• 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.

ZoCurious

Second Lieutenant
10 Badges
Jun 2, 2014
169
197
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Crusader Kings III
In Crusader Kings II, AI rulers without sons strove to change Agnatic succession to Agnatic-Cognatic in order to ensure that a daughter of theirs could succeed. Similarly, AI rulers with elective succession laws would institute hereditary succession as soon as they could. Working to ensure the inheritance of one's children made sense from both gameplay and historical points of view. AI vassals had agendas too, frequently demanding elective monarchies; again, perfectly sensible on all accounts.

But that does not happen in Crusader Kings III. If you start in 867, Asturias will forever retain Feudal Elective; West Francia will forever retain Male-Only succession; Scotland will forever retain Tanistry, etc. Rulers do not seem to do much about the prospects of their own progeny, and vassals never seek to have succession laws amended to their own benefit.

But there is a rather annoying exception to this apparent laziness of the AI: Basque characters waste no time changing Male-Preference succession to Equal, despite that being both wildly ahistorical and severely detrimental to the AI in terms of gameplay.

The suggestion therefore is that AI should be inclined to change the succession law whenever the first in line to their top title is not their child and that it should be inclined to seek elective succession to their liege's title.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions: