-
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.
- Status
Noted in NWO that mod CTD when using either Duke or County level break up option of Jan 2. Crash happens consistently with Generate 2 children dialog box. Kingdom level seems to sometimes work but also crashes sometimes. Cleaned out mod files and re-installed before launching 4.0.7 beta 3. Have all major DLC including Jade Dragon
So, for patch 2.8.1, chinese holding art doesn't display. But you probably already knew that.
Non dynastic heir doesn't seem to be working. I turned on the rule, created a female character with 2 male children, the eldest from other dynasty and the younger from my own.
I let my character die of an old age. Game-over score screen appears immediately upon death without dynasty transition as it should.
I was going to play with matrilineal marriage off with this rule but it seems infeasible for now.
I let my character die of an old age. Game-over score screen appears immediately upon death without dynasty transition as it should.
I was going to play with matrilineal marriage off with this rule but it seems infeasible for now.
Last edited:
Tried Charlemagne with NWO, De Jeur Counts, Ancient Religions Specific, Open Faith Marriages Allowed, - CTD on County, Duchy, Kingdom level for NWO at the add children question box. Had same problem at all levels with Komes Anastasios of Monemvasia at all De Jeur NWO levels. Used 769 bookmark. In NWO chose impact for all religions, merchant republics, nomads one county. Always crashes at children question. Note - I deleted all settings and gfx before I re-tested (after your note). Also CK2Plus beta 3 is only mod enabled. Version of main game says 2.8.1. I did not have this problem with Beta 2
Disregard - No bug - it was an own goal my fault. I played with the landed_titles.txt file to change a country color and missed that I left the copy hanging around. When I cleaned it up all worked well.
Similar situation - you create a game with the rule non-dynasties heirs - YES, you take the governor without successor, you write to kill ID consoles, a game comes to an end...
non-dynastics are fixed for next version. Apparently new "player_heir" scope doesn't work if heir has a different dynasty.
Is being allowed to bundle and chain holy wars one after another intentional? 5 year limit cap doesn't seem functional.
Also:
Default rules behavior is setting defensive pacts to off and with enough power base you can basically tear through every ruler with lightening sieges and infinite holy wars using a vague religion.
Whenever you win a holy war you acquire a ton of trade posts. I managed to get 20+ with a trade post limit of 2. Also feels broken.
Just checking.
Also:
Default rules behavior is setting defensive pacts to off and with enough power base you can basically tear through every ruler with lightening sieges and infinite holy wars using a vague religion.
Whenever you win a holy war you acquire a ton of trade posts. I managed to get 20+ with a trade post limit of 2. Also feels broken.
Just checking.
.png){kind=avatar}
I think it's the cultural localized name of one of the counties up in d_mecklemburg. Could be wrong though
Rana aka Rügen, right... That's working as intended.
It seems it should actually be a very developed region...
It seems it should actually be a very developed region...
Fraticelli and Waldensians have a -50% clergy tax which equates to clergy appearing to give negative tax(which in all actuality becomes 0 tax). Was such behaviour intended? Shouldn't there be a reduction , say 15% instead of 50%, so that players have a reason to switch to these religions?
Well, there is a point in assuming the Rani were not as organized as say the 13th century French kingdom, which also would be represented by a "Feudal" government. But, as you say, from what Wikipedia etc yield on a glance, they were unusually developed for a "tribe".
The problem is imo that this is a game; and in real life if you asked Charlemagne, he would not have told you he was considering himself to be a "feudal" lord. The government forms ingame are simply an abstraction to group certain similar organization systems together. And imo the Rani tribe could probably fit into both categories - are highly developed Tribal or a rather underdeveloped Feudal realm. It'd be on the edge, so to say, and thus fit both government types.
Okay what I have just said seems pretty obvious, but the reason is that I think the game could actually benefit from an intermediate government form, between truly "Feudal" and truly "Tribal". Like "Proto-Feudal", or something like this, which Charlemagne would still have as well. The only problem that I don't know how that would work, and how it would be distinct enough from the existing types to be a justified addition. If I can ever figure this out, I'll be back with a suggestion about it
To end this sidebar/off topic I'll just add this here; It's an abstraction for the purposes of more fluid game play rather than historicity. In a similar fashion to de Jure inheritance systems that often had (semi) clear outlined procedure but that also had a tendency to get ignored because might makes right, be it military or political. The former is much easier to abstract than the latter.
Small Bug: Karlukid Khaganate in Charlemagne start (ID: 188768) is a tributary to both the Uyghur and China. Is this intentional?
still cant seem to be able to evoke sympathy as a secret roman on chalcedonian/iconoclast characters in beta 4
- Status