As an emperor, you shouldn'y be allowed to fabricate claims and conquer your subjects in the HRE. I've always thought it to be somewhat weird that the emperor could do this.
But now after the Free Cities were included, and the subsequent Austrian aggressions against them, I now think it is outright ridiculous that an emperor should conquer a Free City just for the sake of conquest alone.
My two main arguments in favour of making it impossible to use this CB as emperor against HRE states:
The Nationalist and Imperialist casi belli chould be blocked in the same way, naturally. And missions and events giving claims should never be applicable to a HRE member if playing as emperor.
Retaking cores should still be a valid CB though.
Of course, removing the possibility of expanding within the Empire would make it easier to retain the throne. This is in itself a good thing, IMO, because it favours a more historically plausible route where the Habsburgs actually hold on to the throne. Likewise, taking the Imperial throne should be a real challange for a non incumbent player - making that kind of play a whole new thing.
However as is, this would also make earning IA too easy.
So this is my suggestions on how it should be balanced, by adding the below:
But now after the Free Cities were included, and the subsequent Austrian aggressions against them, I now think it is outright ridiculous that an emperor should conquer a Free City just for the sake of conquest alone.
My two main arguments in favour of making it impossible to use this CB as emperor against HRE states:
- It makes no sense to go land grabbing against your subjects
- It never happened historically
The Nationalist and Imperialist casi belli chould be blocked in the same way, naturally. And missions and events giving claims should never be applicable to a HRE member if playing as emperor.
Retaking cores should still be a valid CB though.
Of course, removing the possibility of expanding within the Empire would make it easier to retain the throne. This is in itself a good thing, IMO, because it favours a more historically plausible route where the Habsburgs actually hold on to the throne. Likewise, taking the Imperial throne should be a real challange for a non incumbent player - making that kind of play a whole new thing.
However as is, this would also make earning IA too easy.
So this is my suggestions on how it should be balanced, by adding the below:
- A one time hit on IA when failing to restore unlawful territories (timed with the CB itself, when the CB expires without any action taken the emperor loses something like -20 IA)
- A new Imperial Reform, available before Gemeiner Pfenning, which forbids any HRE member to call a non HRE member into an internal HRE war. This suggestion is partly based on the historical Peace of Prague (1635). A new reform makes the road to Revoke the Privilegia one step longer for the emperor.
- (EDIT) Added this one also, enacting an Imperial Reform should cost 100 IA, instead of 50 as it is now. I played an Austrian game when 1.12 was released and I found it too easy when I could revoke the Privilegia in the 17th century.
- A "reversed Demand Unlawful territory" where any Elector can demand that the Emperor restores the province in question. If refusing, he will suffer a relations penalty with all electors (except subjects and maybe allies).
- An option to start a coalition war for the HRE members against the emperor.
- Or simply making a conquest move suicide for your election campaign, giving the Electors such a great relations penalty that they will probably not vote for you for the next 50 years or so. This would require emperor AI to be tweaked accordingly.
Last edited:
- 4
Upvote
0