so, heres something that kind of makes me want to pull my hair out. whats the deal with the capital of upper lorraine being trier? why is the capital of lower lorraine cologne? westphalia, osnabruck? champagne, reims? and so on, you get the picture
the thing about making historic bishoprics the capital of certain duchies is the ai will stop at nothing to get their hands on it, and this can get extremely dumb when the primary building is a temple. if they think too long about moving capital, theyll realise theyre not allowed to hold their capital county and give it away, and then immediately get mad because they want it back. if they DO manage to set it as the new capital, they kind of just soak the wrong holding type penalties because they dont know how to change the primary barony and at present theres no way for them to tear down the bishopric and build a castle in its place. even when the primary holding IS a castle, such as in the case of trier and cologne, the situation is still pretty stinky since two historic electoral bishoprics just disappear without fail within the first few months of gametime, which honestly kind of takes me out of it (alt history is whatever, but when it happens EVERY time, i dont know about that one chief)
i feel like a lot of the way western europe has been carved up has been explicitly with 867 in mind sparing no thought whatsoever as to how thats going to mess with 1066. mainz, trier, and cologne should have duchies of their own, if not in 867 then definitely in 1066, and the de jure capitals of affected duchies should be literally any other county. ideally youd wanna have duchy capitals just not be static but im not holding my breath on that one, ive a sneaking suspicion thats hardcoded and going to be an issue for the entire lifecycle of the videogame
apologies if my tone is a little rude, im just kind of frustrated about it. i just dont understand how this could have been overlooked
the thing about making historic bishoprics the capital of certain duchies is the ai will stop at nothing to get their hands on it, and this can get extremely dumb when the primary building is a temple. if they think too long about moving capital, theyll realise theyre not allowed to hold their capital county and give it away, and then immediately get mad because they want it back. if they DO manage to set it as the new capital, they kind of just soak the wrong holding type penalties because they dont know how to change the primary barony and at present theres no way for them to tear down the bishopric and build a castle in its place. even when the primary holding IS a castle, such as in the case of trier and cologne, the situation is still pretty stinky since two historic electoral bishoprics just disappear without fail within the first few months of gametime, which honestly kind of takes me out of it (alt history is whatever, but when it happens EVERY time, i dont know about that one chief)
i feel like a lot of the way western europe has been carved up has been explicitly with 867 in mind sparing no thought whatsoever as to how thats going to mess with 1066. mainz, trier, and cologne should have duchies of their own, if not in 867 then definitely in 1066, and the de jure capitals of affected duchies should be literally any other county. ideally youd wanna have duchy capitals just not be static but im not holding my breath on that one, ive a sneaking suspicion thats hardcoded and going to be an issue for the entire lifecycle of the videogame
apologies if my tone is a little rude, im just kind of frustrated about it. i just dont understand how this could have been overlooked