Abdication of a King

[MonkeyMan]

Just a quick one I thought of as I yet again charged my 70 year old but 10 valour king uphill against 200 feudal knights. It tends to be a bad idea to let your son inherit the throne after he reaches 40 or sometimes the current king is just in crazy fool. So instead of just removing the disband button from the king and his heirs, can you just replace them with abdication buttons and declare illegitimate buttons, to save me the bother of mass regicide (and whatever you call killing heirs). I'm sure its far too late to do anything about it, but nevermind eh?

[Dîn-Heru]

An excelent idea Perhaps I could be implemented in RTW though. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[LordTed]

Then people will keep sacking the heirs untill they get good ones, not historically accurate as the history gang will undoubtably inform you

[A.Saturnus]

It should be possible to get rid of the lousy heirs when they are childs. If one is 7 and a sucker, why wait?

[Marco]

You should be able to elect an appropiate heir to the throne.

[Praylak]

I think there's a sense of realisim as it stands now with hiers. You can't just dump your 7-year old son in the local river. Although I'm sure it happened at least once. Vices were rampant and quite common with many rulers in those days. Nothing a good old fashioned suicide attack can't remedy though.

I tend not too focus so much on my king or his hiers as I find his generals (specificly x-hiers) are most critical. You can groom them into awesome generals even if they have the odd bad vice. Give them a title or two and let them develop a province and command some battles and eventually you'll create a fine instrument to expand your reach. Unlike your King, generals are immortal so you have every incentive to develop them.

For example in my current game as The Novgorod, my king has 2 influence, and is basicly a total looser. It's a small empire but its prep'ed to become great. In the meantime all provinces are governed by ex-hiers, and all have great loyalty and virtues. Once my economy and tech is secured, I'll be riding these bad boys out to expand the empire. My king though, is best left at home in the center of it all. In 30 years he'll be dead anyway.

[andrewt]

It's good to have a good king. It ensures that you have a steady supply of good heirs that would become good generals once they become ex-heirs. I usually look for good command then acumen then loyalty. Generally the last isn't a problem since heirs usually have good loyalty if you aren't getting beat badly. If they have good command and acumen, they are also good candidates for governorship of high income provinces, which generally have good bonuses to loyalty, as well as offical positions like chamberlain or marshall.

[LadyAnn]

Abdicate the King? it is a mark of disgrace. The King should always die of illness It is a cheesy tactic to try to kill the king because you don't like him or because he is old.

Tell Queen Elizabeth II to abdicate now

Annie

[Kongamato]

Remember Seppuku from STW? This could be the exact same thing, just being King-only and consisting of a message saying that your king has abdicated his throne for some reason or another.

[LadyAnn]

I thought Sepuku in STW was only when the King is captured during battle without heir. Perhaps I am wrong...

Annie

[71-hour Ahmed]

Quote[/b] ]I thought Sepuku in STW was only when the King is captured during battle without heir. Perhaps I am wrong...

Seppuku was when they were cut off without somewhere to go, or if they were too dishonoured by cowardice. You couldn't make it happen unless you got a general to lose lots of battles (possible but stupid). Heirs have no effect on whether it occurs.