Why is Navarra Titular?

KonradRichtmark said:

That's such a simple and elegant solution that it can't possibly be right. Someone must have thought of it already and decided against it for some reason. Honestly, that seems like a perfect solution.

Click to expand...

If Navarra is destroyed, it should be plausible that basque culture can disappear too, making the realm totally un-recretable and should make some players complain (as always) about it.
But the remaining basque dynasties should indeed be the first in row to claim the re-creation of the realm.

Mus said:

It also serves to illustrate the silliness of the rigid dejure mechanic and another example of game mechanics not allowing things in game to mirror reality (kingdoms appearing and disappearing down the start date timeline but not in game. In what is mostly a great game this is an ongoing issue.

Click to expand...

You're exaggerating the extent of the problem. In this period Catholic King-tier titles did not "emerge," they were explicitly created by a Fons Honorum. Every Catholic King-title in-game a) existed in 1066, b) claimed it was merely a revival of a previous title (Bosnia claiming to be Serbia, Portugal Galicia, etc.), or c) was a Crusader state.

Border changes among Catholic King-tier states with recognized borders were basically unheard of.

Which means the system mirrors reality much better then any system that allows you to leave France de jure just because you haven't been an actual French vassal for more then a century.

Akjosch said:

It's not like Philip IV didn't do exactly that with Navarre in 1284 ...

Click to expand...

This is not true. He married the reigning Queen of Navarra, who inherited the title from her father. The Spanish did something very like this creating the title due to owning the de jure territory under Ferdinand II in 1511, but that's out-of-period.

As for Navarra and gameplay, that was very extensively tested. Much of CK1 was a test. The conclusion was it was way too easy to go from Duke to King. Pay a little prestige, nab two Counties, and then instead of having to declare independence you get it for free. You get a prestige bump, desmene bump, the whole nine yards.

CK2 made this easier in a lot of ways. Since you only need half the land, it only takes a claim on one Navarran County to make you a King. In CK1 you needed both. If you're a Duke you don't have to fight an independence war. If you're already a King it's a no-brainer because free prestige.

Nick

so... ck1 concluded its too easy to go from duke to king and then ck2 comes and they make it easier??? :O

or did i misread your post?

TheStrangerOrg said:

so... ck1 concluded its too easy to go from duke to king and then ck2 comes and they make it easier??? :O

or did i misread your post?

Click to expand...

In some ways it's easier.

The biggest way it's easier is that you only need half the land in a title to create/usurp the title in CK2, whereas in CK1 you needed half. This is an incredibly important change for de jure Navarra because that country is only two provinces. In a CK2 with de jure Navarra anyone who can conquer a single province from a two-province minor has all the land he needs to become King if Navarra is a Kingdom.

You're reading a general argument about the ease of becoming King into my post that isn't there. I'm specifically referring to becoming King of a de jure Navarra, not usurping Germany or becoming King of Jerusalem. Since Navarra is two provinces and the creation requirement went down to 50% it is trivial to get the land to become King in CK2. In CK1 you needed both provinces, which was still pretty trivial, especially if the Muslims won the Reconquista, but less trivial then one province.

In general it's harder to become King in CK2. The 200 piety requirement for creating King-titles is new to CK2, and still trips me up. You can't steal titles with prestige, so CBs that allow you to become King are a lot harder to find.

Nick
EDIT: Lots of changes to increase clarity.

TheStrangerOrg said:

so... ck1 concluded its too easy to go from duke to king and then ck2 comes and they make it easier??? :O

or did i misread your post?

Click to expand...

The duke to king thing is Harder in CK2 (independance war needed).
The mechanic invite a claimant + press claim to conquer title in CK2 make it somewhat easier to gain a title which you don't own even one province. The usurpation mechanic with only 50% land is quite too easy too IMHO.

To be correct, Navarra is not a 2 provinces kingdom. 3 or 4 (the de jure duchy + Labourd/Dax)

What's wrong with a two province De-Jure Navarra?

So what if it's small and easy to get (relevant to other nations), it's not strong, it's poor and under-developed, much like the Kingdom of Cyprus should be in the game.

DominusNovus said:

From what I've seen, nobody has been saying that Iberia is particularly easy as a location to play.

Click to expand...

In my experience Iberia is THE easiest location to play. Lots of alliances to form, lots of tiny Muslims to attack, good coastlines, easy to move capital to conquered Islamic areas for massive tech boosts, you're Catholic, Spanish culture buildings are almost definitely better than their Italian and Russian counterparts (and probably others, too). Inevitably the large North African emirates/sultanates will attack you, but it's not hard to make an alliance with a large power like France or England who can protect you until Holy Orders come into play.

In general I've had the easiest time starting in Barcelona, especially compared to Rus-sian dukes or Irish earls.

Zultra said:

What's wrong with a two province De-Jure Navarra?

So what if it's small and easy to get (relevant to other nations), it's not strong, it's poor and under-developed, much like the Kingdom of Cyprus should be in the game.

Click to expand...

A two-province de jure Navarra would be identical to a one-province one. You'd only need 1 of the 2 provinces to usurp the duchy and the king title.

Navarra would have to have 3 de jure counties to increase the minimum holding to 2.

Arko said:

If Navarra is destroyed, it should be plausible that basque culture can disappear too, making the realm totally un-recretable and should make some players complain (as always) about it.
But the remaining basque dynasties should indeed be the first in row to claim the re-creation of the realm.

Click to expand...

+1

Cultures are assimilated by others over time, and when they do, any kingdom associated with that culture ceases to be relevant as a concept even. It's not like any amount of relevant conquests in Asia Minor would constitute a credible basis for proclaiming a reborn Hittite kingdom.