Fear will keep the local aristocrats in line. Fear of this conclave!

[Secret Master]

I also feel like this should be the murder plot generator to end all murder plots. Given your spymaster is one of them.

I actually kept waiting for my ruler to get murdered. Maybe he is just lucky, but despite the hate, he hasn't been murdered yet.

I was kind of hoping, to be honest.

From the pictures you can see he has 19 vassals, - the 5 on the council - 5 on the factions - 2 inprisioned = 7, i guess he must have used his spymaster in all the 7 remaining vassals to force them out of factions

Nope. I haven't used my spymaster at all for that purpose. I wanted to see the factions grow naturally.

When I get a chance, I'll see what happens when I finally die. With a little luck, I might just have to cave in to the council's demands for more power.

I have noticed before that if the council members hate each other as well as me, they can't faction up properly before the discontented council timer expires upon succession.

 

[Secret Master]

Actually, I literally died a few minutes after I fired the game up.

Here's my standing with vassals after dying.

Not too shabby, I'd say.

My malcontent vassals on the council started calling in favors to force other vassals into their factions, but then the vassals died, leaving me with a weak sauce Council power faction and an independence faction at only 130% of my power.

I'll take those odds.

 

[iniudan]

Ok, your elective, so you actually avoid the heir getting part of of the previous ruler opinion. And I see it mostly your dynasty that landed so they will vote for someone that will not make you lose everything even if they hate your ass.

You're no fun. =p

 

[Secret Master]

Ok, your elective, so you actually avoid the heir getting part of of the previous ruler opinion. And I see it mostly your dynasty that landed so they will vote for someone that will not make you lose everything even if they hate your ass.

Your no fun. =p

That seems to make elective strong in new and interesting ways.

And since I can fiddle with tyranny, I should be able to revoke/murder the vassals that are not of my dynasty to continue on for quite some time.

There's no reason to specifically pursue tyranny as a goal in and of itself, but I think the right government set up can allow you to get away with literal murder without facing the legal consequences.

 

[Sernista]

That seems to make elective strong in new and interesting ways.

And since I can fiddle with tyranny, I should be able to revoke/murder the vassals that are not of my dynasty to continue on for quite some time.

There's no reason to specifically pursue tyranny as a goal in and of itself, but I think the right government set up can allow you to get away with literal murder without facing the legal consequences.

I think what the Tyranny mechanic lacks (and would be very difficult to make work) is the difference between new steps of tyranny and 'normalized' tyranny - which could cut both ways, in that creating a sense that a particular tyranny is a thing you do rather than a one-off reaction to an extreme circumstance gets a lot of people picturing themselves in the cross-hairs who otherwise would pardon their enemies being screwed over. Just characters would naturally react with indignation and outrage to novel impositions, while the Arbitrary would be inclined to consider how the act affects them before judging. Compare a single horrific deed of Martinesque stature (wiping out the immediate family of your traitorous vizier, for example), which would polarize heavily in that moment and create an acute response, but wouldn't 'live on' except for among the people who you wronged and their partisans, to decapitating Councillors who displease you on an annual basis. That second one, after you've done it the third unconnected time it doesn't even matter who you're targeting, because everyone on that council knows they are on borrowed time.

 

[imperium3]

Elective should give inherited tyranny if the same dynasty inherits, as it is that succession law now seems to be wildly OP.

 

[Secret Master]

I think what the Tyranny mechanic lacks (and would be very difficult to make work) is the difference between new steps of tyranny and 'normalized' tyranny

I've always wished for (and I know why we'll never get) tyranny that is far more context sensitive in general. Your post illustrates the limitations of a more generic kind of tyranny.

Kinslaying is bad in the game, but I've always felt that kinslaying without Papal blessing (excommunication or declaration of heresy) should impose double the tyranny it normally would, but only with dynasty members. By the same token, executing rivals to council members might generate tyranny generally, but the council should at least not care or even be pleased regardless of the justification. On the other hand, those who want to be on the council might be happy to see you act against a council member, while existing council members should be very unhappy unless they authorized the action themselves.

We'll never get a super-complex system, because its a rabbit hole. Once you start getting into details, you can start giving special modifiers for just about every tyrannical action. Then the game becomes Crusader Kings II: The Quest to Understand the Interface.

I am glad that insignificant people generate no tyranny anymore. It was kind of silly in the old days where executing Random Guy With No Connections would make powerful Duke of Awesome mad.

 

[Dragatus]

I think what the Tyranny mechanic lacks (and would be very difficult to make work) is the difference between new steps of tyranny and 'normalized' tyranny - which could cut both ways, in that creating a sense that a particular tyranny is a thing you do rather than a one-off reaction to an extreme circumstance gets a lot of people picturing themselves in the cross-hairs who otherwise would pardon their enemies being screwed over.

One way this could be approximated is by having tyranny opinion modifiers that are large but have short duration (1 year?) and fade over time (I seem to recall some mention of that being possible now). That way if you revoke some titles or make some heads roll everybody freaks out, but then they calm down over time when no more atrocities are committed. If however you keep doing it then you'll always have a tryranny modifier up draining your popularity.

Some actions should still "stick" to the character though, so perhaps executions could have a chance to make you Cruel while title revocations and imprisonment would have a chance to make your Arbitrary. A 25% chance (to match castration and blinding) would make it unlikely you'd get the traits the first time you do it, but pretty much unavoidable if you make it a habit.

 

[Dr Gonzo]

The two year window of discontent after succession doesn't really amount to much. I was hoping to make use of it in my current game but the faction didn't fire despite getting up to 500% of liege power. I know the answer to this would be to own the faction but it can be hard to do.

 

[Secret Master]

The two year window of discontent after succession doesn't really amount to much. I was hoping to make use of it in my current game but the faction didn't fire despite getting up to 500% of liege power. I know the answer to this would be to own the faction but it can be hard to do.

What's weird is that factions during the discontent period tend to be shy. That is, they get plenty of power, but the owner tends to balk. They do fire, though. Just not all the time.

Nomads are the complete opposite. I've had several faction revolts start when they only have 50% of my power at random times in my reign (nomads can join factions regardless of discontent). I crush them within a month. It's like they just are trying to bluff their way into a position of power.

 

[Mulleks]

Nomads are the complete opposite. I've had several faction revolts start when they only have 50% of my power at random times in my reign (nomads can join factions regardless of discontent). I crush them within a month. It's like they just are trying to bluff their way into a position of power.

Nomad clan #1. 750 men vs 5250 men. Rebellion! Ended in 3 seconds as I quicksiege down their yurts. Clan absorbed, recreated, redistributed.

20 seconds later...

Nomad clan #2. 750 men vs 5250 men. Rebellion! Ended in 3 seconds as I quicksiege down their yurts. Clan absorbed, recreated, redistributed.

You'd think a Faction trying and failing would clear all factions for 3 months or something. All these clans were happy with 30-50 positive opinion of me. Another AI quick I've noticed is warbands constantly going back to the same province after being destroyed there. Warband goes to Thrake, gets smashed, shattered retreats across to Iberia, comes back, warband leader "Oh man, there's a 10k stack on Thrake...lets go to that province just south of it owned by the same guy!" Predictable results follow.

 

[jpinard]

Excellent thread. Thank you!

 

[Siggerad]

Well nice solution, but is 1165 and you only have half of the Abssanid empire, thats the other side of the issue with Conclave-free patch, if wait for the tick down is revolt wars is soooo loong and boring.

 

[Secret Master]

Well nice solution, but is 1165 and you only have half of the Abssanid empire, thats the other side of the issue with Conclave-free patch, if wait for the tick down is revolt wars is soooo loong and boring.

Revolt wars? Do you mean coalition wars? Because this thread isn't about defensive pacts and coalitions.

Although in fairness, I can show you how to beat coalitions and defensive pacts without wasting time worrying about infamy. It's not too hard, since the AI runs defensive pacts with the same coordination as the Third Crusade (that is, basically none).

 

[Zolotaya]

We'll never get a super-complex system, because its a rabbit hole. Once you start getting into details, you can start giving special modifiers for just about every tyrannical action. Then the game becomes Crusader Kings II: The Quest to Understand the Interface.

I am glad that insignificant people generate no tyranny anymore. It was kind of silly in the old days where executing Random Guy With No Connections would make powerful Duke of Awesome mad.

While I don't use Elective succession (except in forced scenarios such as tribals) the process is similar across the board.

This dlc substitutes micromanagement busy-work for plain down-time between actions. This increases the tedium factor by 10 for me. It also looks like the future dlc will continue inserting micromanagement tedium as a solution to boredom.

Anyways, thanks for posting a thread that recalls better days on the forum.

 

[Secret Master]

Anyways, thanks for posting a thread that recalls better days on the forum.

You are quite welcome.

 

[Red Earth]

Elective should give inherited tyranny if the same dynasty inherits, as it is that succession law now seems to be wildly OP.

I think you still inherit opinion if it's a close family member elected. Or it might be just children but I do remember reading that it is passed on because of the closeness of the heir not the succession law itself.
Also, if it was kept for same dynasty characters, why would your own dynasty react that way? They wouldn't think this dynasty of ours has a bad history, I'll hated anyone of us that takes over. Also, would someone hold your cousin responsible for the actions of your father? Probably not, but even by election they'd think like father like son.

 

[Rognvaldr19]

Levies and taxes can be a BIG problem when you're surrounded by massive realms/alliances

I feel that's exactly something they were trying to emulate with Conclave. When you're big enough, you can absolutely gut the council, but if you're unstable, have very powerful vassals or being targeted by a realm stronger than yours, you have to rely on them and surrender power for not just the realms survival, but your own.

 

[Dr Gonzo]

I think you still inherit opinion if it's a close family member elected. Or it might be just children but I do remember reading that it is passed on because of the closeness of the heir not the succession law itself.
Also, if it was kept for same dynasty characters, why would your own dynasty react that way? They wouldn't think this dynasty of ours has a bad history, I'll hated anyone of us that takes over. Also, would someone hold your cousin responsible for the actions of your father? Probably not, but even by election they'd think like father like son.

The other factor to remember is that one of the major downsides of elective is that if you have a distant relative inherit the throne they will not inherit the alliances of their predecessors as they are often too distantly related to the characters whose marriage formed the NAP. This is just the positive side of the side of the same coin.

 

[Red Earth]

Yes the distant heir doesn't get the pacts, but I still make sure to set up betrothals beforehand because my children can be married to rulers or heirs and gain titles for my dynasty somewhere. But once I die they aren't princes and princesses anymore. They're just kinsmen and not important enough for anyone to marry.