1.06 No natural causes of death

[kgkong]

Since patch 1.06, I've actually noticed that generals, admirals, rulers, heirs, and political group leaders, etc, no longer die of natural causes. They can still die in battles, from events, expeditions (though expedition deaths create another bug).

Bit odd. On one hand this makes AI nations to tend to play a more consistent game. They are much better at keeping alliances as rulers don't seem to be replaced (unless in elective governments for the ruler). On the other hand, it makes political groups remain stagnant. They don't have new leaders take charge and direct the the group based on their own traits and such, unless you have an event that forces one to step down.

[Kimlin]

I feel that it was always like this. Not something added in the update. There’s mods that address it.

[ℳɑℵƐɳƮɨɳʊᎦ]

yeah, part of it is a bug but I also think they wanted to try and have a balance between RNG deaths and making sure leaders such as Abraham Lincoln and Queen Victoria don't die in their 30s. Honestly I wish that leaders would switch every decade or so especially in democracies where it was uncommon for leaders to last especially through electoral defeats.

[kgkong]

Originally posted by Kimlin:

I feel that it was always like this. Not something added in the update. There’s mods that address it.

I know there was the ongoing bug with the expedition death, replaced general not being accessible because the UI still shows the old dead general and he's marked as "busy". This was before 1.06.
But really, it's been every game since 1.06 this has happened, and never once before. Before 1.06 all my people died by the age 60 (give or take depending on health traits), or would potentially live longer if I had some form of healthcare.
Definitely gotta be something 1.06 related.

Originally posted by ℳɑℵƐɳƮɨɳʊᎦ:

yeah, part of it is a bug but I also think they wanted to try and have a balance between RNG deaths and making sure leaders such as Abraham Lincoln and Queen Victoria don't die in their 30s. Honestly I wish that leaders would switch every decade or so especially in democracies where it was uncommon for leaders to last especially through electoral defeats.

I feel like this would have been achievable to ensure specific historical figures survived into when they show up, if they just generated new significant political/warfare figures in the pool of available people as their time period approached. To help ensure someone like Queen Victoria doesn't die young, they could have given a health trait to her if she was significantly dying young in most games.

[Zero, Dark Knight]

Sure let's assume it's just bad coding .. but then that means they specifically wanted to tag leaders as 'unable to die until X'

1: what was 'X' originally supposed to be?
2: why would specific leaders be important in an ahistorical game?

It may seem like a moot point to ask, but I think both of those questions, if answered, would reveal a lot about the design philosophy of the devs and the intent behind Victoria 3.

[Kimlin]

This is definitely an issue present since day 1.

https://www.reddit.com/r/victoria3/comments/ydvxdk/immortal_characters/

I do agree it is something they can adjust for and allow key historical figures to live longer and others to have normal life spans.

[kgkong]

Originally posted by Zero, Dark Knight:

Sure let's assume it's just bad coding .. but then that means they specifically wanted to tag leaders as 'unable to die until X'

1: what was 'X' originally supposed to be?
2: why would specific leaders be important in an ahistorical game?

It may seem like a moot point to ask, but I think both of those questions, if answered, would reveal a lot about the design philosophy of the devs and the intent behind Victoria 3.

This is why I think it's more of a bug issue than just a badly made QoL optimization issue myself, I don't expect PDX to totally screw up something so simple. But then again, it's possible that when the patch was made, someone might have slightly overlooked something in the code or engine which resulted in this issue.

[Kimlin]

Originally posted by Zero, Dark Knight:

Sure let's assume it's just bad coding .. but then that means they specifically wanted to tag leaders as 'unable to die until X'

1: what was 'X' originally supposed to be?
2: why would specific leaders be important in an ahistorical game?

It may seem like a moot point to ask, but I think both of those questions, if answered, would reveal a lot about the design philosophy of the devs and the intent behind Victoria 3.

Same reason CK3 cares about historical figures. They are fun and interesting. The game may be ahistorical but it is in a historical setting. It’s not like Stellaris.

[curtadamsCA]

They don't have to make *everybody* live to a 100 (literally) to make sure Victoria makes it to 81. If nothing else, they could make 81 the age everybody makes it to, which would at least be less ridiculous. And it's not that much work to add a MIN_AGE_SURVIVAL trait to leaders, defaulting to 0.

[Many-Named]

Originally posted by Zero, Dark Knight:

Sure let's assume it's just bad coding .. but then that means they specifically wanted to tag leaders as 'unable to die until X'

1: what was 'X' originally supposed to be?
2: why would specific leaders be important in an ahistorical game?

It may seem like a moot point to ask, but I think both of those questions, if answered, would reveal a lot about the design philosophy of the devs and the intent behind Victoria 3.

non-sequitur, really.