ITT we rate rulers of nations from any time period in the way they're rated in eu4

Perhaps, but still best of the genre.

Nappy 3 will always get a bad rap no matter what happens

2/2/6

4/6/5
The universal spider

I really do not get why hes almost not talked about, hes prob in the top 3 of French kings.

>best of the genre
A genre made up of four current games, two of which are widely considered better than EU4.
Hell I liked 3 more than 4.

>I really do not get why hes almost not talked about
Same reason why nobody ever talks of Maximilian I.
In a period full of culturally significant wars, nobody bothers with the boring political sovereigns. Why talk of how Louis set up the incorporation of Burgundy (how many people even know about Burgundy in the first place?) or the reorganization of the french government, or the new road network, or the trade fairs circuit? It's the fifteenth century! We've got the tail end of the 100yw, the war of two roses, the renaissance, the fall of the ERE, etc. to talk about! Nevermind those piddly events that will shape the 16th and 17th century.

6/6/1

Luckily he came paired with a +3 military advisor who lasted his whole rule.

6/0/6

0/-1/0

I'm afraid Agrippa dies.
But Germanicus also has a +3 and +10% army morale.
If that's too rich for your blood, Tiberius has a +2 and +5% discipline.

2/2/5

5 admin, 1 diplo, 4 military.

The genre is trash for redditors

1 admin, 6 diplo, 1 military.

6/6/6

Rude, to be quite honest

Bump

2/0/5

2/2/5

Svatopluk I of Moravia
2/1/6

Harold was a great diplomat though.

>military
>5
Yeah nah. If the eternal fuck that was Charles the Halberd was more competent at military matters. No way Louis is a 5

reddit-tier thread concept

Why do commies fear the birb warrior?