10/10 difficulty

>lmao let's dissolve the institutions that my predecessors created to make their empire more manageable because I need PERSONAL CONTROL
>wtf why is governing this vast empire so difficult now?

not after the coup but 2bh he let it get to that point so piss be upon him.

He had to deal with the power of the Ottomans AND the rise of heresy on Germany, which ended up weakening it.

HE FUCKING CAPTURED THE KING OF FRANCE AND STILL FUMBLED NEGOTIATIONS

What did you expect him to do, given the rules of the time?

not sack Rome for no reason?

Louis XVI

Up to his tits in debt, inherited a broken political and social system, and then slapped with some of the worst harvests France has ever seen. All coming fresh off the enlightenment.

Poor guy never stood a chance.

Even more relevant than OP's pic except he actually DID it, even though his reign was tragically cut short.

The guy inherited half the known world out of sheer dynastic luck before turning 30. The richer parts, too. The only relevant part he didn’t control was France, and managed to control that threat. I’d say that’s a pretty damn good early game boost. Could have snowballed much harder.

Majorian takes the top spot.

Amadeo of Saboya

>tfw Louis XV lived for as long as he lived
>tfw the Régent didn’t slap enough sense into him

Should have had a stroke the second he gave back Belgium. Also his wife was too pure for this world, the poor woman.

didnt she ordered to shot civilians or something

Those were mutinous troops that refused his orders, you fucking brainlet. Regardless the Pope brought it on himself for continuously getting the church involved in the France/Habsburg mire of shit.

Maria Leszczyńska? I don’t think so, she had barely any influence at court and none outside of it. She was just a good, pious woman who won the lottery of royal marriages, was deeply in love with her husband despite the age difference (she was 7 years older). Even when the king started treating her like shit, overtly taking tons of mistresses, reducing her allowance to not much, she remained dignified. The people loved her, too, to the point that a part of the impopularity of the king towards the end was how he treated her.

Trump

>(((mutinous troops)))

It was a protestant inside job, even Luther admitted to it.

im retarded, i thought you were talking about Louis XVI for some reason

Yeah I cited that incident because it shows his incompetence in letting such a thing happen, ever heared of command responsibility?

>When your own dumbass country calls for psychotic Dutchmen to invade because you don’t subscribe to the heresy made by a previous king so he could fuck bitches and get money and because you also realized France is a pretty good ally. Why is England so dumb?

Was there any way he could have consolidated the Austrian part of his Empire?

>ruling a country in such a shit state that they just couldn't do it

right since diocletian's rule was only 20 years, the longest since god knows who.

>Restoring Britain
>Instituting short-term economic fixes (price fixes on commodities)
>Stabilized the government, in a bureaucratic sense

His tetrarchy model is good on paper: two emperors, two subordinates with a well defined means of transferring the imperial power

He wrongly assumed that the presence of a colleague Augustus/Caesar would prevent ambitious generals. But his rule was the final last breath of fresh air Rome as a large empire would have before the defining split and the move to Constantinople.

Worst thing about Doicletian, in my opinion, was the way he presented himself as a ruler. Not a Roman prince.

>His only sin was being born at the wrong place at the wrong time the poor kid tried really hard to be a good emperor too, fucking hell.
Kek momma's boy. His mom did all the work

>tfw England was ruled by fucking Krauts for the rest of its existence afterwards

Diocletian also reunited the empire, Britain was a rouge state for about 10 years until Constantinus brought it back. I think Diocletian also put down a big revolt in Alexandria too.

People referred to the empire as "restored" and "happy times" under Diocletian's rule

Empress dowager Cixi is definitely up there, talk about the wrong person for the job.
>We're getting fucked on both sides by euros and now even the fucking Japs
>The people have lost faith in the Qing's ability to defend them and want to overthrow us, establishing a hand government and maybe even a western style democracy
>Obviously this is due to a lack of Confucian morality, instead of establishing a western education system, and modernizing the government let's establish more Confucian schools to impress the people with our respect of China's traditions
>btw my birthday's coming up, and the party had better awe me!

>hand government
should be han, as in native rule compared to rule by manchus

Thanks, autocorrect.

Heraclius 100%, complete Shaggy dog story

SON

YOU'VE GOT A WAY TO FALL

Diocletian just missed with the wrong king imo

Especially considering there were little to no theological differences between the church of England and Catholicism at the time. Mainline English protestants were basically Catholics who pretended the Pope didn't exist.

Marie Antoinette did so such thing. She was a good and moral woman, very charitable, and she taught her children her moral values.
She, her husband, and especially their children did absolutely nothing wrong.
FUCK YOU FILTHY REPUBLICAN SCUM, YOU RUINED THE FUCKING WORLD
YES, I'M ANGRY.

>They did nothing wrong

They really didn't do anything right either. While Antoinette did have the misfortune of being turned into public enemy number 1 for no crime other than being of Austrian birth, Louis XVI was just flat out a poor leader.

There were so many times in his reign he was gripped by indecision and just agreed with whatever the first person talking to him said, only to walk it back ten minutes later because somebody else contradicted him.

Then he decided he was going to put his foot down and make a decision far after it was too late and at the worst possible time's to do it.

The royal family didn't deserve the treatment they got but they were also the worst possible leaders at the worst time.

Napoleon was million times better than any 18 century french kang

Not really that high of a bar

>any byzantine (roman) emperor after 1204
the palaiologos dynasty did some good but any chance of the ERE rising back to the days of justinian or when the WRE was fully entact were long gone

Not in terms of maintaining the integrity of France or even his own personal position he wasn't. Louis XIV and Louis V never lost a war so badly they were forced to abdicate and exiled twice and watched as their country was occupied by foreign troops and had their lands stripped away.

XIV came sooooo close though to getting completely crushed, he was just lucky

Have you heard the tragedy of Maximilian the First?

>that hairline

JUST

Louis XVI would have been a great king if he had been born a generation earlier or later. He probably would have been perfect on the throne during the Bourbon Restoration.

>supported radically reforming the French tax system and basing taxation on your wealth, so that the burden of taxes was no longer on the poor; didn't accomplish this because of the noble-led Parlements
>initiated prison reform and achieved a good chunk of it; it was under his leadership that prisons were required to provide prisoners with adequate food, bedding, and to allow them visitors and some form of mental stimulation (books, needlework, etc)
>initiated a form of free health care for the poor, requiring churches and hospitals to provide medical care for people who couldn't afford it; the churches and hospitals could then be reimbursed by the crown
>saw no problem with allowing the Third Estate to have double representation because they represented a wider segment of the population; only wavered from this when his eldest son died and he was holed up with the comte d'Artois and the ultra-royalist party, who convinced him that the Third Estate were rebellious children who needed to be figuratively spanked for daring to ask for more
>saw no problems with almost all of the reforms of 1789, since most of them were reforms he had tried to push through during his reign but was blocked by the Parlements

His major problem was that he was so afraid of being considered tyrannical that he refused to accept his own judgement. 99% of the time, his first impulse was the correct one.

Obama

This. I'd go into specifics but that would break the 25 year role, so I'll just say that he was naive to think that "let's all come together and find solutions together" would work. The conditions he was elected in required bold, decisive action, and he bent over to compromise from the beginning.

>such a chad you realise this French Revolution will spread
>people try to assassinate you for this
>such a chad they all apologise and you know your son will survive so you pardon them

>some german peasant decides spreading heresy is what will save you from the Turks rather than centralising the HRE
>Turks ally with the French and pope doesn’t excommunicate them for this
Such as ...
Only institutions I can think of he dissolved was in the Low Countries and uniting them

>France is a good lesser kingdom
FTFY
James was got rid of because if he stayed then the Roundheads would have won and then we’d be a republic, imagine how cancerous that would be
>dude you’re attending a Christianing so we can’t bother you
>dude all your trooops marched on Rome where were you

>the king of Germany
This is only true for Georg Ludwig I, for the rest they are English to their bones which are British

>can’t pass laws because that’s tyrannical
>lose a war because you’re a tyrant
Ever late game of CK2 ever

>Obama could ever be good
Maybe if he didn’t race bait and was more than just enlightened centrist

>no Aethelred the Unready

>Adolf Hitler
Suppose he got into office by some miracle. But Germany and Austria were doing well. The Jewish Communists never existed.
Probably would see National Socialism as the norm for Central European Governments.

To be fair he "just" needed to somehow win at Yarmuk, though it's still like 91% difficulty.

>wielding a cucumber sword

>he needs more than a vegetable to defeat his enemies

laughingtapestry.jpg

Maximiliano de Habsburgo (Mexico)
He unironically loved the country

What if I throw my cucumber at yer mom, how'd you like that m8?

...

Charles I of Austria, a competent and compassionate ruler, who nonetheless took power during the war that would see Austria destroyed in less than two years despite his best efforts. If only Franz Josef had died in 1913.
Also this. I'd count Anthemius too.

Syagrius and the Kingdom of Soissons.

Proof that you can do everything right and still fall victim to the machinations of the Eternal Kraut

>unironically the last good ruler Spain ever had

>tfw the good ones NEVER win in the end

what the fuck was wrong with Rome

he looks like nicolas cage

Chuckled not gonna lie

>only on the throne because the true king was murdered aged 15/16
At least he tried to make up for his scheming mother.

Consequence of his attempt at absolutism that the state apparatus couldn't stop imminent catastrophy

diocletian did do it, somewhat, and then he declared hes going into retirement, and spent the rest of his days in his own private retirement palace the size of a town, and no one even bothered him

dude was badass

what about Charles III

>Born to a Zoroastrian family native to Gilan, Mardavij was an anti-Muslim, who sought to revive the Sasanian Empire which was conquered in the 7th century by the Muslims. He first started his career by joining the army of his kinsman Asfar ibn Shiruya. Mardavij, however, later betrayed and killed him, conquering much of Jibal. He then set out to conquer Hamadan, Dinavar and Isfahan from the Abbasid Caliphate, and thereafter declared himself king of Iran, making Isfahan his capital.

>He then defeated the Daylamite military leader Makan ibn Kaki, and conquered Tabaristan in 932. By 934, his authority was acknowledged as far as Shiraz[1] and Ahvaz.[2] However, his goal of recreating the Persian Empire was ruined when he was murdered by his own Turkish slaves in 935.

JUST

Fucking roaches, every time.

:( Always makes me sad

I think you can say that he legitimately inherited the worst situation of anyone in history.

Cixi repeatedly fucked over any attempt at reform, up to and including having the emperor murdered

Heraclius

youtube.com/watch?v=lR56KbXuW8U
youtube.com/watch?v=3GWwohI5h1w
youtube.com/watch?v=-qZxMY7FZf8

allegedly

Interesting Things Explained Well just did a podcast segment about him. It's hilarious. Max and his batshit wife get duped into ruling Mexico just before France decides to back out and let it implode.

Suffering personified. I'd also count Franz Josef just for the amount of shit that he had to go through.

This guy, of course.

>managed to take a country on the brink of economic ruin to an economic powerhouse dominating the continent
>and managed to take it all the way around to a country that was actually ruined
What a wild ride

germany was economically ruined by 39 you fucking retard, stop repeating nazi propaganda

>germany was economically ruined by 39 you fucking retard, stop repeating nazi propaganda
Ok sweetie

Probably made easier by seizing the assets of a certain (((group)))

back to 9gag

>Following a policy dependent upon heavy borrowing of “gigantic sums of money”, Nazi Germany’s national debt by 1939 “had reached 37.4 billion Reichmarks,” where even “Goebbels, who otherwise mocked the government’s financial experts as narrow-minded misers, expressed concern in his diary about the exploding deficit.”

Facts vs propaganda I guess.

>le 9gag
t. reddit
Germans have a capacity to rebuild economies quickly, see West Germany
pics or it didn't happen

>uses a 9gag meme
>thinks pics/infographs are evidence

google german-economy 33-39

But we all know you won't do it since /pol infested wheraboos are not willing to challenge their worldview.

Why wouldn't you borrow huge sums from countries you're planning to declare war on? It's free money.

I mean he also attempted to imprison several leading churchmen and generally offended important ministers