They have to live in the Empire? Well, that's a new thing I learn. So I'd suppose Charles V lived in Wien.
Development Diary - 25th of October 2006
- Thread starter Johan
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- Status
How would that have worked had they succeeded? Would England or Spain have been folded into the Empire in some way?mandead said:
According to the electors in the 17th century that wasn't the case.
Actually at the end of the religious wars at the end of the 15th century it was decided, I think, that religion wasn't important and they could decide their own faith and that both the electors and the emperor could be, theoretical, lutheran.
So, the election of a lutherian Gustav II Adolf of Sweden is possible, especielly IRL there he was voted for it by almost half the electors under a few years.
ComradeOm said:
Presumably. Regardless of borders, I think really the HRE was simply Christendom (or at least, it was to start with) and any decent Catholic (and later Protestant) leader could have united Europe in times of need.
Had the cash & influence been available, Henry or Francis could have been elected Emperor. Charles obviously tried a lot of harder due to the fact the position was almost a family heirloom. Francis' claim was based on that of Charles the Great, a Frenchman (well, Frank) and first Emperor.
I hope this is possible in EUIII, albeit quite difficult. If I'm playing as France I should have to more or less bankrupt myself with gifts and bribes to become Emperor. Of course, the expenditure should be worth it
EUIII probably should tighten the requirements. But there is a distinction (IRL) between what actually happened, & what was possible. If outsiders could fish for the title, then they should be able to do so in the game. But, as it is in EUII, it is way too easy to become Emperor from outside. I have very often, with Portugal, become HRE, in the mid/late 15th C, just by RM'ing every elector. (Occasionally I'd add a few judicious bribes, but not always.) And, late in the game, you're so rich you can just buy the title.
Perhaps the requirements should shift over time, to reflect the de facto situation. That would also entail Habsburgs' advantage growing as the game goes on, at least assuming that, as IRL, they get the title almost every time.
Perhaps the requirements should shift over time, to reflect the de facto situation. That would also entail Habsburgs' advantage growing as the game goes on, at least assuming that, as IRL, they get the title almost every time.
George LeS said:
Well, to start with I will assume the RM system has been overhauled. I imagine it to be more like HoI II's alliance system - ie, there's a percentage chance of another country accepting your marriage proposal. You shouldn't be able to simply spam marriages out to knock up relations and give you LOS over all those nations' empires.
I understand your point regarding Portugal and other such nations being able to grab the title for whatever reason. Personally, I'm not too against this. It makes for a nice alternate history. Portugal was a rich and well-respected European nation (especially after her and Spain started colonising) and good relations with Germany and plenty of cash of course help no end in her bid for the imperial crown. However, I think there should be some sort of inherant bonus towards the Habsburgs', but not a great one. There were of course one or two exceptions to the Habsburgs' dominance of the title, and before then the Luxembourgs and Carolingians, and so on.
I think it'd be nice if a particularly overzealous Catholic family could overthrow the Habsburgs for a few generations. Assume for a moment that Charles the Bold never dies, and Burgundy is elevated to a Kingdom (I hope this is possible by event; if not I'll add it
) - they'll still have the grandest court in Europe, and the best-trained army and most-advanced artillery.At the end of the day, the Habsburgs' monopoly of the title was down to bribing practically everyone in the empire, and of course the corruption and "favours" that happened soon after their claimant's victory.
Assume a richer, more influential nation takes the place of Austria here, ie France (the richest nation in Europe by far at game-start), a resurgent England, or even a Portugal with full coffers from Brazillian imports.
So long as we don't get Inca or Hussite Emperors, I'm happy
Jolt said:
Doesn't matter, even if he resided in Brussels or Mechelen (as he did for quite some time), he would still be inside the HRE. The border of the HRE was drawn at the river Schelde (Vlaanderen - Brabant). And in 1548, Vlaanderen even became part of the HRE.
I'm steadily more and more wanting to buy this, I went from ...
"The graphics in this game sux"
To ...
"They are getting better, and if they improve I may buy it, as long as my comp works with it"
"The graphics in this game sux"
To ...
"They are getting better, and if they improve I may buy it, as long as my comp works with it
"
There however wasn't any problem with the eligibility of Francis or Henry VIII in the 1519 election, either, and Sigmund of Luxemburg was King of Hungary, who was too busy in that realm to be able to spend much time in Germany, when he was elected in 1410.Vulture said:
The reigns of Friedrich II, who resided in the Kingdom of Sicily, Alphonse of Castile and Richard of Cornwall were before the adaptation of the Golden Bull, and thus in a substantially different constitutional situation, which makes them only partially relevant for the evaluation of the situation in the EU3 period, yet generally even after the Golden Bull there was no definite requirement beyond mere formalities of the emperor residing in Germany. There were, on the other hand, often some strong reservations about electing a non-German emperor, expressed for example during the negotiations over Jiri z Podiebrad's attempt to be elected Roman King and successor of Friedrich III.
I've just been reading about Richard, 1st Earl of Cornwall. Absolutely fascinating; I never knew an Englishman had been King of the Romans!
I know about the sole English Pope, though
What's the main difference between Rex Romanorum and Imperator Augustus, by the way?
Richard was crowned King of the Romans by the Pope. I always thought that King of the Romans was the title one was given until one was crowned by the Pope, at which point one became Emperor?
Also, wasn't it a title bestowed on the son (or obvious heir) of the Emperor?
Just curious
I know about the sole English Pope, though
What's the main difference between Rex Romanorum and Imperator Augustus, by the way?
Richard was crowned King of the Romans by the Pope. I always thought that King of the Romans was the title one was given until one was crowned by the Pope, at which point one became Emperor?
Also, wasn't it a title bestowed on the son (or obvious heir) of the Emperor?
Just curious
Captain Frakas said:
I think any Christian (Catholic/Protestant/Reformed; not Orthodox though) European ruler should be able to be elected Emperor.
I think that any european christian (including orthodox) ruler in a monarchical governement should be able to be elected emperor.
The election should be based on three factors for each electors : relations, reputation (badboy), prestige.
And the relations should be influenced by the culture and the religion. (That should keep out the title orthodox rulers as long as they have no orthodox electors...)
If an elector don't have extremely good relation (+150) with any european christian ruler who have a great prestige and a low reputation, he should vote for himself.
If at least another elector will vote for the elector, the elector should also vote for himself.
The election should be based on three factors for each electors : relations, reputation (badboy), prestige.
And the relations should be influenced by the culture and the religion. (That should keep out the title orthodox rulers as long as they have no orthodox electors...)
If an elector don't have extremely good relation (+150) with any european christian ruler who have a great prestige and a low reputation, he should vote for himself.
If at least another elector will vote for the elector, the elector should also vote for himself.
Historically, were electors allowed to self-vote?
What were the restrictions? Any?
And as for your sig:
Napoléon Ier, Empereur des Français, Roi d'Italie, Médiateur de la Confédération suisse, Protecteur de la Confédération du Rhin
What were the restrictions? Any?
And as for your sig:
Napoléon Ier, Empereur des Français, Roi d'Italie, Médiateur de la Confédération suisse, Protecteur de la Confédération du Rhin
It's the second of November, where's our new diary?
And the Electors got quite fed up with non-Germans as Emperor after Sigismund spent his time in Hungary.
Yes, they self-voted, and additionally there was the restriction (not often applied) that candidates must have been born within the Empire. Francis I did some dancing around the issue; Henry ignored it.mandead said:
And the Electors got quite fed up with non-Germans as Emperor after Sigismund spent his time in Hungary.
New commandment passed down from... god... to Me: Thou shalt not post in previous Dev Diary threads on the day when we are expecting new Dev Diaries.
Oh man I was so looking forward to the next dev diary. I know it's a catholic holiday in many parts of Germany, but I didn't know that the Swedes care for that. Well anyways, I hope they just postponed the new dev diary to today or anything.
Wait wait wait... You're telling me that a new Dev Diary wasn't released because of All Saints Day?
And did they change the font on the map? It looks more serify then the earlier builds
And did they change the font on the map? It looks more serify then the earlier builds
If it's about becoming Holy Roman Emperor of the German Nation (old emperor Otto's formula from the 10th c.) IIRC the sequence goes like this:mandead said:I've just been reading about Richard, 1st Earl of Cornwall. Absolutely fascinating; I never knew an Englishman had been King of the Romans!
I know about the sole English Pope, though
What's the main difference between Rex Romanorum and Imperator Augustus, by the way?
Richard was crowned King of the Romans by the Pope. I always thought that King of the Romans was the title one was given until one was crowned by the Pope, at which point one became Emperor?
Also, wasn't it a title bestowed on the son (or obvious heir) of the Emperor?
Just curious
First you need to be crowned King of Rome.
Then you have to be elected, yes elected, King of Germany, in Germany.
Then the Pope can crown you Holy Roman Emperor.
- Status