Crusader Kings II

[Hooahguy]

Britannia! How'd that happen without you getting demolished?

No clue, maybe because they have part of Ireland?

[naut]

Unless they changed this, vassals can be in multiple factions at once.

Yep, they can be in 2 each.


(Although I have it set to 3 each personally.)

[komnenos]

The old gods has some problems for example it has brought unique events just for norse pagan and tengri religions. I liked that there were especial events for other pagan religions like hellenic religion. I hope they add some events for other pagan religions in next patch.

[rickinator9]

The old gods has some problems for example it has brought unique events just for norse pagan and tengri religions. I liked that there were especial events for other pagan religions like hellenic religion. I hope they add some events for other pagan religions in next patch.

The Hellenic religion is dead. It's just for some roman emperors IIRC. Tengri doesn't have any events either. The mongols do. They should have named it 'The norse gods' as it seems they spent 90% of their time and manpower on the Norse. I'm kind of dissapointed by this, but we could have seen it coming.

[B-Wing]

Just to be clear, if I were to buy The Old Gods DLC and started a new campaign at the new, earliest start date: would the campaign still last as long as the regular one, or does it arbitrarily end around 1066? Haven't found a definitive answer to that question in my searching.

[komnenos]

The Hellenic religion is dead. It's just for some roman emperors IIRC. Tengri doesn't have any events either. The mongols do. They should have named it 'The norse gods' as it seems they spent 90% of their time and manpower on the Norse. I'm kind of dissapointed by this, but we could have seen it coming.

But if you use ruler designer it will be useful and you will expand this religion around the world so it's needed to add especial events for it.

[Beskar]

Just to be clear, if I were to buy The Old Gods DLC and started a new campaign at the new, earliest start date: would the campaign still last as long as the regular one, or does it arbitrarily end around 1066? Haven't found a definitive answer to that question in my searching.

The end is the same as the normal end. No reason for it to be different.

[Chaotix]

Also The Old Gods changes to game mechanics will carry over into later start dates, so if you wanted to play a Pagan in a far more challenging situation you could try playing Romuva in 1066 or something.

Pagans (aside from the Norse) actually have it a lot easier in the 1066 start than the 867 start. Pretty much everybody (even the Scandinavians, since they've converted) will suffer some terrible attrition if they try to go after you, allowing you to build up a lot before you reform and enter the fray.

There's a reason Pagan Lithuania was so powerful, and it took the Christians until the 1200s with the Teutonic Order to finally take 'em out.

[Hooahguy]

So my character died, leaving my heir to rule. Thankfully my heir was already past 16 so it didnt cause too much trouble. Then the former Empress of England conveniently died a year later, so now Scotland and England are united and its awesome, although I am really not prepared for managing an empire. I was used to around 10-15 vassals. Now I have 47. Trial by fire, I guess.

[Monk]

I love seeing this thread so active again.


So it turns out (simply due to the random nature of the game) The Seljuk Invasion is a lot like the Mongol invasion. Sometimes it just doesn't happen which is exactly what happened in my Persian game. The cutoff date passed and still no invasion... well screw that i said, because this is a fun game and I need challenges!

I forced the Seljuks to spawn and I'm actually quite pleased with their starting strength. They spawn with around 45k men and effectively serve as a mini mongol-like invasion. By the time you hit 990 (when they can start spawning) 40k soldiers is quite obtainable, and defeating that is not impossible... Of course it's not easy either..

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

They swept aside the serene kingdom of Turkestan which had stood on the borders between the Great Cuman Khans and the Southern Shahs of Persia for decades. Within a year, they'd toppled the regime and declared a new government rule beneath their powerful Warlord.



At the time of their arrival in 1016 there were three principle powers around the Caspian Sea.

In the North, the Cuman Khaganate of Khazaria rules the Steppe lands, uniting much of the nomadic Tengri populations into a powerful confederation. Although they war with themselves as much as outsiders, their rule has lasted nearly a century and shows no sign of stopping any time soon. To the South, the wealthy Shahs of Persia rule from their capital at Samarkand. Enjoying a Golden Age beneath the Karen Dynasty, the Kingdom of Persia is follows the teachings of Zoroastrianism fiercely. After centuries battling other faiths for the right to survive, theirs is a culture supremely familiar with the concept of war..

And beyond the Shahs still is the mighty Abbasid Caliphate, resurgent in power after having been in decline for centuries past. Despite the much easier target of the dis-unified Khans of the north, the Seljuks move south for their next conquest..



Ebrahim The Blessed rallies his forces near the capital as the Seljuk host pours over the horizon, invading the northern provinces. The outer defenses and counties are abandoned in order to concentrate the defense around the dynastic Karen holdings in Merv, and the capital of Samarkand





Attempting to bypass the Shah's defense of Samarkand the Seljuks move into Merv nearly unchallenged. It isn't until they reach Tagtabazar that the Shah is able to rally a defense and move his men down from the capital.. the results are horrific. The first major battle fought in the north since the foundation of the Shahdom of Persia sees nearly a full third of the Persian forces killed before the Seljuks retreat, suffering complete decimation as they lose nearly 60% of their forces in the process of the assault on Merv..



Having fully occupied the north the Seljuk host commits the full remainder of their attack on the traditional homeland of the Karen Dynasty. In an act of defiance they sack a number of holdings, but thankfully, most of the Shah's family are able to escape before the Seljuk troops take the cities. With his home behind burned and priceless family artifacts being claimed as personal loot, Ebrahim rallies his troops in Merv along with two full compliments of mercenaries. As the Shah marches west, the troops from the southern Satropies finally arrive, spoiling for a fight.



The Battle of Akhur saw the breaking of the strength of the Seljuk invasion into Persia. 39,000 Persians and 6,000 Cuman and Armenian Mercenaries faced off against 30,000 Turks. The fighting in the center is said to have been the bloodiest in the history of the Zoroastrian Shahs up to that point. Ebrahim's left flank was completely broken after its commander was killed near the start of the battle. Through the turmoil and chaos of the resulting melee, Ebrahim and his men found themselves surrounding fighting in two directions at once. If not for heroic actions by the Shah himself, personally leading each counter attack against the enveloping Turks, the day may have been lost. Not a single soldier who survived the battle could doubt the bravery of their Shah that day..

When the dust settled the war was effectively over. Hemmed in between two armies and the sea, the Turks were forced to flee north, and once the retreat started it could not be stopped. The hopes of the Seljuk warlords to capture the rich lands of the Persians had ended in disaster, and the most trying test of the Zoroastrian Shahdom had been passed... at great cost.

[Hooahguy]

Okay, any tips for running an empire? Pretty much all my vassals hate me and Im very worried Im going to see an all out rebellion soon.

[Monk]

It's a constant balance of power. You want strong vassals because they help lessen the micromanaging aspect of the game, ensuring your realm is growing steadily along with your demesne. But.. you can't afford to let them get too powerful, or they will rise up to challenge you.

Never think for a moment that your vassals are friends of your ruler. The military AI can be a bit suspect at times but the character AI is good enough to know how to advance its own interests. If you're getting your ass handed to you on the frontier don't doubt that your enemies will take the chance to declare a faction revolt while the levies of your supporters are down.

Vassals are the rungs on the ladder to success, don't hesitate to step on them. If a duke gets more than one duchy title, try to scheme one off of him. Try to assassinate, plot, or otherwise reduce his power. If all else fails use your chancellor to fabricate a claim on one of his duchy titles (Expensive but can be worth it). If you have a strong claim on a vassal title you can revoke it for free.

And remember most of all: If you have to injure a man.. make it so severe that you'll never need to fear his vengeance. Never leave retribution half finished.. you rule a medieval court of intrigue, not a social club.

[Hooahguy]

So I shouldnt be worried if most of them have a negative opinion of me?

And remember most of all: If you have to injure a man.. make it so severe that you'll never need to fear his vengeance. Never leave retribution half finished.. you rule a medieval court of intrigue, not a social club.

I dont have too much experience with imprisonments and assassinations, but isnt there a serious penalty to imprisoning vassals without them rebelling first? Im not so good with all the politics stuff, might want to start by pacifying the strongest vassals.

Also currently Im the Emperor of Britannia and the King of Scotland, Im guessing I should destroy the Scotland title. Or maybe I should pass it off to my heir?

[Chaotix]

So I shouldnt be worried if most of them have a negative opinion of me?


I dont have too much experience with imprisonments and assassinations, but isnt there a serious penalty to imprisoning vassals without them rebelling first? Im not so good with all the politics stuff, might want to start by pacifying the strongest vassals.

Also currently Im the Emperor of Britannia and the King of Scotland, Im guessing I should destroy the Scotland title. Or maybe I should pass it off to my heir?

You should be worried if they all have a negative opinion. Check the factions tab to see how powerful the factions are, and that's a gauge of how worried you should be. Give them gifts and honorary titles to get them off your back.

Definitely don't imprison a vassal without just cause. That is a sure way to get yourself into a civil war, because it pisses everybody off. What you can do is pay attention to plots, and as soon as a vassal you want to keep in check comes up with a plot, try to imprison him (you have just cause if he is plotting something illegal). You will either get him, which means he can't join factions any more, or he'll rebel, but it'll be just him and not all of his faction allies. Then you can stamp him out, revoke a title off him once you've won, and severely weaken him.

Once they're in prison, never let them out during that ruler's reign, even if people ask you. It's usually better to take the opinion hit if you can't flatter them with diplomacy, because chances are the prisoner will hate you and join a faction as soon as you let him out.

I tend to think assassinations cause more trouble than they are worth, unless you want to make sure that you inherit something. If you get caught in the act trying to kill a vassal, all of your vassals will hate you. But it's useful if you're careful about it.

I would destroy the title, but don't do it immediately, because it will piss off your vassals in Scotland. Wait till your king is old and everybody loves him because of the Long Reign bonus. That's usually the best time to destroy titles and enact policy changes.

You could also keep it if you want the extra prestige associated with it, but most Scottish vassals will desire the title and get a -20 opinion hit on you. Don't give it to your heir. If you do that you are creating a powerful vassal. Usually your heir will love you, but if he dies before you do, there can be all sorts of complications and you might not get it back. For instance if you are using Agnatic-Cognatic Primogeniture and he only has a daughter, she will get the Kingdom but your second son will be heir to the Empire. There's a ton of different ways it could go down based on succession laws, and it's usually a good idea to not even open up that Pandora's box. And then there's the fact that his vassals could rebel and take his title away as soon as you give it to him, and there's nothing you can do about it.

[Monk]

So I shouldnt be worried if most of them have a negative opinion of me?

No you absolutely should Appearances Hooah, above all appearances. You want them to love you, but never for a second trust them

[Hooahguy]

No you absolutely should Appearances Hooah, above all appearances. You want them to love you, but never for a second trust them

Gotcha.

So Ive been managing politics for now. Only had two -100 vassals, and I killed them both and their heirs were in the green so thats that. As for the others, most seem to be coming around, it went from 75% of vassals red to only 30% of them in the red so thats good I think.

Then I had the "Install (insert name here) as ruler of Britannia" movement. How do I deal with those kind of factions, the ones that want to overthrow me? So far Ive only had one serious faction that got to 53% o I had to kill the guy they wanted on the throne, but I dont think I can keep killing my vassals. Unless thats what it takes to rule an empire. In which case, Ill get the guillotines ready.

[Monk]

Its true, the way characters and factions all conspire against you is far more engaging than the warfare aspect. It makes me rather excited for EU4's alliance system, however it's going to look.

I would not at all be surprised if they built EU4 to be very closely related to CK2 in a number of gameplay mechanic areas. With the insane popularity that CK2 has gotten (to the point Paradox has pledged 2 full years of additional content) it would make a lot of sense.

[Hooahguy]

Alright, all of the factions are gone but 3 separate elective succession movements. Not too bad, but Im expecting it to grow into a problem in a few decades. Right now its at 30%. I dealt with one small rebellion, all but 2 of my vassals like me (of of the two was the one who rebelled so hes in the oubliette), and I have a 12 year old male heir who actually has good traits. I think Im good right now.

[Monk]

but I dont think I can keep killing my vassals. Unless thats what it takes to rule an empire. In which case, Ill get the guillotines ready.

You absolutely can. Remember that the "invite noble" intrigue option will spawn a randomly generated male character in your court. This character has your exact culture and religion and can be granted as many titles as you want.. in case anyone gets ideas. Sometimes they have the ambitious trait so they make poor vassals, but you can always just hit that button again.

Vassals can be replaced, the absolute rule of the dynasty cannot be.

The best way I've found is to limit your inter realm marriages. Most often, vassals who end up with claims on the throne through a marriage to your daughter will come back to haunt you. In a generation or two, they will have a strong/weak claim and they will be itching for a chance to press it.

Do your best to limit claims on your main titles to only your immediate family and keep track of your heir and the second and third in line for succession. This is probably the most important part of dynasty management. If you want my advice? Never give brothers titles. Ever. Raise them under high martial characters and use them solely as your generals. This gives them a very important role in your dynasty, allows you to get a bit into the immersion of the game, and also keeps you a bit safer for your troubles all in one.

While its true vassals may still attempt to install them over you, your landless general brother will have no power on his own. The faction will be a lot easier to deal with if the claimaint has no land of his own since he will be MUCH easier to... 'persuade' from their course of action.

[naut]

You can reduce your feudal laws and increase your Noble Customs tech, each will give small boons. The laws can then be moved up again once you've dealt with the problems.

Also use your family. When reassigning lands and titles favour your unlanded cousins, etc. they will have a dynasty bonus of +25 (I think?). And be vigilant with unmarried vassals, these are prime opportunities to marry your non-heir children into noble houses to end their lines and bring their lands into your dynasty.

[Hooahguy]

Gotcha. How many holdings is a good amount? I currently have 4/5 holdings that Im allowed to have, but very now and then a vassal will ask me to give up a title that they should have. So far Ive been rejecting them diplomatically, but I maybe I should give some of them up?

[Chaotix]

I always try to hold as many holdings as possible under my demesne limit. Having the extra income and troops is almost always worth more than the Prestige penalty you get for unlanded sons. Muslim decadence does make things a little trickier, as GC said, but you're playing Britannia so you don't have to worry about that.

Even if you can't diplomatically reject your vassals, it's not much of a penalty to deny them. Usually the kind of vassal that asks you is a Count within one of your Duchies, so they're not much of a threat. If you can, look for a way to consolidate your holdings such that you have all the Counties in each Duchy you own and not much outside them. That way you will avoid this kind of event entirely.

[Monk]

My Byzantium/Rome game finally came to a halt when a civil war involving half the Empire finally taxed my patience.

Now you know how Augustus must've felt.

[Chaotix]

My Byzantium/Rome game finally came to a halt when a civil war involving half the Empire finally taxed my patience. I'll resume it another day, but its absolutely crazy. In the meantime, I've decided to try a Republic! Venice in 867. I'm only a couple decades in so far, but it is a nice change of pace. The internal politics of the Republic are a very fun and intriguing way to occupy what is apparently a rather war-less time.

For those with experience playing Republics: Can you do some blobbing? How does territorial expansion work as a Republic, and what's the best way to go about it?

Playing as a Republic is all about economic expansion.

Typically your primary goal should be making a lot of money, and you'll find that conquests and expansion come with the money. You have a few tools at your disposal, and it works in a basic cycle:

-You can build trade posts in coastal provinces.
-You can declare war for cities in provinces in which you have trade posts.
-You can declare war for provinces in which you have cities.
-You can also do whatever a feudal lord can do.

When you are Doge, make it your first priority to get yourself enough cities to fill your demesne limit. Cities give you a lot more cash than trading posts, and they are mainly an insurance policy in case you don't get re-elected. Also try to get yourself a Duke-level title, so that you can have Count-level vassals even when you're not the Doge.

If you're not the Doge, or if you started out as the Doge, you'll also want to devote attention to building trade posts. Build as many as you can, and try to build them all around a single sea region, as you'll get bonus "trade network" money. You can have a lot more trade posts than cities, so these will become your primary investment down the line.

You can give anyone in your family an honorary title called "designated heir", which will make him the heir instead of following the usual Seniority rule. Be aware that age is a major factor in the elections. You can also pay the election fund, though, and once you are rolling in dough it is quite easy to trivialize the election and make sure you get elected.

If you want to role-play you may choose to forego the campaign fund, as it really does make the election process trivial. However, be aware that if you're just a Patrician, the Doge can attempt to seize your trade posts. If you Diplomacy is not high enough, there's nothing you can do about it (not even rebel), and you can't plot to get them back either against a Doge, or if you are the Doge. That's prompted a rage-quit on my end, but only because I wasn't aware of what little freedom there was in that situation.

Anyway, once you are rolling in cash you'll be able to hire enough mercenaries to take on Kingdoms and eventually the Empires. It's perfectly possible to build an empire of coastal duchies and trading posts; Greece's duchies are 100% coastal and Italy comes close as well. Whatever you can't seize as a Republic you can always fabricate claims for.

A final few points of advice:
-Use the trade post views often, they are very useful and also give you an aesthetic sense of "empire".
-Build up the republic city! When the AI is Doge, they won't do it since they know it just gets passed off to the next Doge. But a weak capital city can limit your potential, whereas a strong one can provide you with a ton of extra cash.
-If you're going to make vassal Duchies, make them Dukes or Archbishops, not Mayors. City-level Duchies will become their own separate republic with their own five families, and it's very messy.

[Chaotix]

Good stuff, thanks! One last question though: What can you do with Empire titles? Will it not let you create them? Is there an Empire tier for Republics?

I believe you can create Empires just the same way as a Feudal lord, though I haven't done it myself.

[naut]

Hooah you also want to make sure your capital has either the most holdings or potential for holdings in it. A capital with 3 castles and a Marshall + Steward active will give much more money and levy than three counties spread out. Though you will get slightly less prestige.

[Chaotix]

Hooah you also want to make sure your capital has either the most holdings or potential for holdings in it. A capital with 3 castles and a Marshall + Steward active will give much more money and levy than three counties spread out. Though you will get slightly less prestige.

This is not always true.

A city will produce many times more gold than a castle will. And under the usual crown laws you get a quarter of all your direct city vassals' income. This means with three spread out counties (say each with one city, one church, one castle) you'll get a quarter of the income from three cities. However, if you have just one holding, with three castles, one city, and one church, you only get the income from that one city.

You don't get any substantial tax income from holdings that are not your direct vassals. To be specific, you get a percentage of each direct vassals' total income. So say you have a count vassal who has a city for a vassal, and you have Low Feudal taxation, then the amount you get from that city specifically is 10% * 25% = 2.5%. And if you have No Feudal Taxation, you get nothing. Taxation of anything beyond direct vassalage is extremely inefficient for the top liege.

This is assuming you were talking about owning those three castle holdings.

In general, as Psychonaut said the best counties to get in your demesne are the ones with the most potential holdings. But it's also best to only have one holding (usually the capital castle) in each of those counties, and let the rest be held by vassals. This way you maximize your vassal baronies/cities/bishoprics.

Sorry, that was much longer and confusing than I intended it to be.

[komnenos]

My Byzantium/Rome game finally came to a halt when a civil war involving half the Empire finally taxed my patience. I'll resume it another day, but its absolutely crazy. In the meantime, I've decided to try a Republic! Venice in 867. I'm only a couple decades in so far, but it is a nice change of pace. The internal politics of the Republic are a very fun and intriguing way to occupy what is apparently a rather war-less time.

For those with experience playing Republics: Can you do some blobbing? How does territorial expansion work as a Republic, and what's the best way to go about it?

Why you want to try Venice? I suggest Genoa to you. Because Genoa is in a good place and also in history unlike Venice , it behaved the other kingdoms fairly ,so I think it deserves more than Venice for playing it.

[naut]

This is assuming you were talking about owning those three castle holdings.

Yes I was talking about owning. True in pure cash terms you won't get that sweet extra city tax from multiple holdings. But if you have three with decent buildings (say level three of each) and a level 20 steward and marshall you will be able to raise 3000+ troops and each will provide 14-17 gold (numbers that will grow with more building investment). The other reason is that this revenue is never subject to vassal opinions either.

But, these considerations are also dependent on your demesne limit.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

So I bought "The Old Gods" and played it a bit. I have to say that raiding is a lot of fun. Especially if you do it as a count with ~300 men in the Mediterranean. Seeing a 10-15 times larger forces in the neighboring county and then carefully calculating when it's the best time to leave before they arrive.. That is fun! Played cat and mouse with the Muslims in Spain and Italians near Rome. I do hope that one day we will get ship battles as well. Playing a Norse viking will get a lot more interesting then!