Does a male ruler being distracted decrease your chance of children? For example if you are commanding an army or going on a pilgrimage does that stop the chance of your wife getting pregnant? For male rulers with multiple partners does splitting your attention matter? For example if you have infertile (e.g. older) concubines or wives does that decrease the chance of a fertile partner being pregnant (e.g. compared to just having one fertile partner)? Does the process of seducing or romancing other characters decrease the chance of your wife getting pregnant?
Quick Questions, Quick Answers!
- Thread starter Ivashanko
- 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.
Currently, no, to all questions. Concubines and secondary spouses' fertility are halved by default. Also, the game will lower your own fertility if you have too many children.
- 1
If I understand correctly, in confederate petition the game will create higher-level titles if the younger sons have enough land. But how does it decide what "enough" land is? It seems like in some cases inheriting one county leads to a new duchy for the younger son while other times a younger son gets a couple counties in the same duchy but no duchy.
I thought it didn't do this to the player character himself, but rather to the women he has the children with? I think I had 17 children on one character, and all of them were with his wives the "normal" way, no seduction or lovers.
The women yes but my male character has >25 children with polygamy and the everytime I tried to "renew" the wives, the 'chance' in marriage menu is 'none', so I guess it does it too. The only time I can impregnate someone is when I succesfully seduce them...
- 2
Cities are bad right now because they only gives you 10/20% taxes (forgot which one), if you have lay clegy, temple is better as barony vassals
Thanks! The placement of that button does not argee wit my brain.
- 1
I reported this as a bug. But knights, heirs, and leaders who participate in the crusades need to gain the “crusader” trait!!
Is there an easy way to hover over a place name and see where it is or jump to it?
How advanced are the emchanics regarding armies marching across lands that are not theirs? I ask this with regard to closed borders mechanics in games like EU4.
As far as I am aware, closed borders don't exist in CK3. As much as I can find online is that your armies have supplies and suffer attrition dependent upon the supplies they have and the supply limit of the county they are in.
What I don't understand is how this effects me if armies that are not mine are crossing my lands. Do foreign armies use my land for supplies or do they use just their own supplies? If they use my farmland does that negatively effect my own people in any way?
A friend, who is pretty new to Paradox grand strategies but has spent years playing 4X games, asked me about closed borders. I said to him that I wasn't entirely sure how it worked. That got me wodnering and I thought I'd ask.
He said, and I kind of agreed, that there should be a negative effect on that army in your lands, not on your lands. Maybe that's just not the way things worked in mediaval times. Perhaps lands were free for anyone to cross and live off.
As far as I am aware, closed borders don't exist in CK3. As much as I can find online is that your armies have supplies and suffer attrition dependent upon the supplies they have and the supply limit of the county they are in.
What I don't understand is how this effects me if armies that are not mine are crossing my lands. Do foreign armies use my land for supplies or do they use just their own supplies? If they use my farmland does that negatively effect my own people in any way?
A friend, who is pretty new to Paradox grand strategies but has spent years playing 4X games, asked me about closed borders. I said to him that I wasn't entirely sure how it worked. That got me wodnering and I thought I'd ask.
He said, and I kind of agreed, that there should be a negative effect on that army in your lands, not on your lands. Maybe that's just not the way things worked in mediaval times. Perhaps lands were free for anyone to cross and live off.
No closed borders in CK3. Anyone can march anywhere - though with varying amounts of attrition on their troops based on terrain, supplies, whether the territory is hostile or borders their own territory etc.
Non-hostile troops crossing your territory doesn't have any negative effets on your though - only if they're hostile and start sieging.
- 1
- 1
Each barony has a Supply Limit, expressed as a number of men. If the total number of troops standing in that barony is less than that, fine and well. If it is greater, then each of those armies will begin to lose supply. Typically an army starts with 100 supply and loses five per month, but the traits of their general can effect both of these. If an army's supply goes below 60, they will begin to take a penalty to Advantage. If it hits zero, they will begin to lose men to desertion and starvation.
If an army moves such that it is moving from any enemy county into any enemy county that does not border a county you control, it will suffer immediate attrition for each such county it passes through. (It is often easy to bypass this attrition by taking a short detour through neutral territory.)
As far as I know, provinces do not themselves receive negative effects from armies, unless that army completes a siege or a raid.
- 1
Just to be sure : I'm gonna fight a liberty and an independance faction next generation. What's gonna be the objectives of the rebels? Should I just defend my capital or be more offensive?
I have 3 quick questions.
1) When besieging an enemies capital, should they just be able to up and move it to a different city? I'm wondering if that is just an oversight in the program, doesn't seem like the enemy leader and his councilors should just be able to waltz through my troops and relocate.
2)I had a bunch of murders taking place, not the kind that happens when an enemy murders someone, but an event. At the end of the event chain my ruler discovered it was his granddaughter ....... who was 0 at the time. He confronted her and the murders stopped. So is it an oversight that someone not even 1 year old is responsible for these murders, or did I blame the wrong person? I wasn't given any legal reason to arrest her (so I didn't) and her character sheet doesn't show any indication that she is a known murderer. I did enact the "restricted measures" option at one point, so maybe that's why the murders stopped for now and she's actually innocent?
Ok, never mind on this one. After a year or two new evidence showed up. Turned out to be one of his sons, who even admitted to the murders, then fled the country.
3) When educating a child, should I have the ward be someone who has the highest learning, or the highest skills in what I want the child to learn? It seems as though the highest learning gives me the best result when I pick the child's lifestyle.
1) When besieging an enemies capital, should they just be able to up and move it to a different city? I'm wondering if that is just an oversight in the program, doesn't seem like the enemy leader and his councilors should just be able to waltz through my troops and relocate.
2)
Ok, never mind on this one. After a year or two new evidence showed up. Turned out to be one of his sons, who even admitted to the murders, then fled the country.
3) When educating a child, should I have the ward be someone who has the highest learning, or the highest skills in what I want the child to learn? It seems as though the highest learning gives me the best result when I pick the child's lifestyle.
Last edited:
I want to report a bug, but it's an ironman game, do you now how to get the files?