I edited it myself, since I was tired of seeing parchment all the time. It isn't actually blank--the light areas are 25% gray and the borders are 75% gray.
Last edited:
Post your empires/funny pictures/mini-AARs/etc
- 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.
He was Cruel and possessed and Ambitious. I can think of better Candidates for sainthood Like one of my chars who went out of his way to become a saint. HE reformed himself went though depression and got all the good traits and then died as he went to visit a monk.. He was a much better Candidate for a saint.. Than this Cruel Ambitious man
( No I am not serious about what I said..I bet this guy had connections somehow to the Pope.. Who by the way this was one of about three saints by one pope. Must of been some Convention that I missed because he was naming a lot of saints from this one region )That would make sense.. Why would I care about some Polish Saint.. ( Although i would care if he fought Heathens and died ). But yeah that is a good point. It would also mean that Ireland and Scotland and fragmented England are not doing anything worthy enough to have a saint be named in that region lol.
I'm confused—only "possessed" is on that character page. And possession isn't simply negative/demonic in CK2. Also, the Karling thing might just be that the dynasty rules a majority of Catholic provinces... unless they've killed themselves off in the century of your gameplay. Always a possibility.
When I zoom in on the picture I believe it shows the icons for Ambitious and Cruel.. A bit hidden but I do believe i see those traits there.Could be wrong though..
Am I wrong.. It looks like those two traits.. But I cant really tell
Last edited:
I see Charitable, Just, Zealous, and Paranoid after Saint. Note that the icon for Cruel has a different color than the one in the Zealous icon.
Ahh So that icon is for Zealous not Cruel.. thanks for the information !
.png){kind=avatar}
A hilarious parallel between two rival caliphs!
The Barghawata Caliph (and King of the Canaries) holds only the Canaries...
...while the Sunni Caliph (and King of Arabia, Adal, and Sindh)--has his capital in Socotra, and holds barely anything other than that island!
(After the Abbasids somehow misplaced the Sunni Caliphate in 1004, the Ziyad kings of Yemen restored it in 1009 and held both titles together until a faction gave Yemen to the Husamids in 1077. The Ziyads reconquered Yemen in 1087, but lost it again in 1102 to the Ma'afirids, and currently are failing to fend off a claimant to Adal and a rebelling faction.)
(After the Abbasids somehow misplaced the Sunni Caliphate in 1004, the Ziyad kings of Yemen restored it in 1009 and held both titles together until a faction gave Yemen to the Husamids in 1077. The Ziyads reconquered Yemen in 1087, but lost it again in 1102 to the Ma'afirids, and currently are failing to fend off a claimant to Adal and a rebelling faction.)
- 3
Propably my best game ever. Started Ironman with just one province in 1066 and ended with large empire.
- 7
Few interesting screenshots. First, Chazars are in a quite bad shape. I think every county they own is occupied right now.
Aren´t you a little bit early?
And finally, from another playthrough, king of Tara took over England, making all of British isles tribal.
Aren´t you a little bit early?
And finally, from another playthrough, king of Tara took over England, making all of British isles tribal.
- 8
.png){kind=avatar}
It's been a WIP getting to that point for over a year of tweaking and revamping of the HRE Restoration mechanics.
Yeah, that emperor was a tad early/diligent. Good to see it in Louis II's hands, though.
- 2
It's been a WIP getting to that point for over a year of tweaking and revamping of the HRE Restoration mechanics.
Yeah, that emperor was a tad early/diligent. Good to see it in Louis II's hands, though.
Well, he probably just pressed his claim on East Francia, since he already had everything else . But 50 years later, both Italy and Burgundy are mostly independent and it is quite a mess . It´s one of problems with HRE´s creation: No matter which kingdoms you own, de jure HRE will always be in its 1066 borders. So, he created HRE with Burgundy, Italy, Lotharingia and East Francia, but more than half of his land was then outside of his de jure territory, therefore making dukes there eager to start Independence faction.
- 1
When you form the HRE, you do nothing but gain de jure pretension-- not lose. In the case of Italy and Burgundy for the Standard HRE, the independence faction will behave as if the HRE was de jure in those regions (though not _quite_ as strong as fully de jure). Main issue is culture and the fact that super-duke Bonifazis, Guideschis, and Welfs [in Burgundy] hold nearly entire de jure kingdoms' worth of territory.
- 2
He wasn't the original conqueror, that one died without an heir, but he has no adventurer trait, but he was a host leader, so maybe that's why.
Oh yeah, despite winning the war for Egypt, he was only a count owning all the counties in Egypt, so I console commanded him the kingdom, that could've broken it too.
Even more curious. Adventurers are either "duchy adventurers" who go after a duchy only, or they have a claim to a title -- which they would take in the result. So if someone had a claim to k_egypt (odd that a non-Muslim would get a claim to Egypt) and became an adventurer for it, they'd also take the k_egypt title (since that's the basis for their claim). Just taking the territory without gaining the kingdom title sounds like a crusade CB.
A Catholic King of Egypt.. Wonder how long he will last in the middle east.
His people cant be happy about them being ruled by a Catholic.
More importantly how did he get a a claim on Egypt ?