Id disagree, although they may not fit the council positions at least my heir is of my dynasty.
The Byzantine Empire, and how Holy Fury ruined them.
- Thread starter Anilomu
- 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.
Id disagree, although they may not fit the council positions at least my heir is of my dynasty.
normally im not used to giving family members titles because of the previous title claimant opinion penalty, I'm seeing now that it's better to have a bigger dynasty. But I am not a fan of having to go martial, normally i play stewarship or diplo. I guess I have to go and begin focusing my children on martial education.
I don't know where you are getting these things. Stewardship education is still good. It's associated with some very good traits that will also help a candidate.
Martial is good for extended family members you plan to land, but you can pick something else for your children
And if you reign for long enough and everyone likes you, their opinion and your prestige outweigh most other things. The system is only unstable for short reigns.
Martial is good for extended family members you plan to land, but you can pick something else for your children
And if you reign for long enough and everyone likes you, their opinion and your prestige outweigh most other things. The system is only unstable for short reigns.
I am simply getting this from the modifiers listed in the voting tab, many of the people who vote like martial characters and those with high diplomacy, which have higher weights in power.
Well thats up to you isnt it. Historically the best rulers of the empire did a bit of both. Some family in positions of power, some positions filled with loyal but not necessarily competent people from outside the dynasty and a few well placed bribes for those in power who can't be controlled.
You're choosing to focus on one aspect of being a ruler, and while it may be a choice you make for roleplaying, it isnt the best and only way as you seem to think. Try using favours on good commanders who dont support your choice. Try leaving freshly vacant commander spots unfilled if at peace. Try to not choose old members of your dynasty as heir so you have 40 years of long reign bonuses by the time a new emperor is elected. Dont lead armies if you're not chuck norris but also dont let one guy get all of the prestige from winning battles, spread it around.
All of the above are methods you never considered in your posts. Use them all. Seriously. Do it.
I will use these tips, thanks, my empire is stable for now. I still hold to my opinion on adding back succession laws, but considering no one is agreeing, that's never going to happen.
Thanks all for your clear and respectful replies.
Make sure if you have specific bugs to report it in the bug sub-forum, with a save if available.
We've done the "Let me change the law thing" to death by now, I think. Short version: It's the roman Empire, it works like that because that's how it's run.
There is an issue with the Byzantine Emperor currently being punished for firing mediocre commanders and replacing them with better ones, or being punished because they quit, same with the Martial.
As regards getting someone elected - it's expensive (I've paid almost 1,000 Gold) but you CAN use favours to get your juvenile son elected which you couldn't before.
There is an issue with the Byzantine Emperor currently being punished for firing mediocre commanders and replacing them with better ones, or being punished because they quit, same with the Martial.
As regards getting someone elected - it's expensive (I've paid almost 1,000 Gold) but you CAN use favours to get your juvenile son elected which you couldn't before.
I started in the late middle ages and reformed the byzantine empire. It being my first play thru like this is probably why I am not enjoying the forced succession law change (even more so when not expecting it). But all that aside..I feel that they should still let you change the succession law even if they make it really hard to do so that you can still play how YOU want to. I am all for learning how to take advantage of it but for someone who is still fairly new to crusader kings, its rough. So please paradox...let us at least have the option to change it if you are going to force the change on us
You do continue as lord of all your other titles, and I think you get a strong claim, so it's not that hard to become emperor again if you really want to. I was playing a king-level vassal in the Empire, got elected emperor; then when I died, they elected some rando and I lost the throne, but my next character still had all his other titles - he even managed to keep control of the Varangian Guard through (probably; it might just have been a bug) some strange interaction with how king-level vassals work in Byzantium.
The HRE was elective, that's how it was run, yet you're allowed to change it's succession laws in game. Why shouldn't it be the same for the ERE/RE.
Agreed, also this expansion just came out, I don't think asking for Byzantine succession laws (which were there before) was done to death at all.
When the relevant dev diary came out, I had suggested another way to make the law more flexible. Maybe, instead of being able to change the law, an emperor with absolute power and high centralization should get more voting strength.
As has been previously said - Between assigning titles and one or two favors every 10 years, you're pretty much guaranteed the heir of your choice. Hand off a county or two in your demense if needs be.
I've found the Imperial election system to be incredibly powerful. Since I can effectively designate any heir I want, I just maximize the number of eligible heirs. Eventually one of those Nieces/Nephews/Grandsons will Quick, Strong or a Genius. Move heaven and earth to make that character the next Heir and you have an incredibly powerful line of succession.
Really, the only falling off point for this style is it makes it *very* challenging to keep bloodlines in the family where you want them.
I've found the Imperial election system to be incredibly powerful. Since I can effectively designate any heir I want, I just maximize the number of eligible heirs. Eventually one of those Nieces/Nephews/Grandsons will Quick, Strong or a Genius. Move heaven and earth to make that character the next Heir and you have an incredibly powerful line of succession.
Really, the only falling off point for this style is it makes it *very* challenging to keep bloodlines in the family where you want them.
The way it actually works: imperial elective succession is tied to Byzantine and Roman empire titles, imperial government type is tied to having imperial elective succession.
The way it should have worked: imperial government type is tied to imperial administration, imperial elective succession is tied to having imperial government type.
That way anyone who wanted primogeniture could just change from imperial to late feudal administration and be done with it at the cost of the loss of the perks of imperial administration and government type (free vassal retraction, free viceroyalty revocation, ability to hold cities). And other empires would have the possibility of centraizing and adopting imperial elective succession. Hell, the description of imperial administration even says it's modeled after Rome.
The way it should have worked: imperial government type is tied to imperial administration, imperial elective succession is tied to having imperial government type.
That way anyone who wanted primogeniture could just change from imperial to late feudal administration and be done with it at the cost of the loss of the perks of imperial administration and government type (free vassal retraction, free viceroyalty revocation, ability to hold cities). And other empires would have the possibility of centraizing and adopting imperial elective succession. Hell, the description of imperial administration even says it's modeled after Rome.
There is an easy fix. Don't lose the election. Make Byzantine primo and castrate everyone who opposes.
That would actually solve a lot of issues and make a whole lot of sense.
Pun intended?
And yeah it is really hard to lose Elections so far as I've seen as long as you are properly appeasing your Council using the Viceroy System to ensure they have ~100 Opinion of you constantly. You get the Themes back constantly and you can just decide to always have the 4 Most Compotent Feudal rulers, a Priest and any other two people you like, then give Themes to the best Martial skilled people in your realm so you can always have access to them. If everyone loves you it's rarely an issue. Literally the only time I have ever had any manner of Succession Threat (besides losing Bloodlines to being forced to switch to a Dynastic branch you dislike) I have ever faced was when I changed from Orthodox to Catholic with know Heirs who had come of Age.
I solved that by getting rid of one Obstinate Ass of a Commander and bribing two more. THAT is what I have problems with. I want more crises. I want some Generals who end up with claims even after I have passed the Crown to myself, so they can gather a support base and rise up like they should.
Last edited:
Something IS funky with how elective works at the moment, I made a thread about it. Otherwise it's great and easily my favorite part of HF, even more than reformation as it turns out.
Here's what annoys me most. Why don't we have the ability to repeal this succession type for something we prefer? Why are we locked into such a nasty succession type? I should be able with enough support to repeal the law and make it inherited.