Personal unions are a vital part of christian nations' gameplay. Although the implementation isn't bad, it could be handled much better. Right now PUs seem to just be vassals with a few additional interactions and 40 more years before allowing the integration.
Here are a few things that would, in my opinion, improve the personal unions:
Anyway, that's all I have to say, let me know if you like the idea or not.
Oh, and I'm really sorry if there are any inconsistencies or grammatical erros in the post, I'm very tired for some reason.
Here are a few things that would, in my opinion, improve the personal unions:
- The political unions
Contrary to popular belief, unions shouldn't be exclusive to monarchies. There are documented cases of both theocracies and republics in political unions. I think that for the sake of argument 3 examples from the EU timeframe will be enough:
-union between Teutonic and Livonian Orders: the Baltic Orders' union started in 1236 after Brothers' of the Sword defeat at Saule. Although the union was very loose by the game's start it was still extant and should be included in the game.
-English-Scottish political union: even in times of civil war, England and Scotland managed to hold onto their union. If the government change happened to England in game, the union would most likely break. Cromwell even had an ambition of adding a fellow burgher ruled state into the union - the Netherlands. And if we're talking about the English relations with United Provinces...
-Dutch-English union: As a result of glorious revolution of 1688, William III of Orange, Stadhouder of the Netherlands, became a king of England. This situation would be impossible in EU4, as the Netherlands are considered a republic and England was a kingdom at that time. Problem could also be resolved by allowing NED to get in unions if they're controlled by the orangists but... why not both?
- More control over getting unions
Everyone had one or two(or fourteen) games where that old, heirless prick on your ally's throne refused to die for a dozen years only for you to see that, instead of union you were promised, they're changing their dynasty. It would be really nice if we could get into agreements with countries we marry about what happens on their succession. To implement such mechanic in a complete way, a dynastic system would be needed, but that's the topic for some other thread.
- Permanent "Enforce Union" Casus Belli
I've said it once before, even made a thread about it, but it's worth repeating. The "enforce union" casus belli disappearing after ten or fifteen years is dumb! Look at England, fighting for over 100 years with France for their throne! Or Polish-Lithuanian Vasas who had tried to get back on the Swedish throne for generations. CB could only be removed in a peace deal or by the claimant deciding to renounce his claims, probably by a new dynastic action in diplomatic interface.
- More interactions with the PU
To make a difference between the union and other subjects more clear, more unique interactions could be added, for example:
-Release the partner: In case of unwanted or rebellious juniors you could always release them from the union. The former partner would get +100 relations and your relative on its throne not to weaken your dynasty.
-Seize Land: If you want to manage some land by yourself or to make your PU's integration faster or just want to take some land before you release the junior(see the previous point), you'll be able to take the whole areas from it. You can think of this interaction as of a prosthesis for instances like Spain taking the Netherlands from Austria after their PU broke or Poland taking the whole Ruthenia from Lithuania before they merged into the Commonwealth in 1569. The seized land would require coring and your PU's relations and/or liberty desire would be impacted.
-Render vassal: The action allows the suzerain to give or take vassals from his PU's control.
-Change the senior state: If you're a small state and manage to get personal union with, say, France - you're pretty much f*cked. If France declares independence you're almost guaranteed to die, but on the other hand releasing such a tasty blob would be a real bummer. To resolve this problem, you could always flip your senior-junior order - your tag would change to the former junior and the country you've previously played as would become the new junior partner in the union.
- Autonomy Stages
As I've said, PU system doesn't really reflect how it worked in real life. I know, some abstractions need to be made, otherwise personal unions would be too confusing. To make up for this a new autonomy stage system could be created to show different approaches towards ruling in at least two countries at once:
*Full autonomy - the subject is allowed to pretty much rule by itself. It can wage wars, deny senior's call to arms, have vassals and doesn't have to pay his suzerain anything(no syphoning income) and cannot be integrated via diplomatic action. The malus is, the senior partner cannot answer defensive call to arms until its "subject" reaches -50% warscore.
*Moderate autonomy - subject can have vassals and wage its own wars but only if its overlord allows it. If the junior doesn't want to fight in a war it will be forced to pay subsidies and give up half of its manpower. Senior can syphon income. Before integration the overlord needs to wait 60 years. Changing autonomy stage to this one gives no liberty desire to the subject.
*Regular union - pretty much what we've got in the game at the moment. Changing autonomy stage to this one from moderate will increase the subject's LD by 10%.
*Moderate control - the junior partner needs to pay part of his monthly income to the suzerain. It also gets negative modifiers to development and building cost but gets lower core creation. The suzerain is allowed to take away ships built in its PU's docks at 50% discount and increased liberty desire(unless the junior is in debt).
Before integration the overlord needs to wait 35 years. Changing autonomy stage to this one from the regular will increase the subject's LD by 15%.
*Direct control - the junior partner needs to pay a big portion(base >25%) of his monthly income. Maluses to building and development cost stay the same. Core creation modifier is removed. The senior will be able to directly control its junior's armies during wars.
Before integration the overlord needs to wait 20 years. Changing autonomy stage to this one from the moderate control will increase the subject's LD by 30%, but goes down twice as fast as in previous stages.
To be fair, I'm not certain what should be needed to change autonomy stage. Perhaps good relation with the junior partner, as well as high prestige and legitimacy? With which stage the junior starts would depend on how much development does it have compared to the overlord. In a unique case of Poland and Lithuania, the event should set the union at the highest autonomy, to represent bizarre relations between the two states.
Anyway, that's all I have to say, let me know if you like the idea or not.
Oh, and I'm really sorry if there are any inconsistencies or grammatical erros in the post, I'm very tired for some reason.
Last edited:
- 8
Upvote
0