Paradox Games

Ah, I didn't know that.

Weird Crusader Kings 2 glitch: I put myself in my own dungeon out of suspicion that I attempted to poison my own son. My character didn't have any traits like Possessed, Lunatic, or Paranoid that would lead to such an event and I did not plot against any of my children (and last I checked, the game doesn't allow you to do so). I couldn't release myself because the game won't let you interact with yourself, but after a day or two the game realized something was wrong and I was released.

Weird.

I've heard of similar occurrences. One of my friends told me about a meme pic he saw of a spymaster reporting himself for trying to off himself.

Hm...this is annoying. I'm trying to get the Middle Earth mod to run on CK 2. It runs fine, but for some reason when it loads the window goes downward, so I can't click on a lot of stuff on the bottom.

I'm still playing CK 2 these days. I don't have Horse Lords yet but I'm in the middle of a campaign and don't wanna risk save incompatibility. It's my old Swedish campaign that I've picked back up. I've united Britain as well as Scandinavia, and am just waiting for enough of the Isles to turn Germanic before severing the two Empires from each other. We've also got the northern coast of France under our collective control for the most part, all the way from Zeeland to Brittany.

I'm still learning the more complex parts of CK 2, so could you explain why you would want to split two empires you control?

I ask because I control both Francia and Byzantium, and I'm starting to think it may not be worth all the work.

edited 12th Oct '15 1:16:19 PM by Ringsea

Oh, a lot of little reasons. Less land to fight for and maintain, and more chances for your family to make a name for itself when you're NOT in charge of everything. Plus if you release them, you can reclaim them later for prestige.

Less work, too. And less strain moving your troops to defend your turf when it's smaller. Just overall it's less of a job running one Empire than two.

Indeed. I'm loving that I don't have to worry about as many nobles to deal with since I made a number of other men king of the various constituent kingdoms that make up my Empire. I'm still King of England and I think Wales, but also Emperor of Britannia.

Or because you think that holding all that land under yourself makes things too easy.

Or because your vassal limit is strained and one of the empires is basically a drag on your (potential) economy, like Tartaria, which is large and full of low-value provinces and duchies, or even Byzantium, which, while valuable, has a huge number of small duchies, when you could be making room for something like Persia or Francia.

To be fair to Byzantium, those duchies are parts of Kingdoms that just haven't been formed yet. Make the titles and give them away and you'll be just fine. And then you conquer some smaller Kingdom, make part of it your capital, and just keep the Empire title without the big Kingdoms under your direct power.

True, but I'd much rather rule through dukes than kings for as long as possible (gotta squeeze them for that sweet, sweet tax money, and given the AI's love of lowering taxes to rock bottom, I'd rather have vassals who can hold all counties in their subrealm personally).

Also, thanks to Born in the Purple, it can be tricky to keep Byzantium and any other empire at the same time.

edited 12th Oct '15 3:00:03 PM by Balmung

Seriously. I have so many power hungry nobles always wanting low crown authority, elective monarchy, taxes on the nobility that are so low they're pretty much nonexistent...

I tank vassal levies instead and never go above medium CA (unless I have not already instituted primogeniture before becoming a king, and thus dodging CA restrictions). And then when any of them complain, I bribe the problem away. Also, you know, standard things like marginalizing any vassal who is ambitious.

edited 12th Oct '15 3:05:06 PM by Balmung

I'm not worried about going high CA until the end of the game. I NEED that high CA then if I'm going to convert to EUIV while maintaining my Kingdom. Though I guess it could be fun to see the system implode on itself and need to rebuild.

I'm personally hoping just that by the end of my Britannia game I'll have France, Spain, Britain, and maybe Scandanavia under my control. I'm having to take Spain in fits and starts because I can't support a war as long as the Musaids can, but I'm pretty sure that with Scandanavia it'll be a lot easier. My one problem is that the crusades are at their proper date now, so I probably won't be able to launch one at it.

Hm, maybe I can do alternating Holy Wars against Spain and Scandanavia...

edited 12th Oct '15 3:26:57 PM by theLibrarian

My hope is to form Germanic Britain, Scandinavia, and Russia as independent Empires sort of like the Karlings did. I might chase a German one after the Crusades properly kick off, but I'm not intentionally triggering the damn things early if I can help that.

Hmm. Yeah, this whole two-empire thing is going downhill fast. Too much junk going on (and, honestly, too many notifications)

I assume it would be better to keep Byzantium in general? For what it's worth, I started out as France and so I'm still Occitan in culture.

Don't forget that even early Crusades can't hsppen until 900. And honestly, if I was Germania + Scandinavia + Britannia, I'd be more interested in kicking off Great Holy Wars than worried about a few petty Catholics desperately trying to stop their rapid territory loss. Besides, they're more likely to either wreck themselves fighting Iberian Muslims or randomly trash some Tengrists in Hungary than target you, especially since none of Scandinavia and I don't think any of Britannia is a valid Crusade target for the AI.

I've never had a GHW allowed to go through yet. Not sure if my games are just holding me to the 1100 deadline which I've never lasted til, or if there's something wrong.

Also, to any newcomers like Ringsea, remember: The money and land are only means to an end in Paradox games. The entire goal is to amass the most points, which are functions of other things.

In CK 2 it's about Prestige and Piety, which are gained by fighting, making titles, and making the right choices in events. The land is important, since it gives you the right to make titles, and vassals of different ranks give you different levels of continual prestige gain. On the other hand, fewer external wars can happen when you keep knocking off enemies.

In EUIV it's a matter of being on top in three main factors that I've forgotten, for as long as possible.

In Vicky and Hearts of Iron, it's all about gaining the RIGHT land and allies so your sphere of influence or victory points can be the strongest.

It's never directly about conquering territories, it's about what you DO with those territories when you get them.

edited 12th Oct '15 4:39:17 PM by Journeyman

I've never had a successful GHW take place.

I'm not even that far. I've never been allowed to hit the declare war button with that CB chosen.

That is if you care about points, that is it. They are a interesting mean to gouge your success, but hardly the only one. Hearts Of Iron aside Paradox games don't have very strictly "goals" to bind the players. Some go for highest score, others go by biggest empire and others just go by most interesting story (particularly in Crusader Kings).

Are you still Catholic? And are the Byzantine vassals still Orthodox? If yes to both, then holding on the Byzantine lands would be the most hardest. Might be worthy just for the cool factor, though.

edited 12th Oct '15 4:45:57 PM by Heatth

I find that most of these things are most readily achieved by getting more land.

For example, Europa Universalis scorea you on diplomatic/naval/trade performance, administrative performance, and military performance. The easiest way to accomplish all of these is to get more land, as more land means more force limit and naval force limit, more trade power, more production, more manpower, and more tax income.

Crusader Kings - hold more titles, personally, or as vassals and/or family for more prestige. Have more chruch vassals for more piety. Simply having more/better land gets you more points here, too.

For Great Holy Wars, once Crusades and Jihads have triggered, GHWs should trigger within 10 years.

edited 12th Oct '15 4:44:05 PM by Balmung

I sure hope. And points are how the GAME measures success.That's why when you resign instead of quit, the game shows you that list of families and their scores. Though I definitely don't fault people for choosing their own criteria. Most things besides dying will improve your points. Dying just banks the points you've gained in that lifetime.