Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ShoesandHats]

Who did you start with? I just had my first game as Viking, and man, they're OP. Started as Jorvik, expecting a OPM on the border with Christiandom to have a hard time, and them boom, I'm given the whole of Northern England. Then I abused the conquest CB to grab Ireland, subjugated King Something the Boneless for Scotland, Roflstomped everyone.

Now we're in 937 and the Empire of Britannia own all of Scandinavia, the Low Countries, most of Northern Germany, Gascogne and Rome (because why not). Also every barony-level titles in Asturias (Claiming Kingdom is weird). Oh, and I haven't reformed yet, so my whole Empire is a mess of constantly fighting vikings, while the traditionnal way to pass on a title is a full-blown civil war.

By the way, don't you think retinues should be split between heirs in gavelkind? Having those extra 7k Housecarls in each civil war makes them too easy for my taste.

I started as Ivar the Boneless because of the ten-thousand some event spawn troops he gets at the start, and started out by conquering all of Ireland seeing as it's piss easy.

Retinues are pretty OP. I wouldn't have gotten this far without mine. By now, I've conquered all of the de jure territory of Italia using mostly my retinues.

By the way, is there any reason for me to form Francia at this point? Is there any point in having more than one empire in general, even? Besides the prestige boost, I mean.

[Wiles]

You're better off not forming the second empire. It will give your vassals that are de jure part of Francia a relations hit (desires the empire of Francia).

Was your first ruler named Inigo?

It was Ironman so I couldn't use the ruler designer, I had to use the customizer after the game started. Rest assured, my second ruler was named Inigo.

At least I'll be able to discover if it's a problem on my computer or on my save game...

I let it run for over an hour and it didn't work.

[umiman]

I dunno... if he doesn't have any other kings in his empire, would he have any vassals that would desire the empire title? They can't hold one unless they're a king.

[Felius]

At least I'll be able to discover if it's a problem on my computer or on my save game...

I let it run for over an hour and it didn't work.

Well, it's the save then. I'll have to play another game later.

[PanH]

Damn, was under a regency, the regent was in a lower crown faction. Crown authority went from high to autonomous in a year (couldn't decline, which is fine if it's ONCE), I didn't get any "lowered crown authority" opinion bonus, and vassals are now revolting for something else. I was actually intending to lower it to medium once I went out of the regency, but guess I didn't have a word to say in it.

[Sheb]

And this is why I like seniority succession so much. Now, if only I could find a way to have seniority succession while still keeping the subjugation CB of pagans.

What happens if you turn Christian for one generation, change the succession laws then revert to pagans?

[Digital Hellhound]

In my current Cornwall->Wales game, I could go for Tanistry succession. Good idea, or best idea? I can't see any harm in my dynasty having full control of which brat takes the throne.

[Felius]

In my current Cornwall->Wales game, I could go for Tanistry succession. Good idea, or best idea? I can't see any harm in my dynasty having full control of which brat takes the throne.

Elective might make it easier for you to control which, at least as long as you keep your lords moderately happy. In Tanistry this sounds harder to do.

[cerapa]

Made a thread for figuring out how the hell the levies work now. Help out if any of you have noticed something or can be arsed to dig up the numbers.

[Mongol13524]

In my current Cornwall->Wales game, I could go for Tanistry succession. Good idea, or best idea? I can't see any harm in my dynasty having full control of which brat takes the throne.

Tanistry is probably the second best succession law in the game, go for it.

[Eagle_eye]

Second best? Behind what, exactly?

[EuchreJack]

Second best? Behind what, exactly?

Muslim Succession, perhaps?  It allows you to always designate your heir directly, but you can't inherit much (only males can hold land).

[varnish]

My game has Croatians running Aquitaine, French Norse Scotland, a Bavaria that stretches from Italy to the Black Sea, a powerful, successful Jewish Khazaria, and almost no ruling Karlings. Madness reigns in Europe.

[Glloyd]

Second best? Behind what, exactly?

Primogeniture is my favourite. All you need to do is groom your perfect heir, and let the rest of the herd be damned. If something goes wrong with your prime heir, you can simply strategically assassinate your children until you get the ideal ruler. Works pretty well for me.

[Sheb]

I found another nice little tricks for those heated successions when every relation boost is needed: a lot of peasant rebels are going to be from a different religion, so you can just crush one, never peace out and get a permanent +25 "defending against infidels" bonus.