Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

WAD: A bug - hatred of heir

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.
U

unmerged(21697)

Captain
Nov 10, 2003
331
0
Visit site
A bug - hatred of heir

A bug to be reported.
Situation:
1. Law saying, that after my death the crown will be taken by the strongest of vassals
2. Two normal vassals
3. One vassal - my son. He's the weakest of all.
4. No more children except of this vassal.

Action:
1. I change the law to the one saying, that the crown will be recieved by the oldest heir (which means, my single son).

Effect:
1. Two vassals revolt - that's understandable, the new rule brings unfortunate change to them.
2. MY SON REVOLTS!!! He's an idiot, a dumbass, a retard or what??? He doesn't want to become my successor?
 
Upvote 0
Not a bug. More of an unfortunate circumstance.

I think this illogical sequence of having all vassals go to 0% loyalty on changes in inheritance laws is in the game to prevent you from changing the inheritance laws at a whim because your inheritance situation has changed.

So even though it is illogical it is WAD.
 
It cant be working as designed. That assumes that someone actually considered the matter and decided that it made some sense to have the beneficiary of the change be equally upset by the change. If someone actually made that design decision then that was just poor judgment.

It really takes away from the feel of the game. If a civil war occurs the king should be able to count on the vassal who benefited from the change to fight on the side of the king in order to secure that benefit.

I suspect this was more of an oversight or something left to deal with later.
 
Can the game in any way realize who really benefited from the change and have their loyalty not drop? Also, how about the situation you have three sons as counts and also your brother as count. Your brother has biggest martial and you wish to change your elective to primogeniture. Your brother still says in it the succession queque while coming to lower spot on that. Also the positions of sons might change. How would it decide who benefits there? Imo, it's really better when you can rely on every vassal going to zero and don't need to guess the outcome...
 
crazy canuck said:
It cant be working as designed. That assumes that someone actually considered the matter and decided that it made some sense to have the beneficiary of the change be equally upset by the change. If someone actually made that design decision then that was just poor judgment.

It really takes away from the feel of the game. If a civil war occurs the king should be able to count on the vassal who benefited from the change to fight on the side of the king in order to secure that benefit.

I suspect this was more of an oversight or something left to deal with later.
Click to expand...

Agreed, it is odd. I wonder if it is indeed intended to have him rebel against you when you favour him or if it is an unfortunate by-product of not being able to have the effect "make exceptions".
 
Byakhiam said:
Can the game in any way realize who really benefited from the change and have their loyalty not drop? Also, how about the situation you have three sons as counts and also your brother as count. Your brother has biggest martial and you wish to change your elective to primogeniture. Your brother still says in it the succession queque while coming to lower spot on that. Also the positions of sons might change. How would it decide who benefits there? Imo, it's really better when you can rely on every vassal going to zero and don't need to guess the outcome...
Click to expand...

Well, that is a problem, of course...but would it really be that hard to have the computer check who went to the front of the queue and exempt him from the loyalty drop? As for the sons changing positions later, well that's for then. It should not affect their loyalty at the moment the law was changed IMHO.
 
/agree

I think it would be more accurate to boost the loyalty of those who benefit from a law change. Your sons should be happy to get out of the elective law rut.

Right now, I never change inheritance laws if I have vassals, only if I control all land in my realm. If I do, they all revolt and it just becomes too much of a hassle.
 
Gothmog said:
Well, that is a problem, of course...but would it really be that hard to have the computer check who went to the front of the queue and exempt him from the loyalty drop? As for the sons changing positions later, well that's for then. It should not affect their loyalty at the moment the law was changed IMHO.
Click to expand...

I don't agree that it would be difficult. The program script already calculates who the heir will be. I am no programmer but it seems a simply matter of identifying who the heir will be under the new rules and then adjust accordingly.

edit: sorry I read your message again and realized we were saying the same thing. :eek:o
 
Well anyone who goes up in ranks at all should have their loyalty increased, or stay the same at the least. If they're unchanged and not number one, then maybe they'd have a decrease so long as they're not at the bottom. The only real question is what to do about those who have no chance at the throne to begin with, should they drop to zero?
 
While somehow surprising at first sight, the move of a son suddenly entitled as the heir of the king and thus declaring war to him, is not totaly irrational.

I mean, the son now knows that if his father dies, he will be the legitimate successor, so he could feel a little impatient about that event ... :D

ok, I'm just trying to find some explanations here :D
 
crazy canuck said:
edit: sorry I read your message again and realized we were saying the same thing. :eek:o
Click to expand...

No problem... :)

As for loyalty dependent on succession order, well that's already in the game. Heirs get a bonus to their monthly loyalty change depending on where they are in the order of succession...
 
Easy to way to fix, though not perfect, would be have change of inheritance law drop loyalty by 80% or 90%...
 
Byakhiam said:
Easy to way to fix, though not perfect, would be have change of inheritance law drop loyalty by 80% or 90%...
Click to expand...

Well, that would help some (since those first in line recover quicker), but it might make things a bit too easy in small kingdoms...the best option would be to exempt the guy who gets the main benefit from the loyalty drop...but it seems the Paradoxians are less than keen on doing that.
 
Illogical as it may be it is not a bug. It is a game mechanism to keep you from changing the inheritance laws anytime you want without repercussions.
 
Sonny said:
Illogical as it may be it is not a bug. It is a game mechanism to keep you from changing the inheritance laws anytime you want without repercussions.
Click to expand...

Well, I understand the general idea about it, but how is that mechanism challenged by having one of your vassals not be affected (the guy who benefits from the change) by the loyalty drop?

If you have ten vassals, and all but one drop to zero loyalty, then I'd say that's quite a deterrent from changing the law back and forth at whim.

The only time it would cause a problem is if you only have one or two vassals, but if you only have that many, you can in all likelihood just take their titles from them and make the change anyway without the loyalty drop affecting you at all.

So, while I understand the idea behind the mechanism, I hardly think that one exception would wreck the system, unless there are major problems involved with programming (another issue altogether).
 
Grosshaus said:
Bingo ;)
Click to expand...

Why do I feel like Frank Drebin in The Naked Gun here? :)

Ah, well...I think this means I could go on about me being psychic, but if it is a programming problem, then I guess we'll have to live with it (oddness and all)...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back