why do my kings live for such a short time?

[unmerged(56754)]

Black cirlces - kings that have a number yet (eg Carlo V is only the second carlo)
Black box - short living spaces
Red line - christoforo emo was in charge of the republic when i switched to monachy, so carlo V was the first BORN into king

My past kings keep dying after about 3 years, why? i could understand it happening, but this often? surely if it happened this much, they'd be too young to keep naking babies, but they just carry on.
wtf?

 

[minority]

LOL. It seems to me you are just experiencing a bout of really bad luck. Unless of course there are factors influencing monrach lifespan that we don't know too much about.

cheers

 

[unmerged(8351)]

I have noticed stability tends to correlate with monarch life.

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

That is because there were 4 other Carlo's king of Italy before the EUIII times

Carlo I (aka Charlemagne 771 - 781)
Carlo II (aka Charles the Bald 875 - 877)
Carlo III (aka Charles the Fat 879 - 878)

And the fouth one is probably Carloman of Bavaria king of Italy from 877to 880

EDIT
No, Charles IV, Holy Roman Emperor 1355 - 1378 was the 4th Carlo

 

[unmerged(46430)]

I have noticed stability tends to correlate with monarch life.

His stability isn't that bad. Has it recently gone up?

 

[unmerged(49083)]

The monarchs die quickly because poeple get bored of them.

 

[unmerged(56754)]

whats really annoying is that sinse posting this, 2 more kings have died, but one might be from battle, i just want to know if i will ever stop!

ive had 3 stability for years, before i my leaders kept dying all the time, so thats not it........ still, atleast i have an unlimited force of monachs to keep charging, :rofl: who needs an army?

 

[SonofWinter]

Monarchs die, because some fools, not saying you are one of them, turn them into generals and leave them in charge of armies. In the last 200 years of the game I only had two kings who lasted less than 20 years and one of them had crappy stats, so I turned him into a general.

 

[unmerged(56754)]

Monarchs die, because some fools, not saying you are one of them, turn them into generals and leave them in charge of armies. In the last 200 years of the game I only had two kings who lasted less than 20 years and one of them had crappy stats, so I turned him into a general.

not really, i havent had time to use them, when i start a war, i put my king in charge, sent them to fight, about half way there, the king dies, and before i can put my next king in charge, the armies already fighting and seiging so i cant put him in charge

 

[Rundstedt75]

Monarchs die, because some fools, not saying you are one of them, turn them into generals and leave them in charge of armies. In the last 200 years of the game I only had two kings who lasted less than 20 years and one of them had crappy stats, so I turned him into a general.

That's not a bad idea, I've had a rash of incompetent kings lately so if it continues... it's off to the front with them .

 

[JanIv]

Do they actually die a natural death? May be some of them are removed from the throne by a coup d'etat. That may correspond with the idea of low stability resulting in fast shift in kings.

 

[Scipio808]

I've noticed that the average life of my monarchs is about 10-13 years.Some go longer(30-40 years) some are shorter(1-2 years).I think if I've had a few die recently, I'm due for a 7-6-8 stat for 40 years kind of Monarch!

 

[unmerged(49083)]

I love it when I have a godlike monarch, something like 9-8-9.

 

[durecellrabbit]

I love it when I have a godlike monarch, something like 9-8-9.

I've only had one like that but he died in a year and got me a regency council .

 

[Chaingun]

If my king sucks I put him to command some unsignificant army which I try to get into as many battles as possible, hoping he will die.

 

[Nimic]

I'm more troubled by bad monarchs than short-lived monarchs. In my "diplo-annex Europe" France campaign I had two kings with 3 in diplomatic skill in a row that lasted for about 20-25 years each, and this was right in the middle of my go to annex some countries.

 

[crusaderknight]

Monarchs die, because some fools, not saying you are one of them, turn them into generals and leave them in charge of armies. In the last 200 years of the game I only had two kings who lasted less than 20 years and one of them had crappy stats, so I turned him into a general.

And turning monarchs into generals is foolish why? In my Portugal game it's 1499, and I've had three kings since the start: Afonso V, Henrique I, and Joao II. All three have led their troops from the front in every war I have fought in, and they have all personally conquered the lands I have taken over. They have fought in Morocco, Connaught, Scotland, and Norway. In fact, I only kicked butt as badly as I did because of their generalship. And none of them died in battle.

 

[unmerged(485)]

I'm more troubled by bad monarchs than short-lived monarchs. In my "diplo-annex Europe" France campaign I had two kings with 3 in diplomatic skill in a row that lasted for about 20-25 years each, and this was right in the middle of my go to annex some countries.

Ain't life a bitch??

 

[unmerged(503)]

extraordinary monarchs were rare, seriously think about it...most monarchs simply stank. inbred, zealots or disolute, fraticidal or indifferent, narrowminded or uncaring...and by the same token monarchs that could have been great...were prevented by politics in thier own kingdoms, rivalry among noble houses, discontent in the realm or parliment, or, if you prefer the estates general. the Edward Plantagents(or insert here your fav monarch)were a truely rare breed in history. PS sounds like paradox got it right, was more common to have a blah monarch then the reverse.

solution...banzai charge any large enemy army with your lame ruler.

I'm more troubled by bad monarchs than short-lived monarchs. In my "diplo-annex Europe" France campaign I had two kings with 3 in diplomatic skill in a row that lasted for about 20-25 years each, and this was right in the middle of my go to annex some countries.

 

[SonofWinter]

If you leave a General in charge of an army without fighting battles, he is more likely to die of disease, winter attrition or some other fitting end. He doesn't even have to be in a battle. He will die off faster if you turn him into a general and leave him charge of an army. Don't like the facts then argue with me till you turn blue in the face, it won't change the facts. :rofl: