Those things may be intended to matter, but they don't. A blood brother best friend +100 opinion councilor will still vote against the kind unless a favor is involved.
But he did. I can show saves with such members. A blood brother best friend +100 opinion will vote for the king until he isn't highly into Glory Hunter, Zealot or Pragmatic agenda.
If you're trying to say such character CAN be not a loyalist - yeah, he
can. He should have Cynical, Craven, Just AND (not or) Paranoid without Content, Arbitrary, Slothful, Greedy, Zealous to became Pragmatic with such loyalist traits. He should have Brave, Honest AND Proud without Craven, Shy, Humble, Content to became Glory Hunter. Also he can be a zealot, if he is Zealous and there is not active crusade where you are not patricipiating (he need just humble or crusader without content or liege having 200 piety).
It's really simple. The one and only complications happens with priority having two or more equal values. Theoretically it should be loyalist, but in practice there are complications with power.
But how a system that takes
traits and power, not just one number, have a problem it isn't take traits?
Really, if you're speaking about "hey, I can't understand how this system works", I'm up for you, I always say, here and everywhere where I speak about Conclave -
Developers should explain how this system works. I also believe it should be more complex, but really, it's not easy to catch how PRIMITIVE system works without manual or explanations. So yeah, the main mistake Paradox made with Conclave is that they changed rules working here for 4 years and don't explain it brightly. They didn't tell - "hey, guys, that times when everything that matters was opinion is gone, now traits are in play too!" and they didn't tell how exactly traits are matter.
It can be datamined from script and event folders (and it's nice to write bugs if code don't works as intended - code is commented, so we can guess). And yes, I believe it's bad, and it's why good expansion - at least I'm started to know traits for my mine vassals, not just opinion - at least expansion to right direction, had bad, bad reviews.
However, in the current state of this game, if the council votes against the implementation of increased council power, it will then immediately declare war to increase council power. Every time. Without fail, unless the king's personal military is stronger than the council's.
Yes. That's why you need to have personal military stronger than the council if you want to break nobility rules.
It's essentially Magna Carta history: king granted nobles privilegies, then he revokes it, nobles rebels, king loses, repeat privilegies. Or look into de Monfor Parliament - and look into Witenaġemot and it's constitutions. And it's bad feudal simulator if you haven't, well, feudals, not just a stand for a flag because ruler can't play North Korea.
As such, from a gameplay standpoint, the council has literally no effect on how the game plays out, except that once every year or two the player has to put down a rebellion consisting of every landed councilor, guaranteed.
That's not true. I'm playing with council, and I haven't council rebellions - because I'm powerful and don't create a council that is more powerful that I am if I'm going to revoke powers. I have to see numbers about how many troops vassals have, which traits do they have, where their alliances are. I'm doing literally such things you're proclaiming "just isn't matter", and I haven't rebellions from council.
And, by the way, I implemented Imperial Government to a tribal, so I was came all the way from full council unlocked to full council abolishment.
Their personality, opinion, relationship, ambitions, traits and life focuses are immaterial. They will simply always do the thing that points toward increased council power, even if they voted against that same increase yesterday and lost a war pushing for that exact thing six months ago.
So it's "I can't understand rules how council take a vote so it's irrational"? No, their personality, opinion, relationships and traits are materlal. But they like to have power if they are not content - and content councilors are loyalists and don't enter factions. They are not irrational, they just have ratio besides "hey king is great we all have to make everything he say"/"hey the king is a son of Satan we must kill him and burn his body", how it's bad? For me, it's bad because they have too little triggers and too predictable, but you say quite the opposite.
Why councilors should APPROVE A KING WHO MADE THEM TO FORFIET THEIR RIGHTS? Why should they? Especially if a king haven't power to prove it? They really can say "hey, our king is good, but he is taken too much. After all, if he was really a good man and our friend, he won't forfiet our rights." (That's why every big vassal have a relation hit when you revoke council rights.) Damn, you point at guys who want to have rights, who have resourses to have rights, and when they're trying to use such resourses, you call them "illogical"!
my sole reservation with the council features is the need for it to work more logicly, the AI is generaly set to work in a certian pattern and some ingame relationships like friendships arent taken into account
Ok. Let me sum - you're telling something like that:
"So. I had a guy. I don't remember which traits he have, and I didn't looks a lot. I don't see which is his friendships but me, and as game don't show them me as a number I can't guess. I don't know how he take a pattern he take. But I know he have a friendship with me, and I believe this factor should overweight everything other, that I don't matter". Did I get you right?
