Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Crusader Kings II ~ Quick Answers

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Crusader Kings II 69869 Bug Reports 19707 User Modifications 10588 Suggestions 5969 Tech Support 6362 After Action Reports
Show only dev responses
Lwantssugar said:
I have a bug/problem thats already been fixed but Id like to prevent in the future:
Im playing as the Itallian king of France (won it in a Crusade) and something bad happened, as it turns out my king only had daughters so I was reliant on them to hopefully bear a son. 2 of them had matrilienial marrages so I wasnt worried about succesion yet, however, 2 of them died along with my only grandson who was assassinated. I was disappointed at this series of events but not too broken up intially, I still had one daughter left. however a message popped up claiming I had no heir of my dynasty, clearly my daughter is in a matrilinieal marriage and of my dynasty so why would it bring this up? I had been using the Oldest child succession law (I cant remember the spelling) before and it wasnt recognizing my daughter even though my gender laws were Agnatic-Cognatic. why did this happen?
Click to expand...

Your daughters are not adding up in my mind. I am cornfused.

You only had daughters.
Two are married matrilineally.
Two of them (daughters) died.
Grandson died. (only one mentioned)
Now you have one daughter left. (is this the third daughter?) Matrilileally married? Any sons by any of your daughters?

How many daughters do you have exactly, married how?

You need to say exactly what succession method you have as people get confused. Gavelkind, Primogeniture, Seniority. (Elective?)

Check your coat of arms to see if anyone is listed as your heir. (Perhaps the warning is in error and your daughter is listed after all) Who is listed if anyone?

Do you have a daughter married normally that had a son? (even if she's younger, if she has a son, her line becomes precedent over an older daughter that has no sons) Did you end up remarrying your current liege to a woman matrilineally by mistake? (ie have a son not of your dynasty who is current heir?) Sorry we need a bit more info to make further guesses...
 
How exactly do muslim invasions work? I mean, you invade an entire kingdom, and for that you get +25% taxes instead of 50 years of uselessness until the religion/culture penalties disappear?

I'm starting to understand why the ERE is always wiped out in 100-200 years in my games :-/.
 
Yenzen said:
How exactly do muslim invasions work? I mean, you invade an entire kingdom, and for that you get +25% taxes instead of 50 years of uselessness until the religion/culture penalties disappear?

I'm starting to understand why the ERE is always wiped out in 100-200 years in my games :-/.
Click to expand...

You DO get the culture/religion penalties, so you still have to wait them out before you can enjoy your 25% extra taxes, which in many cases you won't since the provinces will at least switch religion.
Specially if you play the powerhouse Fatimid Shia Caliph.

And also every invasion costs 500 piety, which isn't exactly cheap.
 
My vassal, the Earl of Shetland, declared a war to depose another of my vassals, the Duke of Vestlandet, in favor of the Duke's younger brother.

I was not allowed to help on either side of the war, even though I am their king. I know this is normal in my kingdom.

The Earl of Shetland won the war and to my astonishment, Shetland and the whole Duchy of Vestlandet immediately became independent of my kingdom under the new duke (I'm King of Norway).

I don't understand how this duke thinks he can go independent from me, and manages it, without my being allowed to fight at all. Can anyone explain it?
 
Why does my mother keep plotting for my throne?

I am Kaiser.I won the election after being my uncle's right hand man(Chancellor).My mother inherited several Duchies and is an Imperial Princess.(Different Dynasty)Why does she Keep plotting for my throne when I'm her heir in the first place?(she's too old to have more kids)
 
Antalia said:
My vassal, the Earl of Shetland, declared a war to depose another of my vassals, the Duke of Vestlandet, in favor of the Duke's younger brother.

I was not allowed to help on either side of the war, even though I am their king. I know this is normal in my kingdom.

The Earl of Shetland won the war and to my astonishment, Shetland and the whole Duchy of Vestlandet immediately became independent of my kingdom under the new duke (I'm King of Norway).

I don't understand how this duke thinks he can go independent from me, and manages it, without my being allowed to fight at all. Can anyone explain it?
Click to expand...

Its because he's not your de jure vassal. I know its not a bug, but I think if there is a risk that the winner would escape your realm, the liege should be allowed to join on his Duke's side.
 
Its because he's not your de jure vassal. I know its not a bug, but I think if there is a risk that the winner would escape your realm, the liege should be allowed to join on his Duke's side.
Click to expand...
Do you mean it's because the Duke's younger brother (the new duke) was not landed before the war resolved?
 
Stefanos_P said:
You DO get the culture/religion penalties, so you still have to wait them out before you can enjoy your 25% extra taxes, which in many cases you won't since the provinces will at least switch religion.
Specially if you play the powerhouse Fatimid Shia Caliph.

And also every invasion costs 500 piety, which isn't exactly cheap.
Click to expand...

Hmn, I'm asking because I just saw an invasion of Armenia and none of the provinces had any of the penalty icons after the ERE lost.
 
Antalia said:
Do you mean it's because the Duke's younger brother (the new duke) was not landed before the war resolved?
Click to expand...

Actually, rereading it I'm not sure why he didn't become your vassal after winning. He was the Earl of Shetland - is that de jure Norway or de jure Scotland (I don't remember). And the title they seized I'm virtually certain is de jure Norway. Sorry, not sure anymore.
 
Actually, rereading it I'm not sure why he didn't become your vassal after winning. He was the Earl of Shetland - is that de jure Norway or de jure Scotland (I don't remember). And the title they seized I'm virtually certain is de jure Norway. Sorry, not sure anymore.
Click to expand...
Everything involved is de jure Norway - but there seem to be three characters of interest:
1. The Earl of Shetland, who was vassal to the Duke of Vestlandet, declared the war to depose the Duke of Vestlandet. The Earl isn't blood-related to either of the other two, if it matters.
2. The (now ex-) Duke of Vestlandet lost the war. He's the older brother of the person who stepped up and became the new Duke:
3. The new Duke of Vestlandet was not landed before the war was won. He was the #2 heir to the duchy (after the now-ex-Duke's daughter). As soon as the war was won, the whole Duchy of Vestlandet became independent. It consists of its de jure counties + Shetland.

I wonder if the new Duke not having land is why the duchy became independent - but I'm 99% sure that I've seen "depose" wars fought before just like this, and the new Duke just stayed as my vassal. I'm very puzzled by what could have caused independence ,and I want to keep a nasty surprise like this from happening again!
 
I recently took Castille and Leon in holy wars and gave one of the counties to the only kinsman I had with any offspring (albeit they were daughters), expect that at least he would have secured dependents.

Now I notice that neither daughter is his heir, but instead some random courtier from another dynasty, who is a courtier of an English Duchess.

I don't understand how this could be the case. Brittany (my kingdom) has agnatic-cognatic primogeniture, Castille (have not bothered usurping/destroying the title, considering it though, I don't want multiple king titles but i fear the -50 to relations) has agnatic-cognatic gravelkind. Does anyone have an idea what could be going on?

And any way to deal with all the king titles without usurping them all and pissing off my vassals while spending a fortune?

Also, due to lack of courtiers and kinsmen I've elected to use prince-bishops and even one prince-archbishop in other newly conquered areas. Are there any disadvantages to this? Now I can pick any successor with free investure, there are no inheritance woes, and the free investure nets an easy +30 to relations. (Until I get excommunicated)
 
I have a question about Gavelkind succession laws.

Playing as a King of Sweden a have three sons. The oldest son dies and leaves a grandson. Up to now, I thought that according to Gavelkind my next eldest son is my heir, but it occurs that i was wrong, because my grandson stands as the first in the line of succession. I changed laws to elective to get my son in the throne, but still - why the grandson was my heir? Should it be like that?
 
Berkis said:
I have a question about Gavelkind succession laws.

Playing as a King of Sweden a have three sons. The oldest son dies and leaves a grandson. Up to now, I thought that according to Gavelkind my next eldest son is my heir, but it occurs that i was wrong, because my grandson stands as the first in the line of succession. I changed laws to elective to get my son in the throne, but still - why the grandson was my heir? Should it be like that?
Click to expand...

It works as intended. If you look at your succession list you will se that your grandson is number 2 in line after your first born son, this is known as 'deep' gavelkind succession law and is the variant used in crusader kings 2. Historically I believe so-called 'broad' gavelkind succession law was more common (that´s the variant where the Rulers own sons go before eventual grandsons in the succession line).
 
In a strategic sense, what would make revoking and owning all titles in your realm, (completely disregarding demesne limit), not feasible? If you have no vassals, then their supposition of tyranny wouldn't exist, and if you have the power to do so initially, removing them in the first place shouldn't be too much of a problem. Your penalty to taxation seems disproportionate to the extra income that you receive for ownership of an excessive number of holdings. If you start out as a Prince in Russia, and you begin the game over your demesne limit, is it a good idea (in terms of gamey power) to hand out land, or would it be best to just keep it?
 
Doppelsoldner said:
In a strategic sense, what would make revoking and owning all titles in your realm, (completely disregarding demesne limit), not feasible? If you have no vassals, then their supposition of tyranny wouldn't exist, and if you have the power to do so initially, removing them in the first place shouldn't be too much of a problem. Your penalty to taxation seems disproportionate to the extra income that you receive for ownership of an excessive number of holdings. If you start out as a Prince in Russia, and you begin the game over your demesne limit, is it a good idea (in terms of gamey power) to hand out land, or would it be best to just keep it?
Click to expand...

Handed it out.

Several folks tried the Tyrant approach and it gets to a point where you get absolutely zero income.

So you rely on conquest and more revokes in order to make any gold whatsoever.

Also the micromanagement is pita.
 
Stefanos_P said:
Handed it out.

Several folks tried the Tyrant approach and it gets to a point where you get absolutely zero income.

So you rely on conquest and more revokes in order to make any gold whatsoever.

Also the micromanagement is pita.
Click to expand...

Are there any other negatives attached to this? I'd like to see other independent realms try to depose you if you were a tyrant or they supposed that you were too powerful. I simply don't want the game to invite me to be cheap, because then it's too boring, and I can't take much credit for any success that I get.
 
Doppelsoldner said:
Are there any other negatives attached to this? I'd like to see other independent realms try to depose you if you were a tyrant or they supposed that you were too powerful. I simply don't want the game to invite me to be cheap, because then it's too boring, and I can't take much credit for any success that I get.
Click to expand...

Besides the fact that it's just not fun, I don't think so, can't really remember.

I myself tried it once and it got extremely boring and annoying after a little while.
 
I currently own kingdom of Italy, Sciliy, Jerusalem, and just aquired Galacia in a crusade. I want to create an empire to assign a king to Galacia, and noticed that the Latin Empire is in the game, despite the culture of Italy being Latin, I am aware they aren't really the same thing but I am not too worried, I just want an empire.

I searched it in the game and it is not created, so I checked out the conditions and set about meeting them, they are
-must be catholic/heresy
-must have control of Constantinople, Thrace and another neighbouring county that starts with K.
-"X is not currently in existance"

When I searched I noticed the bottom thing had a red star next to it, but I figured this might have been because I was at war, and thought perhaps there is a rule that you can't create the title at war (just like you can usurp) After fabricating claims on the required counties, I now have them in my posession. Go to create the title and I can't. It still says "X is not currently in existance" or something along those lines, but it doesn't exist, what have I done wrong?

If for some reason I can't create it, is there any other creatable empires I could relativly easily meet the requirements for? I am not too concerned about historical accuracy as it is all out of whack anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back