What Stability Do You Prefer?
- Thread starter Ratlegion
- 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.
I try to keep it at +1, but I don't sweat sitting at 0. Only time I really go above +1 on my own is when I need the extra oomph when converting a province's religion.
Without mods, +0 or +1. Of course, you PREFER to be at +3, but it's not worth spending ADM to get +3. Of course, with religious ideas, the game will quite often push you from +1 to +3 without spending ADM. If that happens, great.
The only big exception is if the extra +2 stab would let you convert an otherwise impossible province (such as kuzestan 11 base tax hostile culture Sunni as Buddhist) and you care about converting it.
Heck, Eastern religions can't even convert a province like Rome normally...would require a lucky event or religious rebels from religious ideas to convert that...or to feed it to a released Sicily who takes religious ideas 7th and wait
. They have it accepted and might actually convert it.
The only big exception is if the extra +2 stab would let you convert an otherwise impossible province (such as kuzestan 11 base tax hostile culture Sunni as Buddhist) and you care about converting it.
Heck, Eastern religions can't even convert a province like Rome normally...would require a lucky event or religious rebels from religious ideas to convert that...or to feed it to a released Sicily who takes religious ideas 7th and wait
. They have it accepted and might actually convert it.
I cruise along at 0 or +1 (depending on revolt risk etc.)
However, if I'm ahead of time in admin points I raise it to +2.
However, if I'm ahead of time in admin points I raise it to +2.
I prefer 3 of course, but normally it´s 0 or +1, except when raised by an event/decision for example.
I tend to stay at +1 if possible, don't sweat it if I go to 0, and hope for events/missions to get higher. With an early game exploration country I always take the early mission to raise prestige to 50, it's trivially easy if you have access to explores (ahem, Portugal) so +2 right out of the games with the possibility of going to +3 with only spending the points for 1 is nice. Other nations I will sit on 0 for quite a while, all depends on the particular country goal for early game that I am playing.
I only go with +1, it's too expensive to raise it any higher. Also, a number of random destabilizing events that are significantly accelerated by having high stability. You're basically wasting monarch points by trying to stay at +3.
+1, since having positive stability has positive modifiers here and there and it doesn't cost any extra. +2 and +3, if I'm having problems, such as lack of money, rebellions or converting provinces.
Negative stability drops your legitimacy each month, for one.
Negative stability drops your legitimacy each month, for one.
Last edited:
Usually I stay at +1 but for some nations it's particularly easy to stay at +3 without spending adm points - the Emperor for example gets lots of missions to that increase his stability by +1
It really depends on the situation.
In my current poland game I'm steadily trucking along at -2 stab.
Full religious unity and a culturally homogenous state and I have no revolt risks.
I can afford +3 advisors and pull in about 60 ducats a month, so i see no need to go higher than -2.
In my current poland game I'm steadily trucking along at -2 stab.
Full religious unity and a culturally homogenous state and I have no revolt risks.
I can afford +3 advisors and pull in about 60 ducats a month, so i see no need to go higher than -2.
You get negative legitimacy if your stab is below 0. Really bad if you do a lot of diplo-vassalizing.
I have a really high turnover of rulers. I haven't been below 60 yet.
Also, staying at -2 is for the purpose of DoW'ing. Saving adm points on stabbing allows me to core more stuff.
Also, staying at -2 is for the purpose of DoW'ing. Saving adm points on stabbing allows me to core more stuff.
To be honest, I try to keep it at +2 or +3. If I get a comet or other stupid stab hit, I just use the console to get rid of the event. I will accept stab hits from ruler death, and then pay for getting it back up with ADM points. But because of the frequency of stab hits, I have tended to just shrug them off.
What I would prefer instead is a "stab decay" like Prestige. Or more sensibility in why there is instability than just silly events. If the system had more granularity, or more choices and trade offs, I might accept the occasional shock to stability more often. But the all-too-frequent and random -1 or -2 hits just get filtered out as RNG noise which the console can make up for all-too-easily.
No, I don't care about iron mode or achievements. I care more about playing a game I enjoy. RNG stab hits are probably my least favorite "feature" of the game.
What I would prefer instead is a "stab decay" like Prestige. Or more sensibility in why there is instability than just silly events. If the system had more granularity, or more choices and trade offs, I might accept the occasional shock to stability more often. But the all-too-frequent and random -1 or -2 hits just get filtered out as RNG noise which the console can make up for all-too-easily.
No, I don't care about iron mode or achievements. I care more about playing a game I enjoy. RNG stab hits are probably my least favorite "feature" of the game.
I tend to stay at 0 or +1 as most people. But negative stability recently hit me hard in a Sweden game. After having won my independence war + the next war to gain some territory and OE I had high war exhaustion and my ruler died. I didn't want to spend the adm points because I knew I could handle the rebels. But then both my manpower and money was low when the treaty timed out.. didn't think far enough there.
I see the stab events as representing all the random stuff going on in a nation that you cannot really control as a ruler, you just have to adapt to whatever the game throws at you and ride it out. You know stab can drop at any time, so it's part of the job as ruler to plan for it and be prepared.
I see the stab events as representing all the random stuff going on in a nation that you cannot really control as a ruler, you just have to adapt to whatever the game throws at you and ride it out. You know stab can drop at any time, so it's part of the job as ruler to plan for it and be prepared.
Never increase stability unless there is a specific reason to do so, or you have lots of extra admin points. Bumping from +1 to +2 might be the biggest waste of monarch power in the game, aside from the next step of course.
I've been finding myself cruising on +3 stab often lately. Long ruler life + religious idea events and a distinct lack of comets have been good. Rarely had to raise it myself, tho with orthodox -10%, -25% trading in wine, -25% religious idea + all the other stab reduction from decisions it has become pretty cheap.
Never really understood why ruler death with a strong claim heir stab hits you tho. Wouldn't there usually be celebrations for the coronation of the uncontested and undoubted heir? Weak claim heir I could find the stab hit justified.
Never really understood why ruler death with a strong claim heir stab hits you tho. Wouldn't there usually be celebrations for the coronation of the uncontested and undoubted heir? Weak claim heir I could find the stab hit justified.
I pay ADM points to maintain at +1 at all times (esp. when playing Russia to avoid Time of Troubles between 1550-1650). I am usually (80% of the time) at +2 thanks to events (level 3 advisors greatly increase chances of stab events). And high stab does make a huge difference. I don't understand people saying 0 is enough.