Yeah I agree, I've always found it annoying that when I found my wife cheating on me with some foreign duke I could imprison my wife but I could not answer the insult of that upstart little bastard by invading his lands capturing and imprisoning him. While it may not be justification for taking the lands they control there should be an insult based CB that will allow you to depose foreign leaders for various actions.
Why can't I invade Castille for executing my daughter?
- Thread starter Svo
- Start date
-
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.
But wouldn't a liege who doesn't react to a foreign king executing his daughter be considered weak? I think vassals would be supportive of a response to such an insult. People don't always want war for rational reasons, even in the modern times.
Now the actual peasants who are sent on the front lines would maybe rather stay at home but no one is asking them their opinion. And it's not like the other CB's are more beneficial to them anyway.
Last edited:
Yeah if you let some random jerk get away with publically executing a princess of the realm, you're looking pretty shabby to all the other King's and vassals out there. It'd be an interesting CB, would it be a "Revenge Execution" or "Depose Liege" type of situation?
Well, aside from the dragons and the wall and the goofy religions and the blizzards & zombies, yeah, it's a pretty damn good representation of medieval feudalism; especially the first book, which contains hardly any of the aforementioned caveats. Take that for whatever it's worth.
But regardless, my point is this: if your vassals like you, they'll go to war over your daughter. If they don't, they still have to go to war over your daughter, because that's the feudal contract. Keeping their levies raised will slowly drop their opinion. This is already modeled in game. Medieval kings often spent their entire lives waging wars pressing their far-flung claims, and their vassals understood this is the way of the world. When they didn't like it, conflict occurred.
There are some good arguments against adding this CB (such as how often the AI will waste their time doing it), which is why I'm still on the fence, but "No vassal would be willing to go to war over this" is never a good reason that a CB shouldn't exist.
Last edited:
No. It's not. It's maybe similiar but it's not a accurate representation of the medieval feudalism. It's still fictional and inspirate by Middle Ages... but nothing more.
Guys! A war that took place within the timeline of the new expansion was started because Charlemagne disgraced someone's daughter. Just putting that out there....again...although I do enjoy my fair share of AGoT.
Putting the spoiler warning after the spoiler rather defeats the purpose.
It would more likely result in faster blobbing than ever. If an AI wastes all of its levies in a war over nothing, then when another AI moves on it with a real CB, the first AI isn't going to put up much of a fight, now is it?
Last edited:
Many mods have implemented a revenge cb. There's no reason for paradox not to have by now...
Maybe only allow it for just and family- and/or love-oriented people. Or only for arbitrary ones, considering thousands of families get torn apart by the war anyway.
Not very historical.
The biggest problem I have with the GoT universe is that they have been in High Medieval times for thousands of years, never progressing despite having more ability to do so.
Last edited:
It's usually the necessity for progress that causes it rather than the ability.
Come on, they have amazing Greek fire bottles and other scientific progress, yet have incredibly long winters and do nothing other than hoard food and scrape by? This is clear necessity.
The Vikings invade Northumbria to kill Aella over the execution of Ragnar
THIS IS EXACTLY THE STUFF IM TALKING ABOUT WHEN I SAY CK2 NEEDS TO BE OVERHAULED !!! we need a huge dlc for court intrigue/events and all kinds of diplomacy stuff, yet we never get it WTF PARADOX !!!
The point with this sort of thing (and Helen of Troy) is that even if it didn't really happen, in the Middle Ages they believed that it had. Given those precedents, what sort of lord would turn to his liege and say "Sorry my lord, I know they killed your daughter and dishonoured your name before the entire world, but I'm just going to sit this one out."
Such wars didn't often happen in the Middle Ages because lords were not stupid enough to go executing a powerful king's daughter instead of ransom, not because nobody was prepared to go to war over such things.
To give you another example, the war that led to the Battle of Hattin was precipitated by Raynald de Chatillon's failed attempt to seize a caravan carrying Saladin's sister.
I agree, if the king of France executed the king of England's daughter do you think he would not do anything?
Last edited: