wimpy kings

[Toledo's Maverick]

I'm not here to complain, but i would like to know how to improve things like piety, dread and accuman,

What i know so far:
-failed inquistions increase piety, although, they usely gain a vice of being atheist or heretic, after several.

-you can gain dread through exections, which uselually gives you a penalty for moral, happyness, etc.

-V&V's can effect these, but they are for the most part random.

there must be something im missing

[KampfBar Ritter]

The easiest way to get rid of a wimpy king, is to get rid of him while he is still a prince.

If your heir that is first in line is a looser get rid of him while you can. Assasinate him with an high valour assasin or send him on a suicide mission.

------------------
All my actions are dedicated to the memory of my great Lord Frederick I who one day knighted a poor woodsman and man-at-arms. Ich der Salut der mutig Barbarossa

[Pragmatic]

For a king to get Dread, it's easy to gain two points of dread.

First off, put the king (or the future king, in the case of heirs) in a battle. During the battle, execute the prisoners. Bingo, Scant Mercy, a +1 to dread.

Then, when king, and you capture some rebels, execute them one time only. Bingo, Swift Justice, another +1 to dread.

Also, while king, release all the rebels just once. That gets you Occasional Mercy, which is, umm, I forget.... I think it increases Happiness.

Anyway, that's a way to affect the V&Vs.

[elzar]

Quote Originally posted by Toledo's Maverick:
I'm not here to complain, but i would like to know how to improve things like piety, dread and accuman,

What i know so far:
-failed inquistions increase piety, although, they usely gain a vice of being atheist or heretic, after several.

-you can gain dread through exections, which uselually gives you a penalty for moral, happyness, etc.

-V&V's can effect these, but they are for the most part random.

there must be something im missing[/QUOTE]

I play as english alot, and no matter what I do, I never have any descent heirs. It's usually a game of well this one is the least horrible. There have been games where I just throw in the towel because if I killed off everyone who was just horrible, I would have no heirs left. I can't seem to get any descent ones as the English

[jas]

Quote Originally posted by elzar:
I play as english alot, and no matter what I do, I never have any descent heirs. [/QUOTE]

Do you keep your king at home a lot? I've found that my heirs are much better if my king is seeing a lot of battle. Usually it works out for me that my first couple of heirs are crap (because I don't want to put my king in danger until I have a few) and thereafter they're quite good as I use my king as a general quite heavily. Needless to say by the time the fourth or fifth heir has appeared, every assassin in the kingdom has a copy of the likeness and movements of the first two dud heirs ..

[chunkynut]

I've seen (i think) alot of talk about v&vs of your king affecting heirs on there 14th year.

When an heir is about to mature send your king into battle and then your heir gets a skilled attacker or some such.

This is what i've heard anyhow.

My Question. Is this true??

Because if so we can stop the random crappy heir V&V now!! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

[Thane Talain MacDonald]

Well, it is realistic. The English had mucho resources, but many, many, many kings that were utter shite :P

[KampfBar Ritter]

I suspect that they tried to have some general historical accuracy time line for each faction concerning kings etc...

Take the Almohads, they have strong leadership in the beginning of the game but after some time they get a few generations of bloathed, perverted, crack brained, inbred loosers.

I have found that using your King and heirs in battles helps some what also.

This is a fun game isn't it? http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

[Furtrapper]

Playing the Italians, I had a totally crap Doge - two influence, no dread at all and no acumen. PLUS he was a secret child molester and little boys at that! Once that got out, well I feared mass rebellions. Luckily, he had had a son.

What did I do? Well, as he had an heir, I sent him into a hopeless battle and then into the middle of a bunch of spearmen...hey presto, no more Doge.

Needless to say, the heir, who was ok but not much more, was delighted to take the throne and then promptly spawned infants like it was going out of fashion. Some 20 years later, I have half a dozen princes with cavalry and daughters doing the rounds in Europe marrying whoever will have them. I've even managed to keep a general quiet!

Wimpy kings? Kill 'em off!!!

[Coeur De Lion]

i find the byztantines to have the bets kings and prices in the middle era to towards the end they seem to be drunks and weirdos maybe that led to theend of there great empire.
only if i was a king i would of ruled the world http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif

[Terrax]

Does anyone find the Dread description of a General with max Dread as satisfying as I do?

[Kraxis]

Quote Originally posted by KampfBar Ritter:
I suspect that they tried to have some general historical accuracy time line for each faction concerning kings etc...

Take the Almohads, they have strong leadership in the beginning of the game but after some time they get a few generations of bloathed, perverted, crack brained, inbred loosers.
[/QUOTE]

Well, take a look at the Danish Royalty next time... and the time after that and again. They are always drunken, inbred, odd toed ect ect... and I can tell you that it was not the case in history. A few were really bad, but they never made it to king (one did but that was in the 1700's). The Danish Royal line was nothing like the line we see in the game.

The bad line happens because the Danes never expand successfully, so they sit around at home driking and getting other bad habbits.

------------------
BTW, Danish Crusades are true to history.

You may not care about war, but war cares about you!