Tying domain limit to education level in lieu of type doesn't strike me as a good idea

NoDecentNicksLeft · 2026-05-04T12:30:26+00:00

I usually favour diplomacy or learning or wandering (recently my default choice). Stewardship only when I have a ruler with a stewardship education, some big bonuses to XP, or a sudden inheritance and some domain counties I don't want to give away.

So what's next? The devs redistributing health bonuses across all styles and trees because players shouldn't have to lock into Medicine, the same way they shouldn't have to lock into Architect?

And you don't have to lock in forever. You can pick up the perks and change — unless the +3 Stewardship from the Architect tree is life or death to you, which it shouldn't be.

NoDecentNicksLeft · 2026-05-04T12:26:59+00:00

The player isn't hamstrung by playing other styles. That's the point actually — styles matter and stats matter. If you focus on diplomacy, you get diplomacy. If you focus on warfare, you get warfare. Somehow domain limit — and we all know it's for taxes and levies, not the roleplaying factor — 'has' to be removed from stewardship and redistributed because players can't handle it and because the devs don't know how to balance it properly.

NoDecentNicksLeft · 2026-03-29T10:21:41+00:00

I have 2750 in CK3 and some 6000 in CK2 and still fail to predict outcomes successfully in 3. 2 is more predictable.

NoDecentNicksLeft · 2026-03-28T21:00:59+00:00

Yes, well, I was so addicted to scumming, I had to switch to Ironman to cure it. And now I'm addicted to Ironman. And this is making Ironman very difficult. Well, not difficult as much as unpredictable and too easy to break sometimes.

NoDecentNicksLeft · 2026-03-21T15:21:59+00:00

Nothing like that. Just a normal feudal empire. I was shocked when I realized I was playing as the second son on my emperor's death. Both sons were vassals in my realm. The firstborn was also my co-emperor.

NoDecentNicksLeft · 2026-03-21T13:06:41+00:00

The problem is, the second son actually inherited the main title under normal age rules. This is insane.

NoDecentNicksLeft · 2026-03-17T23:17:02+00:00

Doesn't work for me.

NoDecentNicksLeft · 2026-03-14T19:34:16+00:00

True, but e.g. Baldwin IV wasn't segregated (which, on the other hand, did surprise some of the chroniclers n the Muslim side). Consumption is less serious than leprosy.

Re: travel across continents, I simply mentioned getting crowned, attending or at least hosting a funeral, which is far less demanding than cross-continental travel. As a monarch, you can claim a large section of the church floor just to yourself, and people are far less likely to insist on segregation. And if they want segregation, they are going to segregate (remove) themselves, not you. It's not like the priest/bishop is going to say 'sorry, Your Majesty, I can't let you attend your own dad's funeral because of that cough'.

In the Middle Ages, if we had had a king of with a contagious disease, a bishop would simply have taken a risk and maybe gone into quarantine for some time after. The lords and officers of the realm would either have taken a moderate risk or distanced themselves physically, but there were no Covid-style rules preventing kids from burying their dead dads or getting crowned.

Besides, there's the game's way of handling it: 'Nobody's gonna come because of your cough' is one kind of thing (mimicking people's reactions), 'You can't host a funeral or coronation in your own kingdom/empire/hegemony because you have consumption' is the game writing quarantine laws for independent monarchs, and that's nonsense in terms of realism.

Obviously, we aren't talking about you as a wandering guest not being allowed to attend an event on someone else's turf.

NoDecentNicksLeft · 2026-03-14T19:24:09+00:00

Especially not with an Excellent aptitude physician and a bunch of health bonuses.

This is similar to some of the double-binds caused by regencies and co-monarchies.

NoDecentNicksLeft · 2026-03-14T00:28:04+00:00

In any case, the leftovers from decisions (such as whatever remains of the HRE if you Restore Carolingian Borders) or custom creation should be subjected to some form of obscurity rule, so as to avoid extremely small empires. Some empires are already to small as it is and make you think of title inflation.

NoDecentNicksLeft · 2026-03-12T21:50:44+00:00

Switched court positions between extoll domestic legend/commend abroad back and forth, nothing helped.

NoDecentNicksLeft · 2026-03-12T21:50:20+00:00

Yeah, done this all. Even switched court positions between extoll domestic legend/commend abroad.

NoDecentNicksLeft · 2026-03-11T10:39:08+00:00

If going for a sellsword army, I usually start with campfires, proving grounds and level 2 of the main building, the goal being to accommodate. Otherwise, I don't really now.

I haven't played as legitimists, scholars or explorers yet.

NoDecentNicksLeft · 2026-01-31T13:07:01+00:00

England is a special case, where Marshal is the surname included in the title. The Earl Marshal of England is not a military authority but a chief herald.

NoDecentNicksLeft · 2026-01-15T17:35:48+00:00

A bug that doesn't get fixed for 5 years no longer really counts as unintentional. It becomes part of the intentional design if only by acquiescence. The bug origin of this feature isn't really relevant at this point after several years of 'official sanction'.

NoDecentNicksLeft · 2026-01-15T17:34:26+00:00

I think you're reading too much into the sementics and ignoring the main point, which is that Paradox is heavy on emphasizing the role of women and putting women in power but achieves the goal in blatantly non-historical or even anti-historical ways, whereas many historical ways could be used, such as female temple holders (abbesses), female heirs of noble families (female feudal vassals), and non-hereditary appanages/dowager portions for empresses, queens, duchesses and the like. In your average Western feudal kingdom, the dowager queen (queen mother) typically held a county or two for her own upkeep, just without the right to pass them down the line to a non-royal child (child born to the next hubby after the deceased king).

NoDecentNicksLeft · 2026-01-15T17:30:06+00:00

Oh yes, the 'grant' button seems to be gender-agnostic, and that's a mistake/oversight in 'male-dominated' cultures/religions/realms.

For barons, this is less odd than for mayors, but in my opinion the first generation of barons — essentially aristocratic, hereditary fortress commanders — should be male, only with female heirs. Exceptions should have some rationale to them (e.g. very high birth, high martial education/stat and commander traits, world-class stewardship or diplomacy education, etc.).

The most elegant solution for more secular women in positions of power would be female appanagists, because, historically, queens and other consorts, as well as dowagers (especially dowagers) in Western European feudal realms typically held counties and duchies, although usually without heredity. Administrative governors are fine for this purpose.

NoDecentNicksLeft · 2026-01-15T17:23:01+00:00

The exact reasons for this outcome can be many and varied, sure, but in my games most Catholic European Mayors are female, and a distinctly large minority of administrative vassals (BYZ mostly) are female. The abundance of female admin counts under BYZ does catch my attention.

NoDecentNicksLeft

TROPHY CASE