Heya everyone! As we move into week 2 of slickness week more videos are on the way - next up are some challenge videos I hope you find interesting. Stay tuned for April 1... something interesting might appear. What CK2 content would y'all like to see in the future? Stay safe everyone!
An honorable mention would be Alfonso VI of Leon, having possibly the highest base intrigue in the game, and has claims he can get from killing his brothers and potentially uniting all of Hispania with old-fashioned reconquest.
Hispania never really existed. Definitely you can't call the Iberian peninsula Hispania. Even charlemagne's marca hispanica is debated amongst historians to have ever existed.
@@herman1francis As someone who has studied history (only a Bachelors' degree, but still, it's a degree) one thing I've learned is that saying something never existed is wording the statement far too strongly. I would say it something more like, "we don't have incontrovertible evidence for Hispania's existence; also, historians haven't figured out more productive things to do than fight over the validity of the scraps of evidence we do have." Lack of known evidence is not the same as actual lack of evidence, even though we usually aren't in a position to know for sure which situation we actually have.
@@benjaminmiddaugh2729 You worded it excellently, thanks for your comment Benjamin. I am myself a Historian and everything you said is reasonable and correct. I usually don't go into this kind of depth on youtube but the point I was trying to get across is that there is no "Hispanic" nation. Spain doesn't form as a naton-state until the constitution of cadiz in 1812 and before that date there were many previous constitutions written like the toledo one or the catalan ones, and yes, there is a document from the XIIth century called constitucions de catalunya, not to be undermined as Aragon as it is well known that aragon was not a single group of people as we could understand a nation being today. TLDR There is no Hispanic nation, and there has never been.
I’d recommend a Viking play through as well. You can have a lot of fun reforming the religion and such. Sometimes I just like collecting artifacts and bloodlines though, and it seems like Christians have access to the largest number of them.
breaking free from the abbasids in the earliest start date and forming the persian empire as a zoroastrian is one of my favorite playthroughs edit: read Alzabo's comment right after i hit reply haha
Correction: boleslav II the bold wasnt the third ruler: It was: Mieszko Boleslaw I the brave Mieszo II Bezprym(only 1 year tho) Kazimierz Boleslaw II the Bold I might have skipped a third mieszko between boleslaw II and Kazimierz, I am not perfect at the polish history, but I am 100% sure Boleslaw II wasnt the third ruler
@@adrian225 Bezprym, as you called him, ruled for 6 years (1034-1040). But Polish historians (my history teacher for example) call him Bolesław. Bolesław the Forgotten. So Bolesław the Bold was the third Bolesław in Polish history. I think that what he meant wasn't about Bolesław the Bold being a third ruler, but a third Bolesław. Fun fact: Bolesław the Forgotten isn't actually counted as a ruler of Poland. History books say that during 6 years of his rule there was a period of interregnum. Why? The only reliable source confirming his existence is currently in the Gniezno Archbishopric archives, in posession of the Catholic Church. Why nobody knows about him then? Because, according to the half-legend about him, he turned back to the Slavic faith and executed bishops residing in his domain. That's why his second nickname was "The Cruel". Releasing information about him would hurt the position of the Church in Poland, since it is said that the baptism was the beginning of a sovereign Poland and then the religion couldn't be separated from the state.
@@adrian225 True he wasn't a third ruler, but he was the third king of Poland. In early medieval polish history being the ruler of Poland and being the king of Poland wasn't one and the same. Back in the day a polish ruler had to be crowned with the approval a Pope or a Holy Roman Emperor otherwise he was just a duke. Being crowned was a big thing and a sign of independence. If a ruler was too weak or felt that it would be better to be subservient to the HRE he wasn't crowned. For example Mieszko II was crowned as a king only to be deposed later. He later came back on the throne, but only as a duke. To sum things up there was no "King is dead. Long live the king" rule. CKII simplifies thing and makes every ruler of Poland a king (fun fact even Bolesław II the Bold wasn't crowned as a king until 1076). Hell even after the assassination of Leszek the White in 1227 when the central authority of the ruler already weakened by the feudal fragmentation was completely dissolved we still have kings in ck ii. To be fair those "kings" were the dukes of Cracow (one of the most important provinces) so its not that out of nowhere.
@@djaevlenselv It's complicated to explain in writing alone, but you were pretty close, thing is, Polish tends to put emphasis on the second syllabel, rather than the first, you basically said *Bo*lesław, rather than Bo*le*sław, but honestly, you weren't that far off. I'm not sure what the OP comment's on about.
Hello. I am here to set up time stamps. Though you may fish around with these timestamps its 100% worth the watch of the while video. 0:52 King Ivar 'The Boneless' 2:24 Sultana Arwa of Yemen 3:54 Utapa Gyalpo Purgyal Lhachen of Maryul 5:23 King Boleslaw II 'The Bold' 6:35 Earl Alfred of Dorset 8:03 Duke Hunoald of Aquitaine 9:31 King Haraldr 'Fairhair' of Norway 11:07 Khan Subtai of Uriankhai 12:39 Sultan Alp Arslan of the Seljuk 14:26 King Dyre 'the Stranger' of Konugardr
Also am I the only one who can't "find" these people? Like I find them but they aren't rulers or anything as they come under family memebers i.e. King Ivar isn't a King but his Brother is?
To add for more interesting rulers: - Saladin al Ayyubid, you can either play him as Emir of Alexandria or Sultan of Egypt with 5 possesions of good traits. - Baybars, founder of the Mamluk Sultanate, rise from the slave, into soldiers, into generals and then become the Sultan while repelling the Mongols with strong trait. Pretty awesome right? -Rodrigo Diaz the Vivar aka El Cid, Count of Valencia. You can either fight the Moors in boring Iberia or escape that situation by joining Crusade and become King of Greece. - Tamerlan a.k.a Timur founder of Timurid Empire, speak for himself. - Raziyya Ghulam, Khatun of Rajastan. Flip into Jain and start producing the heir of the most gigantic yet peaceful Jain Empire.
I agree with Baybars. Man's a fucking beast. And Tamerlane, now that's a world conqueror there, both irl and in-game, and one of the greatest men to have lived.
@@lastword8783 To me, he is the epitome of ambition and making your mark upon the world, regardless of normality and right and whatever moral and legal nonsense that affects any self-respecting monarch. If he wants it, then he will take it, and the world and its mediocre rules can be damned, and cross him, then you, your family, your neighbor, and that tree by your house, will burn. That is respectable and admirable, for he knows that by the end, the one that's staring back at the mirror is himself, not others. He started with nothing, less than a peasant and lower than a slave, yet he died an emperor ruling an expansive and powerful empire, with his enemies dead and destroyed. That makes him a great man, possibly one of the greatest to have ever lived. Destructive? Yes, you have to be to make your mark upon the world, to wrest destiny for yourself. Besides, he destroyed his enemies, so who cares, and no, I could care less about the civilian deaths. He made his mark, he had a great character about him, he lived his life to the fullest, and he remained true to himself till the end of his life. That's what matters. Few could ever live without regrets like him. The only regret I believe he had was that he never got the chance to conquer China, and that's it. He is greatness, especially in regards to utter individual accomplishment, and that makes him far better than Cyrus, Darius, Saladin, Umar Al Khattab, Napoleon, Charlemagne, or any other. The only rulers that can hope to match him would be Nader Shah, Oda Nobunaga, Qin Shi Huang Di, and Julius Caesar. If you want a more in-depth look on this chad level emperor, check out the book Tamerlane: Sword of Islam Conqueror of the World by Justin Marozzi. Its a great and fun read without being too insufferably academic.
@@someorclad9738 These things are all subjective so by your own criteria of greatness, truly he was great. Yet I would wager that what makes men great is not what they did for themselves but what they did for civilization itself. By that measure, I find it strange that you would not mention the grand city of Samarkand or the architecture that Timur patronized but rather the butchery and his indulgence and certainly, excess of it. Violence and power is supposed to be a tool as all great men would see it and not one that should be wielded to simply satisfy our own thirst for it in of itself. All the other men you mentioned transcended (at least cyrus, saladin, umar al khattab who i am more familiar with) their conquests to build a better world than they found where as with Timur, he ended his life on being the proverbial 'king of the ashes' and his capital, a jewel amongst a smoldering world. On that note, they all surpass him and for good reason, they are all remembered more favorably. I also read Marozzi's book and really liked it. I also recommend Harold Lamb's book. It reads more like a novel but I also really enjoyed it.
@@lastword8783 I believe everyone knows about Samarkand and him being a patron of architecture, so I don't think I need to mention it. Its obvious that he was a man of good taste in art, and his descendants the Mughals, more than made him proud. So yeah, no need to mention that. Besides, tales of craft and aesthetics are boring. Lets get to the good stuff. Indeed, violence is a tool, but Tamerlane used it very, very effectively, and unlike most, actually not a sop at using it (no I am forced to do this nonsense) and can actually enjoy himself. What better way to prove your supremacy than by slaughtering everyone else, and ensure that only your palace remain. That's a good way to both build your empire, and denying anyone else a chance to rise. It is indeed a jewel in a smoldering world, and that's a good thing to me. The jewel is his empire, and the smoldering world is everyone else, and when all is said and done, its your people and yourself that matters, not others. Such audacity and will is astounding, and I doubt even someone as impeccable as Umar or Trajan would dare such a thing. Besides, most of those killed by him are his enemies or rebels, so who cares. I like his indulgence. He knows what he wants, and gets what he wants. No need for bullshit like right and law and stuff. His character is that of a force of nature, and till the end of his life, he is true to his desires. That is respectable, as he, unlike most rulers, can proudly view himself as he is, not some construct by the needs of his kingdom or people or insert heroic nonsense here. With Tamerlane, he is himself. With others, I cannot tell whether you're acting on your own behalf or that of others. Granted this great man is not always so independent, but compared to others, Tamerlane is not just another automata. Plus, damn he's got a lot of waifus. As a man, now that's a fucking achievement, especially when one of your legs is fucked. I can say for certain that had 2B, Tanya, Touka, Maho Nishizumi, Kino, Sophitia, Erza, and Saber and all of them fine waifus exist in our world, he would have no trouble charming and acquiring them all. Now that's thad level domination right there. Perhaps their conquests did build a better world (Cyrus without a question), but were they their own men by the end of the day? Were they true to their desires? Were they really self-made men? Tamerlane cared not for a better world, since why build it when you can batter that selfish entity it into bloody submission, then shape it to your own perfect vision. And Tamerlane cared not for building that flimsy utopia, since it is better to build yourself up, to rise above the dregs of your station and reach as far as you can go. Like I said, he began with nothing, a horse thief and the lowest of the low, yet he died an emperor, above all and everything, enemies grounded to ash and ruin while his empire the only worthy jewel worth witnessing. That to me is far more superior than building a better world. He build, conquered, and did everything for himself, for his ambition, and for his desires. This makes him greater than most rulers. Tamerlane was his own man, instead of some extension of the state or representation of his empire. Why would you want to build for civilization and others, when you can prop up your own palace, satiate your own desires, achieve anything you want, reach the highest hierarchy of power, and be yourself. Doing things for others, trampling your own wants in the process, is the act of a weakling and a dishonest man. Doing things for yourself and achieving things for yourself and your comrades and loved ones, now that's greatness. Heroism is foolishness. Indulgence is proper. You're the one that's looking back at the mirror by the end of the day, not civilization or others. So who cares. So in short, yes. Tamerlane is greater than Cyrus, Umar, Augustus, or any of those world makers. What matters more to me is being your own man and staying true to what you want and your desires, instead of some overly lofty and moral goal that's just insufferably boring to comprehend. Solidarity is key to greatness, not any of that utilitarian drawl. Being a hero can be a pretty alright read, but being your own man makes an awesomely great read. Tamerlane is essentially a rugged Griffith, but no treachery to his comrades. Anyway, thanks for the book mention, I'll check it out. Edit: Some spellings and additions.
looking at Ivar's wiki page shows that he may have been known as "the hated" or exosus in latin and a medieval scribe with basic knowledge may have mistaken it for ex (without) os (bone) giving the name boneless, or he just had weak bones
I agree, it was tough since Dyre has better stats and I've already included 3 norse characters. Maybe he would have been better than Ivar to be included :shrug:
@@tada-kun982 His wife is Bjorn Ironside's daughter, you can get the alliance for the asking and are also eligible to get at least NAPs with the other sons of Ragnar (depending on the random traits some may require a little schmoozing to approve).
Congrats, you’re one of the few anglophone paradoxians who don’t make my ears hurt by butchering any language he sees! Even your polish is comprehensible and surprisingly good for someone who just learned a few phrases
Lol I'm sure if any Tibetan heard this video they would be happy for the attempt, that pronunciation was completely improvised. How do you pronounce Piety?
@@AlzaboHD no worries! Your videos are super entertaining in spite of your occasional oopsies. You have a narrating gift and I'm glad I've run into your channel!
No wonder Sabotai is OP, his IRL counterpart was the most possibly the one of the greatest, if not the greatest, general to live before gunpowder was invented.
@@AlzaboHD Temujin himself relied alot to him as one of the 4 great generals of the Mongols. His vows to the Khan was simple yet so deep: "I will repel all your enemies, like a cloth repel the winds" One of the reason Mongol Empires declined, was his death too, as a siege leader, genius tactician, inventor of "quick building bridge" to capture enemy stronghold from behind, and using early tech gunpowder from China to siege the European strongholds. Truly one of a kind general, on par with the modern Von Clausewitz.
@@@AlzaboHD There is a trilogy of novels about the Mongols I recommend called "Conqueror", written by Conn Iggulden. He also has a series about Caesar and one about the War of the Roses, all excellent.
@@AlzaboHD Every day, the 'pain au chocolat' opressors attack without any reason the 'chocolatine' team. France had Religion Wars a few centuries ago, now it's Bakery Wars.
Personally speaking arpad almos of the magyars or whatever his name was was a really interesting king to play as. You start off with a mini death horde and when you beat Bulgaria you get a bloodline and some MORE death hordes. And interestingly enough your son is already a hero of the Eagle warriors, making it extremely easy to get ANOTHER bloodline and a bunch of prestige. Plus the feature that let's you appoint your sons to assemble mercenary companies is pretty cool, although not inherently overpowered as you don't get a discount for employing them. It's also cool that you can either conquer all of the balkans and pillage the great city of constantinople, adding to more roleplay value. Or you could reform the tengri religion and become the new first genghis khan, before he shows up later on. Another also interesting character to play is dyre the stranger.
In my experience, these genetic traits are a negative thing to start with since having one gives me about a 90% chance of getting Slow or Imbecile heirs.
You can see devs really love history, because you have wikipedia links in the game to actual rulers. As a person who is obsessed with history I absolutely love that little feature. I hope they kept it in CK3.
A little mistake, this polish king is Bolesław II The Bold, he is not the first historical king of Poland ( as even the number suggests xD ). First king was Bolesław the Brave, same guy who is shown in the Piast bloodline.
Your boy Hasteinn in Brittanny over at the Viking Age start is fucking badass. High martial, small event spawn army, prime spot for Britanny kingdom formation.
You should do top 10 most interesting starts of each of the three major start dates (769, 867, 1066)... I know there might be some overlap. But I think that would be a cool way to organize it for plebians like me... Thanks for all your awesome content!!
@@alanjacker1374 I mean like there would be some of the top 10 powerful kings also featured in top 10 interesting starting characters in the different dates. Not like across the start dates lol
Quite an interesting video, but the number #1 spot has a slight mistake. Subjugation isn't the best CB, that would be invasion, as it not only allows you to take the targeted title, but also every piece of land you occupy that belongs to the ruler being invaded. Say you invade the kingdom of England, and that the king also holds Scottish lands - with an invasion CB, you are able to occupy any of the Scottish holdings and conquer them along with the kingdom of England. Not just that, but you also aren't limited by the one-time use gimmick of a subjugation CB, seeing as invasion CBs can be used as many times as you want. This is what makes nomads so powerful.
@@trentn1127 Messalian is interesting because it's Christian with Divine Marriages and Yazidi - Islam (in game mechanics) with excommunications. I want more examples like that :)
10:44 a cheesy tactic that I found while playing was to declare war on every single country possible in norway de jure. Then siege every single land with a death stack, instant 100% to every single country as long as you siege the land. Then you make peace and get the land as vassal. Then keep sieging. The deathstack you start with will make the ai not attack you and you can just siege every single one since they all are in seperate war.
Another great pick for practically guaranteed success is Sigurdr the ring from the earliest start date. He starts with reasonable stats and high marshal and his son is Ragnarr Lodbrok who gets the strong and brawny traits when he comes of age. Plus despite the nation to the south of you having twice as much land their ruler is almost always incompetent my first move is to declare war on him and suddenly you can form Sweden. Vassalize everyone in your de jure domain because they will say yes. Then the counts of Norway should say yes when asked because you're powerful, of the same culture and religion. Subjugate the Danes and your able to reform your religion and are halfway to forming the empire of Scandinavian or just forming your own empire. You can do all of this in 20-30 in game years.
1:49 that achievement is a little harder than that - you have to conquer somewhere in northern France or Brittany first to pick up the Norman culture, then conquer England to pick up the English culture after 1100
There are many ruler I don't know that very strong. I mean Laszlo from Magyar is quite strong on Hungarian conquest event and wasn't included on the list. Thanks for the info and nice vid 👍
I was actually surprised to see a character named Dyre. In history there was no such person, but there were two brothers, Askold and Dyre, who ruled in Kiev, by Russian Chonicles. Paradox, apparently, have decided to combine them into one OP guy 😂
I haven't tried him recently, but Haesteinn of Nantes in 867 used to be the OP versatile choice. He's a feudal unreformed Norse, which is already incredibly powerful, and he also has IIRC Genius, 1500ish event troops, and enough prestige to prepare an invasion of anywhere from the start. Simple players will use this to invade France, but you can also drive into Mauretania for the Norse Ummah, or invade the Abbasids and form the Norse-Jewish raiding state of Israel. The sky's the limit with Haesteinn.
Even though Sigurdr Ring was mentioned before he should still be nr.1 since you can form scandinavia and reform Germanic within less than 50yrs of the game. Or just wait until year 800 and Invade Charlemagne and steal most of his empire via that broken CB.
Hey AlzaboHD, what steam workshop mods are you using? Idk what it is about it, but the graphical mods make the world look so much more vast and I love that.
If you have Charlemagne's expansion choose Sigurd Ring, Rangnar Lodbroks father, you can take Denmakr, Norawy, Sweden and even Saxony in less that 4 years
Alzabo, you should do a video on surprisingly challenging rulers in CK2 and countries in EUIV that look like they would be powerful or easy, but turn out to be weak and provide challenging playthroughs.
Not sure if you're still playing this amazing game, but I have a challenge for you that I have enjoyed a lot myself. Start as a French count or Duke in the earliest start and scheme the last Merovingian onto the throne of France. Then have him or his offspring form the Angevin empire while you scheme and fight on his usually fairly inept behalf. The AI isn't very good at noticing precisely who is helping it like this though, so it won't always cooperate. I once had Theoderic arrest me and burn my wife at the stake, causing him to lose a critical war and be beheaded. If you haven't tried this before, prepare to restart the game a lot. Particularly hard to get Carloman to live long enough to forcibly overthrow him. If Charlemagne takes the whole thing it gets much harder to overthrow him, and he inherits when his brother dies so...
Where's Rurik? Quick, lots of gold, has bloodline, has 40 free ships. Sits on slavic AND finnish holy sites. NAP with king of sweden. Something like 23 martial. Helgi is hardcoded to belong to the sons of Perun and when you die he will be its leader. Everything that's true for Ivar applies to Rurik tenfold. I reformed Romuva, Suomenusko, Slav, Germanic in one or two lifetimes by using germanic sea conquests and subjugations.
Great video, King Kazimierz the Great is also a great pick, it's fun to restore Poland back to its former glory. Btw what's the map mod you're using, it looks better than vanilla
heres an interresting funfact about subutai. He was never beat. Hes the ONLY general, that was never beat. He just stopped pushing. As stupid as that sounds, nobody really knows why. Hes an absolute monster, if you think that hes a badass ingame, read up on him in real life. and then give him a bloodline
Heya everyone! As we move into week 2 of slickness week more videos are on the way - next up are some challenge videos I hope you find interesting. Stay tuned for April 1... something interesting might appear. What CK2 content would y'all like to see in the future? Stay safe everyone!
Thank you for all the content. Really helping me get through these weeks of boredom.
AlzaboHD IT’S CHOCOLATINE
I would like to see your review on global mods like "The Witcher Kings" or "Guardians of Azeroth". They are really worth playing
i would like to see a kolguyev challenge. which is a northern russian island with basically no income and 2 months of raising ships can bankrupt you.
top 10 best heirs in CK2?
I’m impressed Ivar can conquer half of Britain without a skeleton...
Or the mystery of how he has so many children :thinking emoji:
@@AlzaboHD ofcourse he was a pro at banging
@@AlzaboHD Thats why he is called Ivar the BONERLESS
Ivar confirmed to be a secret octopus!
labrynianrebel did you know that one of an octopuses 8 tentacles also acts as a penis?
An honorable mention would be Alfonso VI of Leon, having possibly the highest base intrigue in the game, and has claims he can get from killing his brothers and potentially uniting all of Hispania with old-fashioned reconquest.
I didnt know about this, will definitely check it out. Thank you!
Ah yes, the tutorial lord, also my first character to create a true empire with, he really is a beast
Hispania never really existed. Definitely you can't call the Iberian peninsula Hispania. Even charlemagne's marca hispanica is debated amongst historians to have ever existed.
@@herman1francis As someone who has studied history (only a Bachelors' degree, but still, it's a degree) one thing I've learned is that saying something never existed is wording the statement far too strongly. I would say it something more like, "we don't have incontrovertible evidence for Hispania's existence; also, historians haven't figured out more productive things to do than fight over the validity of the scraps of evidence we do have." Lack of known evidence is not the same as actual lack of evidence, even though we usually aren't in a position to know for sure which situation we actually have.
@@benjaminmiddaugh2729 You worded it excellently, thanks for your comment Benjamin. I am myself a Historian and everything you said is reasonable and correct. I usually don't go into this kind of depth on youtube but the point I was trying to get across is that there is no "Hispanic" nation. Spain doesn't form as a naton-state until the constitution of cadiz in 1812 and before that date there were many previous constitutions written like the toledo one or the catalan ones, and yes, there is a document from the XIIth century called constitucions de catalunya, not to be undermined as Aragon as it is well known that aragon was not a single group of people as we could understand a nation being today. TLDR There is no Hispanic nation, and there has never been.
Man what a great game, I just formed the Empire of Hispania. 400 hours in I think I'm going to do a run as a Persian vassal. Wives ahoy.
I strongly recommend a Zoroastrian run, making the Saoshyant was one of my favorite campaigns
I’d recommend a Viking play through as well. You can have a lot of fun reforming the religion and such. Sometimes I just like collecting artifacts and bloodlines though, and it seems like Christians have access to the largest number of them.
@@AlzaboHD Excellent, thank you!
breaking free from the abbasids in the earliest start date and forming the persian empire as a zoroastrian is one of my favorite playthroughs
edit: read Alzabo's comment right after i hit reply haha
Play as a zoroastrian because it allows you to do incest.
You've confused Bolesław I the Brave - first king of Poland with the third king of Poland rulling in 1066 Bolesław II the Bold. Otherwise great job
that was a big whoopsie moment, thanks for letting me know!
@@AlzaboHD I have to say, I've fallen in love with your Polish. You're nailing it. Really appreciated.
Correction: boleslav II the bold wasnt the third ruler:
It was:
Mieszko
Boleslaw I the brave
Mieszo II
Bezprym(only 1 year tho)
Kazimierz
Boleslaw II the Bold
I might have skipped a third mieszko between boleslaw II and Kazimierz, I am not perfect at the polish history, but I am 100% sure Boleslaw II wasnt the third ruler
@@adrian225 Bezprym, as you called him, ruled for 6 years (1034-1040). But Polish historians (my history teacher for example) call him Bolesław. Bolesław the Forgotten. So Bolesław the Bold was the third Bolesław in Polish history. I think that what he meant wasn't about Bolesław the Bold being a third ruler, but a third Bolesław.
Fun fact: Bolesław the Forgotten isn't actually counted as a ruler of Poland. History books say that during 6 years of his rule there was a period of interregnum. Why? The only reliable source confirming his existence is currently in the Gniezno Archbishopric archives, in posession of the Catholic Church. Why nobody knows about him then? Because, according to the half-legend about him, he turned back to the Slavic faith and executed bishops residing in his domain. That's why his second nickname was "The Cruel". Releasing information about him would hurt the position of the Church in Poland, since it is said that the baptism was the beginning of a sovereign Poland and then the religion couldn't be separated from the state.
@@adrian225 True he wasn't a third ruler, but he was the third king of Poland. In early medieval polish history being the ruler of Poland and being the king of Poland wasn't one and the same. Back in the day a polish ruler had to be crowned with the approval a Pope or a Holy Roman Emperor otherwise he was just a duke. Being crowned was a big thing and a sign of independence. If a ruler was too weak or felt that it would be better to be subservient to the HRE he wasn't crowned. For example Mieszko II was crowned as a king only to be deposed later. He later came back on the throne, but only as a duke. To sum things up there was no "King is dead. Long live the king" rule.
CKII simplifies thing and makes every ruler of Poland a king (fun fact even Bolesław II the Bold wasn't crowned as a king until 1076). Hell even after the assassination of Leszek the White in 1227 when the central authority of the ruler already weakened by the feudal fragmentation was completely dissolved we still have kings in ck ii. To be fair those "kings" were the dukes of Cracow (one of the most important provinces) so its not that out of nowhere.
Says beer in polish: nails the pronounciation.
Says Boleslav's name: oh god why.
I think we can see where your interests truly lie.
"proszę jeden piwo" was the expression I learned first before visiting Poland lol
@@AlzaboHD Well, *akshuallly*, it's "Jedno piwo", because Polish needed to be more confusing.
How _is_ Bolesław pronounced? I've always had trouble figuring out those Slavic pronunciations.
@@djaevlenselv It's complicated to explain in writing alone, but you were pretty close, thing is, Polish tends to put emphasis on the second syllabel, rather than the first, you basically said *Bo*lesław, rather than Bo*le*sław, but honestly, you weren't that far off. I'm not sure what the OP comment's on about.
1:33 "And speaking of raiding..."
Oh no, please not Raid Shadow Legends
And now a word from our sponsor, Raid Shadow Legends
It made me tense up. With how much work he puts into his scripts I guarantee you, that he did it on purpose...
Hello. I am here to set up time stamps. Though you may fish around with these timestamps its 100% worth the watch of the while video.
0:52 King Ivar 'The Boneless'
2:24 Sultana Arwa of Yemen
3:54 Utapa Gyalpo Purgyal Lhachen of Maryul
5:23 King Boleslaw II 'The Bold'
6:35 Earl Alfred of Dorset
8:03 Duke Hunoald of Aquitaine
9:31 King Haraldr 'Fairhair' of Norway
11:07 Khan Subtai of Uriankhai
12:39 Sultan Alp Arslan of the Seljuk
14:26 King Dyre 'the Stranger' of Konugardr
Also am I the only one who can't "find" these people? Like I find them but they aren't rulers or anything as they come under family memebers i.e. King Ivar isn't a King but his Brother is?
@@birphon You are just a loser! Nobody used your time stamps and you cannot find the rulers.
@@attorneyinvestor3941 Calm down sis.
To add for more interesting rulers:
- Saladin al Ayyubid, you can either play him as Emir of Alexandria or Sultan of Egypt with 5 possesions of good traits.
- Baybars, founder of the Mamluk Sultanate, rise from the slave, into soldiers, into generals and then become the Sultan while repelling the Mongols with strong trait. Pretty awesome right?
-Rodrigo Diaz the Vivar aka El Cid, Count of Valencia. You can either fight the Moors in boring Iberia or escape that situation by joining Crusade and become King of Greece.
- Tamerlan a.k.a Timur founder of Timurid Empire, speak for himself.
- Raziyya Ghulam, Khatun of Rajastan. Flip into Jain and start producing the heir of the most gigantic yet peaceful Jain Empire.
I agree with Baybars. Man's a fucking beast. And Tamerlane, now that's a world conqueror there, both irl and in-game, and one of the greatest men to have lived.
@@someorclad9738 I am not sure if Timur can be described as a 'great man'. Too destructive in my opinion.
@@lastword8783 To me, he is the epitome of ambition and making your mark upon the world, regardless of normality and right and whatever moral and legal nonsense that affects any self-respecting monarch. If he wants it, then he will take it, and the world and its mediocre rules can be damned, and cross him, then you, your family, your neighbor, and that tree by your house, will burn. That is respectable and admirable, for he knows that by the end, the one that's staring back at the mirror is himself, not others.
He started with nothing, less than a peasant and lower than a slave, yet he died an emperor ruling an expansive and powerful empire, with his enemies dead and destroyed. That makes him a great man, possibly one of the greatest to have ever lived. Destructive? Yes, you have to be to make your mark upon the world, to wrest destiny for yourself. Besides, he destroyed his enemies, so who cares, and no, I could care less about the civilian deaths. He made his mark, he had a great character about him, he lived his life to the fullest, and he remained true to himself till the end of his life. That's what matters. Few could ever live without regrets like him. The only regret I believe he had was that he never got the chance to conquer China, and that's it. He is greatness, especially in regards to utter individual accomplishment, and that makes him far better than Cyrus, Darius, Saladin, Umar Al Khattab, Napoleon, Charlemagne, or any other. The only rulers that can hope to match him would be Nader Shah, Oda Nobunaga, Qin Shi Huang Di, and Julius Caesar.
If you want a more in-depth look on this chad level emperor, check out the book Tamerlane: Sword of Islam Conqueror of the World by Justin Marozzi. Its a great and fun read without being too insufferably academic.
@@someorclad9738 These things are all subjective so by your own criteria of greatness, truly he was great. Yet I would wager that what makes men great is not what they did for themselves but what they did for civilization itself. By that measure, I find it strange that you would not mention the grand city of Samarkand or the architecture that Timur patronized but rather the butchery and his indulgence and certainly, excess of it. Violence and power is supposed to be a tool as all great men would see it and not one that should be wielded to simply satisfy our own thirst for it in of itself. All the other men you mentioned transcended (at least cyrus, saladin, umar al khattab who i am more familiar with) their conquests to build a better world than they found where as with Timur, he ended his life on being the proverbial 'king of the ashes' and his capital, a jewel amongst a smoldering world. On that note, they all surpass him and for good reason, they are all remembered more favorably. I also read Marozzi's book and really liked it. I also recommend Harold Lamb's book. It reads more like a novel but I also really enjoyed it.
@@lastword8783 I believe everyone knows about Samarkand and him being a patron of architecture, so I don't think I need to mention it. Its obvious that he was a man of good taste in art, and his descendants the Mughals, more than made him proud. So yeah, no need to mention that. Besides, tales of craft and aesthetics are boring. Lets get to the good stuff.
Indeed, violence is a tool, but Tamerlane used it very, very effectively, and unlike most, actually not a sop at using it (no I am forced to do this nonsense) and can actually enjoy himself. What better way to prove your supremacy than by slaughtering everyone else, and ensure that only your palace remain. That's a good way to both build your empire, and denying anyone else a chance to rise. It is indeed a jewel in a smoldering world, and that's a good thing to me. The jewel is his empire, and the smoldering world is everyone else, and when all is said and done, its your people and yourself that matters, not others. Such audacity and will is astounding, and I doubt even someone as impeccable as Umar or Trajan would dare such a thing. Besides, most of those killed by him are his enemies or rebels, so who cares.
I like his indulgence. He knows what he wants, and gets what he wants. No need for bullshit like right and law and stuff. His character is that of a force of nature, and till the end of his life, he is true to his desires. That is respectable, as he, unlike most rulers, can proudly view himself as he is, not some construct by the needs of his kingdom or people or insert heroic nonsense here. With Tamerlane, he is himself. With others, I cannot tell whether you're acting on your own behalf or that of others. Granted this great man is not always so independent, but compared to others, Tamerlane is not just another automata. Plus, damn he's got a lot of waifus. As a man, now that's a fucking achievement, especially when one of your legs is fucked. I can say for certain that had 2B, Tanya, Touka, Maho Nishizumi, Kino, Sophitia, Erza, and Saber and all of them fine waifus exist in our world, he would have no trouble charming and acquiring them all. Now that's thad level domination right there.
Perhaps their conquests did build a better world (Cyrus without a question), but were they their own men by the end of the day? Were they true to their desires? Were they really self-made men? Tamerlane cared not for a better world, since why build it when you can batter that selfish entity it into bloody submission, then shape it to your own perfect vision. And Tamerlane cared not for building that flimsy utopia, since it is better to build yourself up, to rise above the dregs of your station and reach as far as you can go. Like I said, he began with nothing, a horse thief and the lowest of the low, yet he died an emperor, above all and everything, enemies grounded to ash and ruin while his empire the only worthy jewel worth witnessing. That to me is far more superior than building a better world. He build, conquered, and did everything for himself, for his ambition, and for his desires. This makes him greater than most rulers. Tamerlane was his own man, instead of some extension of the state or representation of his empire. Why would you want to build for civilization and others, when you can prop up your own palace, satiate your own desires, achieve anything you want, reach the highest hierarchy of power, and be yourself. Doing things for others, trampling your own wants in the process, is the act of a weakling and a dishonest man. Doing things for yourself and achieving things for yourself and your comrades and loved ones, now that's greatness. Heroism is foolishness. Indulgence is proper. You're the one that's looking back at the mirror by the end of the day, not civilization or others. So who cares.
So in short, yes. Tamerlane is greater than Cyrus, Umar, Augustus, or any of those world makers. What matters more to me is being your own man and staying true to what you want and your desires, instead of some overly lofty and moral goal that's just insufferably boring to comprehend. Solidarity is key to greatness, not any of that utilitarian drawl. Being a hero can be a pretty alright read, but being your own man makes an awesomely great read. Tamerlane is essentially a rugged Griffith, but no treachery to his comrades. Anyway, thanks for the book mention, I'll check it out.
Edit: Some spellings and additions.
"free to play" DONT FALL FOR IT GUYS
Chunky Chew yeah you need dlc and alot of it(although you can get all the dlc free online)
paradox giving the game and some dlc for free is like drug dealers' "the first one is free"
unocualqu1era because the game is as good as crack
Only one of these characters is playable without DLC. Kind of ironic that he'd advertise the game being free in this video
You could always just play with people who have the DLC already? Contrary to popular belief, multiplayer for this game is still very much a thing.
Please tell me I'm not the only one who thought this was an Isorrowproductions video just because of the Ironside intro
I know right? I thought this was an ISP video
lol fuck, same here lol
you're all men of culture
looking at Ivar's wiki page shows that he may have been known as "the hated" or exosus in latin and a medieval scribe with basic knowledge may have mistaken it for ex (without) os (bone) giving the name boneless, or he just had weak bones
I think Rurik should have been on the list, he has 53 combat skill as shown and 27 martial
I agree, it was tough since Dyre has better stats and I've already included 3 norse characters. Maybe he would have been better than Ivar to be included :shrug:
@@AlzaboHD i like playing as rurik, he has some slav-related events
@@tada-kun982 He also has that useful alliance to the Swedish dude.
@@brianbates212 he does? Btw marry into ragnarr lodbroks dynasty, instant alliance with 5 strong vikings
@@tada-kun982 His wife is Bjorn Ironside's daughter, you can get the alliance for the asking and are also eligible to get at least NAPs with the other sons of Ragnar (depending on the random traits some may require a little schmoozing to approve).
"CK2 is free to play on Steam"
Only one of the characters is playable without DLC...
That's overexaggerated
You mean one feature
You're just stuck playing a Christian
@@anthonyreynolds1995 the islamdlc was free awhile back
@@greekcommie621 I bought the game like 4 years ago when it wasnt free lmao
@@anthonyreynolds1995 oof
Congrats, you’re one of the few anglophone paradoxians who don’t make my ears hurt by butchering any language he sees! Even your polish is comprehensible and surprisingly good for someone who just learned a few phrases
Thank you, my job is to mispronounce English not the more cultured languages of Europe!
@@AlzaboHD your polish is on par with Taureors tries with German :3
I could listen to your voice all day long
Alzabo: Knows how to properly pronounce "Gyalpo Purgyal Lhachen VI"
Also Alzabo: Doesn't know how to properly pronounce "Piety"
Lol I'm sure if any Tibetan heard this video they would be happy for the attempt, that pronunciation was completely improvised. How do you pronounce Piety?
@@AlzaboHD Pie-Uhh-Tea sounds like a good treat
Bolesław I was the first king of Poland. This is Bolesław II.
Dziekuje for the correction! I don't know much about Poland's history
Also, it's quite ironic how he is perceived as a strong character in the game, as he ended up in exile IRL.
@@AlzaboHD no worries! Your videos are super entertaining in spite of your occasional oopsies. You have a narrating gift and I'm glad I've run into your channel!
Correction: Bolesław I was the SECOND ruler of polska, Bolesław II would be the 6/7 th ruler
I'm from Poland and you truly warmed my heart with your Polish. Wasn't expecting that and I love it as much as your great video 💚
No wonder Sabotai is OP, his IRL counterpart was the most possibly the one of the greatest, if not the greatest, general to live before gunpowder was invented.
I'm going to read more about him that sounds interesting, thanks!
@@AlzaboHD Temujin himself relied alot to him as one of the 4 great generals of the Mongols.
His vows to the Khan was simple yet so deep:
"I will repel all your enemies, like a cloth repel the winds"
One of the reason Mongol Empires declined, was his death too, as a siege leader, genius tactician, inventor of "quick building bridge" to capture enemy stronghold from behind, and using early tech gunpowder from China to siege the European strongholds.
Truly one of a kind general, on par with the modern Von Clausewitz.
Илиан Тодоров I think gunpowder was already invented before the mongol conquest and Subutai
A guy who rose from being a simple commoner to casually conquering Eastern Europe while on a scouting trip.
@@@AlzaboHD There is a trilogy of novels about the Mongols I recommend called "Conqueror", written by Conn Iggulden. He also has a series about Caesar and one about the War of the Roses, all excellent.
9:27 as a French guy I must say that I've laughed super hard.
A victory for team pain au chocolat
Gotta say you caugth me off-guard with this one
Carrément ! :D
@@AlzaboHD Every day, the 'pain au chocolat' opressors attack without any reason the 'chocolatine' team. France had Religion Wars a few centuries ago, now it's Bakery Wars.
@@AlzaboHD the only team there is
Personally speaking arpad almos of the magyars or whatever his name was was a really interesting king to play as. You start off with a mini death horde and when you beat Bulgaria you get a bloodline and some MORE death hordes. And interestingly enough your son is already a hero of the Eagle warriors, making it extremely easy to get ANOTHER bloodline and a bunch of prestige. Plus the feature that let's you appoint your sons to assemble mercenary companies is pretty cool, although not inherently overpowered as you don't get a discount for employing them. It's also cool that you can either conquer all of the balkans and pillage the great city of constantinople, adding to more roleplay value. Or you could reform the tengri religion and become the new first genghis khan, before he shows up later on. Another also interesting character to play is dyre the stranger.
9:26 Mon bon sieur, on dit Chocolatine !
Anyway, this Himalayan guy seems interesting for a campaign, thanks for the idea !
Mon dieu, t'es sudiste de la cote hérétique?
AlzaboHD Disons que j’ai quelques familiarités avec l’Aquitaine et le Poitou vil nordiste !
@@AlzaboHD De la part d'un Poitevin, je dis Chocolatine. Mes oreilles saignent à chaque fois qu'un gars dit Pain au chocolat...
@@Nuketown458 alors ca fait du bien pour toi qu'on apprend le mot "pain au chocolat" a l'ecole aux states ; - )
Vive le VRAI sud, vive la Provence et vive les pains au chocolats!
In my experience, these genetic traits are a negative thing to start with since having one gives me about a 90% chance of getting Slow or Imbecile heirs.
You can see devs really love history, because you have wikipedia links in the game to actual rulers. As a person who is obsessed with history I absolutely love that little feature. I hope they kept it in CK3.
A little mistake, this polish king is Bolesław II The Bold, he is not the first historical king of Poland ( as even the number suggests xD ). First king was Bolesław the Brave, same guy who is shown in the Piast bloodline.
Your boy Hasteinn in Brittanny over at the Viking Age start is fucking badass.
High martial, small event spawn army, prime spot for Britanny kingdom formation.
My boy Bolesław finally getting some recognition
You should do top 10 most interesting starts of each of the three major start dates (769, 867, 1066)... I know there might be some overlap. But I think that would be a cool way to organize it for plebians like me... Thanks for all your awesome content!!
Who the fuck would overlap?
@@alanjacker1374 I mean like there would be some of the top 10 powerful kings also featured in top 10 interesting starting characters in the different dates. Not like across the start dates lol
@@deanbphillips ahh i see
14:15 Can't I just uninstall the Jade Dragon to get read of the plague?
I think so, now if only we can uninstall the ccp DLC irl am I right
@@AlzaboHD china delenda est
Thanks for the video man, provided much solace in a difficult time
There better be the Magyar Arpad king from the 867 start date and Rurik or some shit on this list 👊😤
Almos n Arpad are quite the strongest starts in ck2.
Quite an interesting video, but the number #1 spot has a slight mistake. Subjugation isn't the best CB, that would be invasion, as it not only allows you to take the targeted title, but also every piece of land you occupy that belongs to the ruler being invaded.
Say you invade the kingdom of England, and that the king also holds Scottish lands - with an invasion CB, you are able to occupy any of the Scottish holdings and conquer them along with the kingdom of England. Not just that, but you also aren't limited by the one-time use gimmick of a subjugation CB, seeing as invasion CBs can be used as many times as you want. This is what makes nomads so powerful.
Love all the uploads!
Would love to see more guide videos! For EU4 but also like CK2
As a history student from poland I can agree with piast piwo part
12:50 fun fact Alp means brave and arslan means lion.
Which language?
@@shashwatsinha2704 Turkish
@@AhmetCanE99 Ok, great. There is an eatery chain in my city(Kolkata) by the name of Arsalan.
10 most interesting religions (including heresies) in ck2. I mean mechanically not according to a doctrine :)
1) Catholic
2) Norse pagan
3)Sunni and Shia Islam
4)Tengri
5)Zoroastrian
Everything else is boring and generic
Norse
Catholic
Everything else
Heresies
Norse and Catholic are the only two fleshed out religions in the game and heresies are a total afterthought.
@@trentn1127 Messalian is interesting because it's Christian with Divine Marriages and Yazidi - Islam (in game mechanics) with excommunications. I want more examples like that :)
@@MS-Melas oh God, Hellenic being unteformed pagan, combined with the location of mostly Orthodox is OP
@@MS-Melas Never played it, looks interesting
More CK 2 please !
3 out of 10 are Vikings in 867 start date... bias much by the company? Oh yea the game is made by Swedish people LUL
10:44 a cheesy tactic that I found while playing was to declare war on every single country possible in norway de jure. Then siege every single land with a death stack, instant 100% to every single country as long as you siege the land. Then you make peace and get the land as vassal. Then keep sieging. The deathstack you start with will make the ai not attack you and you can just siege every single one since they all are in seperate war.
I thought ivar was called "the boneless" because he had a very weak skeleton and had to be carried around and such
Jonathan Simms we don't actually know why both are possible
The only good thing about the pandemic is all the new Alzabo content
Another great pick for practically guaranteed success is Sigurdr the ring from the earliest start date. He starts with reasonable stats and high marshal and his son is Ragnarr Lodbrok who gets the strong and brawny traits when he comes of age. Plus despite the nation to the south of you having twice as much land their ruler is almost always incompetent my first move is to declare war on him and suddenly you can form Sweden. Vassalize everyone in your de jure domain because they will say yes. Then the counts of Norway should say yes when asked because you're powerful, of the same culture and religion. Subjugate the Danes and your able to reform your religion and are halfway to forming the empire of Scandinavian or just forming your own empire. You can do all of this in 20-30 in game years.
Alzabo: says number 1 is dyre of Kiev
Me: *laughs in count haesteinn*
Oh my god, that part with buying the Piast beer in Biedronka caught me off guard :D
I spent my time in Poland wisely as you can see lol
1:49 that achievement is a little harder than that - you have to conquer somewhere in northern France or Brittany first to pick up the Norman culture, then conquer England to pick up the English culture after 1100
There are many ruler I don't know that very strong. I mean Laszlo from Magyar is quite strong on Hungarian conquest event and wasn't included on the list. Thanks for the info and nice vid 👍
Still supposed to post this on reddit but my man Kazimierz was still kicking ass and taking names at the age of 70
This video and the commentary is too good. 10/10 well done.
The fact that you made this chocolatine vs pain au chocolat reference was a surprise to be sure, but a godamn welcome one!
I was actually surprised to see a character named Dyre. In history there was no such person, but there were two brothers, Askold and Dyre, who ruled in Kiev, by Russian Chonicles.
Paradox, apparently, have decided to combine them into one OP guy 😂
he is also Halfdan Ragnarsson’s bastard child, ironically he is better than all of Halfdan’s children in 867
I haven't tried him recently, but Haesteinn of Nantes in 867 used to be the OP versatile choice. He's a feudal unreformed Norse, which is already incredibly powerful, and he also has IIRC Genius, 1500ish event troops, and enough prestige to prepare an invasion of anywhere from the start. Simple players will use this to invade France, but you can also drive into Mauretania for the Norse Ummah, or invade the Abbasids and form the Norse-Jewish raiding state of Israel. The sky's the limit with Haesteinn.
Yes. This x1000
Even though Sigurdr Ring was mentioned before he should still be nr.1 since you can form scandinavia and reform Germanic within less than 50yrs of the game.
Or just wait until year 800 and Invade Charlemagne and steal most of his empire via that broken CB.
Piwo in Biedronka ( , due to spread of pandemic I had to return to my country, missing Poland so much .Great job
I spat out my tea when you said "cucking counts"
I can't wait to chug on some Piast while playing as Bolesław the Bold after doing my shopping at Biedronka. Can't be more Polish than that xD
Alzabo, your voice and your knowledge of langagues is so awersome o_o
Please do a video on After the End!
After the End Old World is recently released masterpiece ^^
I'm just happy my native Northumbria got a mention, get in
Hey AlzaboHD, what steam workshop mods are you using? Idk what it is about it, but the graphical mods make the world look so much more vast and I love that.
I am using the graphics overhaul Novus Graphicus, its on the steam workshop. Cheers!
Your polish is amazing ;)
09:24 IM PROUD OF YOU #TEAMPAINAUCHOCOLAT
If you have Charlemagne's expansion choose Sigurd Ring, Rangnar Lodbroks father, you can take Denmakr, Norawy, Sweden and even Saxony in less that 4 years
Alzabo, you should do a video on surprisingly challenging rulers in CK2 and countries in EUIV that look like they would be powerful or easy, but turn out to be weak and provide challenging playthroughs.
That is the best pronounciation of Polish names I have ever heard on CZcams
(I am Polish myself)
Même les anglophones sont au courant au sujet de cette source de querelles ancestrales entre pain au chocolat et chocolatine. X)
I see what you meant about your French having an accent xD
You're right though, it's pain au chocolat !
Haha yeah most people think Im English or Canadian!
@@AlzaboHD To be fair unless it's a heavy Californian or Texan accent it's kind of hard to tell for us :(
I hate that Not the entire World map is visible
the word play got you my sub and like
Hey and what about Rurik? I think he is pretty powerful and has a strong heir on the start.
He definitely is! He features in the newest top 10 ck2 video - I think you'll appreciate it !
Maybe follow up with "The 10 Strongest spouses"? Great video as always btw
Didn't see Hastinn of Nates 0/10, love the video
I love your CK2 content.
AGOT Littlefinger, speaks for itself
Not sure if you're still playing this amazing game, but I have a challenge for you that I have enjoyed a lot myself. Start as a French count or Duke in the earliest start and scheme the last Merovingian onto the throne of France. Then have him or his offspring form the Angevin empire while you scheme and fight on his usually fairly inept behalf. The AI isn't very good at noticing precisely who is helping it like this though, so it won't always cooperate. I once had Theoderic arrest me and burn my wife at the stake, causing him to lose a critical war and be beheaded. If you haven't tried this before, prepare to restart the game a lot. Particularly hard to get Carloman to live long enough to forcibly overthrow him. If Charlemagne takes the whole thing it gets much harder to overthrow him, and he inherits when his brother dies so...
Nobody should forget Chief Yurak of Kolguyev...
Where's Rurik?
Quick, lots of gold, has bloodline, has 40 free ships. Sits on slavic AND finnish holy sites. NAP with king of sweden. Something like 23 martial. Helgi is hardcoded to belong to the sons of Perun and when you die he will be its leader.
Everything that's true for Ivar applies to Rurik tenfold. I reformed Romuva, Suomenusko, Slav, Germanic in one or two lifetimes by using germanic sea conquests and subjugations.
That subtle hint of the virus from the Silkroad in 2020 :D
Hey what about Rurik? He is a very good charecter with a great starts, army and starting position
I think we should get a ck2 religion tier list
Where are you from? Your polish is quite good. 😋
Hey thanks! Im from USA but stayed briefly in Wrocław for work. Still learning, its a tough language
Więc Pozdrowienia z Wrocławia (greetings from Wrocław). Its my hometown.
beinlausi (boneless) is the kenning for the wind.
Great video, King Kazimierz the Great is also a great pick, it's fun to restore Poland back to its former glory. Btw what's the map mod you're using, it looks better than vanilla
I got that star wars reference 09:52
heres an interresting funfact about subutai. He was never beat. Hes the ONLY general, that was never beat. He just stopped pushing. As stupid as that sounds, nobody really knows why. Hes an absolute monster, if you think that hes a badass ingame, read up on him in real life. and then give him a bloodline
Castration challenge? And here I thought 2019 had gotten carried away with their tide pod challenges.
I'm a little surprised that you set Ivar so low, considering that most of the characters above him start out with considerably less troops.
Nice Corona reference :D
No Rurik? The Genius with a quick heir
Man I loved playing as Alfred the Great...
No one thinks Ivar the Boneless is impotent. He got his nickname because he lost a leg.
Good to know - thanks for the info!
This list should not be anything else than nomad and tribal kings as the retinue system makes them all incredibly overpowered.
Bruh it took me a good chunk of research to realize #6 is Alfred the Great
PAIN AU CHOCOLAAAAAAAAAT
Bien jouer camarade, ça c'est du private joke pour les françouze X)
You really need to get the Coat of Arms packs.
i have over 1k hours in ck2 ( I know not a lot) but this is the first time i find out that Subutai is playable wtf
what mod are you using?
He is procouned Eye-varr
Dzień Dobry AlzboHD ;)
Good video