• 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.
@knuckey:

Yes, it [blocking title creation based upon crownlaw_title = { has_law = no_title_creation } in the allow of the affected titles] is a rather simple solution. Blocking creation of titles of tier higher than current title tier based upon a crown law title is also extremely simple. Plus, you get properly explanatory tooltips in the title screen that actually reference which applied crown law title is blocking their creation (no small thing!) and such for free. The only cost is 1-2 lines of code in your relevant titles' allow clauses.

I imagine that it could be a little annoying if you're blocking it at the count level for ALL titles, admittedly, but wouldn't you rather Captain Gars spent his time making it possible to, say, join specific/exact war(s) by event (your suggestion last year, right?) or deal with various other total roadblocks in CK2 scripting instead of adding a minor convenience at a relatively high time cost? That said, if it's important to you that hard-code supports this pattern, then I suppose you should definitely add it back to the list (or I will).

I don't mean to tread on these suggestions. I do think that we need to do a certain degree of editing to emphasize game-changers for moddability over stuff that's already solved but neat, though. There is simply too much important stuff that is simply impossible to do correctly or at all, by any stretch of redundancy or inelegance.

EDIT:

That said, there's a lot of outright junk on the wiki (i.e., stuff that doesn't really make sense at all or is horribly specific such that Gars would never spend time adding it for an audience of one or now none), so the aforementioned suggestions do stand above those. I just don't have the heart to remove the stuff, though.

A better suggestion that encapsulates that one, perhaps, would be to have a global title creation condition. This would allow an author to alter the conditions of title creation across the board. You could require a minimum of three lower level titles instead of two, or require 80% of land ownership for *all* titles, not just empires. I have no idea where this would go or what it would look like, but I imagine it would be very useful.
 
1.add real_father and set_real_father in Character history.They don't work in Character history now.
2.Let modders customize death_reason. Why can't we customize death reasons now?
 
1. add a targetted_decision where ROOT can be a title or a province
I'm not sure if my suggestion is redundant with these entries from the wiki:
- Third-party title/character support for targetted_decisions (to allow diplo-actions in the form of Arrange Marriage or Grant Landed Title)
- Province decisions
 
1. add a targetted_decision where ROOT can be a title or a province
I'm not sure if my suggestion is redundant with these entries from the wiki:

It is essentially redundant with both, yes. The first suggestion is specifically about adding another layer to targetted_decisions (an actor, a recipient, and a 3rd-party title/province/character-- like a true diplo-action, whereas we currently only have actor/FROM+recipient/ROOT), so it goes a bit farther. In any case, if you wanted to target provinces or titles with targetted_decisions directly (not as a 3rd-party), then they aren't really diplo-actions at all (you don't have "diplomacy" with a province or a title directly) but just province or title decisions.

All of the above would require extending GUI support. 3rd-party targetted_decisions would at least not require any fundamentally new GUI work, though, as most of the hard-coded diplo-actions use these templates.
 
A thing: I hope the one that removed the suggestions was not a normal user but Meneth himself and in this case a motivation of the removal would be necessary.

IMHO only him and the one that wrote the suggestion should have the right to do so if not we start a wiki war...

As you can see from the wiki edit history, it was undoubtedly me that removed or deduplicated or recategorized or clarified some of the content on the Modding Suggestions wiki. I don't see the purpose of placing it on the wiki if the intention is not to distill and improve the content. Since Meneth does not have the time or specialization at this point to do this for the thread directly, he moved it to the wiki so that others could do the same.

Anyway, Captain Gars is editing the wiki himself now, so I'm not going to be doing any further editing except for perhaps to add further content. I believe your fears of a "wiki war" were unwarranted.
 
@Captain Gars I've added a note to the "rejected" section:
"This sections is for suggestions that have been confirmed will definitely not be implemented in the foreseeable future.

Note that only Captain Gars is allowed to move suggestions into or out of this section. Edits not by him doing so will be reverted."
Sound good?

Anyway, Captain Gars is editing the wiki himself now, so I'm not going to be doing any further editing except for perhaps to add further content. I believe your fears of a "wiki war" were unwarranted.
You're still free to clarify or refine suggestions outside the rejected section.
 
You're still free to clarify or refine suggestions outside the rejected section.

Oh, of course. It's merely that, now that Gars is on the job and actively consuming that information, it is no longer quite so pertinent to clean it up and get it ready for his initial review.

And kudos to Gars for adding the Rejected section. There are a number of items on that list that just ain't gonna happen, and it's good to get them moved out of the mainline finally.
 
Oh, of course. It's merely that, now that Gars is on the job and actively consuming that information, it is no longer quite so pertinent to clean it up and get it ready for his initial review.

I still hope that the community/Meneth can keep the list up-to-date, clean it up and etc. because I don't have much time for that.

And kudos to Gars for adding the Rejected section. There are a number of items on that list that just ain't gonna happen, and it's good to get them moved out of the mainline finally.

Yeah, and it's very hard to work from when it's cluttered with too much irrelevant stuff.
 
-Succession law that requires a definable trait to be present

I'm not sure I agree with the removal of this. Sure, succession law modding is never going to be fully moddable, however specific new laws have been added in the past, and I dont see why a new law that requires a trait can never be added in the future.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
-Succession law that requires a definable trait to be present

I'm not sure I agree with the removal of this. Sure, succession law modding is never going to be fully moddable, however specific new laws have been added in the past, and I dont see why a new law that requires a trait can never be added in the future.
I've readded it.
Gars can move it to "rejected" if it something that's definitely not going to be done, but that fully moddable succession isn't going to happen doesn't cover this suggestion.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
I've readded it.
Gars can move it to "rejected" if it something that's definitely not going to be done, but that fully moddable succession isn't going to happen doesn't cover this suggestion.
This law sounds like it would actually work fine as a gender law specifically, at least that's the best way I can think of to implement it.
 
The ability to build tribal baronies like this :
Code:
build_holding = {
   type = tribal
}
I don't know if it is possible since they were designed to be capitals but I'm currently making a mod where new communities emerge in random provinces and tribal baronies would be perfect for it! :D
 
Last edited:
The ability to build tribal baronies like this :
Code:
building_holding = {
   type = tribal
}
I don't know if it is possible since they were designed to be capitals but I'm currently making a mod where new communities emerge in random provinces and tribal baronies would be perfect for it! :D
You can have tribal holdings outside the capital already. The easiest way to do that in game is to give a holy site holder control of the province. I'm not so sure about doing it by event.
 
Can we please get the ability to enable event units to replace lost men?
 
Oh and another question, there seems to be a bug with Retinuesize, it can be applied via traits, however it does not seem to actually apply to your totals. Can we have this fixed please?
 
Oh and another question, there seems to be a bug with Retinuesize, it can be applied via traits, however it does not seem to actually apply to your totals. Can we have this fixed please?

Please report bugs in the bug sub-forum instead.
 
So it is a bug? I just thought the wiki was wrong.