1.06 Wishlist

[Numahr]

AI should learn to use the merc feature correctly. Else I feel like cheating using it.
Illustration: I am a small count in Ireland. All counties are the same size and power, approximately. Now any time I have power with an other individual county, I just hire any band of mercs. My enemy has the money to do it but never does. That's it, all the uncertainty of war is gone, I found the one magical button for automatic victory! No risk any more in declaring war to someone roughly as strong as me! All is left is to get claims, the warfare part is just a formality. Now if these counties knew how to use their money to hire some mercs too, for defense but also if they want to attack me, that would make warfare a risky and uncertain business, as it should be.

 

[Hyena Dandy]

I agree with Numahr.

I often wonder why my enemy hasn't hired mercenaries. I look at mercenary screens, but it's rare that they're employed by a smaller areas which would, you know, actually need them.

Is it that the counties don't want to hire mercs and end up losing money? I feel like if it's such a clear attack that, well, either you hire a mercenary or you lose your throne, they oughta risk the mercenaries turning on 'em rather than know that they'll be destroyed.



The other thing I'd like (and I know they're working on) would be some EU3-like Chronicle.

I've made some attempts to start an AAR before the two I'm on now, and the biggest bother for me is that when a war ends, there's no way to check when it started. You obviously know what day it is NOW, but it can be a bit of a bother to log out and scratch down a date every time something important happens.

Battles, too. I think it'd be nice if battles would have their dates recorded.

Unless they already do, in which case I'm just being a fool!

Foolish me

Lalalalalalala.

I shouldn't post on forums when I'm tired.

...

Ooh, wait, another one!

I wish kids would stop doing things. I mean, not when I'm one, but events like the three month old duchess who's getting uppity about my prisoners.

And hostages. Kids as hostages. That's a thing that happened. Like, you shouldn't just be able to send them to be 'educated' if you want...

You could basically form a short alliance that way. "I'll help you when you're in danger. You help me when I am."

If you don't, there's a chance that a kid of yours at the other guy's court will die.

Edit: AND ANOTHER THING!

More culturally-specific portrait traits.

 

[Jak9090]

I would like to see men ruling in their wives place if their wives hold a title, as was the case 9/10 times in history.
I would also like to see more variables added to crown laws.
aswell as a extra tab on the character page highlighting all characters important or relevant to your own char, such as brother in laws, rivals, claimates to your titles, non dynastic family members etc, also make certain chars toggable to this page.

 

[Hyena Dandy]

Gah, I just thought of another. I'm like a bouncy puppy dog I swear.

Scars on portraits.

My guy is wounded. He heals. It says "This will leave a terrible scar."

But it doesn't. The scar disappears entirely.

And also, migrating cuts/scars.

I had an heir who was probably going to be a bit of a doofus. I wanted him out of the way, so his sister, who was older and had some flipping amazing traits, would be my heir.

I got the event that lets me try to murder my heir. And I did. He survived, but was maimed. Somehow, though, he had a fairly long life for someone who was pushed out a window at age 7. He lived to 32. As a teenager-twenties, he had a scar on his chin. When he became an adult-middle aged the scar migrated to his nose.

So I edited the post because I thought it was in the wrong thread, and edited again 'cause I realized it wasn't.

Silly me, sorry all.

 

[unmerged(101730)]

Crown Law should be de facto as opposed to de jure.

It's actually working fine as it is - where it makes sense. It'd just that:

* "de iure anything" should only apply to Catholics, and only be there for king-level or higher titles.
* Outside of the Catholic-ruled area (either right now, until recently, or due to some obscure and likely falsified claims) the territory should not belong to any "de iure" structure.
* There should be only one "de iure" empire at game start in 1066: The HRE.

 

[SaintEsteban]

It's actually working fine as it is - where it makes sense. It'd just that:

* "de iure anything" should only apply to Catholics, and only be there for king-level or higher titles.
* Outside of the Catholic-ruled area (either right now, until recently, or due to some obscure and likely falsified claims) the territory should not belong to any "de iure" structure.
* There should be only one "de iure" empire at game start in 1066: The HRE.

No, it isn't. It should apply to de facto kingdoms as Pugman stated. If I'm Flanders, in France, why should the HRE have any say over what I can do?

 

[olvirki]

I just want females to get an inheritable claim just as their brothers when their landed parent dies. They said somewhere they were working on it and I think they said they will release it in the next patch.

 

[Sleight of Hand]

I just want females to get an inheritable claim just as their brothers when their landed parent dies. They said somewhere they were working on it and I think they said they will release it in the next patch.

In defines.lua:

	WOMEN_INHERIT_PRESSED_CLAIMS = 0,			-- If set to 1, they will get pressed claims on their parents' titles

Change the 0 to 1.

 

[Garak]

It's actually working fine as it is - where it makes sense. It'd just that:

* "de iure anything" should only apply to Catholics, and only be there for king-level or higher titles.
* Outside of the Catholic-ruled area (either right now, until recently, or due to some obscure and likely falsified claims) the territory should not belong to any "de iure" structure.
* There should be only one "de iure" empire at game start in 1066: The HRE.

This would place the Byzantine Empire in the same boat as the Muslim Caliphates in the eyes of western Christendom, which isn't satisfactory, either. The eastern Roman Empire was certainly recognized as legitimate power by the west; removing its de jure status seems to suggest otherwise.

 

[Ephafn]

AI should learn to use the merc feature correctly. Else I feel like cheating using it.
Illustration: I am a small count in Ireland. All counties are the same size and power, approximately. Now any time I have power with an other individual county, I just hire any band of mercs. My enemy has the money to do it but never does. That's it, all the uncertainty of war is gone, I found the one magical button for automatic victory! No risk any more in declaring war to someone roughly as strong as me! All is left is to get claims, the warfare part is just a formality. Now if these counties knew how to use their money to hire some mercs too, for defense but also if they want to attack me, that would make warfare a risky and uncertain business, as it should be.

I strongly agree with this suggestion. It seems that the AI only recruits mercs that whose upkeep it can pay. So you have the Pope (or Venice) with 10K in the bank which only recruits enough mercenaries to put their income in the (slight) negative, instead of recruiting all available mercenaries, potentially disbanding them once they start running out of money. Also AI who risks losing a lot (like those defending in an Invasion CB, or a claim against their only title), should be much more aggressive in term of mercenary recruiting, even if they risk going into debt. They have much more to lose than the merc rebelling.

 

[Orinsul]

The ability for vassals to offer to join the war of a claim, invader or succession CB war against their liege, with the cost of a traitor relationship hit with everyone in the realm and maybe a negative trait too.

And the Caliphates should probably have their capitals in Baghdad and Cairo, not Meccas, as those were they cities that were always the capitals, and having them in Mecca leads to odd results with the capital always being in a random poor province and the revoking of arabia felix rather than staying in the rich seat of power where all the history says they ought.

 

[SaintEsteban]

The ability for vassals to offer to join the war of a claim, invader or succession CB war against their liege, with the cost of a traitor relationship hit with everyone in the realm and maybe a negative trait too.

I agree wholeheartedly. This would add a whole new dynamic.

 

[unmerged(101730)]

This would place the Byzantine Empire in the same boat as the Muslim Caliphates in the eyes of western Christendom, which isn't satisfactory, either. The eastern Roman Empire was certainly recognized as legitimate power by the west; removing its de jure status seems to suggest otherwise.

I don't follow.

A "de iure empire" or "de iure kingdom" doesn't mean it's just "justified", it means this territory is declared by God himself, via his first speaker on Earth the Pope in Rome, to belong to this or that empire or kingdom.

Obviously, neither the Orthodox nor the Muslim or Pagan rulers care about or adhere to such declarations.

Also obviously, just because someone is a duke, count or baron somewhere with de iure territory doesn't mean he gets to decide who the king of this kingdom is, and which kingdom's rules apply - that's for God (via the Pope) to decide (at least in theory). Unless that guy is a heretic or heathen, of course - which is why I wrote that the "de iure" rules should only apply to Catholics.

 

[unmerged(462833)]

First thing, would be nice to get rid of vassals by granting then independence. Loosing a war costs authority, and I don't want to revoke title and gave everything to pope...
Second thing - improved... dynasty tree. So far hard to check it, search who was a specific duke, king etc. Biggest problem with for example queen consorts, I see icon that she was queen but where... I don't want to check that every time... And dynasty tree is what made me proud of my family...
Third thing - could be nice to see something more than random pope...

About mercs proposal - I don't agree - AI use that often enough...

 

[grumphie]

more empires. i want to be able to make a spanish empire once i finished the reconquista. revive the frankinsh one. make the british one ect.

i can currently be one of THE biggest powers but not get an empire as only 2 are availible. would need to cost a crapload of pres, piety and money though, and as well require friendly relations with the pope.

also, if it isnt in already, lower distance penalty with both legalism and higher ranks. pretty obvious that im not going to answer to a duke with no legalism on the other side of france, but will asnwer to a mighty king with high legalism, even though he is quite far away.

 

[Firenz]

just a small change, but how about a bit of snobbery between characters?

If a count/baron/courtier makes their way to being a higher rank, then those of the existing rank and above that have the trait proud or a similar trait get a relations hit.

Similarly could have an envious trait hit amongst those close to the character promoted.

may add some nice flavour, especially as if a small 1 province becomes an emperor you couldn't expect all the other rulers to immediately see him as their equal.

 

[olvirki]

In defines.lua:

	WOMEN_INHERIT_PRESSED_CLAIMS = 0,			-- If set to 1, they will get pressed claims on their parents' titles

Change the 0 to 1.

Thank you !

 

[SaintEsteban]

just a small change, but how about a bit of snobbery between characters?

If a count/baron/courtier makes their way to being a higher rank, then those of the existing rank and above that have the trait proud or a similar trait get a relations hit.

Similarly could have an envious trait hit amongst those close to the character promoted.

may add some nice flavour, especially as if a small 1 province becomes an emperor you couldn't expect all the other rulers to immediately see him as their equal.

I like this, it's an interesting addition that would add another dynamic to character relationships.

 

[Naoki]

also, if it isnt in already, lower distance penalty with both legalism and higher ranks. pretty obvious that im not going to answer to a duke with no legalism on the other side of france, but will asnwer to a mighty king with high legalism, even though he is quite far away.

I second this

 

[Garak]

I don't follow.

A "de iure empire" or "de iure kingdom" doesn't mean it's just "justified", it means this territory is declared by God himself, via his first speaker on Earth the Pope in Rome, to belong to this or that empire or kingdom.

Obviously, neither the Orthodox nor the Muslim or Pagan rulers care about or adhere to such declarations.

Also obviously, just because someone is a duke, count or baron somewhere with de iure territory doesn't mean he gets to decide who the king of this kingdom is, and which kingdom's rules apply - that's for God (via the Pope) to decide (at least in theory). Unless that guy is a heretic or heathen, of course - which is why I wrote that the "de iure" rules should only apply to Catholics.

I understand what you mean, but the way the game uses the de jure system appears not to be strictly what the term means in the historical sense. It's a combination of that and a gameplay mechanic. I'm not sure if the game even could handle having half the map not follow any de jure rules.