+ Reply to Thread
Page 14 of 16 FirstFirst ... 4 12 13 14 15 16 LastLast
Results 261 to 280 of 314

Thread: #4th Tier: Empire

  1. #261
    Forgetful troubadour Cèsar de Quart's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIEU3 CompleteDivine WindHeir to the ThroneVictoria 2
    Victoria II: A House Divided500k clubEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-order

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    El Pont de Mar Blava (Barcelona - Montpellier)
    Posts
    2,724
    Quote Originally Posted by LAF1994 View Post
    AFAIK the Roman (Byzantine) ruler was Basileus Basileion; "King of Kings".
    Well, maybe you know that the Byzantine Empire suffered a gradual "persification" during the VI-Xth Centuries. But this didn't reach Western Europe at all, which is my point. And, anyway, this turn to the East became a turn to the West with the Komnenoi.

  2. #262
    Colonel Stratagyfan101's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIDeus VultEU3 CompleteDivine WindFor the Motherland
    Hearts of Iron IIIHeir to the ThroneRome GoldSemper FiVictoria 2
    Victoria II: A House Divided500k club

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Albany, NY (USA)
    Posts
    964

    Thumbs up

    Advantages of Empire as 4th Tier
    - More A-historical Kingdom titles in Eastern Europe.
    - Flavor (over just getting a trait)
    Disadvantage
    - Possibility to vassalize Kingdoms (making controlling large realm easier)
    - Lack of Options to name empire (if based on predefined CK1 system)

    Advantages of Emperor as a trait
    - No ability to vassalize kings(assuming same level can't be vassalize)
    - Prestige boost
    Disadvantage of Emperor as a trait
    - No real flavor behind it.

    Feel free to add as you feel.

    Also I had a compromise. Emperor as a 4th tier but cant vassalize kingdoms or Byzantium as fourth tier for more ahistorical kingdoms in Balkans/Asia Minor. I.E. Greece, Macedonia or something else and other emperor as trait which changes Title to Emperor of [Imput Kingdom], so say Emperor of Castille.

    Or better yet a drop down list with a few option.
    Option A) Emperor of Primary title.
    Option B) Take title Empire of culture group. (80% of empire needs this culture)
    Option C) Take historical title or P'Dox ahistorical one. (if available)

    I.e. Latin Empire, Iberian Empire, Emperor of Hispania, um IDK option C can really be done via event.
    I got more icons, and they're awesome!!!
    Glory, To Ruin, To Glory: A Majaphit AAR

    Officially pysched for The Hobbit movies! *Prays for a new Middle Earth game that doesn't suck, looks at LotR Conquest and War in the North.*

  3. #263
    General knul's Avatar
    Cities in MotionCrusader Kings IIEU3 CompleteDivine WindHearts of Iron III
    Heir to the ThroneMagickaVictoria: RevolutionsRome GoldSemper Fi
    Victoria 2Mount & Blade: WarbandEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-order

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Amsterdam, The Netherlands
    Posts
    2,387
    Quote Originally Posted by Stratagyfan101 View Post
    Advantages of Empire as 4th Tier
    - More A-historical Kingdom titles in Eastern Europe.
    - Flavor (over just getting a trait)
    Disadvantage
    - Possibility to vassalize Kingdoms (making controlling large realm easier)
    - Lack of Options to name empire (if based on predefined CK1 system)

    Advantages of Emperor as a trait
    - No ability to vassalize kings(assuming same level can't be vassalize)
    - Prestige boost
    Disadvantage of Emperor as a trait
    - No real flavor behind it.

    Feel free to add as you feel.

    Also I had a compromise. Emperor as a 4th tier but cant vassalize kingdoms or Byzantium as fourth tier for more ahistorical kingdoms in Balkans/Asia Minor. I.E. Greece, Macedonia or something else and other emperor as trait which changes Title to Emperor of [Imput Kingdom], so say Emperor of Castille.

    Or better yet a drop down list with a few option.
    Option A) Emperor of Primary title.
    Option B) Take title Empire of culture group. (80% of empire needs this culture)
    Option C) Take historical title or P'Dox ahistorical one. (if available)

    I.e. Latin Empire, Iberian Empire, Emperor of Hispania, um IDK option C can really be done via event.
    I do not see why "emperor as trait" has less flavor then "emperor as 4th tier". I also do not see why with a "emperor as 4th tier" it would be impossible to name an empire.

    The problem I see with the compromise of 4th tier withour vassalization is that as far as I can see, the tiers are almost only about who can vassalize who. Removing vassalization of 3rd tier titles for the emperor tier would basically mean that the emperor title would be a trait.

    As an aside, I do not think that if the emperor title is not a 4th tier then its only advantage could be extra prestige. I see no reason why there wouldn't be other bonusses/mechanism for being an emperor. Take the HRE title from EU3. An emperor country is still basically on the same level as any other independend country, but it gets a lot of nice bonusses, for example moving through HRE territory while in war.

    Such mechanisms could be given to CK2 emperor without creating an additional vassalage tier for them and still make the emperor title a desirable thing to acquire.
    Current AAR: EU4: Single Domination: Ming, the first EU4 AAR ever to feature a non-European country!
    Finished AARs: EU3: Double Domination: Germany versus Japan. EU3: Yin, Yang and the ugly: a Divine Wind Ming AAR

    See an overview of my AARs at my Ink Well page.

  4. #264
    Sergeant MataNiall's Avatar
    HoI AnthologyCrusader Kings IIEuropa Universalis 3Europa Universalis III: In NomineEU3 Napoleon's Ambition
    Rome: Vae Victis

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by the_legion View Post
    Orks and Monster Trucks sound quite cool, too.
    However, they will destroy more flavour than they add.
    Why would it destroy anything ? would you actually not buy the game if something like that got included ?. Its just adding extra to the game and some more flavour to the game.

  5. #265
    Quote Originally Posted by knul View Post
    I do not see why "emperor as trait" has less flavor then "emperor as 4th tier". I also do not see why with a "emperor as 4th tier" it would be impossible to name an empire.

    The problem I see with the compromise of 4th tier withour vassalization is that as far as I can see, the tiers are almost only about who can vassalize who. Removing vassalization of 3rd tier titles for the emperor tier would basically mean that the emperor title would be a trait.

    As an aside, I do not think that if the emperor title is not a 4th tier then its only advantage could be extra prestige. I see no reason why there wouldn't be other bonusses/mechanism for being an emperor. Take the HRE title from EU3. An emperor country is still basically on the same level as any other independend country, but it gets a lot of nice bonusses, for example moving through HRE territory while in war.

    Such mechanisms could be given to CK2 emperor without creating an additional vassalage tier for them and still make the emperor title a desirable thing to acquire.
    Again +1, although being emperor should have potential disadvantages too.

  6. #266
    Colonel Stratagyfan101's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIDeus VultEU3 CompleteDivine WindFor the Motherland
    Hearts of Iron IIIHeir to the ThroneRome GoldSemper FiVictoria 2
    Victoria II: A House Divided500k club

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Albany, NY (USA)
    Posts
    964
    Quote Originally Posted by knul View Post
    I do not see why "emperor as trait" has less flavor then "emperor as 4th tier". I also do not see why with a "emperor as 4th tier" it would be impossible to name an empire.

    The problem I see with the compromise of 4th tier withour vassalization is that as far as I can see, the tiers are almost only about who can vassalize who. Removing vassalization of 3rd tier titles for the emperor tier would basically mean that the emperor title would be a trait.

    As an aside, I do not think that if the emperor title is not a 4th tier then its only advantage could be extra prestige. I see no reason why there wouldn't be other bonusses/mechanism for being an emperor. Take the HRE title from EU3. An emperor country is still basically on the same level as any other independend country, but it gets a lot of nice bonusses, for example moving through HRE territory while in war.

    Such mechanisms could be given to CK2 emperor without creating an additional vassalage tier for them and still make the emperor title a desirable thing to acquire.
    Clearly stated the naming , If based on the old system, but most likely isnt.

    Well in CK1 it did add extra prestige. HRE was different in EU timefram than CK. Ability to move through HRE "countries" is all ready in CK1.

    Emperor needs to be in the game. The question is the implementation. There is already a downside to
    Emperor, many many vassals, that can rebel, (in CK1 randomly) at any time. Especially during a succession.

    Emperor as a fourth tier in my mind just makes Easten Europe more fun. It also adds flavor because you can get a title/name change. If it is just a trait, similar to CK1, then you gain nothing but prestige. You're still a Kingdom and still addressed as King. It also never allowed for another naming option.

    Now the benefits of the trait is that it will not allow making Kingdoms vassals making you have more direct vassals, rather than just 5. The big problem is you get a trait but no real changes except a new pretty blue trait that you only see, once or twice when checking up on traits, stats, or relationships.
    I got more icons, and they're awesome!!!
    Glory, To Ruin, To Glory: A Majaphit AAR

    Officially pysched for The Hobbit movies! *Prays for a new Middle Earth game that doesn't suck, looks at LotR Conquest and War in the North.*

  7. #267
    First Lieutenant sumdood's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIDeus VultEuropa Universalis 3Divine WindHeir to the Throne
    Europa Universalis III: In NomineMagickaEU3 Napoleon's AmbitionVictoria 2500k club
    Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Hawaii, United States
    Posts
    253
    I thought a fourth tier Emperor title would be a given for CK2. I would want to see a title change, a new crown, a new border for the portrait, and new events to go along with being and emperor. Yes, you would be large and powerful with the ability to vassalize kings, but with almost all empires throughout history the biggest threat would be internal.

    Your vassals, especially kings would demand more autonomy and perhaps try to impose elective law and oust your dynasty from power. Different cultured kingdoms should also be hard to please. Not to mention the rest of the world may feel threatened and be more likely to ally together to disintegrate your empire.

    An empire should be difficult to not only build but to maintain as well, albeit a rewarding experience. While many people would not like to see ahistorical empires form, I believe the majority of players would thoroughly enjoy the ability to climb from the bottom ranks to the most powerful position in medieval Europe

  8. #268
    Quote Originally Posted by Jolt View Post
    From the very same article:



    So it can mean Skane or Scandinavia.
    Having the same etymology does not denote having the same meaning or connotation. It means they are derived from the same word-root. The connotations are divergent and distinct.

  9. #269
    Quote Originally Posted by Aardavark View Post
    And, towards the end, the Byzantine Empire (at that point consisting of almost nothing other than the city) being a vassal of the Ottoman's.
    The Byzantine Empire was never a vassal of the Ottomans. They "went down with the city" as it were.

  10. #270
    Modding Paladin RedRooster81's Avatar
    Cities in MotionCrusader Kings IIDeus VultEU3 CompleteDivine Wind
    Heir to the ThroneRome GoldMount & Blade: Warband500k club

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Castle of Aaaggggggh
    Posts
    5,596
    I wanted to ask the devs about the basic question that this old thread poses, without necessarily reviving the rather fierce debate that ensued over what an empire is. Basically, will there be *four playable tiers* for titles in CK2: some folks have noticed the special CoA framing for empires, and one of the released screenshots shows the HRE with the "emperor" title. This would allow for a wide variety of applications, at least for those of us who can't stop tinkering with Paradox's perfect creations

    (1) The Byzantine and Holy Roman Empires of course (which already seems to be part of the current pre-alpha build) but also (2) the Caliphate and maybe (3) making the Papal States overlord of some kingdoms like Naples (which the Pontiff claimed to be by the XIII century IIRC). Along the same lines, for instance England's holding Scotland as a vassal kingdom for much of the medieval period. Also, (4) the title of Emperor of Spain that comes up from time to time on this subforum (let's face it, for most of us who try to complete the Reconquista as one of the Iberian Christian states, we do succeed and a few generations before 1492), so this should be an option, too. Finally, (5) this would allow for the appointment of your heir(s) or a trusted official as a viceroy over one of your more distant kingdom-titles (as the Aragonese did well within the CK2 timeframe for Sardinia & Sicily and the Angevins for Ireland and France).

    And thank you for your time in answering my question.
    Last edited by RedRooster81; 27-01-2011 at 08:40.

  11. #271
    Banned

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Malmö, Sweden
    Posts
    216
    Quote Originally Posted by Tommy4ever View Post
    In CK1 there was one Empire - the Roman/Byzantine Empire. It got the bonus of the ruler being able to hold twice as much in his demesne as a King. That should be the only Empire.
    No. It should not.

  12. #272
    Major galuska's Avatar
    EU3 CompleteVictoria: RevolutionsVictoria 2Victoria II: A House Divided

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Miskolc/Budapest (HUN)
    Posts
    576
    It there were 4 tiers, I would like to see the 'vassalizable' king titles limited.

    I am perfectly fine with the Byz emperor vassalizing Bulgaria, the HRE vassalizing Bohemia, Burgundy, England vassalizing Scotland.

    But if that is unlimited, the 'keep the kingdom together' aspect would be lost, which was caused by the high number of vassals.

    Maybe tie them historically (HRE can vassalize Bohemia and Burgundy only) or maybe limit it with 1 or 2 kingdom vassal per emperor title.
    "Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth.” - Mike Tyson

    When Dr. Evil gets angry, Mr. Bigglesworth gets upset. And when Mr. Bigglesworth gets upset... people DIE! - Dr. Evil

  13. #273
    Modding Paladin RedRooster81's Avatar
    Cities in MotionCrusader Kings IIDeus VultEU3 CompleteDivine Wind
    Heir to the ThroneRome GoldMount & Blade: Warband500k club

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Castle of Aaaggggggh
    Posts
    5,596
    Quote Originally Posted by galuska View Post
    It there were 4 tiers, I would like to see the 'vassalizable' king titles limited.

    I am perfectly fine with the Byz emperor vassalizing Bulgaria, the HRE vassalizing Bohemia, Burgundy, England vassalizing Scotland.

    But if that is unlimited, the 'keep the kingdom together' aspect would be lost, which was caused by the high number of vassals.

    Maybe tie them historically (HRE can vassalize Bohemia and Burgundy only) or maybe limit it with 1 or 2 kingdom vassal per emperor title.
    Or you could do it by event, a special vassalization event for specific countries, though that would limit historical possibilities a bit. What if Scotland dominates England by a peculiar turn of events? It could be limited to region or cultural group somehow?

    But I was thinking along the lines of the Crown Prince getting a subsidiary kingdom title, like (the old question on this forum), Wales to England. In this setup, the holder of such a title would get the title "Prince" or its equivalent.

  14. #274
    Imperial Vicar of the HRE Ruwaard's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIDeus VultCK2: Holy Knight500k clubEuropa Universalis IV
    Warlock 2: The ExiledEUIV: Wealth of NationsEUIV: Conquest of ParadiseEUIV: Res PublicaCrusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
    Crusader Kings II: Sword of IslamCrusader Kings II: The RepublicCrusader Kings II: The Old GodsCrusader Kings II: Sons of AbrahamCrusader Kings II: Rajas of India
    Crusader Kings II: CharlemagneEUIV: Art of War

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    (North) Brabant, the Netherlands
    Posts
    3,355
    Quote Originally Posted by galuska View Post
    It there were 4 tiers, I would like to see the 'vassalizable' king titles limited.

    I am perfectly fine with the Byz emperor vassalizing Bulgaria, the HRE vassalizing Bohemia, Burgundy, England vassalizing Scotland.

    But if that is unlimited, the 'keep the kingdom together' aspect would be lost, which was caused by the high number of vassals.

    Maybe tie them historically (HRE can vassalize Bohemia and Burgundy only) or maybe limit it with 1 or 2 kingdom vassal per emperor title.
    Quote Originally Posted by RedRooster81 View Post
    Or you could do it by event, a special vassalization event for specific countries, though that would limit historical possibilities a bit. What if Scotland dominates England by a peculiar turn of events? It could be limited to region or cultural group somehow?

    But I was thinking along the lines of the Crown Prince getting a subsidiary kingdom title, like (the old question on this forum), Wales to England. In this setup, the holder of such a title would get the title "Prince" or its equivalent.
    First of all (for being consistent) I still hold the opinion, that adding marquesses/margraves as a tier and viscount/burgrave as a position/function for barons would be more important than the rare emperor tier. Apart from the historic empires like the Eastern Roman 'Byzantine' Empire and the Holy Roman Empire, which should be in, at best the Orthodox and the Catholic Christians should get one extra a-historic emperor; although if the extra emperors would only have a emperor trait, there could be more (but it will still need a lot of requirements).

    However if a 4-th tier is added with, I hope, limited number of possible emperors at each time, then historic (or within their historic region) vassalizations/mediatizations should be possible, other vassalizations/mediatizations should require more, can be event driven and should be much more instabile.

    I like the idea of granting away a subsidiary title to a crown prince, however this in theory could also be given to someone else. Furthermore in most cases they won't be styled prince, but would be styled king.

  15. #275
    Actually, I do believe that the 4th "Emperor" tier is pretty much confirmed after the recent series of screenshots and info; At the start of the game, Byzantium and the HRE hold the title.

  16. #276
    Imperial Vicar of the HRE Ruwaard's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIDeus VultCK2: Holy Knight500k clubEuropa Universalis IV
    Warlock 2: The ExiledEUIV: Wealth of NationsEUIV: Conquest of ParadiseEUIV: Res PublicaCrusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
    Crusader Kings II: Sword of IslamCrusader Kings II: The RepublicCrusader Kings II: The Old GodsCrusader Kings II: Sons of AbrahamCrusader Kings II: Rajas of India
    Crusader Kings II: CharlemagneEUIV: Art of War

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    (North) Brabant, the Netherlands
    Posts
    3,355
    Quote Originally Posted by vadermath View Post
    Actually, I do believe that the 4th "Emperor" tier is pretty much confirmed after the recent series of screenshots and info; At the start of the game, Byzantium and the HRE hold the title.
    That's fine since these both were empires, however other extra emperor titles should be very hard to achieve; being a emperor and recognized as such in that period was a rare honour.

  17. #277
    Modding Paladin RedRooster81's Avatar
    Cities in MotionCrusader Kings IIDeus VultEU3 CompleteDivine Wind
    Heir to the ThroneRome GoldMount & Blade: Warband500k club

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Castle of Aaaggggggh
    Posts
    5,596
    Well, we'll see how it works out. I think that it should be a possibility for Spain, once you reunite the Peninsula, as the claim was made historically, but it was never widely recognized outside the peninsula. Indeed, it could be coded in such a way that it brought the man who used it in conflict with the HRE and Papacy, which happened historically. The title represented the leading Christian monarch in the Peninsula and was always tied with the city of Leon, and it originated in a period where the Iberian Christians were relatively isolated from the rest of Europe. It fell out of use in 1157, with the death of Alfonso VII, who divided his kingdom among his sons. But of course, things could have been different.

    As to feudal "empires" like the Angevins, well it is trickier, because there was no formal imperial title. The fourth tier could be used in the case of a large dynasty with sprawling territory to denote the head of the dynasty, when there were strong tendencies for the leader of the senior line to help his brothers or cousins who ruled other lands in times of war. Finally, it could be created in an attempt to subsume several kingdoms together, which I understand was one of Ruwaard's points.

  18. #278
    Imperial Vicar of the HRE Ruwaard's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIDeus VultCK2: Holy Knight500k clubEuropa Universalis IV
    Warlock 2: The ExiledEUIV: Wealth of NationsEUIV: Conquest of ParadiseEUIV: Res PublicaCrusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
    Crusader Kings II: Sword of IslamCrusader Kings II: The RepublicCrusader Kings II: The Old GodsCrusader Kings II: Sons of AbrahamCrusader Kings II: Rajas of India
    Crusader Kings II: CharlemagneEUIV: Art of War

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    (North) Brabant, the Netherlands
    Posts
    3,355
    Quote Originally Posted by RedRooster81 View Post
    Well, we'll see how it works out. I think that it should be a possibility for Spain, once you reunite the Peninsula, as the claim was made historically, but it was never widely recognized outside the peninsula. Indeed, it could be coded in such a way that it brought the man who used it in conflict with the HRE and Papacy, which happened historically. The title represented the leading Christian monarch in the Peninsula and was always tied with the city of Leon, and it originated in a period where the Iberian Christians were relatively isolated from the rest of Europe. It fell out of use in 1157, with the death of Alfonso VII, who divided his kingdom among his sons. But of course, things could have been different.

    As to feudal "empires" like the Angevins, well it is trickier, because there was no formal imperial title. The fourth tier could be used in the case of a large dynasty with sprawling territory to denote the head of the dynasty, when there were strong tendencies for the leader of the senior line to help his brothers or cousins who ruled other lands in times of war. Finally, it could be created in an attempt to subsume several kingdoms together, which I understand was one of Ruwaard's points.
    Well even subsuming several kingdoms together doesn't necessarily need an imperial title, if kingdoms are allowed to have vassal-kingdoms (which can keep their own king). For instance as Aragon, it should be possible to make the heir king of a vassal-kingdom of Sardinia, however it should also be possible to keep one of local 'judges' as a vassal-king of Sardinia.
    Last edited by Ruwaard; 27-01-2011 at 12:32.

  19. #279
    Field Marshal yourworstnightm's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIDarkest HourEU3 CompleteDivine WindHeir to the Throne
    Rome GoldSengokuVictoria 2Victoria II: A House DividedEU3 Collectors Edition
    500k club

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Tusen sjöars land
    Posts
    5,843
    Of Empires there shall be Two:
    The Roman Empire and the Holy Roman Empire

  20. #280
    Seeing as an Empire is a legitimate tier now (as opposed to a character trait and a BYZ-exclusive title), any ruler should be able to achieve it, under certain circumstances. Of course, forging an Empire should be significantly harder than forging a mere Kingdom. A Pope or a Patriarch should be the ones with the power to hand out Imperial titles

+ Reply to Thread
Page 14 of 16 FirstFirst ... 4 12 13 14 15 16 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts