Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

BadBoy: What gives it and what takes it

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
As per this thread, courtiers seizing pagan land in their own name also adds BB for at least the first province. I would presume that once they are counts in their own right, additional territories conquered do not produce BB, but I might be mistaken.

j.
 
I have a Monthly Vassal Loyalty Reduction of 2.5%

I declare war on a heathen in the Levant. Still 2.5%

I am playing Deus Vult, so now I have to sue for peace rather than have the province automatically convert to my ownership. This is an improvement, however, I sue for peace and ... my Monthly Vassal Loyalty Reduction goe to 3.3%.

This did not used to happen in the pre-Deus Vult days, at least not that I can remember. I used to do a lot of crusading and never racked up the BB to increase the Monthly reduction due to reputation.

How is it tht fighting the heathens tarnishes my reputation?????

I still think a lot of the values in the original posting seem off. When I grant a count title my reputation reduction goes down .1% only and for dukes it is .3%
 
Yep, it's a change in DV. I think it's appropriate - you're getting the BB for increasing your personal power and grabbing land. The prestige (and piety if on crusade if I remember correctly) you get is for fighting the heathens. So instead of being a free ticket it's now a mix of good and bad.

Beyond that I'd guess it's also supposed to slow down conquests of religious enemies, which is now fairly easy (thanks to the free claims) rather than ridiculously easy. :)

Have fun
Finn
 
Magnificent said:
lol, I have done all the bad things listed hundreds of times. But since I have no vassel, I am not worried. :cool:
Click to expand...

Which is why the system is flawed, not why it is appropriate, as FinnN states.

The game system is encouraging you to act in a way that is inconceivable for this period, either socio-politically or in terms of administration. A king of even a modest-sized country could not expect to rule it without the assistance of landed nobility. The game should reward the player for respecting this norm. At present the rewards are greater for not having vassals, because reputation is so easily sullied leading to defection of vassals. Hence the tactic of having no vassals to resolve this crisis.
 
When I started with DV, getting BB for conquering infidels bothered me. Now that I've played more I'm more disturbed by the lack of BB for conquering *anyone*, provided you can tolerate them as a vassal. A count revolts? Hammer him down, vassalize him, and you've improved your reputation by recognizing his title. Picked up a horrible reputation because the King of Germany, Burgandy, and Italy was down to one province and you just couldn't resist? No problem, the ensuing civil war will make you honorable again.

Is DV really supposed to be easier the vanilla CK?
 
Wick said:
When I started with DV, getting BB for conquering infidels bothered me. Now that I've played more I'm more disturbed by the lack of BB for conquering *anyone*, provided you can tolerate them as a vassal. A count revolts? Hammer him down, vassalize him, and you've improved your reputation by recognizing his title. Picked up a horrible reputation because the King of Germany, Burgandy, and Italy was down to one province and you just couldn't resist? No problem, the ensuing civil war will make you honorable again.

Is DV really supposed to be easier the vanilla CK?
Click to expand...
You have a point; however, under the old system, a civil war effectively meant one of two things. Either BB would spiral out of control as you annexed rebellious vassals, or you would be forced to sit on your hands and let them become independent.

With the current setup, you can at least repair damage to your own realm and end the civil war without your BB getting out of control. If you choose to let rebels keep their titles in exchange for becoming vassals again, you could be setting yourself up for future treason if the reason they revolted is linked to their traits.
 
I think it's rather sad and of course gamey at the same time to get so much BB reduction for assassinating/killing your own court members, especially babies. ;) I keep a large court now just for BB reduction, I marry my oldest daughter outside the realm and the rest I marry within the court to keep a nice long list of babies to slit their throats (grrrrrrrissquissssssssssh) muahahahahaha. I still offer up Bishophroics for the piety bonus vs BB reputation, but, assassinating court members is the fastest way of reduction I have found and I get to keep ALL the claims I get during a war and don't have to play the 1 for 3 claims game like others have mentioned.

Even though it would ruin my gameplan don't you think that assassinating your own court members to reduce BB reputation should be reduced or even removed???
 
ravinhood said:
I think it's rather sad and of course gamey at the same time to get so much BB reduction for assassinating/killing your own court members, especially babies. ;) I keep a large court now just for BB reduction, I marry my oldest daughter outside the realm and the rest I marry within the court to keep a nice long list of babies to slit their throats (grrrrrrrissquissssssssssh) muahahahahaha. I still offer up Bishophroics for the piety bonus vs BB reputation, but, assassinating court members is the fastest way of reduction I have found and I get to keep ALL the claims I get during a war and don't have to play the 1 for 3 claims game like others have mentioned.

Even though it would ruin my gameplan don't you think that assassinating your own court members to reduce BB reputation should be reduced or even removed???
Click to expand...
After patch DV 2.1. you cannot get rid of Bad Boy points by assassinating your own court members.
However, when I started playing for Novgorod and started conqueing finnish tribes I've got bad boy status as much as it was christian counties but those were pagan tribes? Why I have such a bullshit? BTW I started to fight at Pope's recall however Novgorod is Russian Orthodox state
 
Makes sense to me... Badboy is how much of a threat you are perceived as by others. The more land and power you get, the more of a threat you are. It doesn't really matter if that land was formerly Pagan or Muslim--What matters to other rulers is that it's yours and not theirs.

Just the way I figure it, at least...
 
NicWester said:
Makes sense to me... Badboy is how much of a threat you are perceived as by others. The more land and power you get, the more of a threat you are. It doesn't really matter if that land was formerly Pagan or Muslim--What matters to other rulers is that it's yours and not theirs.

Just the way I figure it, at least...
Click to expand...

Well, I started playing Byzantine Empire on the Hundred Years scenario, in witch the Asia Minor has been conquered by the muslims. When I started taking back the lands of the Empire by kicking some Ottoman butt, I suddenly noticed that my Badboy had suddenly falled so, that I had bad reputation and my vassals were breaking off the Empire.

Now this can't be right can it? I'm fighting the common heathen Turkish enemy and trying to restore the lands considered to be part of the Empire, and my vassals think that I'm bad Emperor. Their scutage is on minimum and the lands conquered divided up.
 
I've never seen sneak attacks give badboy.

The original post tells us,

"diplomatic vassalization: 0.75BB per province hold by the target directly, not including vassals"

What about vassalising in war?
 
If my understanding is correct, it is the grabbing of a title that grants badboy, not actually taking the land? So if I grab a title, that's when the BB kick in, but when I actually take control of the associated land after a war there is no additional BB for that?

To put it in EUIII terms, is it like taking a province you have a core on, which leads to no increase in BB?
 
ppga said:
If my understanding is correct, it is the grabbing of a title that grants badboy, not actually taking the land? So if I grab a title, that's when the BB kick in, but when I actually take control of the associated land after a war there is no additional BB for that?

To put it in EUIII terms, is it like taking a province you have a core on, which leads to no increase in BB?
Click to expand...

You get BB from grabbing and from actually taking the province.

Grabbing is 1 BB
Taking a title in an offensive war is 2 BB
Taking a title in a defensive was is 1 BB
 
OK, thanks, I found that out the hard way just now.

If I declare war on someone, obviously it's an offensive war with them. But when their liege then declares war on me as a result, is my war with the liege offensive or defensive as far as I'm concerned?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back