can we PLEASE get a "refuse title" option for elective?

[Xenrek]

because seriously, im sitting here working out plans to build up my power, i dont mind supporting a king, ill snag my own kingdom when hes an emperor, and eventually overthrow him when IM ready.

but noooo, civil war for elective monarchy; okay i can deal with that, war puts my plans back a little bit, gotta wait for it to be over to fight some claims against other vassals.

but incessantly, unfailingly, every time, king decides to suicide every soldier of the realm, both personal and vassal levy, into 3 different simultaneous wars, and then die getting his head bashed in when he falls on his own axe. and unfailingly i then get stuck voted in as the new king dealing with a fracturing realm and hostiles coming in from all sides, completely now incapable of focusing on my claims that arent going to be inherited when i inevitably die in the 50 years itll take to finally knock down these wars, IF i win.

like seriously, for elective, cant i please just say like, "dont vote for me" "i know im the only vassal not a total dick, but i dont want the bloody crown"? etc?

hell even in a stable realm id rather just build up my personal demesne and decide wars on my own as a super-vassal, than sit there and fight off assassination attempts as king.

 

[Sirrobert1]

Can't you use those fabricated claims to just revoke the titles when you are the king though?

 

[dragoon9105]

He probably wanted to form a custom kingdom for a better COA. The solution is the same one they could have implemented for years a simple " If a player isn't voting for himself, The AI wont vote for the player." condition somewhere. At this point they could even make it a menu option.

 

[Xenrek]

Can't you use those fabricated claims to just revoke the titles when you are the king though?

when the previous king went out of his way to turn the council into a holy hell hole of politics and turn every duke into a mini-king, revoking that way just turns into a "revolt against the tyranny of X"-fest :/

He probably wanted to form a custom kingdom for a better COA. The solution is the same one they could have implemented for years a simple " If a player isn't voting for himself, The AI wont vote for the player." condition somewhere. At this point they could even make it a menu option.

yeah a bit simplistic but would work

 

[Thossi]

Oh, that would've been so nice. Had a game (kind of) ruined for me once.

Firstly, by being elected Emperor of Francia. Okay, that wasn't so bad, and I guess I did a better job of expanding the realm than previous emperors had. Managed to get the Kingdom of England (due to a crusade being called on some Lollard or whatever they were) into the realm; the Kingdom of Jerusalem (but then I screwed that up a bit by granting a lot of counties there to Knights of Santiago, thinking I could just offer them Vassalisation afterwards ... turns out that's not quite how it works, but whatever); Andalusia became mine as well through a crusade (and the vassal I made king of the place actually did a good job of mopping up rest of the peninsula); and I got a good deal of Scandinavia through holy warring any neighbouring rebels (who weren't a part of the defensive pact against me). (Well, in a few ruler's lifetimes ... I didn't really mind being an emperor once I was made one, and eventually managed to keep the empire Primogeniture for a few generations, before losing to the elective faction...)

But secondly, when everyone in my realm decided to vote for my relative, the Duke of Småland, rather than my own heir (who unfortunately wasn't my son but nephew, and was also heir to the Kingdoms of Germany and Bavaria through primogeniture), and then a large portion of the Empire (including my other relative, the French Jewish Queen of England with a Sunni female heir) rebelling in an Independence war ... yeah, that's when I wished for the option to choose if I wanted to continue playing as my closest relative (the one set to inherit Germany, or thinking back and wishing I could've avoided becoming emperor in the first place.

After all, had I just been able to remain vassal King, I could've avoided all that ... and my original plan had to just play and remain the duke of Franconia throughout the whole thing.

 

[fleetothemoon]

Agree with the OP. I suggested this several times across the past several years. Others have raised it too.

I get that there are historical circumstances where people are essentially forced to become the ruler despite their wishes (e.g., in Ottoman Empire, Byzantine, Good old' intact Rome etc), but from a game-play perspective, sometimes a player just wants to remain playing a vassal.

Also, unlike in history, where being elected top-dog can grant you the opportunity expand your power base even after your dynasty lost the top dog position, in the game, this actually doesn't happen and you tend to be weaker rather than stronger as a post-election vassal than a pre-election vassal since any non-dejure vassals (that is, not de jure to the title you own before you were elected*) you obtained during pre-election will change their direct liege to the Emperor, meaning that when you lose your top dog position, you will also lose the vassals you obtained.

In addition, upper tier title laws are usually less centralized than your own original lower title laws - this and the fact that you may be forced to control the elective capital means that in that you would most likely have to distribute some of your demesne out - a process which may be difficult to reverse when you lose your elective position

Overall in the game, it is pretty much never really worth trying to obtain rulership of an elective temporarily, whether it is a republic or a monarchy. The exception is if you are a very small elector who is just starting out, and can benefit from stealing demesne off your subjects when you become the top-liege, but that would pretty much NEVER happen since no one would vote for a nobody, and you won't have the funds to bribe them.

In short, if you want to be ruler, you better be in it for good. Unfortunately, this really conflicts with how sometimes, you are pretty much forced to become a ruler.

 

[Vaximillian]

Yes, this hit me yesterday as the king of Bavaria having been voted into emperorship. I managed to dodge the first narrow elections but in the second I won by a landslide even though I didn't vote for myself.
After my emperor died I ended up losing my non-de-jure Bavarian vassals and, more importantly, my ancestral cradle homelands of Alsace. And even when I switched to the current emperor, the council wouldn't allow me to give those back, as they deemed my new king already strong enough.

A simple “You have been elected, accept the crown? y/n” dialogue would have sufficed.

 

[RoverGrover]

While we're on the subject, can we not get an opinion bonus for having been voted in? I find it pretty hard to believe that people vote me into office and then 3 months later declare war against my perceived tyranny. At least give me like a 12 month "voted in" opinion boost or something. Just an admittedly very tired thought

 

[ThatStrategyGuy]

There should be an option to request that others don't vote for you, but other people should be able to ignore you and vote you in if they think that you're the only suitable candidate. Obviously some traits (Proud comes to mind) should make you unable to request that people don't support you.

 

[vandevere]

Yes, this hit me yesterday as the king of Bavaria having been voted into emperorship. I managed to dodge the first narrow elections but in the second I won by a landslide even though I didn't vote for myself.
After my emperor died I ended up losing my non-de-jure Bavarian vassals and, more importantly, my ancestral cradle homelands of Alsace. And even when I switched to the current emperor, the council wouldn't allow me to give those back, as they deemed my new king already strong enough.

A simple “You have been elected, accept the crown? y/n” dialogue would have sufficed.

Yes. Losing all the lands I started out with was what made me hate being elected so much. In ToG Start, I always enjoyed playing Welf Duke of Anjou. I have several counties, and can usually manage to create the Duchy of Normandy too. after a few generations, France goes elective; and a few generations after that, I get voted King. Of Aquitaine.

So, I lose my Duchy titles, and all of my counties that I've built up over the years, and, in return, I get a Kingly title, the duchy of Bourbon, and the county of Le Marche, with only two holdings.

Sorry, but that's punishment. Punishment, for something I didn't ask for, didn't want, and would have tried everything I could think of to avoid.

If you get elected King, you should be able to bring your original titles and land with you. I can tell you no real life Duke of Anjou/Normandy would agree to losing all of his lands in return for a precarious crown and one dinky county!

 

[HREmperor]

There should be an option to request that others don't vote for you, but other people should be able to ignore you and vote you in if they think that you're the only suitable candidate. Obviously some traits (Proud comes to mind) should make you unable to request that people don't support you.

I don't agree with having traits disallow you from dropping out of the race. Taking away a player's choice is rarely fun, and it's not like every proud character would want to be Emperor. A character might see being an honorary Emperor who's basically controlled by his vassals as being beneath him, and would rather have complete power and influence in his own holdings. He might recognise that becoming the Emperor could actually make him and his family weaker in the long run.

 

[gja102]

I hate the 'get voted in, but then lose your ancestral home' thing too.

Suggestion - have the game distinguish between family holdings, and royal ones. Royal holdings would be specifically tied to the kingdom and the centralisation laws, wheras family holdings are ringfenced and run on their own inheritance laws as before. Say you're the Duke of York running Primogeniture, and you get elected to King of England - you would just get the English Royal holdings (ie London) as a bonus, safe in the knowledge that your eldest son will still get all of York intact, regardless of who is elected in London next.

 

[Yenzen]

You know that thing about the best leaders being those who do not seek it?

They're all making you their leader because they know that even if you won't , that you would be the most competent for the task. They chose you because it'd be hard to fix the mess they created. Not like you can deny inheritance just because you're the oldest, either.

 

[fleetothemoon]

You know that thing about the best leaders being those who do not seek it?

They're all making you their leader because they know that even if you won't , that you would be the most competent for the task. They chose you because it'd be hard to fix the mess they created. Not like you can deny inheritance just because you're the oldest, either.

You missed all the points that others have already made.

E.g., it doesn't make sense for them to all choose you, only to rebel and support another person immediately once you're elected

E.g., it doesnt make sense that vassals become weaker from being elected emperor due to demesne loss/loss of non-dejure vassals

E.g., From a gameplay persective, it doesnt make sense because people may not want to play as a top ruler to begin with, and forcing them to play as such is a questionable design, especially considering the aforementioned points.

 

[Andrzej2]

I think whole election thing should be reworked a little. It shouldn't be instant. When king dies in the elective monarchy there should be no ruler just interrex (working the same way as regent). And you should have some time to influence elections (interrex could also have some special actions like delcaring candidate from minority faction as the king - but he should start with tyranny becouse he basically gained power by coup) and to refuse to take throne if chosen and election would continue.

 

[yourworstnightm]

Actually a declare candidacy feature for elective kingdoms would be great, to be considered by your fellow vassals for the crown you actually have to show interest in it. Could also come with event chains that only happens to candidates where you try to sway electors to vote for you.

 

[Sirrobert1]

Actually a declare candidacy feature for elective kingdoms would be great, to be considered by your fellow vassals for the crown you actually have to show interest in it. Could also come with event chains that only happens to candidates where you try to sway electors to vote for you.

Long as you can declare your son's candidacy in his name.

 

[yourworstnightm]

Long as you can declare your son's candidacy in his name.

Of course, unlanded sons should be candidates automatically, and AI with claims should Always declare candidacy. You should probablybe able to declare any courtier with a claim a candidate.