Fun fact: many of us here do not live in America, feudal or not.
- 2
- 1
- 1
Emperor can't upgrade to kingdom or empire
- Thread starter Sandmann
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Fun fact: many of us here do not live in America, feudal or not.
no he isn't; when he conquers the kingdom of britain...
of course, you have no historical reference for this, so you keep repeating the same tired old nonsense, in 48 point font?
coming from someone who condenses feudal history to a mere 400 years? authority, you are not...
and you just proved he runs a 'kingdom' in your statement... unless you want us to release all of britain as a kingdom, after adding land to hre (for role-play)? kinky...
however, current gameplay mechanics do not support this option... too expensive...
Last edited:
- 3
Cool. How does one go about becoming an elector? (in single-player; in multiplayer you just bribe the current emperor player)
Get a personal union over an elector, and Inherit them.
- 1
- 1
haven't we already been over this one a thousand times before? and why it is poor game design?
- 2
Surprised to see Paradox defend this awful mechanic. The Emperor should ALWAYS be Emperor tier.
- 6
What the hell are you even talking about? Like seriously. You keep saying this but you can't get it through your head that being Holy Roman Emperor has actual different bonuses to being a straight 'empire' in the game. Just like being Holy Roman Emperor was different than being the Tsar of Russia or the Emperor of France.
Also I'm not sure what you're talking about for feudal history.
Why is he running a kingdom? Of course you're running a kingdom. You know what's bigger than being a king somewhere? Being the fucking Holy Roman Emperor. If you hate being the HRE so much, leave the HRE with all your lands, raise yourself to kingdom rank and get yourself elected. Then you'll have the benefits of being kingdom rank and of being emperor. Hell, apparently being emperor is so bad, why would you even want it?
Seriously, this guy...
- 5
- 1
It's possible if you have good relations and one gets eaten while you are still small.
- 2
let me put it to you in pictures; maybe a method you can understand...
forgot about my friends, konigsreich danemark up there...
about PUs/grants: RNG is always possible, the real math joke here: is it 'probable'?
it's like playing deal or no deal with howie what's his name... can you guess the case with the magic elector?
Last edited:
- 3
The game doesn't split titles, what do you expect? Last I checked, since you're still in the HRE, you're a vassal of the Emperor. Since the HRE didn't have kings except for Bohemia, you're a Duchy. Like Brandenburg was Duchy despite the Prince-Elector having the kingdom of Prussia under union. But if you're the Emperor, you don't get the 'Empire' title, instead you get the Holy Roman Emperor title with all associated benefits. If you hate it so much, leave the empire. You can be your kingdom, since you won't be admitting you're lesser than someone else in rank.
- 3
- 1
Personally I feel that they shouldn't be emperor tier; they should be HREmperor tier and get different bonuses (as they already do). But they should still be considered emperor for become vassal interactions (maybe it should make the potential vassal a member of the HRE instead of a proper vassal though?)
It's possible if you have good relations and one gets eaten while you are still small.
OH! I didn't realize I had to be small too. That explains why it never happens in my games as a custom nation in random nations mode (I'm often too big I assume?)
It's annoying you can make (for a cost) a custom nation be an elector though...
- 1
but who am i lesser in rank to? i am the emperor... lol... and king of britain, denmark, sweden, soon castile/poland/lithuania... the list goes on...
the simple fact i've incorporated regions with nobles of higher ranks means i must outrank them... otherwise... i'm a lame monarch? :\
ie: i'm pretty sure they wouldn't object to raising my rank to kingdom then...
even if you are small and have good relations, it's still a roll of the dice as to who the ai chooses, but it's more 'probable'... there's that term again, horrible for game design.
it's also another of those 'on-rails' mechanics, also horrible for design, where the user must be aware of the restriction, and 'scripted solution' to the problem before starting a new game...
Last edited:
- 3
- 1
Yeah, I'm not sure what the soft or hard cutoff for it is, though. That was an extremely rare occurrence on my part, I don't actually recall ever being offered that before. But I had broken free with Austria's help, they were friendly to me, we had an alliance, and marriage, etc. Cologne annexed Trier pretty quickly. I think I had taken Brabant in the independence war that time so I was mostly waiting around for AE to burn + timing to jump on the nearby opms.
Was nice because it changed the Netherlands formation to *not* leaving the empire.
On the downside that run ended up crashing and burning.
I still want to play a Holland run where you end up getting the Burgundian Inheritance (you can pretty easily get a marriage with burgundy a few years after breaking free, which makes you a royal marriage neighbor if the Emperor becomes ineligible (loses it to Nassau or something))
but who am i lesser in rank to? i am the emperor... lol... and king of britain, denmark, sweden, soon castile/poland/lithuania... the list goes on...
the simple fact i've incorporated regions with nobles of higher ranks means i must outrank them... otherwise... i'm a lame monarch? :\
ie: i'm pretty sure they wouldn't object to raising my rank to kingdom then...
It's been said a dozen times already that Emperor is just one of your titles, you are still the Duchy of Holland.
Further discussion with you is clearly pointless.
- 3
- 1
You're submitting yourself to whoever the Electoral college elects. You're therefore subservient to the emperor, unless you are the emperor. Every prince was a vassal in the HRE, like Brandenburg (king in Prussia), Saxony (king in the Commonwealth), etc.
If you don't want to be the vassal of the emperor, leave the HRE. If you're the Holy Roman Emperor, you're already your own special Empire rank, which is much better than the vanilla bonuses, especially once you get reforms passed.
And yet you still acknowledge the HRE as your superior. Either get out of vassalage or stop complaining.
It wasn't done. Even the Habsburgs, which were the Emperors during the whole period never raised one of their titles to kingdom rank. They had kingdom titles at various points, but never raised a single one. The game already lets Prince-Electors to raise their rank despite it being never done during the period.
- 4
- 1
Sure but some of his other titles are kingdom rank (England) and Empire Rank (Scandanavia). Maybe one ought to be able to be higher rank by having 300 NON-HRE development?
I just pointed out before that Prince-Electors with kingdom titles outside the HRE were still dukes in the HRE. There's nothing suggesting that having such titles should give you special treatment. The devs actually allow you to rank up as an elector because people kept whining about it, despite it not being done during the last 360 years of the HRE.
- 3
- 1
Well, you do outrank them. As the emperor. BUT, your "home" title (for example the Archduchy of Austria) does not outrank them. This has actually some historical basis: during the 1740s, where the Hapsburgs under Maria Theresia had lost the Imperial Crown she had to resort to calling herself Queen of Hungary (The Austrian Troops were even called Royal Hungarian during that time, with redesigned flags and all).
The counter argument would be Francis I./II, as he created the Austrian Empire in 1804 and dissolving the HRE in 1806 (Which you really should be able to do ingame as the Emperor. Maybe in exchange for immediate Empire-rank and only after a certain date?). But he didn't actually upgrade the Archduchy into an empire, he simply created a completely new title.
- 2
- 1
Just because he holds the land doesn't mean he the titles necessarily.
- 2
actually, as i have just proven, i cannot be 'duchy' of holland since i've incorporated kingdoms, and as someone pointed out, an empire into my realm...
further reliance on this fallacy is pointless...
and who's going to take it from me? that half stack of english rebels owning what's left of their miniscule village outpost? of course i own the titles...
so... electors were not vassals?... another fallacy, and the train just keeps on rolling... i don't see how emperor can be a vassal to himself, makes no sense...
problem with assertions like these is they often lead to strange ironies... implication here being that an elector can grant themselves the title of king...
why shouldn't you get emperor bonuses on top of it? you're basically wasting a bunch of time babysitting unruly mobs, occupying forts multiple times, and returning land, when you could just be annexing them all instead...
in fact, before autonomy, the bonuses simply were just that... along came autonomy, and all hre members except electors/bohemia/austria get a giant nerf? ;\
correction, i should rephrase that:
Last edited:
- 3