Suggestions regarding the upcoming viceroy and imperial administration laws

darthfanta · Oct 11, 2014

I am EXTREMELY IMPRESSED

by the upcoming viceroy and imperial administration laws.Nonetheless, I see some shortfalls.

I believe kingdoms should also be able to implement ducal level viceroyalties,with the same legal tech as empires for ducal leveled viceroyalties of course. Another thing is that I believe there should be a kingdom equivalent of imperial administration laws which would eventually include free duchy revocation. Why am I suggesting this? It's largely because I don't believe that empires alone should have the potential to be highly centralized. I believe that kingdoms as well have the same ability to be as centralized as an empire.In fact, some kingdoms like Poland were highly centralized in real life.

Another thing I want to suggest is that when the holder of the viceroyalty dies, at least ONE county should return to the crown, namely the capital of the viceroyalty. I am suggesting this because I believed that it is essential that you are able to appoint a landless character outside the viceroyal as viceroy. The system paradox implemented instead forces you to appoint landed characters from within the area of the viceroyalty as viceroy. The viceroy and his descendants should be able to keep all the other land they've accumulated. The capital of the viceroyalty on the other hand should return to the crown.

Terilien · Oct 11, 2014

I think something like that last bit about the county could be a good idea, so long as it comes at a later stage. I think it makes more sense in a medieval context though to have to choose from among your nobles, within or outside the viceroyality.

Also nothing says you can't choose someone from outside the viceroyalty...

darthfanta · Oct 11, 2014

Terilien said:
I think something like that last bit about the county could be a good idea, so long as it comes at a later stage. I think it makes more sense in a medieval context though to have to choose from among your nobles, within or outside the viceroyality.

Also nothing says you can't choose someone from outside the viceroyalty...

I don't think so. If you are able to implement something like viceroyalties in a supposed medieval society, it doubtful whether it can still be called feudal. At any rate, in highly centralized empires that were able have non-hereditary governorships, governors were generally from outside the region.Quite often,they were relatives of the emperor.

Actually, according to what read so far, all the counties given to the viceroy are retained by him and his family. This means you will have to somehow arbitrarily revoke someone's county to send someone outside the region as viceroy.

Talq · Oct 11, 2014

Viceroys must be landed to be appointed. There is no 'capital' to revert.

Also the much quoted Polish situation is deeply misleading. Firstly it was one reference dealing with a very successful king (his kingdom broke up some time after). Secondly, what is claimed, and what happens in practice is frequently different. For example, all of Charlemagne's counties were technically non-inheritable. Within a couple of generations they all were heritable. Many would have been effectively heritable immediately, as, after all the original holder has to die to consider succession.

The fact that there are no implications from non-inheritability of viceroyalties make them simply both useless and dangerous (in the sense of utterly trivialising internal politics) as general centralisation tool in this game.

darthfanta · Oct 11, 2014

Talq said:
Viceroys must be landed to be appointed. There is no 'capital' to revert.

Also the much quoted Polish situation is deeply misleading. Firstly it was one reference dealing with a very successful king (his kingdom broke up some time after). Secondly, what is claimed, and what happens in practice is frequently different. For example, all of Charlemagne's counties were technically non-inheritable. Within a couple of generations they all were heritable. Many would have been effectively heritable immediately, as, after all the original holder has to die to consider succession.

The fact that there are no implications from non-inheritability of viceroyalties make them simply both useless and dangerous (in the sense of utterly trivialising internal politics) as general centralisation tool in this game.

Which is why I am proposing that the capital of the viceroyalty should be returned to the crown upon the death of the Viceroy. This is a suggestion. We already know there won't be a capital to return. If the capital returns, you can land a landless character and then make him the new viceroy.

Lands made inheritable as you mentioned is already depicted either when the law is changed or when the viceroyals joined factions to make their lands inheritable.I don't understand what you are trying to imply in the second point. There's plenty of cases where there's successful non-inheritable governorships. Examples included the ERE and the rest of the middle east.

As for Poland, from what I've gathered, no noble owned more land than what would be a barony on the map.

TL_ · Oct 11, 2014

From a strictly game-focused standpoint, I like that this imperial administration requires you to become an empire. It provides an incentive to move up to that tier.

If not for crown laws, I would rather not waste money on creating a kingly title. Who cares about prestige when that huge hunk of gold could go toward financing levy upgrades, retinues, a new city, claims, mercenaries, or religious donations? Those crown laws give me an incentive to raise myself up to the level of king.

One issue I took with empires was that aside from allowing you to quickly annex kingdoms and vassalize the pope, there's no new legal options to really make your empire FEEL like an empire. The viceroyal system is a nice way of showing that you've modernized and are developing imperialized law. Besides -- there are a LOT of kingdoms in game, but not many empires. I'd rather not start noticing that every single kingdom in the world has viceroys in 1300. That's just silly.

darthfanta · Oct 11, 2014

TL_ said:
From a strictly game-focused standpoint, I like that this imperial administration requires you to become an empire. It provides an inventive to move up to that tier.

If not for crown laws, I would rather not waste money on creating a kingly title. Who cares about prestige when that huge hunk of gold could go toward financing levy upgrades, retinues, a new city, claims, mercenaries, or religious donations? Those crown laws give me an incentive to raise myself up to the level of king.

One issue I took with empires was that aside from allowing you to quickly annex kingdoms and vassalize the pope, there's no new legal options to really make your empire FEEL like an empire. The viceroyal system is a nice way of showing that you've modernized and are developing imperialized law. Besides -- there are a LOT of kingdoms in game, but not many empires. I'd rather not start noticing that every single kingdom in the world has viceroys in 1300. That's just silly.

Well, there is a reason why you might move up a tier now. Vassal limit. This means that if your kingdom gets rather large, it's far more efficient to create king level titles under you to save vassal limit.

Me_ · Oct 11, 2014

TL_ said:
From a strictly game-focused standpoint, I like that this imperial administration requires you to become an empire. It provides an incentive to move up to that tier.

If not for crown laws, I would rather not waste money on creating a kingly title. Who cares about prestige when that huge hunk of gold could go toward financing levy upgrades, retinues, a new city, claims, mercenaries, or religious donations? Those crown laws give me an incentive to raise myself up to the level of king.

One issue I took with empires was that aside from allowing you to quickly annex kingdoms and vassalize the pope, there's no new legal options to really make your empire FEEL like an empire. The viceroyal system is a nice way of showing that you've modernized and are developing imperialized law. Besides -- there are a LOT of kingdoms in game, but not many empires. I'd rather not start noticing that every single kingdom in the world has viceroys in 1300. That's just silly.

I've got to agree with this.

Going from count to duke is a big step - you start amassing technology points, vassals become more of an issue, factions appear and you can expand in a more free-flow monner, as you're no loger hampered directly by demense limit.

Going from duke to king is also a big step - you can no longer amass duchies, but you now have a proper feudal ladder, you gain crown laws and new ways to expand via vassal claims on duchies, if you're Orthodox/Miaphysite/Nestorian, you can also get a patriarch and decadence finally starts to be important for Muslims, Catholics can set up an Antipope. You also get a few extra minor titles to hand out.

Going from King to Emperor, though - nothing new, just more of the same, you already have all of the above, the only difference is that as a Catholic you can now vassalize the Pope, plus vassal management becomes easier as fewer people "desire" your primary title. The Byzantine Empire is an exception, with extra events, duchy revocation, purpleborn heirs and a whole set of minor titles. All other Empires are just big kingdoms.

Search

Suggestions regarding the upcoming viceroy and imperial administration laws

darthfanta

Basileus Basileōn

Terilien

Sergeant

darthfanta

Basileus Basileōn

Talq

Field Marshal

darthfanta

Basileus Basileōn

TL_

Captain

darthfanta

Basileus Basileōn

Me_

Myself