CK2Plus - Suggestion Thread

[Chthonios]

I'd add a pre-Muslim pagan faith if there was anything more than vague information to go on. Honestly, I wouldn't even know what to call it.

Understandable. I know the Nabataeans worshiped Dushara and Al-'Uzza', along with other various deities. There is some information about the pre-Islamic belifs here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabian_mythology

I know the Slavic and Baltic faiths are in game and I believe there is a similar level of historical knowledge about them (as compared to the ancient Arabs).

 

[jtjh95]

When you use Shattered Realms (Integrated into CK2) and use it too form all Kingdoms can we have it so that all Dukedoms are created too within that Kingdom, Currently everyone is a 1 county owner.

 

[animatrix37]

Sure you're not using a mod? Sogdians have the same cultural retinue that the Afghani and Balochs have as well as the entire Iranian group uses the same cultural building as the Altaic group not just the Tocharians.

I tested it out. Retinues appear for Sogdians in vanilla but for some reason when I play with CK2Plus all the retinues disappear. I guess I'll go put his in the bug section.

 

[Forwe]

I'm not sure whether it's possible or not, but could the "Studying the Stars" event chain from scholarship focus not decrease your opinion with temple vassals if you are lollard or waldensian?(I'm not an expert on those two heresies, but I guess it would be fitting for them to disprove the beliefs of the Church)

 

[MariusMR87]

A suggestion for the Roman Empire events: the addition of Provincia Pannonia?

 

[animatrix37]

How about personal deities for pagans to choose from, similar to the Hindu system?

 

[schwarherz]

How about personal deities for pagans to choose from, similar to the Hindu system?

We have something like that for the Hellenics. Applying it to all religions would be far too much work for far too little gain imo.

 

[N1ghteyes]

If we capture a female ruler as a culture/religion that allows concubines could we take them as such? Currently in my game i have 2 duchesses and a countess from various parts of the isles in my dungeon and im not allowed to, though its the same in vanilla as far as im aware. I know it would be super overpowered to make landed females into concubines, but if when you did they abdicated to their heir and only recieved a weak inheritable claim then that would work right?

 

[malta3]

Are more flavour/mechanics for non-germanic pagans planned? Since vanilla germanic takes ideas from real life events and customs I once read through the history of the other faiths and got a few ideas that could work well as ingame mechanics, I could post them here if wanted.

 

[schwarherz]

Are more flavour/mechanics for non-germanic pagans planned? Since vanilla germanic takes ideas from real life events and customs I once read through the history of the other faiths and got a few ideas that could work well as ingame mechanics, I could post them here if wanted.

That's what this thread is for. Go ahead. No promises that we'll use them, however. I'll admit to being curious as to what you found. I could find little to nothing about the Baltic and Slavic faiths.

 

[animatrix37]

Is it possible to make it so that tributaries don't automatically become independent when a ruler dies, maybe in the way that tribal vassals get the option of declaring independence at a ruler's death and this leads to a free tributary war, so tributaries can only leave their suzerain through free tributary cb and the tributary war cb by another independent country to become the new suzerain. Maybe also some tributary oriented events that affect relation between them and their suzerain as well as the tributary itself, like maybe a suzerain demanding more tribute and thus leading to your vassals urging you to declare independence, with you making the decision of staying loyal or fighting for freedom.

 

[daniloy]

Interesting thing I found about the Ibadi.

“The righteous Imamate is a topic of great importance in Ibadi legal literature. The Imam should be chosen for his knowledge and piety, without any regard to race or lineage. He should be chosen by the elders of the community [...]”

Perhaps the Ibadi Caliphate should be become a imamate, with traits like sayyid or mirza being irrelevant. Not sure about the rest.

Source: http://islam.uga.edu/ibadis.html

 

[Rylock]

Is it possible to make it so that tributaries don't automatically become independent when a ruler dies, maybe in the way that tribal vassals get the option of declaring independence at a ruler's death and this leads to a free tributary war, so tributaries can only leave their suzerain through free tributary cb and the tributary war cb by another independent country to become the new suzerain.

I'm considering doing this. It would mean the tributary status would still break if the title changed hands any way other than death (such as through usurpation), but otherwise not.

Currently I'm torn over whether to simply have the tributary status continue without comment (meaning it simply doesn't break at all, and the only way to break out of being a tributary -- other than one of the titles being usurped, as above -- would be to invoke the already-available CB) or to have an event when either party died ("X has died, so now would be the time to break free -- do you want to?"). Not sure the event part of it is really necessary.

 

[Ferrero]

or to have an event when either party died ("X has died, so now would be the time to break free -- do you want to?"). Not sure the event part of it is really necessary.

If the check weren't too heavy on the CPU I'd go for it, allowing for realms with many tributaries to lose them when a weak ruler succeeds.

 

[Ferrero]

Small suggestion: shifting power balance.

Waiting for the addition of estates (see next EUIV DLC), I think we could add a little event: every year, each county has a small but >0 chance of being granted to a subordinate barony, this probability weighed on

• opinion of baron-tier vs count
• wealth+manpower of baron vs count
• city/church/castle technology vs technology type of holder (eg. city in a feudal county)

if the AI decides to ask for autonomy

• if the count is AI and mono-county, he becomes a baron with a claim
• player with only one county: no risk (playability)
• if the count is AI or human and holds more than one county, it becomes indipendent (or under the same liege), the previous owner has a claim
• if the count has a liege it gets an event: he can allow it, earning better relations with all the other vassals of the same type, or oppose it, causing unrest in the province
• no chance of usurpation with tribals or mosque vs iqta

why am I suggesting this? Because, as it currently stands, 90% of the time there is no power shift during the campaign, so that counts hold the power in Northen Italy or Flanders or in the future Hansa in 867 and they retain it unless the player intervenes. This would also let making bishops in charge of several parts of Western Europe in the High Middle Ages, losing then power to both the landed nobility and the burghers.

 

[Azarias59]

Just a suggestion that the excommunication mechanic needs to be updated/reworked somehow. In a lot of my recent test games with 3.0, I've had nearly 50% of the rulers in europe excommunicated at the same time, including young rulers who are still children with regents. I think it should be harder to excommunicate someone or just cost more in general to use it.

Also, I know that long ago, Wiz changed the mechanic so you can't automatically try to depose an excommunicate in order to prevent abuses to it but this brings up an issue when Anti-Popes pop up as there is no present decision available to depose the Anti-Pope in CK2+. I also know that the religious authority malus was taken out to counter act the steep anti-pope negative modifier but I think the entire mechanic needs to be reworked to at least allow for the deposing of an anti-pope decision and a greater cost to excommunication or just a higher requirement in order to ask the pope to do so.

In vanilla it is nearly impossible to excommunicate someone. Does CK2+ change much with regards to it?

 

[Azarias59]

Small suggestion: shifting power balance.

Waiting for the addition of estates (see next EUIV DLC), I think we could add a little event: every year, each county has a small but >0 chance of being granted to a subordinate barony, this probability weighed on

• opinion of baron-tier vs count
• wealth+manpower of baron vs count
• city/church/castle technology vs technology type of holder (eg. city in a feudal county)

if the AI decides to ask for autonomy

• if the count is AI and mono-county, he becomes a baron with a claim
• player with only one county: no risk (playability)
• if the count is AI or human and holds more than one county, it becomes indipendent (or under the same liege), the previous owner has a claim
• if the count has a liege it gets an event: he can allow it, earning better relations with all the other vassals of the same type, or oppose it, causing unrest in the province
• no chance of usurpation with tribals or mosque vs iqta

why am I suggesting this? Because, as it currently stands, 90% of the time there is no power shift during the campaign, so that counts hold the power in Northen Italy or Flanders or in the future Hansa in 867 and they retain it unless the player intervenes. This would also let making bishops in charge of several parts of Western Europe in the High Middle Ages, losing then power to both the landed nobility and the burghers.

I don't think this is realistic tbh - at least not for feudal realms.

 

[Ferrero]

I don't think this is realistic tbh - at least not for feudal realms.

Why not? I'm just basing on historical occurences in Northern Italy, Flanders and Germany: the burghers became richer and powerful, wrestling control from the local nobles and gaining autonomy but CK2 fails to portray realistically non land-based powers such as the city states: mayors are basically powerless once you become a duke, the Prosperity faction is the only way republics can throw their weigh in but only by undermining their overlord's, not gaining power. Cities were actually important players in the Holy Roman Empire, and they could also represent the Swiss wars.
Right, outside the Empire I don't know many examples, but I can cite Novgorod, Pskov, Ragusa and the taifa of Cordoba (a noble republic), but probably there are other smaller examples.

Now, for bishoprics: again, the struggle between lords and bishops was an important part of the Middle Ages in Europe: many city-states were originally under the authority of a bishop, the Free Imperial Cities were founded to be under his authority, and bishops key administrative figures in the Carolingian and Ottonian empires. In India too some rulers granted large swathes of land to the temples.

So, what would this mechanic mean? Simply that the de facto main power in a county is now being held by a different kind of government, who can project it on the other holdings as well. It could be probably limited to a bunch of regions where this historically happened.

 

[Orinsul]

It seems like something that might slow the game to a standstill, tracking three estates in every province.

 

[Ferrero]

It seems like something that might slow the game to a standstill, tracking three estates in every province.

It's my fear as well, this is why I'd only make it trigger in some regions. Anyway there ought to be a workaround, because there are way fewer bishops around the 11th century and way fewer republics than there should be in the 15th century. Of course trends could be reverted, but as it stands now the estates holding power stays basically unchanged.