Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

My second game: Forced to Abandon

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 69864 Bug Reports 19707 User Modifications 10587 Suggestions 5969 Tech Support 6361 After Action Reports
Show only dev responses
Kynaz said:
NEVER EVER give dynasty members land within your own Lands unless its your direct heir. If they are a title claimant they will probably rebel with no regard to logic , if they are a pretender its even worse , they and many generations of them will instant rebel.
Click to expand...

Kynaz is right that Dynasty members can be trouble. But I disagree that you should never ever give them land. You are severly limiting the prestige of your dynasty (aka your final score) if you don't form cadet branches.

The first generations are the most dangerous, because they are the ones with claims on you other titles. But with each generation, these same-dynasty vassals will lose these claims, and simply become like your other vassals, except with a relationshiop bonus for being kin, and a score bonus for being part of your dynasty.

TL;DR Giving Dynasty members land is short term risk for long term gain
 
Amoral said:
Kynaz is right that Dynasty members can be trouble. But I disagree that you should never ever give them land. You are severly limiting the prestige of your dynasty (aka your final score) if you don't form cadet branches.

The first generations are the most dangerous, because they are the ones with claims on you other titles. But with each generation, these same-dynasty vassals will lose these claims, and simply become like your other vassals, except with a relationshiop bonus for being kin, and a score bonus for being part of your dynasty.

TL;DR Giving Dynasty members land is short term risk for long term gain
Click to expand...

Or no risk if you wait a generation and start handing land out to your cousins who don't have claims.
 
Amoral said:
Kynaz is right that Dynasty members can be trouble. But I disagree that you should never ever give them land. You are severly limiting the prestige of your dynasty (aka your final score) if you don't form cadet branches.

The first generations are the most dangerous, because they are the ones with claims on you other titles. But with each generation, these same-dynasty vassals will lose these claims, and simply become like your other vassals, except with a relationshiop bonus for being kin, and a score bonus for being part of your dynasty.

TL;DR Giving Dynasty members land is short term risk for long term gain
Click to expand...

Better yet: marry your dynasty members off to foreign princesses, then put your relatives on those thrones. Even less risk, even more gain.

Just installed my nephew's wife as the Empress of Byzantium. Their son is going to be Emperor and is of my dynasty. Actually he's still in my court currently, so I'm already plotting HIS marriage.
 
grisamentum said:
Better yet: marry your dynasty members off to foreign princesses, then put your relatives on those thrones. Even less risk, even more gain.

Just installed my nephew's wife as the Empress of Byzantium. Their son is going to be Emperor and is of my dynasty. Actually he's still in my court currently, so I'm already plotting HIS marriage.
Click to expand...

Agreed 100% that is the best strategy.

I do not give any dynasty member any land in my realm. Sometimes a small baron, mayor or bishop that is about it and that is usually some marriage accident when I'm not paying 100% attention.

However I like to set them up with there own realms. I won Jerusalem in a crusade. I gave the entire kingdom to my brother and since I'm also the Grandmaster of the Templar's I used them to boost his country until he was able to raise his own levies.

I also set my dynasty member up as the Duke of Barcelona it is the largest Spanish Catholic realm in the peninsula currently and about a century ago I set up a dynasty member on Sweden's throne. He also needed lots of help the first 20 years until his heirs became Swedish and not Italian.

This way you get your cadet branches, lifetime allies, dynasty prestige, and you don't have to deal with any distance realm problems or any other internal problems.

About 200 years as the Kingdom of Naples and zero rebellions/revolts/independence wars. Whenever I give dynasty members land in my own realm it gets hectic real quick.
 
Garuda said:
I enjoyed my first game as Duke of Connacht (1.04) and now started up my second game as King of England (1.05c). All is well until William dies and Roberrt ascends to the throne. On ascension my vassals declare war against me and continuously do so - month after month and year after year. There's no end to it. Eventually I got so fed up with constant AI dows that I started to save, load (load as vassal to offer peace to myself) and reload again. I've lost count of how many times I've done this - but the AI dows just keep coming; it's relentless.

This is not the kind of game I enjoy. I want to enjoy playing my dynasty, but the game seemingly does not allow me that. I'm really disheartened and have abandoned the game. :sad:


I just needed to post here and vent steam - thanks for listening.
Click to expand...

Learn the advantages of GIFT GIVING.....I use this all the time and I never have vassal revolts. ;) Peasants well that's another thing but I can't give peasants gifts. ;)
 
Amoral said:
Kynaz is right that Dynasty members can be trouble. But I disagree that you should never ever give them land. You are severly limiting the prestige of your dynasty (aka your final score) if you don't form cadet branches.

The first generations are the most dangerous, because they are the ones with claims on you other titles. But with each generation, these same-dynasty vassals will lose these claims, and simply become like your other vassals, except with a relationshiop bonus for being kin, and a score bonus for being part of your dynasty.

TL;DR Giving Dynasty members land is short term risk for long term gain
Click to expand...

I agree with armorall (gr) I give out lands to 2nd tier level below me family members. Usually in the mayoral, bishopric or baron level but sometimes at the county level. Most of the time the females are gone to other lands for alliances but, the males remain and they are family and I tend to ROLEPLAY More than min/max or be afraid of little ole revolts. I think all too many players play this game like it's a game of WIN whereby it really isn't, it's a game of ROLEPLAYING with some strategic elements. But, those strategic elements should NOT take precedence over the roleplaying aspect of the game. We all know what happens when you DON't give your heirs lands, but, the FUN of the game is finding out what happens when you DO. ;)
 
I'll tip my hat into the ring here too. Initially I was all for dynastic issues. Yet, really they should pretty much be between claimants with better claims to the throne, good claims to the throne, or claims + a lot of damn power, as it stands. You often get a rebellious cousin with no hope of winning freedom or your crown.. and usually you need him to get someone preggers and then leave him in jail.

The decisions that the AI need to take before rebelling need to have much higher benchmarks. Don't get rid of them by all means, but make each one more significant by making the requirements to war higher. For example, a brother that absolutely loves his other brother, should never go to war. It does happen.

Family rivalry wasn't ALL "Oh brother, please turn so I can stick a knife in your back" There was a lot of it, but not nearly as much as this game would lead us to imagine.

Gameplay wise, I can usually manage a lot of the technicalities.. but even when I keep my court happy, the bastards still plot against me, thereby going to war.

Yes, the more distant the relatives the less likely the conflict, but pretty much anyone with my family name is my biggest enemy in any given game. (I warn you about putting dynasty members on the top of other thrones without careful consideration, I, the Emperor of Wales (rise of empire mod - Wales/England/France/North Spain/Scotland/Ireland)), often had to fight the combined strength of Byzantium and the Holy Roman Empire because of family members in charge of them. Also when internal family members rebel, they can drag in those external ones easily too). Which is how my Empire of Wales fell, when my great-cousin the King of Scotland rebelled, and the two Romes attacked me.. I lost lots of territory and it starting a rolling cycle into destruction)

(Which to be fair, I then played through as another dynasty entirely, without the pre-existing penalties of my old dynasty, I was able to recreate a new europe. Was actually a lot of fun)
 
Last edited:
Okay. So I've started a new game - this time Kingdom of Norway. Three successions and no rebellions, no negative opinions from my vassals, no problems. I guess the angry succession thing is characteristic of the British Isles and not of the game. :)
 
Garuda said:
Some of the worst offenders for rebelling are members of my own dynasty. Many of whom were courtiers with high opinion of me until I granted them land. Ungrateful sods.
Click to expand...

Ha! Yeah, I hear ya. I often refuse to even marry off my dynasty members anymore, unless I have a reason to. Same goes with giving them land. Random courtier counts and dukes are always just so much more polite. I breed my heirs and my council members for good stats, nobody else matters.

I had one king who took the throne at age sixteen. He had six sisters who all came of age during his rein. All six died as childless nuns. ^^
 
Since they are Latin, normans get -20 relation malus with Saxons, it´s very significant. As was said before, put normans in key titles and killing Robert while you´re still William isn´t a bad idea either. Also, everyone who is ambitious and is a pretender WILL cause trouble, deal with them ASAP.
 
Garuda said:
Okay. So I've started a new game - this time Kingdom of Norway. Three successions and no rebellions, no negative opinions from my vassals, no problems. I guess the angry succession thing is characteristic of the British Isles and not of the game. :)
Click to expand...

My HRE is in the exact same situation. The only revolt risk I had for a prolonged time was a 100 relations count with 1% revolt risk, due to being in Finland and my capital being Palermo. Took Rome from the Pope and made it the new capital, and now everything is stable again. Grooming a nephew as heir, we'll see how much I can expand while still holding everything together so neatly.
 
Establishing cadet branches of your houses main line is always risky. Easy option: grant them Bishop titles. Then educate their sons as you like, grant them lands you want to have held by the family, and sleep calm when the claim to the main line's land got lost with the ordination of the son.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back