CK2Plus - Suggestion Thread
- Thread starter Rylock
- 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.
- Status
I saw with my own eyes when schism happened everyone besides byzantines became catholic
- 2
my problem: In some kingdoms dynastys are able to remain in power for ever only being replaced with their own kinsmen after rebelklion.
examples are the uqaylid sultanate where the uqaylid dynsatey is able to stay in power even though they face constant rebellions from their Christian vassals. the rebellions are successful but it does not result in the ruling family losing power
Another example is pictland where the Uib Dynasty and the Circcin dynasty fight for the throne but no other familys are able to get involved due to lack of claims on the kingdom of pictland
My solution: give prestigious and high stat vassals the decision of claming the throne much like the decision that vassals of the Byzantine empire have
examples are the uqaylid sultanate where the uqaylid dynsatey is able to stay in power even though they face constant rebellions from their Christian vassals. the rebellions are successful but it does not result in the ruling family losing power
Another example is pictland where the Uib Dynasty and the Circcin dynasty fight for the throne but no other familys are able to get involved due to lack of claims on the kingdom of pictland
My solution: give prestigious and high stat vassals the decision of claming the throne much like the decision that vassals of the Byzantine empire have
Change "Invite priest to court" into "Invite Perfect to court" for Cathars and Bogomils. The generated character, naturally, always has the Perfect trait. I think these two religions need Perfects to appoint as Court Chaplains (I can't think of any other reason I haven't been able to appoint one) which makes it hard for smaller realms to reliably acquire a Court Chaplain at all. And it's good flavor!
- 2
Not saying that at all. It's a very negative trait and given the height they'd be better at concealment and subterfuge. One additional point is within reason.
- 1
- 1
yeah but it makes you more easily identifiable in public...
though perhaps harder to follow in a crowd?
two roman suggestions:
1.: Make it possible to create Pannonia as a roman province from the duchies of Pecs and Esztergom or make them a part of Istria (which actually should be named Pannonia as it covers most of the pannonian Diocesis)
2.: Change the de-jure capital of Aegyptus to Alexandria, which was the seat of roman administration in the area
and additionally: Could you please finally fix Egypt? It is much too short as it is now; e.g. Thebes should be where in game the county of Faras is
Edit: 3.: in Imperial governed realms, there are buildings in the holdings reducing overall levy a bit. How about decreasing the levy even more but instead adding an increase of retinue? This would emulate a professional army with most of its trappings - it being expensive to keep up and replenish after battle with quick expansion easily bancrupting an Empire
1.: Make it possible to create Pannonia as a roman province from the duchies of Pecs and Esztergom or make them a part of Istria (which actually should be named Pannonia as it covers most of the pannonian Diocesis)
2.: Change the de-jure capital of Aegyptus to Alexandria, which was the seat of roman administration in the area
and additionally: Could you please finally fix Egypt? It is much too short as it is now; e.g. Thebes should be where in game the county of Faras is
Edit: 3.: in Imperial governed realms, there are buildings in the holdings reducing overall levy a bit. How about decreasing the levy even more but instead adding an increase of retinue? This would emulate a professional army with most of its trappings - it being expensive to keep up and replenish after battle with quick expansion easily bancrupting an Empire
Last edited:
- 1
A suggestion for duels:
Have more injury results/traits. I know there's the generic Wounded and Maimed trait, but I'd like to see specific ones, like 'Lost Right Arm', or 'Amputated Left Leg'. I know it's a bit macabre, but it would be interesting to have specific outcomes, to add to the RP'ing experience.
Have more injury results/traits. I know there's the generic Wounded and Maimed trait, but I'd like to see specific ones, like 'Lost Right Arm', or 'Amputated Left Leg'. I know it's a bit macabre, but it would be interesting to have specific outcomes, to add to the RP'ing experience.
- 2
Huh, didn't know that.
But yeah, it could be something like that. For example, an amputated leg could be a sign of dishonor, but there could be a counter trait, like a pegleg (lol, pirate Crusaders
), which gives you similar effects to the vanilla 'Scarred' trait.
in the code
In the future, ask stuff like this in "Quick questions, quick answers" thread.
If your ruler is muslim, you can start a new dynasty if no longer in the same realm as dynasty head.
That's actually an easy one.
Otherwise, you need to be a king... it's a long condition.
You have to be independent, and your dynasty head cannot be in the same realm.
No seniority, tanistry or elective gavelkind.
Female must be matri maried. Male cannot be matri married.
You have to be a legitimised bastard, or be a part of dynasty with more than 40 live members.
Dynasty head cannot be a close relative.
You need to have heirs, and you need 1000 of prestige.
You need to have trait ambitious.
etc.
Code:
start_dynasty_king = {
potential = {
is_ruler = yes
is_adult = yes
holy_order = no
mercenary = no
OR = {
is_tribal = yes
is_feudal = yes
is_merchant_republic = yes
is_patrician = yes
}
OR = {
is_female = no
is_married_matrilineally = yes
}
OR = {
is_female = yes
is_married_matrilineally = no
}
OR = {
primary_title = {
NOT = {
has_law = succ_tanistry
has_law = succ_seniority
has_law = succ_elective_gavelkind
}
}
independent = yes
dynasty_head = { NOT = { same_realm = ROOT } }
}
OR = {
any_dynasty_member = { is_alive = yes count = 40 }
trait = legit_bastard
}
dynasty_head = {
NOR = {
character = ROOT
any_child = { is_married = ROOT }
ROOT = { any_child = { is_close_relative = PREVPREV } }
}
#dynasty head is not a close relative to him or his parents or is of a different culture
OR = {
NOT = {
is_close_relative = ROOT
ROOT = { father_even_if_dead = { is_close_relative = PREVPREV } }
ROOT = { mother_even_if_dead = { is_close_relative = PREVPREV } }
}
NOT = {
culture = ROOT
is_father = ROOT
is_mother = ROOT
}
}
}
NOR = {
religion_group = muslim
trait = incapable
has_character_flag = started_new_dynasty
}
}
allow = {
war = no
prisoner = no
prestige = 1000
trait = ambitious
OR = {
higher_tier_than = DUKE
AND = {
higher_tier_than = COUNT
independent = yes
}
}
custom_tooltip = {
text = HAS_POSSIBLE_DYNASTY_HEIR
hidden_tooltip = {
any_child = {
dynasty = ROOT
OR = {
is_female = no
ROOT = { NOT = { has_law = agnatic_succession } }
}
OR = {
is_female = yes
ROOT = { NOT = { has_law = enatic_succession } }
}
}
}
}
}- 1
I'd like a option for the Revive Ancient Religions where instead of completely destroying the vanilla religions it merely reduces them to a single kingdom. For example Chalcedonian would be reduced to Lombardy, Apostolic to Armenia, Coptic to Abyssinia, Jewish to Jerusalem/Israel, and Sunni to Arabia. I want to have the feeling that the Abrahamic religions aren't dead, just very small.
I find the condition of person whose claim is pressed by other ruler becoming the vassal of the said ruler kind of incomplete.
Why if the claimant is distantly related to the ruler( i.e. has the same dynasty) this person becomes the ruler's vassal but if said claimant is a wife of the ruler or the ruler's heir(or husband in matrilineal marriage) she(or he) does not?
I find this kind of strange (and in some cases it can lead to an unpredicted outcomes; say you claimed your wife's title, she died before you and your heir inherited her title; if foreign inheritance is banned in your kingdom you lose your heir; or your wife may have sweared fealty to her de jure liege; if he has higher rank than you, your heir will not be independent after he inherits your titles even if you were).
While not allowing marrying your dynasty members to daughters of neighboring lords, pressing their claims and thus enlarging your realm may be a balance issue I find it historically unjustified. In case the succession was disputable (and since these daughters almost certainly have only week claims, the succession is disputable in case you able to press the claim) neighboring rulers claimed the title for their wives (or children of said wives) plenty of times.
So I suggest replacing the condition in on_success funciton of other_claim cb in 00_cb_types.txt
with something along the lines of:
and adding something like he line "\n- §Y$CLAIMANT$§! is a wife in regular marriage or husband in matrilineal marriage of §Y$PRESSER$§! or §Y$PRESSER$§!'s close relative." to the corresponding other_claim_desc text in zz_CK2Plus_casus_beli.csv.
any_close_relative function can even be substituted by any_dynasty_member in order to be more uniform(though I personally feel any_close_relative both more balanced and more historically justified).
In my copy of the game these changes work just as they supposed to.
Why if the claimant is distantly related to the ruler( i.e. has the same dynasty) this person becomes the ruler's vassal but if said claimant is a wife of the ruler or the ruler's heir(or husband in matrilineal marriage) she(or he) does not?
I find this kind of strange (and in some cases it can lead to an unpredicted outcomes; say you claimed your wife's title, she died before you and your heir inherited her title; if foreign inheritance is banned in your kingdom you lose your heir; or your wife may have sweared fealty to her de jure liege; if he has higher rank than you, your heir will not be independent after he inherits your titles even if you were).
While not allowing marrying your dynasty members to daughters of neighboring lords, pressing their claims and thus enlarging your realm may be a balance issue I find it historically unjustified. In case the succession was disputable (and since these daughters almost certainly have only week claims, the succession is disputable in case you able to press the claim) neighboring rulers claimed the title for their wives (or children of said wives) plenty of times.
So I suggest replacing the condition in on_success funciton of other_claim cb in 00_cb_types.txt
Code:
# check if we qualify for staying in the realm & inform player of result with a tooltip
if = {
limit = {
OR = {
de_jure_liege_or_above = FROMFROM
ROOT = {
any_liege = {
character = FROMFROM
primary_title = { higher_tier_than = PREVPREVPREV }
}
}
}
OR = {
de_jure_liege_or_above = FROMFROM
ROOT = { primary_title = { higher_tier_than = PREVPREV } }
ROOT = { primary_title = { tier = PREVPREV } }
ROOT = {
any_dynasty_member = {
character = FROMFROM
}
}
}
}
# mark as staying in the realm
ROOT = { set_character_flag = stay_in_realm }
custom_tooltip = { text = CUSTOMTOOLTIP1 }
}
if = {
limit = {
OR = {
NOT = {
OR = {
de_jure_liege_or_above = FROMFROM
ROOT = {
any_liege = {
character = FROMFROM
primary_title = { higher_tier_than = PREVPREVPREV }
}
}
}
}
NOR = {
de_jure_liege_or_above = FROMFROM
ROOT = { primary_title = { higher_tier_than = PREVPREV } }
ROOT = { primary_title = { tier = PREVPREV } }
ROOT = {
any_dynasty_member = {
character = FROMFROM
}
}
}
}
}
custom_tooltip = { text = CUSTOMTOOLTIP2 }
}with something along the lines of:
Code:
# check if we qualify for staying in the realm & inform player of result with a tooltip
if = {
limit = {
OR = {
de_jure_liege_or_above = FROMFROM
ROOT = {
any_liege = {
character = FROMFROM
primary_title = { higher_tier_than = PREVPREVPREV }
}
}
}
OR = {
de_jure_liege_or_above = FROMFROM
ROOT = { primary_title = { higher_tier_than = PREVPREV } }
ROOT = { primary_title = { tier = PREVPREV } }
ROOT = {
any_dynasty_member = {
character = FROMFROM
}
}
ROOT = {
any_spouse = {
OR = {
any_close_relative = {
character = FROMFROM
}
character = FROMFROM
}
}
OR = {
is_female = yes
AND = {
is_female = no
is_married_matrilineally = yes
}
}
}
}
}
# mark as staying in the realm
ROOT = { set_character_flag = stay_in_realm }
custom_tooltip = { text = CUSTOMTOOLTIP1 }
}
if = {
limit = {
OR = {
NOT = {
OR = {
de_jure_liege_or_above = FROMFROM
ROOT = {
any_liege = {
character = FROMFROM
primary_title = { higher_tier_than = PREVPREVPREV }
}
}
}
}
NOR = {
de_jure_liege_or_above = FROMFROM
ROOT = { primary_title = { higher_tier_than = PREVPREV } }
ROOT = { primary_title = { tier = PREVPREV } }
ROOT = {
any_dynasty_member = {
character = FROMFROM
}
}
ROOT = {
any_spouse = {
OR = {
any_close_relative = {
character = FROMFROM
}
character = FROMFROM
}
}
OR = {
is_female = yes
AND = {
is_female = no
is_married_matrilineally = yes
}
}
}
}
}
}
custom_tooltip = { text = CUSTOMTOOLTIP2 }
}and adding something like he line "\n- §Y$CLAIMANT$§! is a wife in regular marriage or husband in matrilineal marriage of §Y$PRESSER$§! or §Y$PRESSER$§!'s close relative." to the corresponding other_claim_desc text in zz_CK2Plus_casus_beli.csv.
any_close_relative function can even be substituted by any_dynasty_member in order to be more uniform(though I personally feel any_close_relative both more balanced and more historically justified).
In my copy of the game these changes work just as they supposed to.
So, I've played a game in the Finland region (starting as Karelia) from 867 to about 1130. I must say, the game has improved a lot (assuming CK2+) in some aspects since last time I played, but I also saw some problems. I'd like to share some feedback from my game in case it's useful.
First, AI countries have huge troubles transitioning to more advanced government type. Right now, the situation is as such: I am a Finnish Orthodox kingdom spanning from most of present-day Finland from the north to Courland, Novgorod and Samoyed lands in the south and east. There are other major kingdoms that have converted from paganism: Sweden and Norway (Catholic) and Muscovy, Kiev and Volga (Orthodox), along with the Hungarians of course (also Catholic). Neither of them have gotten out of Tribal government yet. Only a few smaller realms have transitioned to feudalism (a single duchy in Perm, a single county in northern Norway, and similar such extremely small countries). Larger realms seem to have trouble getting the necessary Tribal Organization due to constant revolts. I checked Sweden before I quit for the day: it's at Medium tribal organization. For an AI country, getting 2000 prestige and not having Tribal Organization rolled back by rebellion is a steep achievement, the more so the larger the realm is. I propose that AI countries should be given a "helping hand" with feudalization, either by cutting the prestige requirements (by 50%, perhaps), by reducing the Tribal Organization requirement for feudalization to High/Medium after certain cutoff dates (or otherwise getting some bonus, perhaps after 1000 or 1100, that helps them upgrade), or maybe both. I can playtest if necessary, though I don't know how to make such changes myself (or I'd already have experimented with it).
Second, the raids. Oh man, the raids. They're really frustrating. I'm not sure who can raid at this point, but it seems like every Norse individual, vassal or liege, pagan or Christian, seemed to be able to raid me. Only once they went Swedish and Danish did it seem like they stopped. At any rate, it made for an extremely frustrating experience with all the raids. I don't suppose anything can be done to either lessen raid frequency or make vassals or Christians not raid?
Thirdly, the council mechanics introduced with Conclave still seem a bit unpolished (vanilla's fault), but especially Glory Hounds. They constantly block warfare against weaker realms because "it wouldn't bring glory", nevermind the fact that there are plenty of sensible wars against smaller realms that nobody would oppose. I really don't know of any ways to fix the council mechanics, I'm just inquiring if the CK2+ staff have any plans of poking the Conclave mechanics or if you guys are just hoping for Paradox to clean things up. (Edit: A simple improvement would be making Glory Hounds' war decisions be "swayed by the diplomacy of other voters" if the target isn't glorious enough, instead of them just simply refusing to poach weak targets. The idea of Glory Hounds is still stupid, but such is life.)
Fourthly, adventurers. This is a huge problem IMO. Adventurers seem to have a constant strength of about 5k men, give or take a thousand, consistently throughout the timeline, regardless of target strength. For a small realm, a 5k stack is an insurmountable obstacle that pretty much just presents an automatic game over or "here, you will now lose the best duchy of your realm, there is nothing you can do about it - oh, and the 5k stack is going to stay after the war and it'll be used to dismantle the rest of your realm every time the truce expires". I only managed to survive the adventurers in my game due to abusing tributaries and, in some cases, some really buggy behavior that made my warscore suddenly go to 100% without a fight. (I can't even begin to think how I'd debug that. Probably a vanilla issue.) Similarly, however, the hosts do not seem to rise much above 5k in strength against larger realms. For the Byzantine Empire, for the Andalusian Sultanate, or even just for my modest Kingdom of Finland as it stands around 1130, such hosts are just an annoyance. Wouldn't there be a way to make adventurer hosts scale more strongly based on target strength? Because I feel this is a huge issue that really ought to be fixed. Perhaps the biggest problem in this post as far as playability is concerned.
Finally, the Hungarian names are borked as ever - I was thinking, would anyone on CK2+ be interested in me submitting an edited version of the cultures file with a list of better, more thematic Hungarian names? For example, "Gazsi" is a common nickname for (usually Roma) men in 21st century Hungary, not the 11th century. In general, the Hungarian name list contains a ton of nicknames and modern names, while others are just flat-out misspelled. I know that things like this are probably not high priority for the mod staff, but if you do believe that I am able to make a better list (I am Hungarian, after all) then it's not like it'll cost you anything to accept such a contribution, which is why I thought I'd ask.
First, AI countries have huge troubles transitioning to more advanced government type. Right now, the situation is as such: I am a Finnish Orthodox kingdom spanning from most of present-day Finland from the north to Courland, Novgorod and Samoyed lands in the south and east. There are other major kingdoms that have converted from paganism: Sweden and Norway (Catholic) and Muscovy, Kiev and Volga (Orthodox), along with the Hungarians of course (also Catholic). Neither of them have gotten out of Tribal government yet. Only a few smaller realms have transitioned to feudalism (a single duchy in Perm, a single county in northern Norway, and similar such extremely small countries). Larger realms seem to have trouble getting the necessary Tribal Organization due to constant revolts. I checked Sweden before I quit for the day: it's at Medium tribal organization. For an AI country, getting 2000 prestige and not having Tribal Organization rolled back by rebellion is a steep achievement, the more so the larger the realm is. I propose that AI countries should be given a "helping hand" with feudalization, either by cutting the prestige requirements (by 50%, perhaps), by reducing the Tribal Organization requirement for feudalization to High/Medium after certain cutoff dates (or otherwise getting some bonus, perhaps after 1000 or 1100, that helps them upgrade), or maybe both. I can playtest if necessary, though I don't know how to make such changes myself (or I'd already have experimented with it).
Second, the raids. Oh man, the raids. They're really frustrating. I'm not sure who can raid at this point, but it seems like every Norse individual, vassal or liege, pagan or Christian, seemed to be able to raid me. Only once they went Swedish and Danish did it seem like they stopped. At any rate, it made for an extremely frustrating experience with all the raids. I don't suppose anything can be done to either lessen raid frequency or make vassals or Christians not raid?
Thirdly, the council mechanics introduced with Conclave still seem a bit unpolished (vanilla's fault), but especially Glory Hounds. They constantly block warfare against weaker realms because "it wouldn't bring glory", nevermind the fact that there are plenty of sensible wars against smaller realms that nobody would oppose. I really don't know of any ways to fix the council mechanics, I'm just inquiring if the CK2+ staff have any plans of poking the Conclave mechanics or if you guys are just hoping for Paradox to clean things up. (Edit: A simple improvement would be making Glory Hounds' war decisions be "swayed by the diplomacy of other voters" if the target isn't glorious enough, instead of them just simply refusing to poach weak targets. The idea of Glory Hounds is still stupid, but such is life.)
Fourthly, adventurers. This is a huge problem IMO. Adventurers seem to have a constant strength of about 5k men, give or take a thousand, consistently throughout the timeline, regardless of target strength. For a small realm, a 5k stack is an insurmountable obstacle that pretty much just presents an automatic game over or "here, you will now lose the best duchy of your realm, there is nothing you can do about it - oh, and the 5k stack is going to stay after the war and it'll be used to dismantle the rest of your realm every time the truce expires". I only managed to survive the adventurers in my game due to abusing tributaries and, in some cases, some really buggy behavior that made my warscore suddenly go to 100% without a fight. (I can't even begin to think how I'd debug that. Probably a vanilla issue.) Similarly, however, the hosts do not seem to rise much above 5k in strength against larger realms. For the Byzantine Empire, for the Andalusian Sultanate, or even just for my modest Kingdom of Finland as it stands around 1130, such hosts are just an annoyance. Wouldn't there be a way to make adventurer hosts scale more strongly based on target strength? Because I feel this is a huge issue that really ought to be fixed. Perhaps the biggest problem in this post as far as playability is concerned.
Finally, the Hungarian names are borked as ever - I was thinking, would anyone on CK2+ be interested in me submitting an edited version of the cultures file with a list of better, more thematic Hungarian names? For example, "Gazsi" is a common nickname for (usually Roma) men in 21st century Hungary, not the 11th century. In general, the Hungarian name list contains a ton of nicknames and modern names, while others are just flat-out misspelled. I know that things like this are probably not high priority for the mod staff, but if you do believe that I am able to make a better list (I am Hungarian, after all) then it's not like it'll cost you anything to accept such a contribution, which is why I thought I'd ask.
Last edited:
Wrt this: would it be possible to make the cost dependent on time or tech or the number of neighboring feudal realms or something?
Oh yeah, that might be a decent one: a certain level of Legalism (3 maybe? Based on my playtesting so far, level 3 Legalism is kind of what you reach by around the year 1000, though I might have to see how various AI realms tech up) as a substitute for Absolute Tribal Organization. 4 Legalism is perhaps a bit high. Even if it's just AI realms that can use this "shortcut" to feudalism/merchant republic status, I think it'd definitely help.
(Edit: Actually, isn't there already a Legalism requirement? Can't remember right now. Well, anyway.)
Last edited:
IIRC, this is the way vanilla works, but CK2+ changed it to requiring adventurers to seek out support. The amount of support, and wealth, they get is what determines their starting forces if i understand everything. This way there's no magical 100k+ army that pops out of nowhere followed by a second army a few months later.
- Status