holding kingdoms as emperor?

[ddrei]

i finally managed to become an emperor and now i wonder... do i want to be also the king of each kingdom or do i want others to handle that? i worry that they want to become independent if i choose other people for the job.

[ste]

I'm at the same point, There doesnt seem to be any penalty for having them, unlike CK2. I would say the only reason to give them away is if you have no choice, over vassal limit

[EA Latium]

Having King Vassals is normally recommended, as dealing with three Vassals is easier than dealing with sixteen let's say.

They won't desire independence if they are within your De Jure, if they are still drifting you can speed up the process or just make sure they won't gain momentum with their Faction in case they form one, an Alliance may be all it's needed.

[Сааребас]

Uhm... in CK2 you could also hold every kingdom title without penalty.

Nevertheless, I would grant them to dynasty members, even from other houses since it will increase the renown your dynasty gets.

Aside from that, there are no penalties for holding them yourself.

[ste]

I think you could only hold 2, but alot of vassals were unhappy you had them, I rememeber having to give them all away on ck2, because of negatives, none seem to care on ck3 no reason on CK3. Youre vassal limit is alot higher aswell

[N1z0ku]

There's no benefit in granting kingdom titles to vassals, unless you're overburdened by micromanagement or hitting your direct vassal limit cap, as you'll be slashing your income something fierce by adding yet another tax link, giving you a % of a % of a %.

Originally posted by Potato:

Uhm... in CK2 you could also hold every kingdom title without penalty.

Nevertheless, I would grant them to dynasty members, even from other houses since it will increase the renown your dynasty gets.

Aside from that, there are no penalties for holding them yourself.

That might've been the case in CK2 ( I don't know, never really played it ), but in CK3 this isn't the case unless said dynasty members are independent rulers.

[Сааребас]

Originally posted by ste:

I think you could only hold 2, but alot of vassals were unhappy you had them, I rememeber having to give them all away on ck2, because of negatives, none seem to care on ck3 no reason on CK3. Youre vassal limit is alot higher aswell

Probably because they were holding a duchy in said kingdom, not because you hold too many.
That was for duchies. Same as in CK3 from King and emperor 2 duchy titles before an opinion penalty.

[JuX]

Not having kingdoms lets you have more direct vassals for better tax and levy gain. However there is a direct vassal limit and forming duchy or kingdom tittles helps you reduce the number of them.

But what matters is your situation as a ruler. If you have trouble maintaining relations with so many direct vassals then forming Kingdoms let's you reduce the amount of people you have to please. It's also a double edged sword should that king becomes unhappy with you.

[ste]

Originally posted by Potato:

Originally posted by ste:

I think you could only hold 2, but alot of vassals were unhappy you had them, I rememeber having to give them all away on ck2, because of negatives, none seem to care on ck3 no reason on CK3. Youre vassal limit is alot higher aswell

Probably because they were holding a duchy in said kingdom, not because you hold too many.
That was for duchies. Same as in CK3 from King and emperor 2 duchy titles before an opinion penalty.

There isnt an opinion penalty or any penalty whatsoever in CK3 from what I can see
Only vassal limit which at 60, you could virtually paint the map with dukes

[FM Helldiver Radio]

I´m emperor of skandinavia with 13 kingdoms under my liege. At the mean time I holded 11 of them on my own without any drawback, but it got confusing.
Its a lot of work to keep all small vassels happy.
Having a hand full of kings is a lot less stressing.
Currently I only hold 3 or 4.

[JuX]

Originally posted by ste:

Originally posted by Potato:

Probably because they were holding a duchy in said kingdom, not because you hold too many.
That was for duchies. Same as in CK3 from King and emperor 2 duchy titles before an opinion penalty.

There isnt an opinion penalty or any penalty whatsoever in CK3 from what I can see

Having multiple kingdom tittles is rather meaningless as emperor. If anything it's risky simply because they are lost on succession with multiple heirs. Emperor can actually destroy all kingdom tittles if you so please and everything will still remain the same under the empire tittles rule.

[N1z0ku]

Originally posted by JuX:

Originally posted by ste:

There isnt an opinion penalty or any penalty whatsoever in CK3 from what I can see

Having multiple kingdom tittles is rather meaningless as emperor. If anything it's risky simply because they are lost on succession with multiple heirs. Emperor can actually destroy all kingdom tittles if you so please and everything will still remain the same under the empire tittles rule.

I wouldn't necessarily call it "meaningless", as each held kingdom title grants you extra prestige each month.

[SKull]

I usually keep them. But you can hand them out once in a while to squash rebellions. The vassal you give it to will love you, while other vassals in the kingdom will be buried under another liege and can't cause you any more trouble for a while.
Usually you end up with a much bigger rebelliion a generation later, though. But as long as you don't have child rulers, the troop count is usually enough that factions don't get powerful enough.

[JuX]

Originally posted by N1z0ku:

Originally posted by JuX:

Having multiple kingdom tittles is rather meaningless as emperor. If anything it's risky simply because they are lost on succession with multiple heirs. Emperor can actually destroy all kingdom tittles if you so please and everything will still remain the same under the empire tittles rule.

I wouldn't necessarily call it "meaningless", as each held kingdom title grants you extra prestige each month.

You don't really need that extra prestige as emperor. You constantly keep having more prestige then you actually need.

[Pokéman493]

You are better off handing kingdom titles that don’t contain any of your personal holdings to other rulers, especially if you want to unify your realm in faith, since the title holder can convert county faiths on their own

[MelkorTm]

if some one unhappy u can cut his head of and replace some one likes u more