Worst Monarch ever
- Thread starter cetvrtak
- 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.
Only kept him to finish the 'Die please die' achievement, abdicated him immediately after
Personally, I find it amusing that everyone talks about England, Timurids and Spain for Die Please Die and I got it by accident as Granada.
Had to abandon that game although afterwards. The fact that I got Die Please Die in a game where one error means doom for your nation should be pretty self-explanatory...
Had to abandon that game although afterwards. The fact that I got Die Please Die in a game where one error means doom for your nation should be pretty self-explanatory...
Not so much if you want to get the PU. Whether you get an heir or not, you have to rush it and put yourself in danger as the threat of either France getting mil tech 4 or the War of the Roses firing when you have painfully little manpower is severe, especially with Castile and Aragon both being rather incompetent when you call either one of them in. That's almost as bad as keeping Enrique, just on a smaller but more explosive scale.
Okay, I have to admit that Castille's heir really is crappy.
I didn't realise yesterday Enrique is also infertile, which really sucks...
I started a game as Castille, and Enrique's daddy died pretty much immediately. I tried to get a PU with Milan before disinheriting Enrique not expecting him to die so quickly. Things went way more smoothly then expected, it's 1455 and I already got this PU with Milan, the Burgundian Inheritance, and the Iberian Wedding.
So now I'll have to pray that I won't be stuck with Enrique for to long, and that my dear rival France won't use the situation to ROFLSTOMP me, as I will not be able to keep up with them technology / idea wise.
I think Englands king is not thát crappy.
Admittedly, yes, if you're hell-bent on winning the game by 1450, England is in quite a perilous position
I just read the wikipedia article on him. What makes him such an extraordinarily bad king? He seems average or slightly below average at best.
Yea, I read it as well. Didnt see anything that made him worthy of 0/0/0, but im just a unemployed drunk.
As someone who has played a least a dozen Castile games (one of my favorite nations to play), I would argue Enrique is NOT the worst ruler in the game. In fact, it's the combination of Juan I and Enrique that gives Castile it's rough monarch point start. That and the fact that Juan is 39 and could easily live for 20 years or more.
Enrique is not the worst leader because you can make him a general. And he makes, at times, a surprisingly good general. In one of my games, he was a 1/4/0/2 general. I put him at the head of an army and let him run all over North Africa. There's something invigorating about a general with stats like that, early game - especially if you don't care if he dies. Of course, then he got the hardy warrior trait ...
Even if you only get a 0/0/0/1, he's a free siege general. Use him until Juan dies and then you'll get an event where you can replace him if you want (not going to spoiler anyone out). And if you're really lucky, you'll get another event that replaces him with an awesome queen!
So he's really not that bad.
On the other hand, a 0/1/0 Queen regency over a 2 year old minor heir is ... awful. Because I've had that and since EU4 isn't Crusader Kings II, you just have to wait it out until she dies or your heir grows up. There's nothing you can do with that.
Enrique is not the worst leader because you can make him a general. And he makes, at times, a surprisingly good general. In one of my games, he was a 1/4/0/2 general. I put him at the head of an army and let him run all over North Africa. There's something invigorating about a general with stats like that, early game - especially if you don't care if he dies. Of course, then he got the hardy warrior trait ...
Even if you only get a 0/0/0/1, he's a free siege general. Use him until Juan dies and then you'll get an event where you can replace him if you want (not going to spoiler anyone out). And if you're really lucky, you'll get another event that replaces him with an awesome queen!
So he's really not that bad.
On the other hand, a 0/1/0 Queen regency over a 2 year old minor heir is ... awful. Because I've had that and since EU4 isn't Crusader Kings II, you just have to wait it out until she dies or your heir grows up. There's nothing you can do with that.
My latest game of England was quite lucky since I got the Mary of Anjou event quickly.
The treaty of Maine never happened tho? anyways I got the mission to PU France, which I easily did with the help of Castille.