have ridiculous base chance on any plot, like 65%
Nobody likes you and everybody loves everybody but you.
The loneliest plots ever are with this guy.
The tutorial leaves a lot of important stuff unexplained, but the tooltips are pretty good and there are some decent CK2 wiki sites.
Inheritance and vassal/liege relationships can be pretty complicated and hard to wrap your head around, at least at first.
Maybe he would have more friends if he murdered fewer people?
fucking hippy
As an example my Spain game started with Galicia, and due to bad decisions I was quickly overrun by invading muslims and lost over half of my holdings. Which left me to sit in my castle for years of game time upgrading buildings and hoping the AI wouldn't finish me. Eventually I broke out and ended up building Portugal, but it was a long wait.
I've only been save scumming for 2 things:
Seeing what crown changes would produce in terms of heir eligibility.
Obvious bonehead moves like forgetting to build stuff when I could, raising armies in the wrong county during an invasion, not making changes to the crown that I wanted to but forgot about.