Is there any way to make alliances with other powers other than through marriage? I've been in several situations where it would be great (and not unrealistic) to form an "enemy of my enemy is my friend" alliance against a larger power that is threatening me and a neighbour (such as my Oghuz nation and Khiva vs. the Seljuks) but I can't find any way to ally with them other than by marrying one of their nobles, and this isn't possible because Khiva is Muslim and my character is Tengrist, and the "Must not marry infidel" mechanic is getting in the way.
Crusader Kings II ~ Quick Answers
- Thread starter unmerged(200028)
- 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.
CK2 alliances are strictly marriage alliances. Coreligionists will sometimes aid you in religious wars, but that is the only non-marriage aid you'll typically see.
Drat, that's a let down. Wonder why they chose to make alliances so limited.
Thanks for your reply.
You need to get a Muslim in your court and then educate some of your dynasty in that religion - takes some time though.
Does this still work? I thought with Rajas of India they took the ability to easily change religion / culture from us cheap bastards that didn't buy the DLCs. Previously tutors could change culture and religion but this was disabled. Instead we got the RoI exclusive decision to change culture/religion to the one of our capital.
This sounds like a rumor started by someone who didn't properly understand the patch notes or the following discussion. No, none of that is true -- the rules changed, but they don't require the DLC (or its decisions). You cannot have an unlanded person of a different culture than his liege convert the culture of his ward but a landed person can do it the same as always, as can any of the courtiers in the court that landed person of different culture. The same is true of religion. Both of these things help as much as hurt (e.g. now you can have the awesome grey eminance, kind, charitable, brave Orthodox-Greek councillor educate your Catholic-Norman boy without risk of change).
Long story, short: All you have to do is give the guy you want to educate your kid a barony and boom, same ward effect as pre-2.1.
Problem is I'd rather not have a lone Muslim in my predominately Tengrist dominion. I still think there should be a way of forming alliances without marrying off one of your relatives or converting a family member.
what is the easiest indian character? And how exactly do you sacrifice to kali? is it a decision like the blot for norse?
Are there really any good historic justifications for non-coreligionists with no dynastic ties joining together in the Middle Ages though? Excluding crusades and Holy Wars, how many examples are there of non-dynastic alliances during the middle ages at all?
(So it's clear: I'd be interested if someone had a detailed answer to this, actually -- I'm unaware of many and actually would be interested to know)
The Auld Alliance of France and Scotland springs to mind. But that was more a response towards the growing power of England. I think the Polish and Lithuanians, while not traditionally allies as such, often ended up fighting on the same side. There are likely to be several examples of counts and barons joining forces with each other to overthrow a leader. Beyond that, I don't know.
I can count the Auld Alliance as an exception (though they're still coreligionists). But didn't Poland and Lithuania have dynastic ties? And certainly civil war and the alliances of convenience there are well-represented in terms of factions and faction wars.
Ahh thank you, that makes sense.
But you think I'd be able to bribe my son/heir back to the country with a fancy new castle I just built for him, but I guess the game doesn't allow for that
So I guess to make this work, I need to kill my heir and all his sons and then the throne should go to my 2nd son?
There was the period of military co-operation between Abaqa Khan of the Ilkhanate and the Frankish Crusader states during the Ninth Crusade. Neither had strong dynastic ties to each other, and they certainly weren't co-religionists.
We also have the example of Jalal al-Din ibn Tokhtamysh, Muslim royal of the Golden Horde, allying with the Poles and Lithuanians during the war against the Teutonic knights. Tatar forces from his army participated in events like the battle of Grunwald alongside their Christian and Slavic pagan allies.
I can try and dig up some more for you, but my point is that alliances between people of different faiths and cultures were certainly not unheard of in the Middle Ages, and I think it would further the immersion in the game if we could have an option to do such a thing. In the case of Abaqa Khan and the Crusaders, it was "the enemy of my enemy", while with Jalal al-Din it was an attempt to win Polish and Lithuanian assistance to claim the Golden Horde throne in exchange for his help against the Teutonic Knights. Why can't we do something like this in the game, for instance getting a neighbour to help you press a claim in exchange for monetary payment or contributing troops to one of their wars?
Ahh thank you, that makes sense.
But you think I'd be able to bribe my son/heir back to the country with a fancy new castle I just built for him, but I guess the game doesn't allow for that
So I guess to make this work, I need to kill my heir and all his sons and then the throne should go to my 2nd son?
If you're playing without ironman mode, you can always bring up the console and force-move them back. As for changing heirs, that is an option, yes. If you kill your heir and all of his sons, your second son will become your heir. Alternatively, you CAN appoint all secondary heirs (so grandsons in line after your son) to bishoprics BEFORE killing your son. That will eliminate them from succession without having to kill everyone. =)
All interesting. I'd say the bottom line answer to your final question, though, is that the AI and current infrastructure doesn't support that sort of thing. They would need to be pretty rare, I'd think, and the AI would need to handle them smartly. Probably not a trivial change, and not one I'd be expecting to see from PDS in the immediate future either.
I'll have to take your word for it. I haven't a clue what the capabilities of the game or its AI are.
I guess it isn't a huge thing, and I agree that it's unlikely to be seen any time soon. I just thought, if ever considered by the developers, it might add an extra level to the game's politics, especially because it would help to work around the very annoying "must not marry an infidel" mechanic. If the game allowed us more freedom to conduct inter-religious marriage, then I think my suggestion about non-marriage alliances wouldn't be necessary.
I've complained enough now, though. Thanks for your reply.
I still don't get how this drift stuff works. Playing as norway, I have vassalized all the dukes in the kingdom of sweden. Then I destroyed the title of kingdom of sweden. I'm highlighting the shields of all the swedish duchies and I see no kind of 100year countdown of any sort. What am I doing wrong?
Have you waited a year to start the counter? Do you have an Empire-level title? Do you have the WHOLE duchy in each of these cases?
Many years, I have the option to claim the scandinavia title but haven't yet (is that the culprit?)
Yeah, I have vassalized all the duchies from Russia to Holstein/Schlesvig
Not sure what you mean by highlighting the shields.
Put yourself on De Jure Kingdoms mapmode, and hover over a Swedish duchy that you've completely vassalised. Is there a (Norway-coloured) hatching over the area? What tooltip comes up?
Oh thanks so much. The countdown is definetely there now! I was clicking on each Duke and looking into the duchy window in the actual province to see the countdown. Never thought to look on the map!