CK2 Dev Diary #50: A Reason for War

[Tryvenyal]

The more I think about it, the less I like the hostage CB. I welcome a way to free hostages, but a straight CB is not a good implementation. I would prefer a sequence of diplomatic interactions that can result in giving a CB.

A rough outline:

Step 1: 'Demand return of hostages'-Diplomatic action
What it says in the title. Optionally with some additional requirements to activate. The recipient can now either (depending on traits, relations, relative power and so on):
A: Return hostages for a truce. And the chain ends - or -
B: Refuse. Bringing you to Step 2.

Step 2: 'XYZ refuses demands'
A: Stand down and mope. No further action and a loss in prestige and piety if yielding to heathen.
B: Issue ultimatum. Go to Step 3

Step 3: Ultimatum
The recipient of tha ultimatum can now either:
A: Give up the hostages for a truce while losing prestige and piety.
B: Refuse without harming the hostages: Initator gains a 'Rescue hostage CB' for limited time as outlined. Failure to declare war costs prestige/piety and general opinion for making empty threats.
C: Kill the hostages: Initiator gains 'Revenge CB' for limited time and major opinion modifiers. Success on Revenge imprisons recipient and his family. Failure to declare war again comes at a cost.

I like these ideas! But instead of granting CBs, I´d like to have the war started directly - same funktionality like when an faction ultimatum is forced.

 

[Aardvark Bellay]

I was wondering where the De Jure Duchal CB went... I used that literally all the time....

Nowhere, as unmodded CK2 never had one. Not that i recall.

 

[Maxuli]

I think it's a bit dangerous to speculate on whether or not killing a hostage upon DOW is just or not -- justice isn't an independent idea that bestows its goodness upon us, it's tied to what is going on in actual, living society. I've spent five minutes googling now, so I'm an expert on the matter, obviously, but it looks like killing hostages wasn't actually that common, and not because of aforementioned Idea of Justice, but more for ransom, but for economic and social reasons:

A study of the Middle Ages would not be complete without a gruesome dimension. On this, Kosto does not fail to deliver. Including stories of the mistreatment and gory decapitation of hostages certainly adds to the drama of the work, though voyeurs should not get too carried away, as we find that these fatal situations were in fact rarities in the Middle Ages.

The Saxons infamously executed on Charlemagne’s orders have always stood out as the best known group of hostages. However, the Carolingians took many other groups as hostages too, including Iberian Muslims, Bohemians, Moravians, Lombards, Danes, Bretons and so on. Furthermore, the Carolingians were not the only ones to make use of hostageship in the early Middle Ages. Rulers from around the globe, such as Islamic Emirs, utilised hostages and this practice became a means of political communication, a sign of good faith. In this sense, hostageship was a common – perhaps universal – language in itself.

But if hostageship was a language then it also possessed many dialects, with political communication not being the only one. Romans used hostages as a means of religious communication, and hostageship could also be a technique of religious conversion (p. 68). It was therefore not always negative, being comparable to processes such as child oblation, commendation, fosterage or even sponsorship (p. 72–7). Hostages were used to provide a guarantee, but these parallels could well have encouraged the continued use of hostages.

From the 11th century, an almost new era of hostageship emerges. Hostages were subject to an exponential increase, not only in number but also in the variety of contexts in which they were used. This was as a reflection of what was going on in society as a whole. Noticeable changes included the increased use of females as hostages and of hostages as representatives following changes in political geography. Conditional respite and ransom, with their links to the Crusade (p. 114), also had connections to hostageship. Hostages were deemed to have significant, if not substantial, economic worth in a ransom market (p. 118) and were also used in many financial transactions. The laws of war also played a huge role in the formalisation of the legal position of hostages at this time, which became enforceable through formal court processes.

Chapter five discusses conditional hostageship, as the more judicial nature of the practice evolved, with legislation on it widespread by the 13th century (pp. 131; 161). Hostageship was now deemed to be based on the mutual trust between two parties, one of which could guarantee the appearance of the hostage when required to do so. The use of hostages was also being integrated into international affairs, as reflected in international peace treaties. Additionally, money had much more of a role to play at this time, and could now be an object of the agreement as well (p. 157). Moreover, conditional hostageship could also be used as a contractual tactic (p. 160).

 

[alfian]

Please make restricted Holy War, only allow neighbor to other religion. No more French Holy War in Iberia.

 

[Gloweye]

I think CB's like the discussed ones would be better with a fleshed out definition of hostages, including wards. So if I beat you in a war, I get your heir in my court, who can't leave without my permission. Responsible for education if relevant. Responsible for safety - dead/mistreated hostages allow for revenge CB, even if they were assassinated. As a measure of protection, people with high opinion of the liege will not plot to kill the hostage, unless the liege invites them. (Short version: If they wouldn't plot against the liege, they wont plot against the hostage because of their loyalty to the liege.). Liege loses relation anyway, around 30 - so if the purpetrator is discovered and someone else, the hostage's family would dislike the assassin more.

This'll also give a whole new dimension to sowing dissent in a realm - you can assassinate hostages in other courts to sour relations. If im a duke in the HRE, I might just assassinate another duke's heir who is hostage of the emperor to completely destroy their relation and potentially enlist his help in my independence war.

 

[Zsrai]

On a more role playing tilt, I would like a personal retribution CB that allows you to declare war on a character that has murdered close family. If you win you get some gold and prestige plus the target is imprisoned. At the minute it sucks that people can do whatever they like to your family with little/no consequence.

There is already a Rival CB in game that already does this. They should probably just expand upon how characters end up rivals (and friends, and lovers) instead. This is a character focused game, after all.

If we got a CB against those who dishonor their marriage to our dynasty (divorce or murder (caught or attempted)) or if they become rivals with their spouse (but the spouse has to ask us for help in that case).

What would be a war result of those vangance/rival/dishonored CBs?

See above, use the Rivalry CB. Pretty sure it's just a prestige/gold hit and you imprison the character you are declaring on, but I haven't used it in awhile.

I would prefer more character based CBs, like Rivalry, instead of more object based CBs, like blanket warfare for land. Maybe instead of a failed revokation or imprisonment attempt automatically firing off a war, it instead gives a CB to imprison that character or a claim on the title in question. I also think a reworking of the war score system needs to be implemented; fighting the entire ERE for 1 county, because you NEED 100% WS, is extremely tiresome. Maybe scale the war rewards to the war score? Say you need 25% to grab a county but feel like drawing out a war against a weaker target anyways, so you get 100%. If you do, perhaps you get more gold/prestige/piety/hostages than you would get if you only got up to 25-30% and ended it? I think adding multiple goals, a la EU4, isn't the right way to go to hit 100% either though.

I was wondering where the De Jure Duchal CB went... I used that literally all the time. Guess I'll have to use a mod until Paradox sucks more money out of me to get content back into the game.

Except that CB was never in the (unmodded) game so you never had it taken away from you.

 

[Harald Fairhair]

Might I suggest that hostages could be part of a peace treaty? Maybe white peace resulting in an non agression pact, or could probably make something up there. Reasons for hostages was to keep peace, very different from people beeing kidnapped where both parties the kidnappers and the family of the kidnapped had no peace treaty. Such prisoners are likely exposed to harsh treatments rather than hostage wich had peace values between parties. Peace treaty could be extended to both parties have hostages or only one side has.

I would like suggest that liege joins vassal war! Seen often it happen to such exsamples like sons of Charlamagne have their vassal title ussurped. I mean could the emperor stand for this or any king to have their sons removed? As well his should also prevent sons to attack other vassals.

And vassals in pagan land should have some support from the liege as well in war as the liege gets from them. One of the great difference between feudal and tribal is that the liege is first amongst equals, rather than above his vassals.

 

[GUmby_Aaron]

I would like suggest that liege joins vassal war! Seen often it happen to such exsamples like sons of Charlamagne have their vassal title ussurped. I mean could the emperor stand for this or any king to have their sons removed? As well his should also prevent sons to attack other vassals.

double redundancy isn't a good idea as you have an enforce realm peace option currently in the game (also if it is an internal war you can right click them to end the war in exchange of a favour if they are of high opinion on you or if you had favour to call in with them).

 

[oerbaa]

Please make restricted Holy War, only allow neighbor to other religion. No more French Holy War in Iberia.

Holy wars are already restricted to your neighbors.

The reason France can do it is because it shares a sea zone with the east coast of Iberia.

This is the same reason Pisa can holy war Africa, because they share a sea tile, which counts as being a neighbor.

 

[Gloweye]

double redundancy isn't a good idea as you have an enforce realm peace option currently in the game (also if it is an internal war you can right click them to end the war in exchange of a favour if they are of high opinion on you or if you had favour to call in with them).

Disagree. The first option is only 3 years every 5 (or something), while the second only delays the war declaration a year with a multiple-year cooldown. You can NOT stop your vassals from stealing each other's land. Which is bad because they're stealing each other's viceroyalties (in my game at least).

 

[AntZudan]

I really want a vengeance CB.

I don't think any of the ones in the diary are a good idea except the first and last. And even then with caveats. The force vassal CB should become unavailable after a certain date. To model the rule of law and idea of land being de jure overtaking the idea that might is right.

Hostage should definitely carry heavy risks of execution. Especially if the war is not won quickly. But is otherwise a great idea and could make for some very fun events.

I'd also like to see a blood feud CB to fight a dynasty that's been your enemy for a long time. Just to settle old scores, although I'm not sure how this would work in practice.

 

[Caeserion]

I'd like to see a more enhanced negotiation system when fighting a war.

Get a holy war declared on you but instead you managed to occupy some of his holdings? Keep one or two at the price of the usual prestige/piety. The HRE declares war on you for your bastard bro's claim on italy? Offer the HRE some of his dejure land that you occupy in exchange for calling off the war and also declaring 'eternal peace' that lasts till one of the two rulers dies.

Just something to shake off the uniformity of the experience.

 

[Haloixix13]

I believe I have a few ideas on the whole "reasons for war"
1. Liberation wars(feudal only)- if an area( I leave the size up to the developers) has a county under the rule of a foreigner( different culture group) a ruler gets a casus belli on that area. Some things to add a little randomness to the game could be things like patriots or relatives event spawned troops(people who want to be liberated)
2. Superiority war(all governments except theocracies)- a war just for glory, 500 prestige is gained by the victor, 300 prestige is lost by the loser.
3. Princess bride(fuedal/tribal only)- have if your wife or kin should die because of a "foreign power" you get a casus belli against said nation.
4 Fiery destruction(tribal only)- one of the things that angered me while playing ck2 is that, as a tribal leader, you are stuck with the fuedal holdings your take in war( limiting the amount of troops available for your army). With this new casus belli, the tribal ruler destroys the top hold it takes in this war.(the developers decide the size)
Culture humiliations(all government types except nomads)-if you added a cultural authority(like moral authority), you could do wars to take land from people of different cultures. The wars would basically be a Ruskin of holy wars, but it would make converting counties to your culture easier. Low cultural authority means your culture in your can change easier.
Cynical disposition( against theocracies)( must have the trait cynical)- Gives a casus belli against theocracies for land that is their religion.

 

[Haloixix13]

I posted mime on page 7, if the developers would give it a look, I would appreciate it.

 

[Jorlem]

instead they turn to Holy Wars or invite duchy claimants to expand in a more meaningful way.

I don't understand why this is a problem. Requiring interaction with other characters, forethought and planning can only be a good thing for a Grand Strategy game. Just tossing all that out the window by allowing wars to be declared based on an arbitrary mapmode that is rather nonsensical in earlier start dates is nowhere near as interesting or fun.

Honestly, after some thought, I'm rather nervous about both this CB and Great Conquest. The ease of availability of CBs in the newer Paradox games makes the mechanic all but pointless, and I'm worried that this will push CK2 along that path.

That said, I really like the more flavorful ones, like the hostage one.

Here's a thought: would it be possible to restrict a war to the personal levies, retinues, and mercs of the attacker and defender, maybe including vassals with an opinion of 80-90+? It would open up design space for smaller wars like the hostage rescue one, that vassals would not be interested in (unless the person you are rescuing is related to one of them, then that vassal might want to join in), instead of requiring that all wars be both nations slamming their entire armies against each other. To that end, maybe make it so that vassal levies cannot be raised at all without a reason (crusades, defensive holy wars, vassal rebellions, that sort of thing), so that the player's focus would usually be on smaller, more flavorful wars than the big map painters, and that when the opportunity for one of those sorts of wars does arise, the player would feel far more powerful than usual as they wouldn't normally be able to call upon the entire country like they could at that moment. Being able to call upon all the vassal levies at a whim could be reserved for the lategame, tied to centralization laws and legalism tech. (To draw a parallel to EU4, this would be like how the Imperialism CB unlocks late game.)

 

[pleasenomore]

I like the hostage CB but the rest of them are unnecessary.

Please stop making DLCs... The last couple have been terrible and so game ruining that you had to create a whole menu of optional settings and rules to undo the damage.

Just let it go...

What is the point of giving us new reasons to start wars without giving us new lands to start wars in?

 

[Hark]

I have to say, I really like all of these new CB's.

Some make it easier to claim new lands, which is cool because it is absurd when I have sacked every Castle, City, and Church in a kingdoms, captured or killed nearly every noble in the kingdom, brought about the deaths of 10's of thousands of soldiers, and now I have the enemy King as my prisoner all I get out of it is a single pathetic county when by all rights I should own the entire kingdom.

Which reminds me, if a war escalates like that I would like that I probably should have the option to upgrade my demands.

The free Concubine and free hostage CBs are a much needed addition. I've jumped through some serious hoops so that I can march an army all the way across Europe and beyond just to free a daughter that was taken as a Concubine, and have done similar things for other hostages. Byzantine Empire took my spymaster prisoner a couple months into the game once for stealing tech. Well little old me in far off Ireland systematically started putting and end to the ruling Dynasty in the Byzantine Empire and brought about the empire's collapse while I was still struggling the Picts and the Welsh trying to take my lands. If someone takes a prisoner I want back they have two options. 1 quickly release the prisoner, or 2 see me burn their kingdom to the ground and hunt down and murder their entire dynasty.

Also intrigue menu is awesome, give me more things to do with it pls.

 

[klopkr]

Again, I don't see the validity in this assumption. Why do you think it'd be a way to conquer large areas in a short time? As mentioned above, these CBs are all fairly limiting, both by requiring fairly specific conditions to be used, and by requiring a cost. Also, almost every way to expand already in the game is going to be more powerful (see examples above). These CBs aim only to reduce frustration and provide opportunity where before there was none
As an example, let's say that Byzantium loses an invasion of Anatolia. As it stands there's no equivalent of an 'invasion' style CB that could regain that territory for them, while Muslims have an invasion they can use for 1000 piety. All this adds is a way for such a war to be fought at all - and only if it is against an enemy much stronger than you, AND only if you pay a hefty price of prestige and piety.

Although your CBs are fine for now why not just have a revanchism CB for characters that lose a large territory like a kingdom or a duchy?

We've been toying with this idea, but having it unrestricted risks being seriously overpowered. It would need a set of specific conditions, or a rare opportunity presented via event, to be feasible.

This is another idea we're toying with, like the previously mentioned force conversion CB that Wuddel mentioned it's something that can't be used lightly though. It would have to require extremely specific circumstances, or only be presented through a scripted opportunity of some sort. Have you got any ideas on when such a CB would feel fair to use?

Why not make it a separate CB you can only use specifically on bordering pagans that don't own land of your culture? It would give us another option for dealing with the border lands of the Abrahamic religions without conquering the pagans or just hoping they will willingly convert.

I only add the culture clause because obviously your people need to be ruled by you under your religion and not the filthy vikings that took over northern england.

Here's a few other CB ideas:

Release Vassal: Force a liege of a different religion to release a vassal of your religion.
Force Regency: Force your drunkard, lunatic, slow, female, etc... ruler into a permanent regency (with a CB to break it off).
Create Regency: Make your dynasty the eternal regents of your liege (think japan). You must control at least 50% of his land or clearly be able to win in any liberation war or some other kind of war to take the throne. It should just be an option other than being free or usurping your liege.
Press all courtiers claims: Push all the claims of a courtier at once.
Migrate: Let a steppe horde take over a kingdom sized portion of land from a neighbor and release all of their own land split up into various kingdom sized realms of foreign culture.
Press all Barony Claims: Take all the non vassal baronies in your counties from someone.
Take outlying country: Take a county you own a barony in.

Also I'd like to suggest you implement threaten war like in EU4 to ck2 for single county or lower CBs. There's too many tiny inevitable wars I'd rather not need to do.

 

[GUmby_Aaron]

Free Hostages
A long-requested CB, this allows you to go to war against a character in order to free any kidnapped concubines or wives, and release certain characters from prison (i.e. friends and dynastants). Rescued characters will, most often, be moved back to your court. It will also take hostages in turn, imprisoning a random close member of the target’s family!

I'd be curious to see what the player base stats are people using the free hostage mechanic currently in the game. How many people really do utilise the way of lifer intrigue option to free someone at the time being, does it actually warrant a CB and will it be cheesed making the character focus to free someone obsolete?

The only way that such a CB would be justified was if it was setup not a free them CB but as a vengence/ultimatum action, as had already been discussed by quite few people in previous posts (also I like that Just characters would remain true to law and execute the hostage if a war broke out between them and the other party).

 

[Cathal341]

It’s currently not possible to attack anyone who holds a close dynastic member in their prison (i.e. your child), is this something you’d like to see changed specifically for use with this CB?

I personally wouldn't like this, instead I would like a direct option to attempt to free them from captivity that works similarly to a plot in that you fire it when you feel the time is right. Success would be determined by things like your intrigue and your spymasters intrigue combined compared to the person holding your dynasty member prisoner and their spymaster combined, if you have a person in their court who really likes you (Like a council member or a commander perhaps? Or maybe even the targets wife/husband/child) or maybe one of their rivals or an unruly vassal from their realm for you to enlist and help. If you get caught the target has a choice to either punish (Kill/Injure/Maim/Disfigure) your dynasty member (Weighted heavily if the AI character is cruel), leave them to rot or perhaps even free them for as to not deal with further attempts at a break out (Weighted heavily if the AI character is kind/depressed).