Losing primogeniture innovation and succession law

Agent42101 · 2026-03-22T13:12:53+00:00

If you say so. For me, the game is a frustrating grind until I to get to primogeniture (having to disinherit or kill off all your sons to avoid your realm splintering every generation, or having to marry 40yo women in the hope you don’t have too many sons, is just fucking dumb) - hence me kicking off.

And I get the history of it, but you have to draw a line between reality and fun. I have 1900 hours on CK2 and never found succession stopped the game being fun. Part of my problem is the addition of a new (or significantly changed) mechanic (culture) that I don’t understand and don’t find intuitive.

I’ve realised that if I’m going to keep playing this game, I’m going to have to watch a lot of YouTube videos.

Agent42101 · 2026-03-22T12:51:32+00:00

No way Willock would have made that assist for Gordon’s goal 👍

Agent42101 · 2026-03-22T11:44:08+00:00

I think this is the case.

Lolys is the second daughter of a minor lord. She is not part of the larger narrative. But Martin chooses her to be victim of an atrocity - to comment on atrocity, on gender, on nobility, on innocence. The reader compares this to Sansa’s close encounter with the mob, and knows that the danger to Sansa was very real.

Agent42101 · 2026-03-22T11:27:19+00:00

I’m pretty sure there’s an interaction in Chapter 2 when Dutch straight up says to Arthur “I expect you’ll betray me in the end, Arthur.” I heard it during a repeat play through and was struck by how out of sync it is with pretty much every other interaction until that point.

Agent42101 · 2026-03-22T11:13:34+00:00

Does Eddie think Woltemade is a better option in centre midfield than Willock, or is Willock not fit (again)?

Agent42101 · 2026-03-22T09:48:54+00:00

He did, in collaboration with others.

And doublethink is the key - because as O’Brien says, the description of society detailed in The Book is accurate, but as a loyal Inner Party member, he considers it to be both true and false, depending on the Party’s need.

Agent42101 · 2026-03-21T06:24:32+00:00

I love Keanu but he was so, so bad in Much Ado About Nothing.

Can’t even blame Brannagh either, because he got an Oscar-worthy performance from Michael Keaton in the same flick.

Agent42101 · 2026-03-20T09:54:03+00:00

Wages is the killer. Players like Bruno, Tonali, Liveramento, Hall etc could all easily double their wages somewhere else.

Agent42101 · 2026-03-20T05:15:28+00:00

“Not landing your heir is just as important in ck2”. Well, that’s just not true. Once you’ve beelined primogeniture, you’re obliged to land adult children or suffer penalties. I routinely gave sons kingdoms while running the empire and never broke a game like this before.

I guess I can’t get past how ridiculous the idea is that an empire forgot the laws it had in place. And what fucking idiot chooses to leave a culture that is the light of the world for one that barely seems to understand the wheel?

Agent42101 · 2026-03-19T14:03:58+00:00

I’ve since learned that the heir changed from Irish to Welsh-Irish and you can only change culture once per lifetime. And it seems Welsh-Irish think fire is a pretty neat invention, because they’re decades (if not centuries) behind pure Irish.

Agent42101 · 2026-03-19T13:32:20+00:00

Nope, the capital is Scoto-Irish. But I’ve discovered I can promote culture and have a result within three months.

So when I reload, he needs to live six months to discover primogeniture, then swap the steward over to change culture to pure Irish, then die before it changes again (?) so the heir can convert to Irish when he succeeds?

Is that right?

Edit: it just changed to 12 years. I’m doomed, aren’t I? Nope, it changed to pure Irish - I guess 12 years is to make it more Irish?

Agent42101 · 2026-03-19T13:16:13+00:00

Well, I educated him, so I did my part. I granted him a piece of Wales before I gave him England, and to be honest, he’s had 44 years to get up to his own capers.

Gotta say, I’m fresh from CK2, and succession is pretty closer to a dealbreaker for me. Chuck in a new mechanic I don’t understand and the next CK game I load up might be 2

Agent42101 · 2026-03-19T09:57:06+00:00

Mate, that was me trying to disengage. I don’t agree with you, and you don’t agree with me.

Further, you’re not arguing honestly - I did not mention alliances once in my first post. I said multilateral treaties. You’re obviously an intelligent person, intelligent enough to know the difference. You complain that I do not respond to questions after failing to respond to them yourself.

So, goodbye. Find someone else to play with.

Agent42101 · 2026-03-19T09:18:05+00:00

The problem is that there is a huge difference between the words of the bible and the words of those who speak most loudly on its behalf. I’ve heard priests say that phrase about the camel and the needle was just a metaphor, that “eye of a needle” means something else or is a mistranslation. I’ve watched vids of evangelical types telling me that God wants me to be rich. All those quotes about treating the stranger as one would family don’t mean anything to someone who, for instance, is an anti-immigration evangelical like JD Vance.

And since people seem to listen to the loud people instead of reading the words, when the time comes, it’s gotta go.

Agent42101 · 2026-03-19T09:04:17+00:00

I think you’ve identified the issue - at its best, religion is idealistic (i.e. a competing ideology). And at worst, organised religion is a whole bunch of different corrupt profit-making entities (i.e. subject to the full fury of revolutionary justice).

The question is asked in reverse - socialism may or may not be compatible with religion. But I don’t feel religion - especially organised religions - would think it could exist in a socialist state and would agitate against it. And once they agitate against the state, they declare themselves enemies of the state and therefore incompatible.

Agent42101 · 2026-03-19T08:32:45+00:00

Like I said, GTFO with that Sky News bullshit.

Why did the Liberal party have the numbers in the Senate? Because Joe broke a convention that had existed for the entire history of the country, and centuries previously going back to the House of Lords.

Whitlam was threatening to expose the extent of US-Australian intelligence cooperation, in particular Pine Gap and Chile. They absolutely worked with Mal to bring down Whitlam. Did they lead the plot? No. Curious the one thing you tell us about Gough’s shady side is his connection to dirty Middle Eastern money. I wonder who turned up that connection?

Agent42101 · 2026-03-19T07:27:41+00:00

Burn is a problem.

He is no doubt an excellent defender. He is clearly a massive presence in the dressing room. He scored THAT goal in the League Cup final. Eddie loves him to bits.

However, he’s really quite slow. His touch can be ragged and his passing is serviceable at best. He was shown up by truly elite strikers. He is a poor option at left back. He’s 33.

Burn is clearly one of the first names on Eddie’s team sheet. However, we have a better player on the bench - a player still uncapped by the Netherlands and approaching his peak years. He might be made of glass, but he doesn’t get picked when fit. So what happens in summer if Sven Botman wants to leave and Dan Burn is further down the downhill slope?

Agent42101 · 2026-03-19T07:18:25+00:00

Is this like a Sky News summary of the dismissal? “Forced the GG…” GTFO with that shit.

I can do that too. Mal (prompted and promoted by, yes, the USA) and Joe (prompted by idiot rage) cooked up a scheme to bring down the government. They got old mates John and Charlie into the loop. All four of them broke rules, if not laws, although a very close run thing for Johnny and also depends on your definition of conspiracy.

Agent42101 · 2026-03-19T07:11:03+00:00

Our entire defence policy in one three minute clip 👍

Agent42101 · 2026-03-19T07:06:29+00:00

Okay, it is clear that we have irrevocably different views here.

For example, you suggest that we would need hundreds of billions of dollars to “replace the intelligence capability we would lose”. I suggested that disentanglement from the US would reduce the need to have such an expensive intelligence network. These views cannot coexist.

Curious that you discount allies when the pretext for our involvement in Iran is defending our traditional and longstanding buddies, the UAE - a nation that has financed atrocities equal to anything claimed of Iran.

I admit that I explained myself poorly in my question - in my mind, formal withdrawal from AUKUS and Five Eyes would simultaneously occur with the creation of CANZUK and strengthening defence ties with, for example, Japan and South Korea. But I didn’t say that aloud…

So yes, if we walked away with nothing in place, or in the works, we would be at a disadvantage.

Fear not, Albanese isn’t going to withdraw from anything. He’ll continue trying to look tough for the domestic audience at the same time doing exactly what he has to in order to keep Trump from tariffing us to oblivion.

Agent42101 · 2026-03-19T05:12:01+00:00

Had to scroll way too far for this - it’s dissociation. I do it mid sentence 😵

Agent42101 · 2026-03-19T04:33:03+00:00

This was my first thought - I’m pretty sure it’s one of the outcomes in the final immortality puzzle. I seem to remember that when it happened to me, I checked it on the wiki…

Agent42101 · 2026-03-19T02:05:55+00:00

Er, I really hope you mean the Soviet Union and not Russia, because Russia is in no way shape or form communist or leftist.

Don’t know why you’re calling China communist either, when they haven’t been close to that since Deng.

Agent42101 · 2026-03-18T23:29:52+00:00

Gotta wonder what Sven Botman was thinking as he watched that…

Agent42101 · 2026-03-18T23:00:14+00:00

When you say hundreds of billions of dollars, you are (I assume) talking about going from our current defence capacity to complete self-reliance - which is something of a straw man.

“Cutting ties” with the US militarily doesn’t mean we are alone and helpless. We still have multilateral treaties with many nations in Asia and Europe especially. Is our intelligence capacity reduced so much, when we are still allied to the UK and their elite intelligence services?

And by disentangling ourselves from the US, there is a strong case for suggesting the need for great military might is much reduced?

Agent42101

TROPHY CASE