That doesn't account for your disinterested vassal getting there first.If you don't have AoW, just avoid controlling the sieges.
That doesn't account for your disinterested vassal getting there first.If you don't have AoW, just avoid controlling the sieges.
But if your vassal gets there first, the AI can't give land to you. They can give it to your vassal, but if that's land your vassal can get, you have to get the occupation yourself. The only issue would be land claimed and coreable by both of you, which is highly unlikely.
I could be mistaken, but iirc without Art of War anything your subjects occupy gets transferred to you by default.
Yup. The only time a vassal occupies a province for themselves is if they have a core (or possibly claim) on it.I could be mistaken, but iirc without Art of War anything your subjects occupy gets transferred to you by default.
It's just a value that determine which way you go in isolationism. Low value means open border, while high value means closed border. But if you're trying to convert alway from Shinto, you don't need to care about it.
I could be mistaken, but iirc without Art of War anything your subjects occupy gets transferred to you by default.
Well, not having AoW definitely makes the game unplayable --'
There is no event to convert to Buhhist. Shinto can only convert to Catholic through the incident system. All other non-pagan religion or animist need to convert throuh rebels.Ok. Because I was not getting the event needed to fire to get the Buddhist conversion event
There is no event to convert to Buhhist. Shinto can only convert to Catholic through the incident system. All other non-pagan religion or animist need to convert throuh rebels.
Uhh... Weird on the wiki on the bottom the "Shinto Events" is this
The Amida Buddha![]()
![]()
This infobox may contain outdated information that is inaccurate for the current version of the game. The last version it was verified as up to date for was 1.22.
Our long standing support of the Ikko - Ikki have not been without friction and in many situations it is as if there are two paralell authorities in Japan. Still, the Ikko - Ikki would arguably not have come as far as they have without our protection according to many.
With times of civil strife behind us many expect us to elevate the leaders of the Ikko - Ikkis to high positions and make their faith more officially sponsored by the state. To many this would be a grave insult to our old traditions however...
Trigger conditions
Mean time to happen
- Is
Japan
- None of:
- Country flag decided_on_mahayana_flag is set
- Country flag supporters_in_the_ikko_iki is set
- Religion is
Shinto
120 months
Immediate effects
- Hidden effect:
- Set country flag decided_on_mahayana_flag
![]()
No, we cannot turn our back on the traditions of our ancestors entirely.
![]()
Amitabhaya.
Guess all the new events for Shinto eludes me.
Looking at the chain of events you need be in the Shinto incident Ikko-Ikki and ends with an open doors. Just pick every option that shift to open doors. When you do it correctly at the end of the incident the flag supporters_in_the_ikko_iki will be set. After that there is a 10 years mean time for that event to trigger.
Does taking poor/under developed provinces make a country weaker? For example, in my last game the ai Ottomans took over all of Arabia, would these poor Arab provinces affect stability costs or anything like that? Wouldn't the Ottomans be better off expanding into Austria instead?
Similarly with the Mamluks - they also tend to expand into Arabia/Africa, but wouldn't Persia be a better target for Mamluk expansion?
It doesn't make your country weaker, it's just your growth is slower.Also after the 1.23 patch, I wouldn't say arab area is that poor. Also I don't know what your mean with poor provinces affecting stab cost.Does taking poor/under developed provinces make a country weaker? For example, in my last game the ai Ottomans took over all of Arabia, would these poor Arab provinces affect stability costs or anything like that? Wouldn't the Ottomans be better off expanding into Austria instead?
Similarly with the Mamluks - they also tend to expand into Arabia/Africa, but wouldn't Persia be a better target for Mamluk expansion?
So, as France, should I wait for the Surrender of Maine event to trigger (insuring England faces me with no allies), or am I actually better off being the aggressor and attacking at the first opportunity (thus letting me use the reconquest cb and take less AE and save on diplo)?
Depends what your priorities are. You can wait for it to happen while you do other early wars, just take Pale and break their alliance with Austria in the Maine war, and come back with reconquest CB in 7 years. It depends if you're confident with early wars or not.Attack before the Maine event with reconquest, otherwise you'll get full AE on your cores if England attacks. Typically England will only ally one or two Irish minors, and Portugal isn't really much to worry about. You can either just chase off his army if they try and siege you, or go siege down Lisboa if you feel like. Just watch for England landing leaderless (usually) half stacks somewhere on your coast and then just march up and stackwipe until he accepts peace. You can get all your cores back plus Calais. Accepted wisdom is to take Pale as well if you want a beachead to finish him off in later wars. Up to you.
Depends what your priorities are. You can wait for it to happen while you do other early wars, just take Pale and break their alliance with Austria in the Maine war, and come back with reconquest CB in 7 years. It depends if you're confident with early wars or not.