I understand this view but when I look at the game with all this years, patches and DLCs I get the impression the devs never enact this way of thinking on them self. This leads to your problem to be never satisfied with certain features/mechanics in game. I choose to take the game as such and don't take it too historical accurate for my mental health.
I wouldn't define it as counter-intuitive rather than complicated and bad explained. In the moment you understand it you can act accordingly. Other could say gamey.
The
AI doesn't understand succession at all, Gavelkind in particular.
What would a good Gavelkind succession look like in your opinion. Maybe I can integrate it in the
CCIL.
I think if you look at the original CKII it's trying to approximate history at a given start date, as the game has evolved it has moved towards trying to "balance" the game, especially by curtailing "gamey" behaviour on the part of the player. Then you have Conclave which seems to operate under "rule of cool" where it introduces a number of anachronisms - like curtailing voting on changes in the law to a small "Privy" Council and allowing for an almost gender-neutral society more than half a millenia before this was even considered over most of Europe.
As to Gavelkind being Counter-Intuitive, it definitely is. It makes the primary heir weaker than his brothers, and it is named after an historical succession law but doesn't follow the basis of said law. The Devs have set it up in such a way that it's needlessly complicated, which is why the AI doesn't understand it.
Personally, I think the law should operate on the historical principle.
That means, first and foremost, an equal division of the demesne among legitimate sons. If there are holding left over then they should be assigned to elder sons first. The eldest son should get the top title, then younger sons should get lower titles. If possible the second son should have a demesne and a title outside the de jure of the eldest son and so on. If there are three sons and three titles of equal rank to inherit then the realm should be equally split (something the current law does correctly, the only time it really is logical or historical).
The first 50% of the treasury should be split equally, the remainder should be split among younger sons, excluding the primary heir. It was quite common for rulers to give younger sons money in lieu of land, indeed Henry I only got cash from William the Conquerer whilst William Rufus got England and Robert Curthose got Normandy.
That's how I think it should work, that's actually "fair", it should reduce the incidence of the AI going for the eldest son or the eldest son feeling so insecure he tries to revoke his brothers' lands. At the same time giving younger sons a bigger cash lump sum makes it easier for them to either upgrade their new demesne or hire mercs if they want to oppose their older brother. If you were at your demesne limit when you died then the younger sons should now be "Powerful Vassals" in Conclave terms, meaning they'll probably get seats on the Council and without conclave they should still be powerful enough to be Faction Leaders if they choose, or to command significant votes in the Assembly.
