It marks the name as a cultural variant on some name that exists in other cultures. So if you're a Finn named Soini and flip to Swedish culture you'll become Sven and vice versa. They're also considered the same name for regnal numbering.
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
Thought it might be something like that. Thanks for sharing.
But were they cut for a good reason in the first place?
CK2Plus has already re-incorporated some of the cut features (e.g. King's Peace). And isn't the point of the mod to provide a more historical and realistic experience?
It'd be great if you could make a concise list of what was cut and why you, or someone else might think it'd be great to bring it back.
I'll start with the post I quoted: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...-the-2-5-2-patch.908792/page-17#post-20687735
The reasons are pretty obvious. They existed because they were realistic, but also to make blobbing harder. They were cut because people complained they made the game too hard (which they didn't if you weren't trash at the game).
So, in short, bring back:
-The modifier that increases likelihood of vassal to seek independence the further it is from the capital of the realm
-Pre-SoA vassal-on-vassal plots if CA is below high
-Mercs having a chance (IIRC 50%) of revolting if unpaid, instead of just disbanding
-Pre-RoI vassal revolts with each tag being independent with their diplomacy, alliances and full levies
-Counter-assassination event on discovered successful or failed assassination of you or IIRC your close family
-Assembly voting by all de jure vassals
Curiously CK2Plus has kept one of the features that was cut in vanilla IMO for a good reason - the numerous ambitions. The huge array of ambitions serve only as a micro-intensive min-max mini-game that's many times worse in CK2Plus.
Hmm maybe that could be done. If it isn't already, I mean, there are so many behind-the-scenes maintenance events in CK2Plus I don't know if e.g. Independece faction don't already account for distance ^^
Why only when CA was below high? Plots don't seem to be something a top liege could forbid, with them being secret and all.
However, plots between vassals sound good. What did they use to do that isn't currently in?
That isn't in anymore? Ok that one I upvote, that should be a thing.
I don't know about this one. I feel like revolts are strong enough at the moment, no need to give them more power.
I also feel that since factions are more logical in CK2Plus, vassals tend to organize better within the realm, even without help from outside. Add 3 king allies to a revolt where 90% of your vassals rebell would be overkill imo.
Assasinations were removed, right? The post you quoted before stated that, so I don't see why we need counter-assasinations.
Your failed attempts already give an hefty opinion malus to your victim and his family, so they are likely to seek revenge on you later. I think seeking revenge even is an ambition iirc.
Direct counter-assasinations don't make sense imo. It's not like the (surviving) victim is going to say "hey assasin, so you failed to kill me. Care to kill the guy that told you to do so for the same amount?"
I honestly don't remember this. What did it use to do?
Well, I have to disagree with you here: Tastes differ, and I for one find the vanilla ambitions to be hilariousely lacking.
Ambitions are there to set mini-goals for characters and thus for roleplaying as well as giving an idea what a chracter "is up to". In vanilla that rotates between "gain a title" and "become councillor" or so, which feels more EU4 to me than CK2.
Thus personally I am very happy that CK2Plus offers many ambitions.
Overall, I don't think the mod is "casual" in any way currently. Most of the things you mentioned were not simply cut from the game, but replaced with something else in the wake of a mechanic rework. And blobbing has always been easy in vanilla CK2.
And this mod here especially added many more mechanics and tweaks that make blobbing very hard. You have a few good points there, but what I think is feasible of them wouldn't have that much of an impact on gameplay imo.
Revolts were actually hilariously weak the way they were originally, at least for the player. The fact that it was so many independent AI meant that rarely there was a powerful stack of any sort.
It was always a question of walking your retinue around and vacuum cleaning up the little stacks and single sieging the important stuff. I once had an entire empire revolt against me in those days and still ended up winning because the AI is even more pants when it's not unified.
There was a really good reason even Wiz was trying to implement such a system when he was still here, even if it wasn't at the time entirely realistic due to a lack of various tools now available to us modders.
As for mercs, pretty sure that got removed because it caused (causes?) all sorts of title wonkiness due to Mercs having their own inheritance system. Keep in mind you used to be able to hold merc titles, holy order titles etc but that ability got removed, possibly by PDS, at some point due to the wonkiness. My memory is much more fuzzy on that aspect though.
My suggestion would be expanding the Benedictine and Dominican orders. They've got so little going for them.
They are very underused as of right now, and basically anything would be better than what they are.
They are very underused as of right now, and basically anything would be better than what they are.
And another new face around here, welcome
As for the suggestion, you are probably right. But I would wait a bit on that one, especially since Paradox is still collecting feedback on all the new stuff. They even said they might add a few more societies with the next patches.
And then, the team is already busy adding societies for the religions who haven't got one yet.
So I'd say expanding society content would be a good idea, but longer term when the dust has settled and the immediate problems have been squashed.
I'd like to see, non-reformed pagans being able to walk 'false-devotion' path
Y'know, really
Y'know, really
ThanksAnd another new face around here, welcome
As for the suggestion, you are probably right. But I would wait a bit on that one, especially since Paradox is still collecting feedback on all the new stuff. They even said they might add a few more societies with the next patches.
And then, the team is already busy adding societies for the religions who haven't got one yet.
So I'd say expanding society content would be a good idea, but longer term when the dust has settled and the immediate problems have been squashed.
I only found the mod last week and then wanted to play it more before I came here so I didn't make a stupid post.I didn't actually know that they had said that, I missed the stream. Thanks for letting me know, prevents further stupid posts/comment.
Cam I just say, it's always nice to see someone agreed with something you said a year ago.
As to adding these features back in, I did some digging a while back and I couldn't seem to find the bit that switches you between base and Conclave-style voting on laws etc. That suggests it's part of just having the DLC active.
Hi - I wanted to respond to these points as I made the original post and I do understand a bit about the mechanics.
This is just a modifier in Defines - currently it's set to 1.0 (no effect) but if you raise the number it adds an opinion penalty from distance to capital - as least I believe that's how it works. It's been over a year since I looked at it. Should probably be marked "handle with care".
Once upon a time Dukes would target Great Dukes with a plot called "weaken fellow vassal". The objective was to force the Great duke to cede one of his extra Dukedoms to a vassal. There were a number of ways this could be resolved - including getting the Duke's liege to ask him to give up the title, and out-right declaring war to force the issue. It was disabled at High CA because at that level vassals no longer get much say on how titles can be disposed of.
The Captain needs 1000 prestige, which is a big ask for a landless character who may or may not get command of a flank. It can happen but it very rare - it used to be quite common if the Mercs outnumbered their employer.
Temporary revolt titles cause all sorts of weirdness. It used to be that revolts would actually fire at 75% size, and could often be crushed, but once a year the revolt leader could ask other vassals to join so that if a revolt was allowed to drag on their was an increasing likelihood that the penalty of raised levies would cause vassals to switch sides.
So, as the revolt progresses the liege gets weaker and the rebels stronger - unless you nip it in the bud. It's now very unlikely a vassal will switch, irrc it can now only happen during the "Overthrow ruler" revolt that fires when you try to imprison someone or revoke a title and fail.
The assassination button was removed, yes, but assassinations can also be enacted by event (separate to the normal plot murdering), a while back I suggested that the option to hire an assassin should be available between 25-100% plot power to allow you to be pro-active in your murdering.
Firing an assassination event even today (via button or script) starts an event chain with the attempted assassination and, if your survive, follow up options.
Before Conclave when you wanted to change a law you had to get 50% +1 of the affected vassals to agree - so for levy and taxation laws this was your direct vassals, for Crown Law this would be all De Jure vassals - several hundred in the Byzantine Empire. It was hardly a perfect system but it was better than being able to stuff your Council with ye-men which is really more of a late-Renaissance thing. It better reflected Feudal politics.
This is just a modifier in Defines - currently it's set to 1.0 (no effect) but if you raise the number it adds an opinion penalty from distance to capital - as least I believe that's how it works. It's been over a year since I looked at it. Should probably be marked "handle with care".
Once upon a time Dukes would target Great Dukes with a plot called "weaken fellow vassal". The objective was to force the Great duke to cede one of his extra Dukedoms to a vassal. There were a number of ways this could be resolved - including getting the Duke's liege to ask him to give up the title, and out-right declaring war to force the issue. It was disabled at High CA because at that level vassals no longer get much say on how titles can be disposed of.
The Captain needs 1000 prestige, which is a big ask for a landless character who may or may not get command of a flank. It can happen but it very rare - it used to be quite common if the Mercs outnumbered their employer.
Temporary revolt titles cause all sorts of weirdness. It used to be that revolts would actually fire at 75% size, and could often be crushed, but once a year the revolt leader could ask other vassals to join so that if a revolt was allowed to drag on their was an increasing likelihood that the penalty of raised levies would cause vassals to switch sides.
So, as the revolt progresses the liege gets weaker and the rebels stronger - unless you nip it in the bud. It's now very unlikely a vassal will switch, irrc it can now only happen during the "Overthrow ruler" revolt that fires when you try to imprison someone or revoke a title and fail.
The assassination button was removed, yes, but assassinations can also be enacted by event (separate to the normal plot murdering), a while back I suggested that the option to hire an assassin should be available between 25-100% plot power to allow you to be pro-active in your murdering.
Firing an assassination event even today (via button or script) starts an event chain with the attempted assassination and, if your survive, follow up options.
Before Conclave when you wanted to change a law you had to get 50% +1 of the affected vassals to agree - so for levy and taxation laws this was your direct vassals, for Crown Law this would be all De Jure vassals - several hundred in the Byzantine Empire. It was hardly a perfect system but it was better than being able to stuff your Council with ye-men which is really more of a late-Renaissance thing. It better reflected Feudal politics.
May I suggest using the "Statecraft" council action to lower imperial decadence via event dependent on the councilman's diplomacy stat, so the higher the stat the more likely the and often decadence is reduced. But to make things interesting certain traits may cause events that add or subtract decadence.
For example; a chancellor with high diplomacy with diligent/patient may see and average of 5-10 decadence reduced in a span of ten years (assuming RNGesus is kind) as opposed to a chancellor with low diplomacy with arbitrary/greedy may see himself in the oubliette. That way AI empires can have better lasting power and still suffer the same mismanagement due to poorly bred "powerful" vassals.
Also with the "Administer Realm" council action would you remove the culture conversion law or convert province ambition since stacking them would be op? Or keep them since RNG is still against us.
For example; a chancellor with high diplomacy with diligent/patient may see and average of 5-10 decadence reduced in a span of ten years (assuming RNGesus is kind) as opposed to a chancellor with low diplomacy with arbitrary/greedy may see himself in the oubliette. That way AI empires can have better lasting power and still suffer the same mismanagement due to poorly bred "powerful" vassals.
Also with the "Administer Realm" council action would you remove the culture conversion law or convert province ambition since stacking them would be op? Or keep them since RNG is still against us.
I'm not sure when you are claiming this was removed, but that definitely existed as recently as October/November, in Plus without Conclave. Kind of screwed up my campaign at the time by splitting my vassal MR in two.
I think administer realm is OK, it has a lot smaller impact than the law. E.g. if you have a steward with stewarship > 10 and CCL set to "None", culture conversion will still be 7.5 times slower (without councilor it'd be 10) If you have CCL set to "Active", instead of culture conversion being twice as fast it will be roughly three times faster (mtth factor of 0.375).
Please make a way to initiate children into societys.
Satanists should be able to ritualistically initiate their newborns into the cult (with an extremely high success rate)
Satanists should be able to ritualistically initiate their newborns into the cult (with an extremely high success rate)
I've been looking at the religious set-up using the specific regions option for Ancient Religions, and I believe that it is much better than just having the entire world become pagan. However, there are a few things that I think could change (for 769 mostly, as that's what I've been using it with):
In addition to this, I believe that implementing parts of the culture requirement into this option would be optimal; so, for example, if Greeks control Sicily, they will be Hellenic, whereas if Berbers/Arabs control Sicily, they will remain Muslim.
On an unrelated note, another good option could be for pagan religions to become reformed at the start of the game for people who would want more religious diversity throughout the game.
- Andalusia and Africa (the Kingdom of Africa) should stay Muslim instead of becoming Chalcedonian.
- I understand why the de jure Kingdom of Jerusalem is Canaanite, however, if possible, I'd make the northern part of the kingdom Canaanite, while making the majority of it Jewish.
- Cornwall should be Celtic instead of Germanic.
- In my opinion, India and the steppes shouldn't be affected by this option, as I personally enjoy the religious diversity on the steppe (Buddhists, Pagans, Manicheans, etc., as well as followers of the Abrahamic religions in later start dates), and India has always just looked... weird (at the very least, Jainism should be in the Deccan, Buddhism in Bengal, and Hinduism in Rajastan).
- The Hejaz should remain Muslim as opposed to becoming Al-Asnam.
In addition to this, I believe that implementing parts of the culture requirement into this option would be optimal; so, for example, if Greeks control Sicily, they will be Hellenic, whereas if Berbers/Arabs control Sicily, they will remain Muslim.
On an unrelated note, another good option could be for pagan religions to become reformed at the start of the game for people who would want more religious diversity throughout the game.
Couple of suggestions for new execution method flavors:
- Freezing, which was used in Iceland and probably also in some other Nordic countries. The prisoners were lowered by a rope into a river, partially submerged until they froze to death.
- Molten metal was used by various cultures, including Mongols. It was usually poured into the eyes and ears, or down the throat (in Russia).
- Status