.png){kind=avatar}
Only once have I had a problem, but that's because I didn't assign anyone with the regency.
- 1
Are Regency COMPLETELY broken?
- Thread starter Jirki88
- 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.
Regencies for me are now properly broken. Whenever I need a regent the guy I designated pops up with the usual " I have been appointed as your regent". But as soon as I unpause a random person will be appointed regent with the same message.
Has anyone else seen this?
Has anyone else seen this?
My first regent ruled for about 4 years. After him wife got in his place followed by some random dude replaced by my heir who was switched by some other dude etc, in total i think 6+ regents. Not one liking me high enough(with bribes and education heir bonuses,chacelor) to at least imprison decadent sibling...
I forget who I was, I think King of Bavaria... But anyways, I had a string of awful luck regarding my characters. They just barely lived to sixteen to produce a male heir and them promptly died, three generations worth of regencies which was quite infuriating. Luckily, I didn't experience this worse than you guys, and my last heir got the event real young where you and your regent become good friends, which meant he let me do whatever the hell I wanted. Just be sure to designate a King/Gregarious unlanded guy as your Regent and you should be good, in all honesty. It worked for me.
Can't say I have any real issue with CK2 regencies. On the other hand EU4 regencies really suck hard. Maybe I just got lucky but I had back to back 15 year regencies last night, no lowering of CA, free to declare war whenever I wished, no problem granting titles to lowborn characters. A couple of times a regent refused to let me gift angry vassal kings but that's about it.
- 1
I usually put my heir (and if he is underaged, my wife or a brother that has titles) as a regent in case something happens.
I have faced minimal issues with regency, worst being that he was taking money from my treasury to give them into charities in my name.
No, but if you have a save from just before the regency, check you don't have two people with the designated regent title. That sounds like the sort of thing that could happen from that. (issue is that if you revoke a title, the minor titles associated with it aren't removed, so you get hordes of commanders you didn't appoint etc.)
- 2
[OT]What is wrong with the EU4 regencies? I have heard people talking about them.[/OT]
dropping in for a mere historical note:
some regents IRL had the guts to (even with kings sons adult, strong and ruling theyr lands) mint theyr own coins.
An english king from Tudor dynasty (the one that started english protestancy hovewer it's called in english) cared little for ruling, most of the job was done by a cardinal loyal to the crown. At first when a noble brought something up he said: his majesty will see to this matter. Later he started saying: we'll see to this matter. By the end it was: I'll see to this
some regents IRL had the guts to (even with kings sons adult, strong and ruling theyr lands) mint theyr own coins.
An english king from Tudor dynasty (the one that started english protestancy hovewer it's called in english) cared little for ruling, most of the job was done by a cardinal loyal to the crown. At first when a noble brought something up he said: his majesty will see to this matter. Later he started saying: we'll see to this matter. By the end it was: I'll see to this
They ban you from declaring war. This has several knock on effects, you stop being able to gain army tradition reducing the quality of your armies and generals. If you have many truces and lots of aggressive expansion penalty they will all expire during the regency making it much more likely that a coalition will form against you. Regents are coded to provide fewer monarch points.
Won a crusade with an old ruler of mine, he died before I could give out the titles.
Unfortunately my regent didn't allow me to give away any titles, so I exceeded the demesne limit at least tenfold. I didn't even wait to see what would happen, I just reloaded to the autosave
Unfortunately my regent didn't allow me to give away any titles, so I exceeded the demesne limit at least tenfold. I didn't even wait to see what would happen, I just reloaded to the autosave
Would the ai waste designated regent on mayors and barons? Whenever it happens it's usually a baron or mayor who steals the regency.
If the revoked title was of a count (very common) its highly likely its gone to a mayor or bishop. They don't have many options.
- 2
Did you designate someone who wasn't at your court as regent? If so, they would be ineligible IIRC from a dev post. You can only have court members actually become regent (courtiers/council members).
Yeah. I really think at the very least, the regent shouldn't be able to modify crown authority more than an actual ruler could. That's really the only thing that I totally hated about regencies. If they wouldn't let the king modify CA 4 times in 10 years, they certainly shouldn't let the regent do that. Regents could screw up a realm historically but they certainly didn't have more power than an adult king.
- 1
I was wondering why I always got sucky random commanders that needed multiple resigns to get to my guy.
.png){kind=avatar}
[/QUOTE]
When you yourself are on a liege's council (Chancellor, maybe?), you occasionally have the option to hand out titles in their name. Or maybe it's that sometimes a Chancellor on your council offers to help with titles. One of those.
Anyway, something like that should absolutely apply to regencies.
And ultimately, I wouldn't say they're broken in any way, just...Shallow. A regency means little more than having restricted options while what it should do is open new gameplay. Regency usurpers, factions against the regent, the above title-handling thing. Maybe if you're away (but not 'incapable'), word could reach you of the regent mishandling your empire or mistreating kin or vassals and you get the option to oust them or otherwise impose your will - say if they continuously refuse a highly-beneficial betrothal, you get a choice to enforce it despite them.
Or you get an event detailing a variety of things the regency is allowing or forbidding and you have the option to enforce a dissenting choice on one of them (whichever you deem most important).
A regent should just act like any AI ruler in the same position with the same traits, with the same power to act, although perhaps at one level less crown authority than currently enacted since regents won't command the same respect the true king would as an adult. Child characters should have no options or ability to perform actions at all except during trait-forming events for those years. A 3 year old can't hand out titles, raise levies, or arrange betrothals. Maybe at 12 or 13 you can start proposing things for the regent to accept or reject. Regents should act in their own interests, giving land to their own dynasty, etc., but keep the child safe because a dead child king could mean no more regency. Regents should always vigorously fight against reductions in crown authority, since the regent benefits from higher authority while in power.
- 1