One of the main points of including dynastic politics is that is together with the ability to form a cabinet of sorts rids the game of abstracts.
1, one of the ugliest, though practical features of EU2 are the horrible slidersettings which are unhistoric, ugly, gamey, highly artifical and who's only benefit is that they are practical from a gamebalance point of wiew. Now, imagine these arn't there.
2, one of the main features of politics and alliances of the time was dynastic. There is a reason so many of the wars fought have the word succesion in their name. Imagine this included in CBs, Treaties etc.
3, one of the main goals of foreign policy of the time was dynastic. You tried to meddle in your neighbours courts to ensure a successor better suited to your cause, religion, alliances etc. This is now (eu2) a non-existant diplomacy feature.
So here comes my joint proposal for dynastic ties, personal involvement, inheritance, alliances, domestic policy and war.
Every rules carries a certain domestic policy and different settings, together with different relations modifiers with surrounding nations/rulers, proness to different religions, and to the four groups represented by the parliament. (nobility, clergy, merchant and peasants). This together with the internal situation (how strong different groups are politicly).
This is a post reflecting what I'm after from the cabinet, internal politics, from a different thread.
Imainge every ruler has a different set of agendas, policys, relations, etc. and also several different succesors. Them too with their agenda, traits, relations etc. And it's not at all clear which successor should be the next guy in charge. This is instead influenced by the stability of the country (not the -3, 3 figure, but say actual turmoil), where an unstable country has a higher volatility among the succersors. And now it becomes intresting.
The different internal groups of course have their favourites with policies better suited for them, and off course your neighbourse are more than willing to meddle in succesion. By war if neccesary. So we create a diplomatic option of supporting a succersor either openly or secretly with money, troops and alliances. This boosts his chences of being elected (although most nations are meddling with their different choices, so it's no cakewalk.)
Then the combined internal support, foreign support and original succession order are combined and a winner is the new king. The player is off course given some sort of help here so that he may more or less choose his succesor when the stab is high (and get a russophile shoved down his throat as sweden when weak). Most of the succesors are of course from the same dynasty. But some exeptions are there.
So now you have changed the domestic policy of your country/your neighbours.
But sometimes you get the choice of creating a dynastic alliance between yourself and some other country and then there is an chance that their will be successors from his dynasty in your country and vice versa. if you play this card carefully you may then place your dynastic relative in a good position of inheritance. Either total (annex), or new ruler only, and of course a chain of the two, where you may be a succeror in the next step. A nice war may of course alter the succesion order slighltly by securing the correct inheritance. And it's worth it because an dynastic tie (bourbon france and spain), means effectivcly securing that border, trade benefits, easier alliance, very good relations etc.
Then of course you get a notification when some other dynasty may inherit some other country (they are first in succesion somewhere), and if you are of the samedynasty as the rulers free CB. or if it would change the powerbalance too much - WAR. included in the peace options as england in their war with france is the possibility to enforce withdrawal of the french pretender to the spanish throne. If his spanish doemstic support is still high enough he may still be elected but this can be changed by a war with spain proper.
So the entire dynastic proposal here is included in two UIs
1, the dimplomatic screen, whre you can filddle with the succesion of others, and see the support others are giving.
2, the policy/cabinet screen, where the groups you have to keep happy are brokering, demanding and bickering and where you have to make a choice between upsetting them by chosing freely among the candidates, or by going whith there choice and according policies. When the groups loyalty are too low you get revolts, economic problems and such. instead of the standard stab point you can se tha happines of the different groups and also how powerful they are. and you change the domestic policies by doing this. This is not nessesary to the dynastic system I propose. Cabinet members whom you pick may still have some opinions on who is to rule the country. And different gov systems are easily shown by the importance of the monarch. In a complete beuracracy the change in monarch is irrelevant, in france it's relevant indeed.
The entire system is simple, directly related to gameplay, dimplomacy, wars, alliances, domestis policy.
It replaces feautures that may be seen as gamey and illigocal (sliders, diplo-annex etc).
It is easy on the eye, simple to control and learn and takes very little micromanaging (if you don't care about dynasties in other countries you don't have too meddle. with it)
It helps to put emphasis and logic on important in game features.
1, one of the ugliest, though practical features of EU2 are the horrible slidersettings which are unhistoric, ugly, gamey, highly artifical and who's only benefit is that they are practical from a gamebalance point of wiew. Now, imagine these arn't there.
2, one of the main features of politics and alliances of the time was dynastic. There is a reason so many of the wars fought have the word succesion in their name. Imagine this included in CBs, Treaties etc.
3, one of the main goals of foreign policy of the time was dynastic. You tried to meddle in your neighbours courts to ensure a successor better suited to your cause, religion, alliances etc. This is now (eu2) a non-existant diplomacy feature.
So here comes my joint proposal for dynastic ties, personal involvement, inheritance, alliances, domestic policy and war.
Every rules carries a certain domestic policy and different settings, together with different relations modifiers with surrounding nations/rulers, proness to different religions, and to the four groups represented by the parliament. (nobility, clergy, merchant and peasants). This together with the internal situation (how strong different groups are politicly).
This is a post reflecting what I'm after from the cabinet, internal politics, from a different thread.
Quift said:
Imainge every ruler has a different set of agendas, policys, relations, etc. and also several different succesors. Them too with their agenda, traits, relations etc. And it's not at all clear which successor should be the next guy in charge. This is instead influenced by the stability of the country (not the -3, 3 figure, but say actual turmoil), where an unstable country has a higher volatility among the succersors. And now it becomes intresting.
The different internal groups of course have their favourites with policies better suited for them, and off course your neighbourse are more than willing to meddle in succesion. By war if neccesary. So we create a diplomatic option of supporting a succersor either openly or secretly with money, troops and alliances. This boosts his chences of being elected (although most nations are meddling with their different choices, so it's no cakewalk.)
Then the combined internal support, foreign support and original succession order are combined and a winner is the new king. The player is off course given some sort of help here so that he may more or less choose his succesor when the stab is high (and get a russophile shoved down his throat as sweden when weak). Most of the succesors are of course from the same dynasty. But some exeptions are there.
So now you have changed the domestic policy of your country/your neighbours.
But sometimes you get the choice of creating a dynastic alliance between yourself and some other country and then there is an chance that their will be successors from his dynasty in your country and vice versa. if you play this card carefully you may then place your dynastic relative in a good position of inheritance. Either total (annex), or new ruler only, and of course a chain of the two, where you may be a succeror in the next step. A nice war may of course alter the succesion order slighltly by securing the correct inheritance. And it's worth it because an dynastic tie (bourbon france and spain), means effectivcly securing that border, trade benefits, easier alliance, very good relations etc.
Then of course you get a notification when some other dynasty may inherit some other country (they are first in succesion somewhere), and if you are of the samedynasty as the rulers free CB. or if it would change the powerbalance too much - WAR. included in the peace options as england in their war with france is the possibility to enforce withdrawal of the french pretender to the spanish throne. If his spanish doemstic support is still high enough he may still be elected but this can be changed by a war with spain proper.
So the entire dynastic proposal here is included in two UIs
1, the dimplomatic screen, whre you can filddle with the succesion of others, and see the support others are giving.
2, the policy/cabinet screen, where the groups you have to keep happy are brokering, demanding and bickering and where you have to make a choice between upsetting them by chosing freely among the candidates, or by going whith there choice and according policies. When the groups loyalty are too low you get revolts, economic problems and such. instead of the standard stab point you can se tha happines of the different groups and also how powerful they are. and you change the domestic policies by doing this. This is not nessesary to the dynastic system I propose. Cabinet members whom you pick may still have some opinions on who is to rule the country. And different gov systems are easily shown by the importance of the monarch. In a complete beuracracy the change in monarch is irrelevant, in france it's relevant indeed.
The entire system is simple, directly related to gameplay, dimplomacy, wars, alliances, domestis policy.
It replaces feautures that may be seen as gamey and illigocal (sliders, diplo-annex etc).
It is easy on the eye, simple to control and learn and takes very little micromanaging (if you don't care about dynasties in other countries you don't have too meddle. with it)
It helps to put emphasis and logic on important in game features.
