Not signed at all.
-1
And I am very glad family prestige no longer increases vassal limits.
-1
And I am very glad family prestige no longer increases vassal limits.
Petition to remove/replace the Vassal Limit
- Thread starter Myrten
- 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.
As you get a new duchy give it to the least happy king simple. Your problem is you can't adapt and are trying to stick to historical borders when all that matters is opinions.
.png){kind=avatar}
I thought we were discussing possibilities what to do with this problem, but if you force me to make a black and white decision I have to recant my previous statement and I therefore advocate removing the vassal limit altogether.
If I were to remove the vassal limit from the game I'm currently playing would it render the save unstable, or would it work without any hiccups? And if I were to play Ironman mode would I still be able to do it?
The problem is that big blob Empires (Player or AI) are TOO stable. The vassal limit is just another attempt by the destabilize them. Factions were suppose to do it......they only scale well for Kingdoms <200 holdings.
I personally like the idea of unstable Empires........I wish they reinstated the Distance Penalty they got rid of with patch 1.05-6.
If you want to be rid of the vassal limit, please tell us (the supporters) what should replace it as a destabilizing/Anti Blobbing Mechanic.
I personally like the idea of unstable Empires........I wish they reinstated the Distance Penalty they got rid of with patch 1.05-6.
If you want to be rid of the vassal limit, please tell us (the supporters) what should replace it as a destabilizing/Anti Blobbing Mechanic.
.png){kind=avatar}
31/44 On vassal limit, and the only kings that have multiple titles are of small kingdoms, Navarra, Asturias etc... I also have two holy orders and Venice. Its pretty easy to manage the vassal limit.
Edit: This is with max centralization.
Edit: This is with max centralization.
"Arbitrary" trait should up vassal limit due to the efficiency of arbitrary rule compared to competent, deliberated rule.
Downside is that all your vassals still hate you.
Downside is that all your vassals still hate you.
31/44 On vassal limit, and the only kings that have multiple titles are of small kingdoms, Navarra, Asturias etc... I also have two holy orders and Venice. Its pretty easy to manage the vassal limit.
Edit: This is with max centralization.
Yeah, I'll admit that I was one of the people who was concerned that PDX was going to overdo it when it came out, but in practice it's been fine. Combined with getting rid of the king malus (which I despised) I'd say it's been a huge net positive for my game. Especially when you think that it's not working with decadence to control the Muslim blobs...
About the only thing I would like to be changed is that temporary titles (ie, vassal rebellions) shouldn't count against your limit. I spread my dynasty throughout the realm, and when one of them revolts they usually pull in EVERYBODY else on one side or the other. Suddenly your number of vassals goes up by a dozen and you can't transfer titles because 90% of your vassals are at war with someone. That is a pain. Everything else is great.
Why is that? +1 vassal limit per 5 or 10000 dynasty prestige would be kinda nice and also hard to achieve.
First of all, I think the limit is already plenty generous. If anything, it should be reduced. Secondly, Muslims would be doubly punished. Firstly because they already suffer from the vassal limits being attached to decadence. Secondly, they have to kill and not expand their own dynasty. I understand some people wish to see The Abbasid implode as soon as possible and thus become an easy prey in one century or so of gameplay. Well, I don't. I would rather see them as a big challenge in the 769 starting date, as they should be, and not the opposite. If the decadent ERE can flourish and stably expand until 1453 in all games and bookmarks, I think it's fair to at least give a chance for The Abbasid to do the same.
Well, the ERE has been a problem for ages (only time they werent, was when they got crushed by muslim invasions and Jihads, and that was just replacing the problem with a bigger one..), but it's not a case for keeping the Abbasids (or any other empire for that matter) extremely strong..
You are right, this would give Muslim players a disadvantage. But come one, +1 for every 5000 dynasty prestige is something you need to spend couple of centuries on getting. Having that wouldn't cause much harm.
And at least in my game the Muslims are a force to be reckoned with. And also very annoying. I can't just play a quiet ERE game unless I accept that Muslims eat up all and everything. Abbasids destroy the poor Nubians and Ethiopians, pretty much wiping out the black population of eastern africa. Also they expand far into India. Umayyads take all of Francia sans Italy, only to be stopped by their apparent lack of a holy war CB against (Germanic?) Pagans.
But there must be a thing called gameplay balance, and for that matter the ERE already is a very stable empire. So unless you do something to make the ERE weaker, it's not fair only to mess with the Muslim mechanics. If you think about it, the ERE has imperial administration (+ 10 added to vassal limit - Is that right?), viceroys, free revocation, free imprisonment (by asking your patriarch to excommunicate anyone), heirs born in purple, strong retinues, primogeniture succession. The ERE is by far the most overpowered empire in the game. The only thing they don't have is free CBs against Christians.
I'm liking centralization more and more the more I play the 2.2 game, since it's working very well to deblob, and make the internals more interesting.