Legitimacy... C'mon Man

[armyissue69]

Needs a rework. You should receive an uptick every year if:
No one attempts to remove your "illegitimate" rule
You maintain positive opinion in your realm

You should NOT reduce legitimacy if:
-Your "lowborn" spouse has positive religious attributes (Try playing Benjamin Yitzak and finding a "not lowborn" spouse. There are situations where you just done have access to a high born spouse.
-An rebellious uprising is put down AND the leader dies in your dungeon (or executed for that matter)

Anyone else?

[CrUsHeR]

Muslims losing legitimacy from lowborn wives is crazy.

If anything, a ruler would gain legitimacy when marrying a wife from a higher ranked family (e.g. Emir / Sultan marrying a close relative of the Caliph).



Losing legitimacy from having lovers is absolutely insane. Some of the most famous kings and emperors were also known for their love affairs. See here

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_II,_Holy_Roman_Emperor#Mistresses_and_illegitimate_issue

[Neshamah]

Losing legitimacy when you lose a battle is frustrating as well. Especially since you don't gain it when you win battles. Just seems stupid to me.

[TemplarScott]

Originally posted by Neshamah:

Losing legitimacy when you lose a battle is frustrating as well. Especially since you don't gain it when you win battles. Just seems stupid to me.

this is the one i agree with if you lose it when losing battles should gain when win battles and not just the war tho i like the legitimacy overall stops you from being able to disinherit at will and making it easy

[Сааребас]

Legitimacy is not something official but rather how strong your claim to rule is in the eyes of others.

[Razorblade]

Can't say I find Legitimacy difficult to deal with at all, even if I'm the only one in my religious group. You have to marry maybe one lowborn before you have plenty of vassals/extended family to marry, and waiting for a generated noble woman is always an option.

[JLefor]

You should gain legitimacy when someone pays tribute and when you win a battle.
i could win 500 in a row with no legitimacy but one loss is -50. Additionally, plagues drive me insane as I work 10 years to increase it back to the baseline, but all that work is gone after a single plague.

[mb3]

Yea, no doubt, the game needs some additional balancing.

[CrUsHeR]

The question is not wether it is difficult to deal with, or even if the consequences would be a game over situation.

The question is, why is such a crap mechanic going against common sense.



Perhaps anyone can explain why being exposed in a lover affair reduces legitimacy?

The only issue would be wether the ruler and the heir are of legitimate origin. So is the heir really his father's son and not a cuckold child. Or is the heir from a legitimate relationship (depending on customs).

A sovereign would under no circumstances be questioned in his legitimacy just because he has maitresses. Quite the opposite, it would be expected from many as a display of manliness and virility.



In turn, winning an aggressive war of conquest increases legitimacy.

How? Why? Being an usurper does make you illegitimate. Even if "might makes right" is the agenda, it would take generations for subjects to accept a foreign ruler who stole their lands in an unjust war.

[ShepherdOfCats]

It kind of sucks that the best way to increase legitimacy the fastest is to paint the map. For all the non-map painters it's a piddling +20 legitimacy for each event you host. Meaning the late eras where the legitimacy ranks cost more to achieve, you have to basically spam conquests.

War is cheaper. It costs me 800 gold to host a grand tournament with 3 events. Meanwhile I can start a war, crush my opponent in single battle (stack wiping even), capture the ruler and gain +100 legitimacy for my "efforts". Probably spent less than 50 gold in that war. Maybe I didn't even really *want* the territory, I just had to do something quick to raise my legitimacy because my powerful vassals hated me.

Also landing your heirs now is even more dangerous because I landed my son and he had 0/5 legitimacy before he inherited the kingdom, and I'm like, "What the F'k did you do?"

I would think that a king who manages to keep his kingdom at peace—under most circumstances—should receive a yearly uptick (unless you have a warmongering religion, in which case proving your might by crushing helpless one-county neighbors would more logically be a preferred method of increasing legitimacy).

[Novia]

Originally posted by CrUsHeR:

Losing legitimacy from having lovers is absolutely insane. Some of the most famous kings and emperors were also known for their love affairs. See here

Indeed, and this part of it gets every more silly whenever you have a bastard from any of those affairs. Every time that is revealed, that is. You receive the same penalty, more disgraced for that one thing than losing a war or battle, even if the relation was public knowledge for the last 30 years. Needless to say this adds up quickly.

That Legitimacy is a static one dimensional value rather than an accumulation of overall history makes it feel really tacked on and forcing meta-specific play, small wonder the AI struggles with it too, unless tribal since tribals never have a problem with it (hell a 1 year old kid can be 4/5 king of tribal Scotland upon succession).

Even if they don't ultimately expand on it, some basic balancing would at least be enough to offset the silliness the current system generates, for the AI's sake if nothing else.

[M82]

Originally posted by armyissue69:

Needs a rework. You should receive an uptick every year if:
No one attempts to remove your "illegitimate" rule
You maintain positive opinion in your realm

You should NOT reduce legitimacy if:
-Your "lowborn" spouse has positive religious attributes (Try playing Benjamin Yitzak and finding a "not lowborn" spouse. There are situations where you just done have access to a high born spouse.
-An rebellious uprising is put down AND the leader dies in your dungeon (or executed for that matter)

Anyone else?

I'm using a mod that entirely disables the legitimacy mechanic. Nobody asked for it, it's more of a thing that prevents you from doing stuff than a thing that rewards you for doing stuff, the penalty for marrying a lowborn even if you're some obscure count in bumf*ck nowhere is ridiculous, I just think the game is worse with it

[Seggellion]

Throwing a party or going on a hunt or to a funeral to increase legitimacy just seems asinine. It appears to be a game mechanic to force you to spend money on the events you may not care about in your particular game at that time.

[dwarfpcfan]

losing legitimacy amount being static also to me is just unrealistic. Yes I totally believe the king of France or england would lose face if he married a peasant girl. But a backward tribal norse leader in north Sweden in 867? Why would anyone it cause the same amount of scandal (lost of legitimacy).

[mutantmuppet]

definitely needs replacing but then I think several things do. Still, for me the worst part of it all is the impact on your vassal's who they start to look more towards factions against you due to your rank being below expectation

[CyanCatMan]

Originally posted by mutantmuppet:

definitely needs replacing but then I think several things do. Still, for me the worst part of it all is the impact on your vassal's who they start to look more towards factions against you due to your rank being below expectation

"Ah i've been given such a beautiful son, i'm sure he'll make a fine ruler."

The literal child:
"Sorry father but your not cool enough to own these lands you've had your whole life."
"Me and my 5 new born brothers are taking your claims."