Kill your opponent.

Originally posted by ajb2196:

Kill your opponent.

let's assume that this is not really an option.

how do i fix this without general murder?

^ It's arbitrary, but required as elective monarchy was overpowered. Outside of murder, there's little you can do except hope they change their votes.

Originally posted by Steve Saint James:

^ It's arbitrary, but required as elective monarchy was overpowered. Outside of murder, there's little you can do except hope they change their votes.

ah, well, general murder it is, then.

just seems funny that nobodies i elevated to dukedom would bite their patron's hand in such a way.

time to kill almost every duke in the empire, then.

I haven't had any issues with Elective Monarchy. Some electors vote for me, others vote for random other people. I was close to losing my Kingdom, i solved this problem by changing laws and revoking titles anyways because my demesne limit increased as a result.

Originally posted by LORD GALVATRON:

Originally posted by Steve Saint James:

^ It's arbitrary, but required as elective monarchy was overpowered. Outside of murder, there's little you can do except hope they change their votes.

ah, well, general murder it is, then.

just seems funny that nobodies i elevated to dukedom would bite their patron's hand in such a way.

time to kill almost every duke in the empire, then.

Have fun!

Originally posted by ajb2196:

Originally posted by LORD GALVATRON:

ah, well, general murder it is, then.

just seems funny that nobodies i elevated to dukedom would bite their patron's hand in such a way.

time to kill almost every duke in the empire, then.

Have fun!

it is not fun to have to kill off loyal vassals. it is even les fun to kill off a loyal kinsman because everyone is voting for him.... despite the fact that they like me far, far more.

this "fix" needs looking at.

Originally posted by Thanos:

Personally I think there should be a cumulative opinion malus for dynasties that dominate an elective monarchy across several generations. It seems rational to think that the longer one family holds the title the less the other vassals believe their votes matter at all thus making them more likely to rebel.

That seems really legit to me.

It always really bugged me that elective monarchy was basically the perfect succession system and noone would mind if the same dynasty ruled for 500 years, so overall I consider the changes a massive improvement. However, I totally agree that the AI voting logic could stand to be looked at and tuned up.

I really don't think it should be enough to just have good relations with your vassals, though. For one, it seems to me much more rational (and much more similar to what a player would do) for electors to vote for candidates with a high opinion of them. Assuming they're actually trying to better their station and not just keep their friends in power, having a ruler who is willing to trust them and go easy on them seems way more important than having a ruler they personally like.

+1

Elective monarchies historically had the problem of nobility electing someone they could manipulate or didn't have to worry about trying to dominate them. Eldest sons/prefered heirs mess with that. (I'd imagine you want your heir to be the most competent). So they'll pick someone they like okay that meets the other prerequisites. No fix for that. (sort of murder and holding as many votes as possible).

Originally posted by Marquis de l'Hamy:

+1

Elective monarchies historically had the problem of nobility electing someone they could manipulate or didn't have to worry about trying to dominate them. Eldest sons/prefered heirs mess with that. (I'd imagine you want your heir to be the most competent). So they'll pick someone they like okay that meets the other prerequisites. No fix for that. (sort of murder and holding as many votes as possible).

thing is, my vassals complain that i have too many voter titles, even with only two duchies (only dukes can vote). seems to me that the -15 for having but two ducal titles really offests the 25 bonus for elective. +10 is on the order of gavelkind.

for me it's less about picking the most competant of the available heir-pool, but more about keeping my titles and realm unified. i went with elective because i have tech to grind to unlock high crown authority, and i want to avoid many long regencies from ultimogenature.

i DID manage to secure the succession for my sole surviving son, then i promptly died of tuburculosis (a first for me). the restored zorastorian high priest then finally called a great holy war (on greece), i of couse won, and now i'm sitting at roughly twice my vassal limit. i'm not even thinking about succession because i have another 8 years of regency to go.

now i just need to figure out why the game wont let me give the kingdom of greece title to the merchant republic i set up in constantinopal, and also why i must wait many years to usurp most of the duchy titles.

i should be a little more clear, im playing charlemange-start abbasid, converted to zorastorian. my realm consists of the entire dejour persian empire, most of the arabian empire, and now the kingdom of greece.

i play for dynasty prestige. i'm wanting to hold more than one toplevel title. i dont want my capitol shifting all over the place, as it invariably does under gavelkind (my capitol really sucks right now due to the first couple of gavelkind successions).

i have no theocracies in my realm, and this merchant republic is my only one. it may still be over 10%, though... greece has a lot of counties. the option to give the title is not even there, though, so there is no greyed out button to hover over.

this long regency sucks. because of low tech and the fact this ruler was 2 when he succeeded, all the vassals hated him. got a double-whammy crown authority faction. decresed by 2, and i cannot even raise it when i come of age.

Originally posted by Thanos:

Ah. I got a bit confused when you said you only had 2 duchies. As for theocracies and merchant republics, you know they are seperate right? 10% of your realm can be theocracies and 10% can be merchant republics. Of course there are ways to go above that 20% but not by directly handing them titles.

oh, i didnt know that, thanks.

just to clarify, both percentages are calculated by total realm size? as opposed to calculating the 10% of one, and the remainder being used to calculate the second, right?

Originally posted by Thanos:

Personally I think there should be a cumulative opinion malus for dynasties that dominate an elective monarchy across several generations. It seems rational to think that the longer one family holds the title the less the other vassals believe their votes matter at all thus making them more likely to rebel.

This is the best suggestion for a fix I've seen.

Originally posted by The Retired Messiah of Sjinto:

Originally posted by Thanos:

Personally I think there should be a cumulative opinion malus for dynasties that dominate an elective monarchy across several generations. It seems rational to think that the longer one family holds the title the less the other vassals believe their votes matter at all thus making them more likely to rebel.

This is the best suggestion for a fix I've seen.

and easily circumvented. all elector vassals are of my blood. that's something i try to do anyway.

also, despite lolwiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elective_monarchy

nowhere is it said that the electors would vote against "tradition" because they want their turn. in almost every example, elective has shifted to defacto hereditary. the HRE example is especially telling, as this is the form that CK2 is probably modeled on.

after all, "patronage" (also known as "neopotism") was very much a strong thing back in those days. support the guy in charge, and you get lands, money, and priveledge.

and that line of thinking gets me wondering: why is there no opinion mallus on a character "upjumped" beyond his "rightful" title? that was part of the system, too. everyone's station was as it was because god said so. when someone upset the "natural order", people got quite upset.

Originally posted by LORD GALVATRON:

Originally posted by Marquis de l'Hamy:

+1

Elective monarchies historically had the problem of nobility electing someone they could manipulate or didn't have to worry about trying to dominate them. Eldest sons/prefered heirs mess with that. (I'd imagine you want your heir to be the most competent). So they'll pick someone they like okay that meets the other prerequisites. No fix for that. (sort of murder and holding as many votes as possible).

thing is, my vassals complain that i have too many voter titles, even with only two duchies (only dukes can vote). seems to me that the -15 for having but two ducal titles really offests the 25 bonus for elective. +10 is on the order of gavelkind.

for me it's less about picking the most competant of the available heir-pool, but more about keeping my titles and realm unified. i went with elective because i have tech to grind to unlock high crown authority, and i want to avoid many long regencies from ultimogenature.

i DID manage to secure the succession for my sole surviving son, then i promptly died of tuburculosis (a first for me). the restored zorastorian high priest then finally called a great holy war (on greece), i of couse won, and now i'm sitting at roughly twice my vassal limit. i'm not even thinking about succession because i have another 8 years of regency to go.

now i just need to figure out why the game wont let me give the kingdom of greece title to the merchant republic i set up in constantinopal, and also why i must wait many years to usurp most of the duchy titles.

You cannot give kingdom level titles to your vassal merchant republics and theocracies. Only through console.