[July 2014] Still can't imprison decadents without becoming a Tyrant?
- Thread starter JohannSig
- 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.
Yeah, I think that it's fine if you manage it correctly, ie NEVER land a family member, never marry any sons but your primary heir, imprison anyone who becomes decadent (and execute them), and observe Ramadan as often as you can. Winning Holy Wars is a great way to lower decadence, but if you're obsessive about your dynasty it's not that bad.
That combined with the bonuses you get from going to Mecca (and others), you're usually able to survive a 20-40 tyranny malus without too much trouble.
But yeah, don't land dynasty members... ever.
That combined with the bonuses you get from going to Mecca (and others), you're usually able to survive a 20-40 tyranny malus without too much trouble.
But yeah, don't land dynasty members... ever.
Landing family members really cuts your chance for them being decadent...in fact, if you're an emperor and you make them kings, they can't become decadent at all. Not to mention that refusing family members titles will mean you'll be swimming in adventurers.
Short-term gain for long-term pain...
My most recent Muslim realm:
Entire male dynasty consists of 4 adults, one of whom is my heir (and landed), one of whom is in jail (decadent).
Link to big image
If they're at your court they can't get married without your permission. Sure you get the occasional adventurer popping up, but once you're a certain size you can easily deal with them anyway.
An important note is that some dynasty members get a "rank" where they gain decadence at a MUCH higher rate than some. I don't understand this part of it. Some members get me +.05/month while others net me .4/month. Big difference in those two dec growth rates.
The problem with this is that landed members will breed like rabbits. The average number of male offspring a landed muslim character gets is pretty high. Even if they don't become landed themselves and slowly die off childless, they will still linger around for up to 60 years on average and will very likely turn decadent. Then the inheriting son will make another batch of kids and so on until you have a whole host of kinsmen, both old and young, that are ruining your decadence score.
I did have a game where I just went nuts handing out duchies to dynasty members... it was managable for a while but then eventually I had 8+ members that were decadent and couldn't be straightened up and the number was simply growing. Most of them were well like so paid assassinations were the only option (and I kept receiving -60 broke feudal obligations if I was discovered). I ran out of people to holy war (I was in India) and soon the lack of wars and titles to hand out made it unmanagable. I struggled on for another 100 years or so before jumping ship and converting to Zoroastrianism.
In my opinion you should be able to ask again after certain time goes by. Its stupid that you have to kill your relatives that you are otherwise in good terms just because of decadence. Something like five to ten years between request would be sufficient to keep it challenging. Not all muslim dynasties were small. Also if the ruler changes between those five to ten years you can ask again immidiatly as it was not the ruler who now rulers who asked but the previous one. Why would that prevent you from asking him to stop being decadent. Not to mention many times the character can become decandent almost immidiatly after you ask so its a mood point to even ask.
Decadent Caliphs does just this, it's a mod in the steam workshop. However I think for king level titles the cooldown is like 10-15 years or something, which is still too long in my opinion.
Well, this has been informational!
According to how the decadent trait works in an above post, it seems that I can have landed King dynasty members beneath me without fear of them growing decadent. It's the dukes and lower that are causing me problems.
Does the Muslim AI carelessly land male dynasty members like I did or can I trust them not to do my mistakes?
According to how the decadent trait works in an above post, it seems that I can have landed King dynasty members beneath me without fear of them growing decadent. It's the dukes and lower that are causing me problems.
Does the Muslim AI carelessly land male dynasty members like I did or can I trust them not to do my mistakes?
Last edited:
I think the AI prefers to land its dynasts, which is why Muslim realms always explode.
I still say decadence is broken until they introduce a decay modifier for it, or have relatives only contribute a static amount that doesn't go up over time. You should be able to tolerate a few decadent relatives, with penalties of course, otherwise you're just shooting yourself in the foot if you allow your dynasty to grow. In that sense, the current system isn't much better than the one we had before.
The thing I don't like about it is that it forces (entices?) you to play a certain way - Never landing family members, imprisoning and killing (either through execution or the Oubelette) as many as you need to. In my game it was 100+ years later (for some reason it didn't save the last date I was playing it, as I'd taken France/Brittany, etc) and my entire male dynasty was 4 members. As a result, no decadence... However, I'd love to see Decadence be an ebb and flow type of aspect, with some characters increasing it while others decrease it through holy wars and celebrating Ramadan.
yeah, but then what about when they have their own families? If they have 7 or 8 grandchildren chances are some of them will be decadent.
Now if you do that multiple times, with a big realm, you'll have decadent characters coming of age all the fricken time, and you'll have to piss off vassals (who may very well have claims on your titles) by imprisoning their relatives
Then I can't risk having dynastic members run my kingdoms for me without inevitably becoming a Tyrant from cleaning up THEIR offpsring mess
Such a shame.I am left with either running the entire Empire on my own or granting kingdoms to *shudder* inferior dynasties.
Then I can't risk having dynastic members run my kingdoms for me without inevitably becoming a Tyrant from cleaning up THEIR offpsring mess
I am left with either running the entire Empire on my own or granting kingdoms to *shudder* inferior dynasties.
Run the entire Empire on your own. With 2.0 levies you'll have more than enough troops from your demesne and retinues and not even need king-vassal troops, *and* you'll avoid the whole -25 Vassal King malus. Clamp Medium CA on the realm and you'll have a super-stable Empire where everyone loves you (except for that occasional imprisoning/executing malus).
So I decided to try again with only dynastic Kings (not dukes and counts) and can confirm what someone said earlier about them providing every bum with a wife and proceeding to breed like rats. So THAT option went off the table real quick.
Then I had fun bulldozing my way over kingdoms both faithful and heathen, using retinue forces only, and installing "fresh" (my culture, no claims) Zealot Kings in my wake ^^ Vassal Kings with the Zealot trait flip county religions in their care amazingly fast - at times it felt like I had 5 Court Chaplains all at work. The other great thing about the Vassal Kings was when I had to hunt down the frequent infidel/peasant uprisings that sprout during "cleanup" - they allow me to spawn their liege levies at a single county not far from said rebels to kill them off quickly.
I still think it's silly to have a Decadence game mechanic that suggests to Players that landing Dynasty members will lower it, when in reality doing so will only make things worse. NOT landing Dynasty members, as was suggested before in this thread, is a much better way to go but sadly renders the Decadence mechanic useless (Not a single Family member went decadent on me).
I miss having my dynastic members running the "Family Company" with me (I kinda felt like a Borgia securing my family's legacy), but not being able to straighten them up or put them in jail if they whine about it is a dealbreaker.
Then I had fun bulldozing my way over kingdoms both faithful and heathen, using retinue forces only, and installing "fresh" (my culture, no claims) Zealot Kings in my wake ^^ Vassal Kings with the Zealot trait flip county religions in their care amazingly fast - at times it felt like I had 5 Court Chaplains all at work. The other great thing about the Vassal Kings was when I had to hunt down the frequent infidel/peasant uprisings that sprout during "cleanup" - they allow me to spawn their liege levies at a single county not far from said rebels to kill them off quickly.
I still think it's silly to have a Decadence game mechanic that suggests to Players that landing Dynasty members will lower it, when in reality doing so will only make things worse. NOT landing Dynasty members, as was suggested before in this thread, is a much better way to go but sadly renders the Decadence mechanic useless (Not a single Family member went decadent on me).
I miss having my dynastic members running the "Family Company" with me (I kinda felt like a Borgia securing my family's legacy), but not being able to straighten them up or put them in jail if they whine about it is a dealbreaker.