Hi. I miss the diplomatic option of enthrone monarchs in order to get better relations between you and his country, tending to answer your requests affirmatively. What do you think?
Enthrone monarchs
- Thread starter Indíbil
- 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.
yep, intervention in other countries' civil wars and support the pro-roman claimant played a huge part in Roman diplomacy. think about the repeated roman intenvention in Ptolemaic succession dispute.
It doesnt have to be a separate diplomatic option, but i do hope for seeing specific casus belli and civil war mechanics on this issue.
It doesnt have to be a separate diplomatic option, but i do hope for seeing specific casus belli and civil war mechanics on this issue.
Wouldn't enthrone monarch be something that should belong somewhere in the casus belli list with it being a peace option?
Are there any examples in the age of one nation actually enthroning someone through normal diplomacy instead of through military action?
Are there any examples in the age of one nation actually enthroning someone through normal diplomacy instead of through military action?
Sure, buit its a diplomatic question too (even if it comes out in other development diary). And actually i think that in Trajan's times Rome had enough influence to choose the throne of Armenia but I can be wrong.
Thanks to remain me the 'casus belli' topic!
I believe that who could dictate what Armania did and who ruled it was something Rome and Parthia had one or two wars about. However, it was after winning the war against their rival that they installed the claiments they backed.
Alternatively it might be that case that enthroning someone is a diplomatic action you can only use with your vassals or tributaries or something like that.
Save it, it would be great if it comes in the list of 'casus belli' when some kingdom starts a civil war (frequent thing in ancient world)
I agree, there should be an option to replace kings, and start a war to replace them with a chosen candidate.
Rome's entire foreign policy in the east was about replacing other kings with pro-Roman candidates. They began doing this in Greece until they annexed it. Pompey created client states out of every single Anatolian kingdom and replaced their kings. The entire thing with Julius Caesar in Egypt was to replace Ptolemy with his pro-Roman sister. In almost every civil war in the Mediterranean, Rome interfered by claiming to "help" and ending up either annexing or putting up a kingdom as client state.
Even looking further before late game, you have Seleucids and Ptolemies replacing kings across the Hellenic world to suit their politics, resulting in large wars. After the Mauryan empire collapses, there is a massive civil war between Shunga and Satvahan dynasties which create a wave of proxy wars (replacing governors and kings all around) until Bactrians take advantage of this and invade.
It can be handled by a CB and intervention option. If the nation isn't on friendly terms and its monarch is relatively new, as a large empire (and only as a large empire, so it doesn't happen all around) you can attack it to replace their ruler with a candidate of your own choosing. If there is a civil war in your neighbouring state or if it is a puppet, you can intervene on any side of your choosing.
Rome's entire foreign policy in the east was about replacing other kings with pro-Roman candidates. They began doing this in Greece until they annexed it. Pompey created client states out of every single Anatolian kingdom and replaced their kings. The entire thing with Julius Caesar in Egypt was to replace Ptolemy with his pro-Roman sister. In almost every civil war in the Mediterranean, Rome interfered by claiming to "help" and ending up either annexing or putting up a kingdom as client state.
Even looking further before late game, you have Seleucids and Ptolemies replacing kings across the Hellenic world to suit their politics, resulting in large wars. After the Mauryan empire collapses, there is a massive civil war between Shunga and Satvahan dynasties which create a wave of proxy wars (replacing governors and kings all around) until Bactrians take advantage of this and invade.
It can be handled by a CB and intervention option. If the nation isn't on friendly terms and its monarch is relatively new, as a large empire (and only as a large empire, so it doesn't happen all around) you can attack it to replace their ruler with a candidate of your own choosing. If there is a civil war in your neighbouring state or if it is a puppet, you can intervene on any side of your choosing.
It should be possible to have political factions that are supportive of a specific country so you can get pro-Roman or pro-Parthian or pro-Macedonian, etc factions which give major diplomatic bonusses and opportunities to diplo-annex though I'm guessing we won't have such levels of depth upon release. Accompanying it though should also be anti-(Coutnry) or independence factions.
It would be much more realistic and important than the current political factions(based up mana types) we have though the dynamicism of it might be hard to implement. Maybe in a DLC or something though it should in my opinion should be in the release version because of how important it was historically.
It would be much more realistic and important than the current political factions(based up mana types) we have though the dynamicism of it might be hard to implement. Maybe in a DLC or something though it should in my opinion should be in the release version because of how important it was historically.
Last edited:
Also it would be nice if Paradox implement a method to control your tributaries desires putting destacaments of your army.
How do you know the factions are based on Mana types? Just because some of them share a name with them?
Because EU: Rome did this AND because the 2 screenshots displaying characters with factions both show a faction associated with a mana type so going off EU: Rome they might do all 4 factions after powers, though with Mercantile for Oratory, as well as the populist factions(useless pains in the ass) for republics and 3 factions based on powers(Military, Religious, Civic) for monarchies.
Last edited:
According to EU:Rome , factions gave direct bonus to commerce, taxes etc.
In the current previews there is nothing related to MP.
It is possible that a certain faction would try to elect a character with specific trait , but it would be an indirect effect.
EDIT: The Carthaginian governor belongs to the religious faction, but anyway has an average Zeal (5) and an awful Finesse (3) ... definitely a bad choice to rule a province, unsell you will need to use that good Martial (9).
Last edited:
Because EU: Rome did this AND because the 2 screenshots displaying characters with factions both show a faction associated with a mana type so going off EU: Rome they might do all 4 factions after powers, though with Mercantile for Oratory, as well as the populist factions(useless pains in the ass) for republics and 3 factions based on powers(Military, Religious, Civic) for monarchies.
Just because they share a name with a 'Mana type' doesn't mean they are related to mana types.
Just look at EU 4, the 3 primary estates, Nobility, Clergy and Burgers are all aligned with a Power type(Military, Administrative and Diplomatic power respectively). Seeing how they've almost completely copied the Diplomatic system from EU 4 it wouldn't be very suprising that they did similiar things with Estates and Factions, though primary difference being that characters can actually join the faction.
Based on this fact as well as the naming, you can make a fair assumption on that being the case. The only argument that can be made right now is that Oratory might not be fully represented by one of the 5 republican factions.
Agree.
The factions influence income (civic faction) and probably trade (merchant) , manpower (military) etc.. ( see DD #6 )
The character's (ruler's ) attributes influence MP ( see DD #3 )