About succession wars

[Blutharsch121]

Hello.

I tried to do a quick search about the subject, but couldn't find anything.

In the early patches you would get an instant casus belli on a throne you claimed, but recently it seems impossible for the human player to form personal unions at all as you basically never inherit the throne and won't get a casus belli on the weak claimant.
I thought the instant casus belli -thing was stupid, as it's a succession thing, but now the claim seems to cease if the monarch dies, so what's the point? Is this intentional, if it is, is it going to be changed later on, or am I doing something wrong?

 

[TheBloke]

Hello.

I tried to do a quick search about the subject, but couldn't find anything.

You could throw a dart blindfolded at the screen and hit two threads about this mechanic. That said, the search is indeed pretty awful. Use Google, e.g.: site:forum.paradoxplaza.com eu4 claim throne

This thread will get you started: Stupid doubt with PU.

 

[Xara]

The claim doesn't cease when the monarch dies, the claim ceases because they got an heir

You only get the CB now if you share a dynasty and claim the throne

Personal unions still form just fine for the player. They're just not that common to begin with.

 

[Blutharsch121]

You could throw a dart blindfolded at the screen and hit two threads about this mechanic. That said, the search is indeed pretty awful. Use Google, e.g.: site:forum.paradoxplaza.com eu4 claim throne

This thread will get you started: Stupid doubt with PU.

Guess I'm just blind then. Thanks.

 

[Blutharsch121]

The claim doesn't cease when the monarch dies, the claim ceases because they got an heir

You only get the CB now if you share a dynasty and claim the throne

Personal unions still form just fine for the player. They're just not that common to begin with.

They have an heir when I claim the throne. A weak one. That's the point, isn't it? In real life, at least. The wars erupt when the monarch dies and a weak heir is supposed to ascend to the throne. Obviously.

 

[Xara]

Claiming the throne of a weak heir when they are not your dynasty is literally pointless. That option should be greyed out (but doesn't), since it's a relic of the past before the dynasty change. If it is a weak heir and it IS your dynasty, the only purpose to claiming is to launch the claim the throne war yourself. There will be no succession wars over it.

 

[Blutharsch121]

Claiming the throne of a weak heir when they are not your dynasty is literally pointless. That option should be greyed out (but doesn't), since it's a relic of the past before the dynasty change. If it is a weak heir and it IS your dynasty, the only purpose to claiming is to launch the claim the throne war yourself. There will be no succession wars over it.

Obviously I would have done that but I didn't get CB. Apparently I've just been claiming thrones of different dynasties without realizing it, counting on the old logic. Should have realized that after a hundred hours of gameplay, heh. Thank you for the answer.

 

[TheBloke]

Claiming the throne of a weak heir when they are not your dynasty is literally pointless. That option should be greyed out (but doesn't), since it's a relic of the past before the dynasty change. If it is a weak heir and it IS your dynasty, the only purpose to claiming is to launch the claim the throne war yourself. There will be no succession wars over it.

Actually it's not literally pointless. It's effectively pointless.

It does actually do something: it changes "On Monarch death.. Regency for Johnny WeakClaim" to "... A Pretender Rises / Regency for Johnny WeakClaim."

The pretender is ridiculous though, because if the rebels do actually succeed - which is highly unlikely - you gain no benefit from it whatsoever. What one might have presumed is that the pretender would be of your Dynasty, such that if he succeeded you would get your Dynasty on the throne and would in the future have a good chance of Claim Throne->PU.

But the pretender is just from a random Dynasty from the target nation's list. So if he succeeds all that happens is that the target nation gets a different king than he might otherwise.

In fact, it's actually an advantage for them: they won't get any Regency years where with the real heir they may well have done, and I believe it's possible that the pretender king might come with 100% legitimacy where of course the Weak Claim guy did not (don't remember if I checked their legitimacy when I tested it, so not guaranteed on that last point.)

Totally silly, and, like much of the Claim Throne/PU/Dynasty mechanic, very ripe for improvement (and simplification!)

Here's further details and screenshots, from when I tested this in the PU thread I linked earlier: Claiming a Throne when the target has a weak claim heir.