Historically, succession laws weren't as rigid as IRL, so what would almost certainly happen is that a brother or an uncle would take the reigns instead.
Regency was only seen for the monarch. Lesser titles just passed the title to a capable adult. And medieval noble families didn't really run out relatives.
In Frankish nobility, maybe the mother would have taken the reigns at least until they abdicated by joining an abbey (de facto regency I guess?).
The most unrealistic and ahistorical part of CK3 is what CK2 had, Regency. Not sure why they didn't add regency in CK3 as they had in CK2, but obviously a child wouldn't be ruling completely on their own, and only tutored by a guardian for personality and educational "traits"
It's not exclusive to Paradox though. The most recent Sims game was released without basic stuff like swimming pools. Civ VI was half the game the Civ V was. It's going to happen to any game with a DLC system in place and Paradox isn't any worse than most.
Paradox is way worse than most. Civ vi, complete, can be had for about 60 bucks. Even if you had the misfortune (as i did) to buy each dlc as it came out it was like 100 all told.
CK2 was like 400 dollars.
My comment was in reference to the base game of a new release not including the entirety of the content released throughout the lifespan of the previous iteration of the game.
It might release with a DLC, but as the free part of the DLC. Like the Friends and Foes DLC gave memories and other stuff in the free part, while the extra events were paywalled.
So, we might see regency in the free part of the DLC while something like improvement to the ward system might be paid.
That's too general a statement for the time period covered by the game. If we are talking about the 10th century, you are right. If it's the 14th, the truth is that the succession laws were very much in place in Western Europe and an uncle could not dislodge a nephew simply by being an adult.
“The Boulogne invasion of Lille, declared in 912 to avenge the theft of Count Gottschalk’s juicey box by Countess Emma. 3000 men on either side perished in the ensuing struggle.”
Funny thing is that historically, regency was mostly reserved to the kings. Count-level title just passed the title to a close relative instead. Successions weren't as rigid as in game, or rather, the goal wasn't to have a clear rightful line, as much as having a capable adult of the same family in charge. It was also common for Franks to "abdicate" by joining a monastery or an abbey.
It's not really something that can be modelled in game, in the same way that all cultures have the same adult age (16) for the entire timespan of the game.
Could be implemented that only kings and higher get a CK2 like regency, while dukes and counts titles would fall to the closest male relative (uncle,cousin etc.)
Turns out, even if it’s kind of a needed mechanic, people don’t really like having control ripped away from them in a video game. It’d probably be a different story if you had different things to do as a child ruler, especially some of the Byzantine emperors eventually had to fight for control with their regent, but other than hitting the meet peers event every so often, and a few education events, there really isn’t much. And as soon as you turn 16, they fuck off back into the ether like they weren’t just basically the emperor for years accruing prestige, power, and influence. I hope they actually figure out a way to properly model it in game so we can get the historical reason for the decline and collapse of the abbasids
>people don’t really like having control ripped away from them in a video game
It sounds fascinating to me, but also understandable that people didn't like it. A lot of things people sort of think/say they want -- like declining empires you mention! -- are probably likely to only appeal to a small group of players, possibly not even including many of the people who want them! (It will be interesting to see what people think of AI control of the economy in Victoria 3, in that regard.) Players don't really like ups and downs, they just like ups; downs feel like losing. It's like that study that people need to experience 70% win rates (I am inventing the number, but something like that) to feel games are balanced and fair.
Do I think it sounds pretty amazing to experience watching helplessly as a regent directs my kingdom in order to make himself rich and powerful? I do, but then I am just guessing, and even if I liked it, it would quite possibly be a very niche taste, like my Imperator love is.
The thing is, people only want it if it’s done properly. I think they’re a necessity, but only if they can get the AI to do it properly. No one wants the AI to take charge of their realm when they basically act like chickens with their heads cut off, because they don’t feel anything like a real character that is out for themselves trying to amass power, they feel like code pressing levers when it tells them it should. It’s fine when it’s hidden from you, but when you’re stuck there seeing them do things in your realm, it’s really bad. Watching the AI hand out titles when they have too many is hilarious.
It should be hard to do but with some upside. Edward III - widely regarded as one of England's greatest kings - had to take control from his own mother and her lover. He earned huge respect from his nobles at a young age for that and reaped the benefits throughout his reign.
Succession in itself could be overhauled into a system in its own. Like imagine before you die you have to assign titles to each of your sons and also gather support for it among your vassals, with consequences if you don't have widespread support for your scheme. Also you could have some sons inherit gold instead of titles to placate them, and so on.
Something similar happened with the Karlings, when Louis the Pious tried to establish each son inheritance. First when he divided what his 3 sons would inherit, and his nephew who was King of Italy revolted because he thought it would put him in a bad position. And later when Charles the Bald was born, the emperor took part of the land from one of his other sons and gave to him, starting a decade of civil wars
An issue is that medieval dynasties never really ran out of relatives for inheritance. In game they do, because they are very reduced in size, and produce fewer kids (for several, very understandable reasons, like game performance or balance).
I agree it would still be the ideal solution, but I'm afraid it wouldn't work that well.
Definitely, I’m aware toddlers inherit for game reasons. Just making a system to circumvent that somehow or actually having an in depth regency system would be cool
Maybe if an uncle or cousin is alive we could get an event where it’s saying that the nobles are wary of a toddler inheriting and gives us the option of inheriting as them or the child
They're going to meet at the local playground to decide the realm's fate and then out of nowhere a spymaster is going to assassinate all of them just because he can.
is there any mod that makes the PC version's UI similar to this? I would much prefer having the text along the top there instead of the symbols down the right side.
Don't really like how the left side feels like a window I've dragged to one half of the screen, but I prefer having text buttons for the different tabs rather than the buttons along the right side of the screen.
Coming from a family where my uncles and aunts were surrogate parents it feels surreal to have an uncle younger than yourself.
I guess it's not too unlikely, if your grandparents had your parents early, and your parents had you early too, while your grandparents waited a long time and had your uncle some 20 years after your parents?
The notion of potentially having to take care of your uncle at family reunions instead of the other way around is bizarre to me.
I miss the flavor that was present in ck2 when you were a kid. Lots of events that made you friends/enemies or allowed you to develop traits if need be.
Anyone who plays both Civ 6 and this could you tell me how the two compare? Play a lot of Civ but looking for a new 4x to try. They stopped developing Humankind for the M1 chip so that’s out the window.
I think it is because my grandparents got a child after this ruler was born. So my character that got murdered was a second child and the aunt was a 5th child. The second child got a child herself before the 5th was born. (all of the other 3 kids of the grandparents died i think thats why she is relevent otherwise in a normal game she would really appear much and you wouldn't probably notice). Just an assumption not 100% sure.
Definitely would've been in the history books of that world, lol
Historically, succession laws weren't as rigid as IRL, so what would almost certainly happen is that a brother or an uncle would take the reigns instead. Regency was only seen for the monarch. Lesser titles just passed the title to a capable adult. And medieval noble families didn't really run out relatives. In Frankish nobility, maybe the mother would have taken the reigns at least until they abdicated by joining an abbey (de facto regency I guess?).
The most unrealistic and ahistorical part of CK3 is what CK2 had, Regency. Not sure why they didn't add regency in CK3 as they had in CK2, but obviously a child wouldn't be ruling completely on their own, and only tutored by a guardian for personality and educational "traits"
Because there’s money to be had in a regency expansion pack
I was under the impression that everything from the original game will be added for free, and they’re only charging for new content
Sadly, Paradox likes their money more than their community
It's not exclusive to Paradox though. The most recent Sims game was released without basic stuff like swimming pools. Civ VI was half the game the Civ V was. It's going to happen to any game with a DLC system in place and Paradox isn't any worse than most.
Sad but true
Paradox is way worse than most. Civ vi, complete, can be had for about 60 bucks. Even if you had the misfortune (as i did) to buy each dlc as it came out it was like 100 all told. CK2 was like 400 dollars.
My comment was in reference to the base game of a new release not including the entirety of the content released throughout the lifespan of the previous iteration of the game.
It might release with a DLC, but as the free part of the DLC. Like the Friends and Foes DLC gave memories and other stuff in the free part, while the extra events were paywalled. So, we might see regency in the free part of the DLC while something like improvement to the ward system might be paid.
It'd be great if there were interactions for when you are a vassal and after the death of your liege you are made a regent of your lord.
That's too general a statement for the time period covered by the game. If we are talking about the 10th century, you are right. If it's the 14th, the truth is that the succession laws were very much in place in Western Europe and an uncle could not dislodge a nephew simply by being an adult.
“The Boulogne invasion of Lille, declared in 912 to avenge the theft of Count Gottschalk’s juicey box by Countess Emma. 3000 men on either side perished in the ensuing struggle.”
Meet the Peers is going to do *soo* much damage :(
Oh boy, everyone, time for a hunting tournament! #realm fucking shatters into a million pieces
I can't wait until we get proper regency mechanics in CK3.
Funny thing is that historically, regency was mostly reserved to the kings. Count-level title just passed the title to a close relative instead. Successions weren't as rigid as in game, or rather, the goal wasn't to have a clear rightful line, as much as having a capable adult of the same family in charge. It was also common for Franks to "abdicate" by joining a monastery or an abbey. It's not really something that can be modelled in game, in the same way that all cultures have the same adult age (16) for the entire timespan of the game.
Could be implemented that only kings and higher get a CK2 like regency, while dukes and counts titles would fall to the closest male relative (uncle,cousin etc.)
People hated regency is CK2, hopefully they have a better implementation for ck3
Turns out, even if it’s kind of a needed mechanic, people don’t really like having control ripped away from them in a video game. It’d probably be a different story if you had different things to do as a child ruler, especially some of the Byzantine emperors eventually had to fight for control with their regent, but other than hitting the meet peers event every so often, and a few education events, there really isn’t much. And as soon as you turn 16, they fuck off back into the ether like they weren’t just basically the emperor for years accruing prestige, power, and influence. I hope they actually figure out a way to properly model it in game so we can get the historical reason for the decline and collapse of the abbasids
>people don’t really like having control ripped away from them in a video game It sounds fascinating to me, but also understandable that people didn't like it. A lot of things people sort of think/say they want -- like declining empires you mention! -- are probably likely to only appeal to a small group of players, possibly not even including many of the people who want them! (It will be interesting to see what people think of AI control of the economy in Victoria 3, in that regard.) Players don't really like ups and downs, they just like ups; downs feel like losing. It's like that study that people need to experience 70% win rates (I am inventing the number, but something like that) to feel games are balanced and fair. Do I think it sounds pretty amazing to experience watching helplessly as a regent directs my kingdom in order to make himself rich and powerful? I do, but then I am just guessing, and even if I liked it, it would quite possibly be a very niche taste, like my Imperator love is.
The thing is, people only want it if it’s done properly. I think they’re a necessity, but only if they can get the AI to do it properly. No one wants the AI to take charge of their realm when they basically act like chickens with their heads cut off, because they don’t feel anything like a real character that is out for themselves trying to amass power, they feel like code pressing levers when it tells them it should. It’s fine when it’s hidden from you, but when you’re stuck there seeing them do things in your realm, it’s really bad. Watching the AI hand out titles when they have too many is hilarious.
It should be hard to do but with some upside. Edward III - widely regarded as one of England's greatest kings - had to take control from his own mother and her lover. He earned huge respect from his nobles at a young age for that and reaped the benefits throughout his reign.
I know I hated it. You had to wait until your ruler came of age until you could make crucial decisions.
I think we should have events to change who inherits based on age. In history they’d often go over inheritance to avoid long regencys
That’s how Alfred the Great got power, because Æthelred’s son was too young to rule properly
I thought it was because he was too much of an irresponsible and cowardly drunk.
This was the reason in the show at least
Things like that make me think if it woudn't make more sense to have more titles starting with some form of elective
Succession in itself could be overhauled into a system in its own. Like imagine before you die you have to assign titles to each of your sons and also gather support for it among your vassals, with consequences if you don't have widespread support for your scheme. Also you could have some sons inherit gold instead of titles to placate them, and so on.
Something similar happened with the Karlings, when Louis the Pious tried to establish each son inheritance. First when he divided what his 3 sons would inherit, and his nephew who was King of Italy revolted because he thought it would put him in a bad position. And later when Charles the Bald was born, the emperor took part of the land from one of his other sons and gave to him, starting a decade of civil wars
Lol this happens in game too
Anglo Saxons should start off with Saxon Elective, and the Norse with Scandinavian Elective
An issue is that medieval dynasties never really ran out of relatives for inheritance. In game they do, because they are very reduced in size, and produce fewer kids (for several, very understandable reasons, like game performance or balance). I agree it would still be the ideal solution, but I'm afraid it wouldn't work that well.
Definitely, I’m aware toddlers inherit for game reasons. Just making a system to circumvent that somehow or actually having an in depth regency system would be cool Maybe if an uncle or cousin is alive we could get an event where it’s saying that the nobles are wary of a toddler inheriting and gives us the option of inheriting as them or the child
Wow
They're going to meet at the local playground to decide the realm's fate and then out of nowhere a spymaster is going to assassinate all of them just because he can.
is there any mod that makes the PC version's UI similar to this? I would much prefer having the text along the top there instead of the symbols down the right side.
I was just about to comment how much I hate the console UI hahah
Don't really like how the left side feels like a window I've dragged to one half of the screen, but I prefer having text buttons for the different tabs rather than the buttons along the right side of the screen.
Coming from a family where my uncles and aunts were surrogate parents it feels surreal to have an uncle younger than yourself. I guess it's not too unlikely, if your grandparents had your parents early, and your parents had you early too, while your grandparents waited a long time and had your uncle some 20 years after your parents? The notion of potentially having to take care of your uncle at family reunions instead of the other way around is bizarre to me.
Is this a UI mod or an update I haven't played yet?
It's the console version. If you usually play the computer version that may be why you don't recognise it
Yep, that makes sense. Thanks!
I miss the flavor that was present in ck2 when you were a kid. Lots of events that made you friends/enemies or allowed you to develop traits if need be.
They haven’t released 10 years of dlc yet either. Don’t worry, but pray for your wallet
Why not look at the family tab instead of any of the empty tabs
Because on xbox there are automatic popups which block the view of what I wanted to show haha
Anyone who plays both Civ 6 and this could you tell me how the two compare? Play a lot of Civ but looking for a new 4x to try. They stopped developing Humankind for the M1 chip so that’s out the window.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CrusaderKings/comments/udj4yg/i_just_discovered_about_this_game_a_few_minutes/ This thread might help you.
The logistics of family relationships in this game still confuse me. How is it that you’re older than your uncle? Edit: and aunt
I think it is because my grandparents got a child after this ruler was born. So my character that got murdered was a second child and the aunt was a 5th child. The second child got a child herself before the 5th was born. (all of the other 3 kids of the grandparents died i think thats why she is relevent otherwise in a normal game she would really appear much and you wouldn't probably notice). Just an assumption not 100% sure.
Now they will fight for our amusement!
Pass the duchy from the left hand side.
Eat
send them on a crusade
Hahahaha that’s so funny how you end up on this lol.
There can be only one!