Seriously, it's the missing manual for CK2. Made me start over, and I'm enjoying it much more.
Last edited:
In-depth Guide to CKII - Feedback Thread
- Thread starter Meneth
- 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.
Seriously, it's the missing manual for CK2. Made me start over, and I'm enjoying it much more.
I'm not 100% the summary advice on construction is best. It takes a long time to get a payback from economic investment but increasing your military size lets you take tons more territory without having to hire mercenaries at huge initial outlays + upkeep. It's probably dependent on who you start as. If you are a duke/count initial military is probably more helpful for expansion if you already have a huge personal levee then economic is probably more beneficial.
There are some pretty important tips for increasing relations using events and ambitions that you could add in that section. The global +10 relations you can get from the Great Tourney and by becoming Exalted among men are huge and make a terrific difference if you´re a king. It´s also a great reason to delay creating those duchy titles as long as you can - 3 duchies give 600 prestige, making fulfilling that ambition MUCH easier.
The +10 relations is how you feel toward the vassal, not the other way around. It's a bit confusing. I like your advice on hoarding duchy titles for an easy exalted (can only do that once though, but if you have a long reign ahead of you it could be incredibly useful).
I would say the extra 250 piety required for a Papal Invasion CB is another, big disadvantage, of Free Investiture.
A few comments:
There is a major exception to the rule of wanting to own every county in a duchy--namely, when the duchy is uncreated. Then you can safely give some counties to vassals without their desiring the duchy title. Also, I think you should probably mention that sometimes certain provinces are so rich that they merit holding yourself, even if they are outside of your home duchies.
In the section on keeping vassals weak, you recommend giving out counties with all the lower titles included. This may be good advice for keeping them happy, but it is sub-optimal for keeping them weak. If you want to keep the new count weak, keep the one or more of the richest holdings (usually cities) as your direct holding/vassal. The relations hit for each holding you keep in your demesne/as a direct vassal is -25. This means it is not usually a problem in the first generation, since he is +40 grateful for having been made a count.
True that, but two fully held duchies will usually fill one's demesne limit anyway, so there's seldom much point to holding anything beyond that.
I'm not sure the money you'd get from holding say, Byzantium would be worth it over holding two full duchies, as the duke would desire the county.
It's not as if your vassals can do all that much with money anyway. A single city vassal will not let them hire mercenaries, only possibly upgrade a building once in a while, or more likely: fail to assassinate someone.
As such, I don't think it is worth it to have vassals in other noble's counties.
I agree it's not a huge hit to your vassal's power, but it does keep them weaker.
Hmm, we seem to completely disagree on the value of having holdings/vassals inside your vassal's de jure territory. And I'm somewhat confused why you think it isn't worth it.
As I see it, if you have a feudal vassal, he's not going to pay you much in taxes anyway. Thus, by having a vassal/holding inside his demesne (and thus getting a -25 relations penalty) you're mainly losing out on troops. But in exchange you making a lot more money.
For example, if you have a standard 3-holding province and you give the county title to a Count, and give him the bishopric as a vassal, but keep the city in it as your direct vassal, you now have the Count as your vassal with -25 relations and the Mayor as your vassal (no penalty, since he's at the baron level, where the wrong government-type modifier doesn't apply). In this setup, you could potentially lose some tax income from the castle and the bishopric, if he has a negative opinion of you and feudal taxes are non-zero. But it will not be very much. You'll also certainly get fewer troops from the castle. On the other hand, the mayor now pays his taxes directly to you, and this will usually be far more money than you are losing from the Count. So you're basically trading troops for cash in that province.
The closest comparison is probably the strategy of creating Lord Mayors. In that case, you have a Lord Mayor with a -30 wrong government type relations penalty and a Baron with no opinion modifier. Now you're potentially losing taxes from the Lord Mayor due to the relations penalty, and you're certainly getting a smaller levy from the city, but in exchange you have no penalty to the levy from the castle. Which of the two strategies is optimal depends on your noble/popular customs, and what value you place on feudal vassals in terms of dynasty prestige, longevity, ability to control the succession, etc. EDIT: Just realized that the Lord Mayor will have a council, so he'll be able to get more in tax/build faster.
As for holding a county inside a duchy, it's a similar analysis. If the Duke has a huge amount of territory, then perhaps you could lose more in taxes than you gain by holding the county title, but in general, you'll be sacrificing troops from the Duke's holdings for the sake of getting direct taxes from all the holdings in the county you possess. So it really depends on the value of the Duchy and County in question. A county with multiple rich cities in a small duchy, is likely worth holding directly. A county without much development might not be.
Last edited:
True, I see your point of trading troops for cash. However, I can't see that paying off much in the long run; I'd rather be able to conquer a few more counties than get maybe a few hundred more gold a decade.
Made some updates to the installment on levies. I was using 25 as the levy opinion floor rather than the actual floor of -25, which changes the numbers quite a bit.
Fantastic stuff, it's been a great help.
Just printed out the latest segments. I have to be in church tonight well before the ceremony begins, so having something to read which begins; "Religion: Keeping the Church Strong" is a big plus!
Just printed out the latest segments. I have to be in church tonight well before the ceremony begins, so having something to read which begins; "Religion: Keeping the Church Strong" is a big plus!
Was wondering something about technology.
1- Are you 100% sure that building tech buildings outside the capital or in vassals´ holdings won´t increase tech rate? Only capital matters?
2- Suppose I get a county with 2 cathedrals and 2 towns, and move my capital there. If I build even the low tier tech buildings (monastic school, small university), I´d get 10 + 10 + 20 +20 = 60% faster technology growth rate right? Expensive, but it might be worth for a technology rush, isn´t it? If I´m a king income won´t be much of a problem anyway sometimes.
1- Are you 100% sure that building tech buildings outside the capital or in vassals´ holdings won´t increase tech rate? Only capital matters?
2- Suppose I get a county with 2 cathedrals and 2 towns, and move my capital there. If I build even the low tier tech buildings (monastic school, small university), I´d get 10 + 10 + 20 +20 = 60% faster technology growth rate right? Expensive, but it might be worth for a technology rush, isn´t it? If I´m a king income won´t be much of a problem anyway sometimes.
It'll increase tech growth in the county it is built. This will only affect other counties if it gets to a tech level before them. As your capital will be the center of your tech growth, it will almost always reach a tech level first, and would thus not gain any benefit from tech buildings in other counties. However, tech would spread faster to the rest of your demesne.
Could be worth it, yes, especially if you do it early in the campaign.
Just to let you know: I'm all prepped and ready for your text for the pdf version of your Guide. Ready when you are, no worries.
Again, about the "most-bang-for-your-buck" theme.
Considering each upgrade to military buildings give pitiful extra troops (with few exceptions, like militia quartes > archery range), isn´t it worth to only build level 1 buildings and instead invest a lot on donjons, keeps etc? Specially because that will give you the largest amount of troops, and since more troops is great both for battles and sieges, I don´t see much reason to get large stables instead of small stables plus other 2 buildings. Sure, keeps take a lot of time to build but you can accelerate that a lot with the steward.
Considering each upgrade to military buildings give pitiful extra troops (with few exceptions, like militia quartes > archery range), isn´t it worth to only build level 1 buildings and instead invest a lot on donjons, keeps etc? Specially because that will give you the largest amount of troops, and since more troops is great both for battles and sieges, I don´t see much reason to get large stables instead of small stables plus other 2 buildings. Sure, keeps take a lot of time to build but you can accelerate that a lot with the steward.