Yeah, that one is making me scratching my head...
I'm in agnatic-cognatic primogeniture.
So my firstborn (a girl) had a -5 relation because of primogeniture. I guess it made sense because it would mean that next boy I'd have would make her lose the heir place.
No wonder, that's what happen a few years later. I get twins (a boy and another girl). So the new girl also get a -5 penalty, still logical (she's the second/third after all), but...
... but my new boy (hence my heir, as he pass before his sisters) gets a whoopy -15 relationship because of primogeniture.
Dafuq ?
Did the code only looked at the fact he's the second child without computing that he's also the only male ? Or did I miss something ?
I'm in agnatic-cognatic primogeniture.
So my firstborn (a girl) had a -5 relation because of primogeniture. I guess it made sense because it would mean that next boy I'd have would make her lose the heir place.
No wonder, that's what happen a few years later. I get twins (a boy and another girl). So the new girl also get a -5 penalty, still logical (she's the second/third after all), but...
... but my new boy (hence my heir, as he pass before his sisters) gets a whoopy -15 relationship because of primogeniture.
Dafuq ?
Did the code only looked at the fact he's the second child without computing that he's also the only male ? Or did I miss something ?
