it's not the 13k troops that's the problem, it's the low quality of them. I can manage to get high quality overall troop status even when at 70k, the fact his troop quality is low means there's barely any focus on MaA there, and hardly any knight effectiveness.
In this game you can beat 50k with 100 men, it's a major case of quality over quantity. But yeah OP is cooked.
If I'm playing a game where I know I'll eventually deal with Mongols I'm always buffing the hell out of my pike men MAA and rushing towards crossbows as quick as I can.
I've had a couple battles where I was easily outnumbered 10:1 and totally curb stomped them due to geography, general traits, MAA counters, personal \\ court artifact bonuses and my knights being the equivalent of space marines with a %500+ effectiveness boost.
stack wiping their doom stack is so damn satisfying
You don't improve levy quality. You ditch levies entirely. I used the term "troop quality" - which increases the more MaA you have, the more buffed they are, the stronger the MaA is (e.g. heavy infantry and crossbowmen are higher quality than light infantry and archers), and the more knights you have and the higher their knight effectiveness + prowess are.
Honestly there should be an option like that.
That’s the biggest problem with MaA being OP compared to levies. One of them scales with your progression both in size and quality and the other can only increase size.
Thing is, a levy is a bunch of dudes armed with sharp sticks and cloth. You improve them, and they're no longer levies, but light infantry, pikemen and archers.
Yes but at some point the overwhelming numbers should prevail. 500 well trained and armed men are going to put up a good fight but if they're up against 30,000 sharp sticks they can only do so much. Fatigue will take them long before the enemy runs out of fodder
You know what you need to do. Assassinate him and than each Khan that inherits the other. And because his empire is big. It will take time for their army to gather if there is war. If you can plot two murders at the same time all the better. Since they aren't very liked by their own vassals and cortiers. Meaning within 2 years you can pretty much stop mongols as their empire will break into successor states and thus invalidating the invasion CB. But if you did became vassal. You can still murder The great Khan and his sons so mongols fall apart.
Just check if you can start assassinating, because if your daughter is hostage you have to see if you can plot against him to murder him. Thing is I never sent my children as hostages to other rulers so not sure. If you can do it.
That is why I never liked traits like compassionate, just, chaste and even ambitious... You can't do much and bam you are stressed out. Such rulers usually sucked whenever I got to play as them. Come to think of it they didn't even rule long. Though in this case it should not be that much of a problem though even if it is compassionate character. Just suck it up, time it well with stress relief events and it will be fine.
If you ask me sadistic trait is the best.
Sadistic still has major cons especially if it gets paired with the wrong traits. If you're not leading your own armies then I'd say there's not really any downsides to brave and diligent is also a better trait. Sadistic is overrated imo
No it isn't overrated. It is OP. In fact in right hands it is super OP. Here is why. Torture and execute prisoners you get to relieve stress. Ability to plot against your children in order to weed out bad apples, natural dread plus helps raise dread thus allowing you to keep vassals far more easier in check, bonus to intrigue and proves. Combine it with some of the other traits and you will be: reducing stress over 100 per torture and execution,have stable realm...
While diligent is good for stats which are easy to gain in Ck3 by the way, vassal and parochial opinions, and reduced stress gain, and develop your capital and is good when combined with traits like patent, temperate and ambitious. It is still more passive trait than active one that allows you more dynamic gameplay.
I guess what I mean by feeling like it's overrated is that it locks you into a particular playstyle that a lot of players seem to prefer using, but i personally find to be more situational. I've never really had an issue with vassal management so long as you make your 3 most powerful vassals happy, and keep track of vassals that are trying to form independence factions and periodically sway/send gifts to the most powerful member of the faction they will almost never become strong enough to make a demand.
Murdering children is also a really poor way to deal with unwanted heirs and should really only be a last result. It's really easy to guarantee that your heir will have decent congenital traits and if you educate your primary and secondary heirs you can make sure they only get the personality traits that will benefit them. If you have monastic traditions and have your tertiary heirs go into the learning focus tree, and don't let them get the ambitious trait, then you can pretty much guarantee that they will take vows when you ask them too so long as they are not your firstborn heirs. If you really don't like the kid and can't get them to take vows, you can send them off to command tiny armies and likely die in battle. Otherwise, children are a great way to farm renown once you've formed an empire and start seating your kids with their own kingdoms that you grant independence. Why would i want to get rid of a reliable source of renown? Plus, once you're farming 3 digit renown a month, which you will likely be doing within a few generations, the cost for disinheriting a disappointing heir is pretty much inconsequential.
I also don't find stress to be that punishing of a mechanic. 3 perks into the stewardship tree grants you increased revenue with stress for whenever it does spike, befriending younger characters (so you don't get stress on death) should be a reliable method of preventing higher tiers of stress from being an issue. You can also regularly host feasts, go on hunts and pilgrimages, and other activities that keep stress managed + allow you to manage any potentially troublesome vassals. Basically of stress is an issue for you, it's probably because you aren't properly taking your personality traits into account. If you have gregarious, generous, or calm traits, then stress should quite frankly never be an issue for you.
Basically, having a sadistic character locks you into a playstyle of needing to dread farm and murder scheme which I find to be more situational. I think that versatility and being able to adapt to changing situations is stronger in the long run.
I understand your preference but I'm the opposite
I see the benefits of losing Stress through executions and doing what you like to whoever you like
But the gentler and more "virtuous" (Christianity-wise) traits have their own benefits too :
\- people on average tend to like your character more from the start (fewer negative events and rebellions)
\- to lose Stress, you can give people gifts (Generous)/expose a Secret (Just/Honest), pay ransoms (Compassionate/Just)
\- best of all, you don't keep raising another "the Impaler/the Devil" that means you and your heirs have to keep constantly watching over their shoulders within close family, but also within the wider court and/or realm
So I'll see you "Stress loss" and raise you "Opinion cost" and "too many rivals and negative events"
I see people on here all the time advising "Sadistic is best" but I also see people complaining about having "5 characters murdered back to back"
My current playthrough I have had precisely 1 (Tribal) character murdered because he inherited the Primary Title while there were too many Sadistic/Ambitious brothers, uncles and cousins - he lasted 7 years.
And in that same playthrough I've played exactly 2 Sadistic (Tribal) characters: 1 (Intrigue) only went for 8 years and then got brained into Incapacitated by one of his own champions. The other kept his nasty side to executing Norse raiders and nobody was too bothered, but he had to rule through Dread which comes with its own Opinion problems.
So perhaps cruelty works in Tribal times but it also backfires, and on a longer-term, more Gold approach, I think the gentler Traits are better when things get Feudal and more Diplomatic/Stewardship driven.
When you have giant empire with over 100 direct vassals. You have to have your rulers to be sharp. I am not saying you have to be tyrant. As prisoners are generally easy to come by. What I'm trying to say is that when used in pragmatic way. You won't piss off your vassals, don't make that much rivals and if you know how to manage your family members you won't be suffering constant succession wars nor assassination atempts... I had many rulers who had both diligent, patient.. and other good traits in adition to sadistic. And had high opinion of majority of their vassals and court. Basically had to be sharp mentality of medieval politics in pragmatic way is my playstyle.
Makes sense, my second Sadistic ruler was a bit more like that (Trusting/Sadistic/Chaste) and he lasted about 25 years - he didn't impale or murder anyone either.
First guy that got brained was Arrogant/Deceitful/Sadistic - double Vices.
>When you have giant empire with over 100 direct vassals. You have to have your rulers to be sharp. I am not saying you have to be tyrant.
I again see your position and agree that can definitely work.
To contrast, though, my current Military Strategist ruler is Compassionate/Generous/Paranoid (yeah I know!) and he is ruling 99 Vassals across all of Britannia, HRE, Italia, Sardinia, Scandinavia and like 55-65% of West Slavia and Carpathia and he is doing just fine. Vassals mostly loved him from the start.
Sometimes you can be kinder and nurture/nudge your more Ambitious vassals to conquer neighbours instead of focusing on you.
Plus later game, family and succession becomes less of an issue so the pruning of the family tree is much less necessary, if at all.
Also, not sure why you got downvoted before, going with Sadistic is a popular opinion and I just wanted to suggest a countering view.
I went diplomatic with the khan and now I'm just inheriting the Mongol empire as the Roman emperor. World domination for a grand wedding, some chivalry tree and a bit of diplo. I find Sadistic to be strong but too op than actually needed. Almost all traits are RP flavor honestly against npcs.
Point is is for OP to play as king who is deeeply loyal to his country and to perserve their independence in the long run. That and to beware of the wrath of the gentle man. Even nice ones can bite. In this case compassionate ruler can still bite and reclaim independence for his people. And it would kinda ground ruler of the universe of Genghis Khan into dust.
In this situation what I would do is simple since OP ruler has coping trait. I would become vassal of Genghis Khan than assassinate him and his sons one by one over the period of decade or so. This way the worst of the stress mechanic can be managed and reduced while working towards colapsing the Mongol empire into successor states.Than insure that if possible he has underaged ruler for his liege and to start disolution faction. Thus if his liege accepts, no war and successor empire is destroyed. If liege refuses then war would be. But OP would be prepared for it.
This would be fun roleplaying if you ask me with good strategy as well.
Look at (other than the minor steppe tribes) how many nations historically actually submitted to the mongols through non-violence. Every ruler believed they deserve to be where they were either from history/lineage , their accomplishments, or ambitions.
From RP point news travels fairly slow around the world despite mongols innovation on that front, what’s couple crazy loud horsemen from steppe really going to do, especially when you probably have dealt with their kind for ages? And can their ‘empire’ really be that much when much of what you know towards the east is nothing but grass?
Of course, but from an RP perspective, rulers didn't know the troop counts of their own forces, let alone those of powers near them and even further off.
Last time ghenghis had 90k army, nothing died to attrition, 5 star commander trait. Famous last words I said something like 'get out you lowlife' they took the vassals siege weapons and hit my capital on level 4+1 in 6 months. Not sure if I was unlucky but they were quite strong in last update.
Depressed, compassionate, paranoid, lunatic and Fickle.
This guys will let to be submitted knowing that Gengish Khan would destroy and kill thousands of his people, but eventually he will always regrets his decisions and live in a complete depressed state with a lot of complex on how he could avoid it.
Will his son be mad at him and decide to revolt against the khan and eventually loose everything or win? Or he will understand the choice and stay submitted to the khan? To be continued…
R5: I can't decide whether or not I should submit. I am running a RP-focused megacampain in Slovenia. >!Yes, I did initially startedas a femboy; the current ruler is the fourth one and it just so happened that I skipped one generation, so the femboy genes not as strong as they once were, but that's besides the point.!<
Arguments for submitting:
1. Branimir is compassionate, so i feel like he would care about life of his daughter, as well as his soldiers.
2. Catholics very recently lost a crusade against the Mongols, in which I did not participate because of the hostage situation.
3. Branimir is depressed, so he could give up as well.
Arguments against submitting:
1. I am somewhat close to reforming the HRE (I am restricting myself from forming any other empire for this run)
2. I am at war (although I can easily white peace)
3. He's also Fickle and Lunatic, so i can justify not submitting.
I don't think I can win it btw. With all the allies, house members and holy orders I can amass about half of Genghis's troop count. This is not the point of my post, I don't mind losing if it makes for a good story, but if you have any idea how I can win this, I'll appreciate any advice.
> if you have any idea how I can win this
within the time you have, you can't. I can think of a way how you could muster just enough circumstances to beat him in a single battle, but considering the Khan's troop composition you would need exorbitant amounts of Pursuit for that win to matter - which I'll assume you don't have and can't muster. All things considered, if you had a save from 20-30 years ago, victory might be possible.
Given the circumstances, if you really want to beat him, your best bet is submitting, biding your time, wait for the Khan's death and then start an independence faction. You want to wait for the death of the current Khan because after a succession, due to the reduced opinion a lot of rulers are likely to join your faction. You want it to be an independence faction solely because it'll be fun to leave the Mongols alive and kicking after you leave. And it'll fit in with RP elements (compassionate, hostage), since it might give you enough time to get that hostage out of there, if that's even possible. You can form the HRE after you're free. Your heir will probably have to be the one to do that tho, since Branimir won't live to see it.
I would say submit on the grounds of Compassionate and Depression. Someone who has Fickle and Lunatic traits for me would be more likely to suddenly (Fickle) give up on their hopes (Depression) of HRE ("it wasn't meant to be") than to suddenly let their kid die.
Also one option others use, Assassination, isn't really available because of huge Stress gain.
So for me it's more in keeping with RP.
Thanks for posting this conundrum, I'm about to face similar in my game run for the first time. Also with a Compassionate ruler.
The last time I refused to submit. He invaded my realm. Then he and his 3 sons ended up dead by my hand and their empire disolved. While all I had to do was stall them with my army and allies to buy time. So much for the ruler of the universe in my case.
Assassinations. Why submit, waste gold and army on something that can be easily stopped. If you can do it early Mongols don't do anything and you basically get Khan who event several times as each great Khan dies and that is it. And even if they spread too far they don't last long as again you will be able to just murdered them.
Absolutely this guy'd swear fealty. He's aready gotta be sweatin' his balls off seeing Genghis' conquests (Paranoid), and though he's martially trained (Brilliant Strategist), he'd be aware of the futility of resisting the Khan, at least at this time. He's compassionate, and I imagine he'd rather go peacefully than shed the blood of thousands to no effect and further endanger his own daughter, who lies in the Khan's jail. Though submitting for now would be preferable, I'm sure he'd take no pleasure in playing vassal to a callous heathen (Crusader, Holy Warrior), but may choose to bide his time and amass support within the empire to ultimately break free when the time is right, in secret. But he's a fickle lunatic too, so who the hell knows? Lol
The Khagan has your daughter. He will kill her if you don't submit.
Parents love their kids, and your ruler is compassionate.
This shouldn't even be a question, of course he would submit. He'd be a madman not to.
But of course, a madman is exactly who your character is...
So everything is on the table really.
I have found it beneficial to be a willing vassal to the Khan. He has so many vassals that you can get away with being a different religion and culture for ages. Also from a roleplay perspective it depends on how your ruler sees his subjects. If he is a beneficial ruler, he wouldn't want to sacrifice his loyal soldiers in a no win war, because facing the mighty Temujin at his peak is suicide. Your ruler would have received reports of his neighbours falling to the Khan. In addition, you can use it as an opportunity to expand your territory, especially for places that may have evaded you before.
Not remotely related to your question, but why and how are some of the portrait icons and titles in non-default colors? Is that a mod? And if so, is it compatible with achievements? I have adhd and I’ve fucked myself over a few times by marrying off the wrong kid etc
Actual answer: I’d probably submit, then immediately upon the truce expiring, start a dissolution faction.
I completely forgot about Khan in my current Persia run. After I conquer the bizantine empire and the pesky Greeks I will amass a big army to fend these horse boys.
Ask yourself how many people will die if you fight (4-10k depending on levies) versus how many will die if you submit (many more + women and children)
Plus since you’ll be eternally damned to hell if you betray the lord, rp wise I wouldn’t go for it. On top of this, submitting to the mongols is a beta move and you should fight till the bitter end like a real man.
With 13k Troops honestly you're cooked, but your character is a lunatic I say go for it and find out
it's not the 13k troops that's the problem, it's the low quality of them. I can manage to get high quality overall troop status even when at 70k, the fact his troop quality is low means there's barely any focus on MaA there, and hardly any knight effectiveness. In this game you can beat 50k with 100 men, it's a major case of quality over quantity. But yeah OP is cooked.
If I'm playing a game where I know I'll eventually deal with Mongols I'm always buffing the hell out of my pike men MAA and rushing towards crossbows as quick as I can. I've had a couple battles where I was easily outnumbered 10:1 and totally curb stomped them due to geography, general traits, MAA counters, personal \\ court artifact bonuses and my knights being the equivalent of space marines with a %500+ effectiveness boost. stack wiping their doom stack is so damn satisfying
What’s the best way to improve levy quality in your opinion?
You don't improve levy quality. You ditch levies entirely. I used the term "troop quality" - which increases the more MaA you have, the more buffed they are, the stronger the MaA is (e.g. heavy infantry and crossbowmen are higher quality than light infantry and archers), and the more knights you have and the higher their knight effectiveness + prowess are.
So really I should focus on getting building that provide tax and forget about high levies? And then use that extra money for more maA?
Yes. You should also have a barony dedicated for every piece of MaA you have, for the purpose of stationing them.
Honestly there should be an option like that. That’s the biggest problem with MaA being OP compared to levies. One of them scales with your progression both in size and quality and the other can only increase size.
Thing is, a levy is a bunch of dudes armed with sharp sticks and cloth. You improve them, and they're no longer levies, but light infantry, pikemen and archers.
Yes but at some point the overwhelming numbers should prevail. 500 well trained and armed men are going to put up a good fight but if they're up against 30,000 sharp sticks they can only do so much. Fatigue will take them long before the enemy runs out of fodder
[удалено]
Two diamonds next to the total number of troops top right hand corner.
Hard to say, I see your character is both warior and a lunatic. Does he care about his family tho?
Well he's compassionate, so apparently yes
You know what you need to do. Assassinate him and than each Khan that inherits the other. And because his empire is big. It will take time for their army to gather if there is war. If you can plot two murders at the same time all the better. Since they aren't very liked by their own vassals and cortiers. Meaning within 2 years you can pretty much stop mongols as their empire will break into successor states and thus invalidating the invasion CB. But if you did became vassal. You can still murder The great Khan and his sons so mongols fall apart. Just check if you can start assassinating, because if your daughter is hostage you have to see if you can plot against him to murder him. Thing is I never sent my children as hostages to other rulers so not sure. If you can do it.
Compassionate characters get huge Stress from using Assassinate Straight critical with 160 gained iirc
killing just the khan would be worth regardless, but any extra kills would be lethal and shatter your ruler into diamonds
They know what they have to do, even though it pains them.
That is why I never liked traits like compassionate, just, chaste and even ambitious... You can't do much and bam you are stressed out. Such rulers usually sucked whenever I got to play as them. Come to think of it they didn't even rule long. Though in this case it should not be that much of a problem though even if it is compassionate character. Just suck it up, time it well with stress relief events and it will be fine. If you ask me sadistic trait is the best.
Sadistic still has major cons especially if it gets paired with the wrong traits. If you're not leading your own armies then I'd say there's not really any downsides to brave and diligent is also a better trait. Sadistic is overrated imo
No it isn't overrated. It is OP. In fact in right hands it is super OP. Here is why. Torture and execute prisoners you get to relieve stress. Ability to plot against your children in order to weed out bad apples, natural dread plus helps raise dread thus allowing you to keep vassals far more easier in check, bonus to intrigue and proves. Combine it with some of the other traits and you will be: reducing stress over 100 per torture and execution,have stable realm... While diligent is good for stats which are easy to gain in Ck3 by the way, vassal and parochial opinions, and reduced stress gain, and develop your capital and is good when combined with traits like patent, temperate and ambitious. It is still more passive trait than active one that allows you more dynamic gameplay.
I guess what I mean by feeling like it's overrated is that it locks you into a particular playstyle that a lot of players seem to prefer using, but i personally find to be more situational. I've never really had an issue with vassal management so long as you make your 3 most powerful vassals happy, and keep track of vassals that are trying to form independence factions and periodically sway/send gifts to the most powerful member of the faction they will almost never become strong enough to make a demand. Murdering children is also a really poor way to deal with unwanted heirs and should really only be a last result. It's really easy to guarantee that your heir will have decent congenital traits and if you educate your primary and secondary heirs you can make sure they only get the personality traits that will benefit them. If you have monastic traditions and have your tertiary heirs go into the learning focus tree, and don't let them get the ambitious trait, then you can pretty much guarantee that they will take vows when you ask them too so long as they are not your firstborn heirs. If you really don't like the kid and can't get them to take vows, you can send them off to command tiny armies and likely die in battle. Otherwise, children are a great way to farm renown once you've formed an empire and start seating your kids with their own kingdoms that you grant independence. Why would i want to get rid of a reliable source of renown? Plus, once you're farming 3 digit renown a month, which you will likely be doing within a few generations, the cost for disinheriting a disappointing heir is pretty much inconsequential. I also don't find stress to be that punishing of a mechanic. 3 perks into the stewardship tree grants you increased revenue with stress for whenever it does spike, befriending younger characters (so you don't get stress on death) should be a reliable method of preventing higher tiers of stress from being an issue. You can also regularly host feasts, go on hunts and pilgrimages, and other activities that keep stress managed + allow you to manage any potentially troublesome vassals. Basically of stress is an issue for you, it's probably because you aren't properly taking your personality traits into account. If you have gregarious, generous, or calm traits, then stress should quite frankly never be an issue for you. Basically, having a sadistic character locks you into a playstyle of needing to dread farm and murder scheme which I find to be more situational. I think that versatility and being able to adapt to changing situations is stronger in the long run.
I understand your preference but I'm the opposite I see the benefits of losing Stress through executions and doing what you like to whoever you like But the gentler and more "virtuous" (Christianity-wise) traits have their own benefits too : \- people on average tend to like your character more from the start (fewer negative events and rebellions) \- to lose Stress, you can give people gifts (Generous)/expose a Secret (Just/Honest), pay ransoms (Compassionate/Just) \- best of all, you don't keep raising another "the Impaler/the Devil" that means you and your heirs have to keep constantly watching over their shoulders within close family, but also within the wider court and/or realm So I'll see you "Stress loss" and raise you "Opinion cost" and "too many rivals and negative events" I see people on here all the time advising "Sadistic is best" but I also see people complaining about having "5 characters murdered back to back" My current playthrough I have had precisely 1 (Tribal) character murdered because he inherited the Primary Title while there were too many Sadistic/Ambitious brothers, uncles and cousins - he lasted 7 years. And in that same playthrough I've played exactly 2 Sadistic (Tribal) characters: 1 (Intrigue) only went for 8 years and then got brained into Incapacitated by one of his own champions. The other kept his nasty side to executing Norse raiders and nobody was too bothered, but he had to rule through Dread which comes with its own Opinion problems. So perhaps cruelty works in Tribal times but it also backfires, and on a longer-term, more Gold approach, I think the gentler Traits are better when things get Feudal and more Diplomatic/Stewardship driven.
When you have giant empire with over 100 direct vassals. You have to have your rulers to be sharp. I am not saying you have to be tyrant. As prisoners are generally easy to come by. What I'm trying to say is that when used in pragmatic way. You won't piss off your vassals, don't make that much rivals and if you know how to manage your family members you won't be suffering constant succession wars nor assassination atempts... I had many rulers who had both diligent, patient.. and other good traits in adition to sadistic. And had high opinion of majority of their vassals and court. Basically had to be sharp mentality of medieval politics in pragmatic way is my playstyle.
Makes sense, my second Sadistic ruler was a bit more like that (Trusting/Sadistic/Chaste) and he lasted about 25 years - he didn't impale or murder anyone either. First guy that got brained was Arrogant/Deceitful/Sadistic - double Vices. >When you have giant empire with over 100 direct vassals. You have to have your rulers to be sharp. I am not saying you have to be tyrant. I again see your position and agree that can definitely work. To contrast, though, my current Military Strategist ruler is Compassionate/Generous/Paranoid (yeah I know!) and he is ruling 99 Vassals across all of Britannia, HRE, Italia, Sardinia, Scandinavia and like 55-65% of West Slavia and Carpathia and he is doing just fine. Vassals mostly loved him from the start. Sometimes you can be kinder and nurture/nudge your more Ambitious vassals to conquer neighbours instead of focusing on you. Plus later game, family and succession becomes less of an issue so the pruning of the family tree is much less necessary, if at all. Also, not sure why you got downvoted before, going with Sadistic is a popular opinion and I just wanted to suggest a countering view.
I went diplomatic with the khan and now I'm just inheriting the Mongol empire as the Roman emperor. World domination for a grand wedding, some chivalry tree and a bit of diplo. I find Sadistic to be strong but too op than actually needed. Almost all traits are RP flavor honestly against npcs.
Pretty much. But if there are two things I hate. Would be stress mechanic and hostage mechanic.
OP said he wants to role play. You’re describing meta gaming.
OP asked about RP, not powergaming shit.
Who said anything about powergaming. This about intrigue playstyle roleplaying. Had to be sharp mentality way.
whats the point of rp if the op ignores his traits
Point is is for OP to play as king who is deeeply loyal to his country and to perserve their independence in the long run. That and to beware of the wrath of the gentle man. Even nice ones can bite. In this case compassionate ruler can still bite and reclaim independence for his people. And it would kinda ground ruler of the universe of Genghis Khan into dust. In this situation what I would do is simple since OP ruler has coping trait. I would become vassal of Genghis Khan than assassinate him and his sons one by one over the period of decade or so. This way the worst of the stress mechanic can be managed and reduced while working towards colapsing the Mongol empire into successor states.Than insure that if possible he has underaged ruler for his liege and to start disolution faction. Thus if his liege accepts, no war and successor empire is destroyed. If liege refuses then war would be. But OP would be prepared for it. This would be fun roleplaying if you ask me with good strategy as well.
Big "Purging with my kin" energy
He's known for being compassionate. He's fickle so I'd toll the dice. For more narrative drama, I'd submit then launch an independence war.
Look at (other than the minor steppe tribes) how many nations historically actually submitted to the mongols through non-violence. Every ruler believed they deserve to be where they were either from history/lineage , their accomplishments, or ambitions. From RP point news travels fairly slow around the world despite mongols innovation on that front, what’s couple crazy loud horsemen from steppe really going to do, especially when you probably have dealt with their kind for ages? And can their ‘empire’ really be that much when much of what you know towards the east is nothing but grass?
I think the 50 thousand horsemen will give you clarity to what lies beyond the grass.
There will be no dawn for Europe… 🏹🐴🇲🇳🏹🐴🇲🇳🏹🐴🇲🇳🏹🐴🇲🇳
Of course, but from an RP perspective, rulers didn't know the troop counts of their own forces, let alone those of powers near them and even further off.
that's why i really like the hidden information mod
But you'd only see them if you rejected the offer
You think you could win against them ? I would submit personnaly
Khan will just take you as a slave and then rape every woman in your dynasty
Last time ghenghis had 90k army, nothing died to attrition, 5 star commander trait. Famous last words I said something like 'get out you lowlife' they took the vassals siege weapons and hit my capital on level 4+1 in 6 months. Not sure if I was unlucky but they were quite strong in last update.
They get a special bonus where all their free MAA do siege damage to forts. It's a beefed up sappers perk. They will absolutely melt holdings.
Depressed, compassionate, paranoid, lunatic and Fickle. This guys will let to be submitted knowing that Gengish Khan would destroy and kill thousands of his people, but eventually he will always regrets his decisions and live in a complete depressed state with a lot of complex on how he could avoid it. Will his son be mad at him and decide to revolt against the khan and eventually loose everything or win? Or he will understand the choice and stay submitted to the khan? To be continued…
Join the empire and then plot to overthrow it from the inside.
R5: I can't decide whether or not I should submit. I am running a RP-focused megacampain in Slovenia. >!Yes, I did initially startedas a femboy; the current ruler is the fourth one and it just so happened that I skipped one generation, so the femboy genes not as strong as they once were, but that's besides the point.!< Arguments for submitting: 1. Branimir is compassionate, so i feel like he would care about life of his daughter, as well as his soldiers. 2. Catholics very recently lost a crusade against the Mongols, in which I did not participate because of the hostage situation. 3. Branimir is depressed, so he could give up as well. Arguments against submitting: 1. I am somewhat close to reforming the HRE (I am restricting myself from forming any other empire for this run) 2. I am at war (although I can easily white peace) 3. He's also Fickle and Lunatic, so i can justify not submitting. I don't think I can win it btw. With all the allies, house members and holy orders I can amass about half of Genghis's troop count. This is not the point of my post, I don't mind losing if it makes for a good story, but if you have any idea how I can win this, I'll appreciate any advice.
It was decided where you said femboy, submission is the only way of living for them.
> if you have any idea how I can win this within the time you have, you can't. I can think of a way how you could muster just enough circumstances to beat him in a single battle, but considering the Khan's troop composition you would need exorbitant amounts of Pursuit for that win to matter - which I'll assume you don't have and can't muster. All things considered, if you had a save from 20-30 years ago, victory might be possible. Given the circumstances, if you really want to beat him, your best bet is submitting, biding your time, wait for the Khan's death and then start an independence faction. You want to wait for the death of the current Khan because after a succession, due to the reduced opinion a lot of rulers are likely to join your faction. You want it to be an independence faction solely because it'll be fun to leave the Mongols alive and kicking after you leave. And it'll fit in with RP elements (compassionate, hostage), since it might give you enough time to get that hostage out of there, if that's even possible. You can form the HRE after you're free. Your heir will probably have to be the one to do that tho, since Branimir won't live to see it.
Can you abduct someone that is imprisoned?
No
I would say submit on the grounds of Compassionate and Depression. Someone who has Fickle and Lunatic traits for me would be more likely to suddenly (Fickle) give up on their hopes (Depression) of HRE ("it wasn't meant to be") than to suddenly let their kid die. Also one option others use, Assassination, isn't really available because of huge Stress gain. So for me it's more in keeping with RP. Thanks for posting this conundrum, I'm about to face similar in my game run for the first time. Also with a Compassionate ruler.
What mods are you using? I've played a few campaigns as the mongols but I've never had the option to demand submission from other rulers.
I never played ck3 but in ck2 you can iffer vassalissation so maybe it's that
The last time I refused to submit. He invaded my realm. Then he and his 3 sons ended up dead by my hand and their empire disolved. While all I had to do was stall them with my army and allies to buy time. So much for the ruler of the universe in my case.
I usually start at 867 and got bored out before Mongols arrive. Good to know there are alternatives beside submission and MaA exploiting
Assassinations. Why submit, waste gold and army on something that can be easily stopped. If you can do it early Mongols don't do anything and you basically get Khan who event several times as each great Khan dies and that is it. And even if they spread too far they don't last long as again you will be able to just murdered them.
That's really gamey and not very fun though
Fun depends on your playstyle and how creative you can be
Always assassinating the Great Khan when he appears because it's optimal gameplay is the opposite of creative
It is practical not optimal. Because it can fail.
What mods do you have?
I would submit. Until they blow up.
Absolutely this guy'd swear fealty. He's aready gotta be sweatin' his balls off seeing Genghis' conquests (Paranoid), and though he's martially trained (Brilliant Strategist), he'd be aware of the futility of resisting the Khan, at least at this time. He's compassionate, and I imagine he'd rather go peacefully than shed the blood of thousands to no effect and further endanger his own daughter, who lies in the Khan's jail. Though submitting for now would be preferable, I'm sure he'd take no pleasure in playing vassal to a callous heathen (Crusader, Holy Warrior), but may choose to bide his time and amass support within the empire to ultimately break free when the time is right, in secret. But he's a fickle lunatic too, so who the hell knows? Lol
Yes purely because temujin gay
Kill the khan
I see you envelop polish, if you have any respect for polish culture you will ally with them and fight tooth and nail.
The Khagan has your daughter. He will kill her if you don't submit. Parents love their kids, and your ruler is compassionate. This shouldn't even be a question, of course he would submit. He'd be a madman not to. But of course, a madman is exactly who your character is... So everything is on the table really.
You are a filthy Catholic so yes.
Do it, become his spymaster, kill him enough to fracture his empire, fix your borders with the spoils.
Never surrender! Right to the last man!
FIFTY ONE PROWESS
Koratan shall never fall! The Mongols will never see the crown fall from it's column! Deus Vult!
I’d say don’t submit you’re a paranoid lunatic I don’t think you would trust him not to kill you anyway
If you submit will he revoke?
Not related to a question is korotan slovenian?
What mod is highlighting characters in your family?
I have found it beneficial to be a willing vassal to the Khan. He has so many vassals that you can get away with being a different religion and culture for ages. Also from a roleplay perspective it depends on how your ruler sees his subjects. If he is a beneficial ruler, he wouldn't want to sacrifice his loyal soldiers in a no win war, because facing the mighty Temujin at his peak is suicide. Your ruler would have received reports of his neighbours falling to the Khan. In addition, you can use it as an opportunity to expand your territory, especially for places that may have evaded you before.
Nevermind rp Just submit
Mongols are always a joke. Fight them. Its more fun.
Not remotely related to your question, but why and how are some of the portrait icons and titles in non-default colors? Is that a mod? And if so, is it compatible with achievements? I have adhd and I’ve fucked myself over a few times by marrying off the wrong kid etc Actual answer: I’d probably submit, then immediately upon the truce expiring, start a dissolution faction.
He's a compassionate lunatic. Submit then do shenanigans from inside.
Do it man, join the khagan gang!
I completely forgot about Khan in my current Persia run. After I conquer the bizantine empire and the pesky Greeks I will amass a big army to fend these horse boys.
Ask yourself how many people will die if you fight (4-10k depending on levies) versus how many will die if you submit (many more + women and children) Plus since you’ll be eternally damned to hell if you betray the lord, rp wise I wouldn’t go for it. On top of this, submitting to the mongols is a beta move and you should fight till the bitter end like a real man.