Crusader Kings II - Paradox Entertainement (02/12)

I am playing a game as Galicia in the 1066 start, and almost a hundred years later I've founded a titular kingdom of Portugal and conquered a nice chunk of Morocco. I am currently playing as Queen Estevainha 'the Bold', who has some pretty awesome stats, but something puzzles me about her.

My queen can lead armies with a decent 10 Martial score. After a few holy wars of doing precisely that (some even while pregnant!), she has obtained the 'inspiring leader' and 'organizer' commander traits.

How is this possible? I thought the only women who could lead troops in the game had to be Cathar heretics, or be produced by the Joan of Arc event chain. Does Estevainha being called 'the Bold' (which she acquired before I realized she could lead armies) have anything to do with this?

That's one BADASS queen!
 
Anyone have any idea why the CK2 thread is much more active than the ones for Vicky or EUIV?
It has far more replay-ability given you are playing a character, a dynasty, rather than an entire nation. The strategies involves also vary given claims, lands, and sometimes entire realms are passed around willy nilly, which frankly was rare in EUIV outside of Personal Unions, and impossible in Vicky.

Basically, there are more features that when enacted ensure you a different game every time in CK2+, whereas Vicky and EUIV tend more towards parallelism with room for some variation.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, out of curiosity, how does the Multiplayer work in practice? I've never actually done it, but I'm wondering if the game works better as a Single-Player experience than it does a Multiplayer one.
 
How is this possible? I thought the only women who could lead troops in the game had to be Cathar heretics, or be produced by the Joan of Arc event chain. Does Estevainha being called 'the Bold' (which she acquired before I realized she could lead armies) have anything to do with this?
Haven't seen you around for a long while, though I may have been just looking in the wrong places. Good to see your still here. :D

As LordInsane said, it seems that landed women are naturally allowed to lead armies, at least their own. I just generated a random female count, careful to avoid any martial traits, and she was available as a choice for General, though not automatically picked as is the case with male rulers. I am not sure why Paradox chose to do this, though I suppose it could be reasoned that, being the most powerful figure in their fiefdom, they didn't have anything keeping them from leading.

Still, that doesn't help you when you somehow end up with a female courtier with the brilliant strategist trait and a (22) martial score. >.>
 
Ariosto said:
It has far more replay-ability given you are playing a character, a dynasty, rather than an entire nation. The strategies involves also vary given claims, lands, and sometimes entire realms are passed around willy nilly, which frankly was rare in EUIV outside of Personal Unions, and impossible in Vicky.

Basically, there are more features that when enacted ensure you a different game every time in CK2+, whereas Vicky and EUIV tend more towards parallelism with room for some variation.
I think you basically got most of it. Of course, EUIV and Vicky do have a lot of replayability if only for the number of nations you can choose to play and random events that add diversity. But since CK2 concentrates itself more on characters and personnal interaction than on state building, there is a lot more diversity.

That's not really surprising though. Medival Politics were much more personnal than the later periods because of how Feudalism works.
Ariosto said:
Now, out of curiosity, how does the Multiplayer work in practice? I've never actually done it, but I'm wondering if the game works better as a Single-Player experience than it does a Multiplayer one.
I'm currently watching a multiplayer playthrough on YouTube. From what I could gather, the main differences between multiplayer and singleplayer is that there is a synchronisation mechanism to avoid players not being on the same date and that the game now only pauses when one of the players push the pause button. Other than that, it's pretty much the same as Singe Player.

The main downside, from what I can tell, is that the game can be stuck at speed 1 because of synchronisation...
 
MP's tone varies from campaign to campaign; something like Sunday League sees nations rise and fall very fast, and RP-based campaigns like Renaissance in Failure (An AH RP campaign partly modded by yours truly.) is much more relaxed and fun.
 
Haven't seen you around for a long while, though I may have been just looking in the wrong places. Good to see your still here. :D

As LordInsane said, it seems that landed women are naturally allowed to lead armies, at least their own. I just generated a random female count, careful to avoid any martial traits, and she was available as a choice for General, though not automatically picked as is the case with male rulers. I am not sure why Paradox chose to do this, though I suppose it could be reasoned that, being the most powerful figure in their fiefdom, they didn't have anything keeping them from leading.

Still, that doesn't help you when you somehow end up with a female courtier with the brilliant strategist trait and a (22) martial score. >.>

And in CK2+ Mazdakis and several other faiths also allow for female generals. Along with no penalty for female heir
 
Bernard Erza... God that looks weird. :D


Now for an update! :D


An Updated complete list of the Monarchs of Aquitaine.

Queen Aliénor 'the Great' I (Eleanor 'the Great', the woman who became Duchess of Aquitaine in her youth, she married at sixteen materially to the first of six husbands, at seventeen she and the Duke of Toulouse succeeded from France, allowing Eleanor to establish Aquitaine as a Kingdom. She then waged a series of wars in conjunction with the surrounding Kingdoms and HRE to tear the heretical French apart. She also placed her daughter 'Eleanor the Usurper' upon the Polish throne.)

King Enric 'the Shadow' I (Henry, Grandson of Eleanor I, son of Duke Toumas (Thomas) of Valois, second son of Eleanor of Aquitaine, eldest son Prince Rainer died without issue. Already called 'the Shadow' when crowned. Enric's reign was a time of mysterious deaths, sudden kidnapings, swift arrests, and military expansion as Enric's secondary talent was in warfare.)

King Guilhem 'the Wise' I (William, second son of Henry I, elder brother Prince Enric became a Knights Templar, he died unexpectedly at age 32 after becoming ill during a pilgrimage to Canterbury.)

Empress-Queen Marta 'the Holy' I (Martha, eldest daughter of William I, a genius, brilliant commander, diplomat, court vixen, and carouser, who placed her mother 'Gudrun the Usurper' on the throne of Norway. While starting her reign in a regency, Martha's reign eclipsed that of Eleanor the Great's as late in her triumphant reign Martha made herself Empress of Aquitaine.)

Emperor-King Bernat-Ezi 'the Fat; I (Bernard Erza, the only son of Prince Serlo, Martha's second son. Bernard was already a Norwegian duke prior to his ascension, having to abandon Norwegian customs caused him to lose face among his new vassals, his reign was a time of successful wars against the Kingdom of Burgundy, wild hedonism, and a large number of royal bastards, most of whom were legitimized by Bernat-Ezi)

Emperor-King Ubald 'the Impaler' I (Ubald, the only son of Prince Havard of Aquitaine, his reign started in an unstable regency, he had to wage no less than three wars against rebellious vassals, but through the use of vast mercenary armies paid for with the royal treasury Ubald triumphed in time for his majority. Extremely cruel and suffering from severe depression and alcoholism, he committed suicide a few days after the celebration of his sister's 16 birthday).

Empress-Queen Marta 'the Just' II (Martha, the sister of Ubald who took the throne after her brother's suicide. She inherited a realm that had been quite shaken by his brief, tyrannical reign. Marta's long reign did much to heal the damage. She annexed Upper and Lower Lorraine as the final sign of the destruction of the power of the HRE after it lost much of it's final territories to the ascendant kingdoms of Germany and Bavaria. She lived to witness the births of her grandchildren and some of her great-grandchildren. As the final sign that her power was absolute, Marta II usurped the Kingdom of Burgundy and created many kingdom titles that had lain dormant, like Navarra, Brittany, and France. Then she refounded the Empire of Francia, a feat that none had achieved in centuries. However the murder of her daughter by the King of Italy sparked a war that ended abruptly after Marta II died in her sleep).

Emperor-King Guiraud 'the Fowler' I (Gerard, the son of Marta II, already called the Fowler for his love of hawking when he became Emperor, he started his reign with a sudden wave of parties, feats, fairs. Then he became obsessed with the occult and acquired a strange book that drove him mad, then when a distant relative, Bernat-Ezi (a namesake of Bernart-Ezi I) challenged him for the throne, Gerard had him assassinated, becoming a kinslayer. During his dreadfully long reign there were several wars to reduce his power, or remove him from the throne completely, but Gerard won them all. One of the few good things that he did was to assist the Dutch in their war of independence from the remnants of the HRE, helping to establish the Kingdom of Flanders as an independent state, not to mention usurping the Kingdom of Aragon and granting it to a relative as a vassal kingdom. By the time of his death from stress, most of the nobility of the Empire was imprisoned.)

Emperor-King Piére I (Peter, the grandson of Guiraud I, his father Prince Robert was executed by King Bernard 'the Cruel' of Mauritania for helping his wife in a revolt against him. Peter found himself in an odd spot, most of his vassals were his prisoners, and had hated his grandfather dearly. So he left most of them in the dungeons to rot, but freed a handful as a sign of good faith. However he had a dangerous feud with his uncle, Prince Guiraud (the second brother of Prince Robert) that resulted in a duel that Peter won, his killing of his uncle caused him to be called a kinslayer. He is believed to be preparing for a war, though against whom is unknown, and Peter has remarried after his first wife died under suspect circumstances.
 
Haven't seen you around for a long while, though I may have been just looking in the wrong places. Good to see your still here. :D

Likewise!


Now, out of curiosity, how does the Multiplayer work in practice? I've never actually done it, but I'm wondering if the game works better as a Single-Player experience than it does a Multiplayer one.
I actually like multiplayer better, and credit it for reigniting my interest in this game. I hadn't played CK2 in about at least year, and after crushing my gaming friend into fine paste one too many times in Wargame: Red Dragon, he wanted to switch things up to something new. CK2 was the only other game that we had in common that we could play together, so we gave it a shot on that reason alone. What the hell.

I was pretty rusty after my hiatus from the game, and my friend was a total noob, but we had a lot of fun bumbling around as Galicia and Leon, respectively, in the 1066 start.

Although there were some sync issues and dropped signals, I think multiplayer made things a lot more interesting. Story-wise, the two of us could enjoy the melodrama going on in our respective courts that one might otherwise not see in AI-controlled kingdoms. My first king had an affair and was murdered by a jealous husband. My friend's current king is a legitimized bastard, who has continued his assassinated father's legacy by having a bastard for an heir himself. My current queen (the aforementioned Estevainha 'the Bold') assumed the throne at the tender age of <1 amidst a huge succession crisis, and defeated all of her pretenders by the time she came of age. Etcetera, etcetera.

I think multiplayer is also a greater challenge. I have a bad habit of save scumming when I make a big mistake, but that is not obviously possible in multiplayer (unless by mutual agreement). I think this has made things more interesting and entertaining, by forcing us to adapt to failure and plot our recoveries (aka SWEET, SWEET REVENGE). Both of us, for instance, were conquered in turn by Castile, and had to rebel to reclaim our kingdoms. Succession crises have also put our characters out of power. These could have been avoided by going back to earlier saves (and by being better players...), but ultimately crisis management is more fun than steady and boring success.

We now have multiplayer sessions continuing our Iberian slow-motion train wreck every weekend, and I've gotten back into playing single player too. Playing online with friends is a lot of fun, and I highly recommend it.
 
So all your female rulers have been mat marrying?

Yes, otherwise the game would end since I'm using Agnatic-Cognatic Primongeniture.

I wanted to change to Absolute Cognatic during Marta II's reign but she died before I could, and my current monarch has two sons before his first daughter so it'd be kind of pointless.

Though in the Aquitaine game, I don't have much luck keeping the eldest son alive, it's been a lot of grandkids and siblings inheriting, and the few that did have a clear succession weren't very good rulers (Ubald I and Gerald I), or died early (William I).
 
Two Related Questions About Ruler Designer, Part I

From your guys' overall experience, as far as it can be determined, is it better to have one or two super-powered traits even at the cost of having to get many minor negative ones to balance them (say, a strong genius, who's also craven, slothful, wounded, drunk, shy and arbitrary), or many little positive traits with only a few negative ones?
 
Two Related Questions About Ruler Designer, Part II

If you choose an advanced and specialized education trait, like Brilliant Strategist, is it better to reinforce these with traits like Brave and Master Strategist, even though it leaves you with deficits in other areas, or is it better to try to counterbalance your education trait with ones like Just and Scholar, even if it neglects your main strength?
 
frustrated progressive said:
From your guys' overall experience, as far as it can be determined, is it better to have one or two super-powered traits even at the cost of having to get many minor negative ones to balance them (say, a strong genius, who's also craven, slothful, wounded, drunk, shy and arbitrary), or many little positive traits with only a few negative ones?
The second option for me. Negative traits generally leads to negative opinion modifiers as well as crappier stats, so it's generally best to avoid having too much of them. Even if you counterbalance with super-powered traits.
frustrated progressive said:
If you choose an advanced and specialized education trait, like Brilliant Strategist, is it better to reinforce these with traits like Brave and Master Strategist, even though it leaves you with deficits in other areas, or is it better to try to counterbalance your education trait with ones like Just and Scholar, even if it neglects your main strength?
I have a tendency to think that it's better to have a ruler who is balanced, or at least who isn't a complete incompetent in every field that isn't his/her specialization. This partially helps should you find yourselves with crappy councelors and spouse at the start. That being said, having a ruler with a 20+ attribute might not be too overly problematic in other fields.

As a final word, I would have to say though that I have a tendency to favor the use of the "Ruler Designer Unlocked" mod. Sure, it becomes extremly easy to create a godlike character with it but at the same time it grants more creative freedom, which enhances the roleplaying aspect of a custom character.
 
I use HIP so my Ruler Designer is unlocked and I can make my starting character have all the good traits. It's fun to see which traits have stuck around five to six generations and which have not.
 
The second option for me. Negative traits generally leads to negative opinion modifiers as well as crappier stats, so it's generally best to avoid having too much of them. Even if you counterbalance with super-powered traits.
I have a tendency to think that it's better to have a ruler who is balanced, or at least who isn't a complete incompetent in every field that isn't his/her specialization. This partially helps should you find yourselves with crappy councelors and spouse at the start. That being said, having a ruler with a 20+ attribute might not be too overly problematic in other fields.

As a final word, I would have to say though that I have a tendency to favor the use of the "Ruler Designer Unlocked" mod. Sure, it becomes extremly easy to create a godlike character with it but at the same time it grants more creative freedom, which enhances the roleplaying aspect of a custom character.
Thanks, Yorel!
 
Sevarics said:
I use HIP so my Ruler Designer is unlocked and I can make my starting character have all the good traits. It's fun to see which traits have stuck around five to six generations and which have not.
Personnally, I am generally very unlucky with genetics. Even if I start with a Strong Attractive Genius, none of the kids inherit any of those traits and when they do it's only one... I generally get tears of joys when they have more than one good genetic trait. Hell, in my last GoT game, I nearly exploded of joy after I saw that my eldest son and Daenerys had a son that had inherited both his mother's quick and attractive traits.

Oddly enough, I kind of liked Geheimnisnacht's use of variable levels of genetic traits since it was more common for me to see kids being born with one.
frustrated progressive said:
Thanks, Yorel!
You're welcome. Happy to have been of service.
 
Top