European empires, vassalize pope, mend schism

[arctvrvs]

Hi everyone !
First of all a small warning : I'm new on this forum and I'm french so if you'd be as nice as to forgive me for my grammar and anything stupid I'd say, I'd be grateful.

So here are the issues I'd like to talk about :
-Francia, Hispania, Britannia and Scandinavia
-only the byzantine empire can form the roman empire
-the pope can't be vassalize anymore
-mend schism can only be done by orthodoxes

Francia :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Frankish_Empire_481_to_814-en.svg
So that's the frankish empire as it should appear.
So my thoughts were : since the HRE is to Francia what the ERE is to the Roman Empire, a frankish lord, king of france and emperor of the HRE (or the HRE doesn't exist anymore) completly controling some duchies of importance, should be able to recreate Francia. The HRE would be obsolete and once again Charlemagne empire would be ready to rule over christendom !

As for Hispania, Britannia and Scandinavia, they are more like mega kingdoms than empires (the pope would never agree to crown an other emperor !) because there can be only one empire.
That's the reason why, for reality purposes, there should just be decisions to fuse the kingdoms into one and no more empires.
The rulers of said kingdoms should also get a special prestige effect for ruling over such great territories.

Hispania :
First of all I would like to see a decision allowing the creation of the kingdom of spain - by a spanish lord controling major duchies in Spain - fusionning Castille, Leon, Navarra, Aragon, Galicia and Andalusia
And Portugal if the kingdom is completly controlled by the ruler.

Britannia :
For Britannia, I think there should be separated decisions for celtics and englishs/saxons/normans. What I mean is while the Celtics would form the kingdom of britannia (which would contain brittany), the english would form the united kingdom (the britain isles and not brittany)

Scandinavia :
well to be king of scandinavia would mean to be king of all the vickings
So just fusing the kingdoms together and giving great prestige effect.
+vicking invasions ? that's just an idea but someone who would unite the vickings together would probably strive for invasions if pagan.


only the byzantine empire can form the roman empire

Yeah... that's just too sad.
I mean I can think of at least 3 other empires who could have the pretense to do so :
-HRE
-Francia
-Latin empire


the pope can't be vassalize anymore

Well considering that the schism was due in some way to the emperor trying to vassalize the pope, there should be a decision, if you are HRE/Francia/LE/ERE/RE and catholic that would make you gain a casus belli to vassalize the pope. The consequences would be excommunication and a big malus of relationship with your catholic vassals and neighbours that the pope could call into war aginst you should you declare war.


mend schism can only be done by orthodoxes

I think the catholics should be able to mend the schism by controlling the pentarchy
If all of the pentarchy is controlled by catholics, the pope can mend the schism and become the only spiritual ruler of christendom.


Feel free to share your opinion

 

[Me_]

Catholics mending the Schism is probably going to be a part of Papacy or HRE DLC.

 

[Rozmarzony]

(the pope would never agree to crown an other emperor !

It's only yours predictions, if he would get a lot of money (and the king would have a great power), he surely will to crown. ; )

 

[arctvrvs]

It's only yours predictions, if he would get a lot of money, he surely will to crown. ; )

And where has your faith in men gone ? :sad:
More seriously, in history the only other catholic emperor to exist was napoleon and he made sure to destroy the HRE to be the only one.
Even spain at the height of its power was called an empire but its rulers were still kings and queens.

 

[Mixxer5]

It's only yours predictions, if he would get a lot of money (and the king would have a great power), he surely will to crown. ; )

Nope, he wouldn't. There can be only ONE Empire. And Eastern one wasn't legit for Catholics.

 

[theKing1988]

First of all welcome to board.

And second, i don't think anyone have ever claimed that the present empire setup is historically correct, it is just the best and easiest way to portray what would happen in game if rulers from the areas in question got strong enough to dominate the area of either of the empires in question.

As far as i'm aware the title of King of Spain has no precendence in the game's time period what so ever. Either you were King of one of the present Kingdoms (alternatively of several at the same time) or if you had delusions of grandeur you tried to set yourself up as Emperor of Hispania (that actually happened with at least one Iberian ruler). And when the Kingdom of Spain actually appeared it was more by accident than design (it was a by-product of the personal union that Aragon and Castille entered, with the marriage of Ferdinand and Isabella in the late 15th Century).

During the game's time period, managing a stable realm was not an issue even with it technically being cut up into several kingdoms, so i'm not sure if i even like your idea of fusing kingdoms, it seems to be a couple of centuries early for my taste now that we are talking about historical accuracy.

Your idea of fusing Kingdoms might not even be possible with the current game engine, have you considered that.

 

[arctvrvs]

As far as i'm aware the title of King of Spain has no precendence in the game's time period what so ever. Either you were King of one of the present Kingdoms (alternatively of several at the same time) or if you had delusions of grandeur you tried to set yourself up as Emperor of Hispania (that actually happened with at least one Iberian ruler). And when the Kingdom of Spain actually appeared it was more by accident than design (it was a by-product of the personal union that Aragon and Castille entered, with the marriage of Ferdinand and Isabella in the late 15th Century).

It is true that it has no precedence in that time period, however the unity of what the game calls Hispania was one of the objective of the spanish rulers for a long time after the fusion of aragon and Castille so it would not be irrealistic to think that if someone conquered most of spain before that, he would want spanish unity.

And second, i don't think anyone have ever claimed that the present empire setup is historically correct, it is just the best and easiest way to portray what would happen in game if rulers from the areas in question got strong enough to dominate the area of either of the empires in question.

I understand that, but that should only be in a mod because an emperor is king of kings and there can be only one.

Your idea of fusing Kingdoms might not even be possible with the current game engine, have you considered that.

I'm pretty sure it is possible, you just have to take a look at the "recreation of the roman empire" event.

 

[Effixel]

Hi, welcome on the forum cher compatriote (and go to Germany, it's much better here)

So as theKing said, empires aren't historical indeed, but given the game mechanics it was the best way to represent these territories. Now you can call them "Great Kingdoms of Whatever" when playing, the result is the same.
As for the vikings, there have been several threads on this topic, all ending up with the fact that "vicking invasions woud be anachronical". Indeed, they happened before year 1000 (8th century for the biggest part of them IIRC); so there is no reason that scandinavian lords get an invasion CB.
I like the idea for Britannia/UK Not sure how it could be implemented though, I suck at coding. And I think this is just a matter of RP actually.

 

[Kagernaut]

Whether we fuse kingdoms or use Empires, the fact is that once someone achieves multiple kingdoms it just gets frustrating that you don't really have one solid realm and everyone wants your freaking titles.

I like the Idea of empires, but yes when I play for historical accuracy I know the empires that have been added are somewhat ridiculous. Combining kingdoms would probably, as stated before, be too early for the games timeframe.
Nonetheless, it feels like your primary title should be...more important than it is.

 

[theKing1988]

It is true that it has no precedence in that time period, however the unity of what the game calls Hispania was one of the objective of the spanish rulers for a long time after the fusion of aragon and Castille so it would not be irrealistic to think that if someone conquered most of spain before that, he would want spanish unity.


I understand that, but that should only be in a mod because an emperor is king of kings and there can be only one.


I'm pretty sure it is possible, you just have to take a look at the "recreation of the roman empire" event.

It get all of that, but you seem to have ignored this little fact

During the game's time period, managing a stable realm was not an issue even with it technically being cut up into several kingdoms, so i'm not sure if i even like your idea of fusing kingdoms, it seems to be a couple of centuries early for my taste now that we are talking about historical accuracy.

It was a source of prestige to be Kings of several kingdoms at the same time, it kept being a source of prestige long after the end of the game's time period. Only when the integrity of the realm that a certain ruler had established seemed to be in some sort of jeopardy (mostly from succession laws) was uniting titles seriously pursued

 

[arctvrvs]

Hi, welcome on the forum cher compatriote (and go to Germany, it's much better here)

Maybe one day, but for now my german is a bit rusty and I'm still in ingeneering school :blush:

As for the vikings, there have been several threads on this topic, all ending up with the fact that "vicking invasions woud be anachronical". Indeed, they happened before year 1000 (8th century for the biggest part of them IIRC); so there is no reason that scandinavian lords get an invasion CB.

Well I just thought that since the vicking invasion ended because they converted to catholicism, a pagan who would unite them may want to start they again (just my feeling though)

I like the idea for Britannia/UK Not sure how it could be implemented though, I suck at coding. And I think this is just a matter of RP actually.

well if you do it by decision rather than by forming empires like it's done now for britannia, you can code it so that the decision appears just for the culture you want

 

[yodaime]

I sort of agree with the OP. The current Empire system, albeit fun from player's perspective, could be definitely improved.

 

[Rozmarzony]

Nope, he wouldn't. There can be only ONE Empire. And Eastern one wasn't legit for Catholics.

Who would prohibit it?
I mean, if someone has a half of Europe, then why he wouldn't?
Because there can be only one? Who cares? Certainly not the popes... and if perchance pope from Rome wouldn't to agree, what about creating puppet antipope and then declaring ourselves emperor?
It's alternate history, it can happen.

 

[arctvrvs]

It was a source of prestige to be Kings of several kingdoms at the same time, it kept being a source of prestige long after the end of the game's time period. Only when the integrity of the realm that a certain ruler had established seemed to be in some sort of jeopardy (mostly from succession laws) was uniting titles seriously pursued

I do see what you mean, and in my opinion, a territory should be able to have several de jure liege. But if you look at Spain or UK, they were king of castille, leon,... and england,scotland,... and they still are (each kingdom still has a parliament in the UK)
it's just the signification of those titles :
-king of spain means that you achieved domination over all the spanish people and most of the iberian peninsule
-king of the united kingdom means that you managed to control all the british isles
-king of scandinavia, you are the ruler of all vickings
and I think there should be a way to represent that in the game

 

[arctvrvs]

Who would prohibit it?
I mean, if someone has a half of Europe, then why he wouldn't?
Because there can be only one? Who cares? Certainly not the popes... and if perchance pope from Rome wouldn't to agree, what about creating puppet antipope and then declaring ourselves emperor?
It's alternate history, it can happen.

well I still believe that there can only be one. but what could happen is an antipope granting you the right to invade the HRE because you are powerful enough to contestate his right to rule over christendom

 

[ziamatt]

Nope, he wouldn't. There can be only ONE Empire. And Eastern one wasn't legit for Catholics.

But even the Papacy referred to the Byzantine rulers as Emperors of Romania or as Emperors of the Greeks, or even as Emperors of Constantinople. It wasn't the the idea of the Byzantine rulers as Emperors that the Papacy had a problem with, it was the idea of the Byzantine rules as Emperors of Rome specifically that the Papacy had a problem with.

 

[arctvrvs]

But even the Papacy referred to the Byzantine rulers as Emperors of Romania or as Emperors of the Greeks, or even as Emperors of Constantinople. It wasn't the the idea of the Byzantine rulers as Emperors that the Papacy had a problem with, it was the idea of the Byzantine rules as Emperors of Rome specifically that the Papacy had a problem with.

Yep but if my memories are correct, Charlemagne was crowned emperor because the empress of the ERE had accessed the throne by murdering close kin and that the patriarch of rome (at that time) did not recognize her as legit.

 

[theKing1988]

Yep but if my memories are correct, Charlemagne was crowned emperor because the empress of the ERE had accessed the throne by murdering close kin and that the patriarch of rome (at that time) did not recognize her as legit.

It wouldn't exactly be historically accurate to not have both in game, just because they didn't rezognize each others right to the legacy of rome, then it doesn't mean that they weren't widely acknowledged as Emperors and heirs to Rome (although not by the same people or simultaneously of course). Just like if someone manage to claim the legacy of Rome for themselves, then it wouldn't be accurate for the counterpart to still be emperor.

 

[Mixxer5]

But even the Papacy referred to the Byzantine rulers as Emperors of Romania or as Emperors of the Greeks, or even as Emperors of Constantinople. It wasn't the the idea of the Byzantine rulers as Emperors that the Papacy had a problem with, it was the idea of the Byzantine rules as Emperors of Rome specifically that the Papacy had a problem with.

Being Roman Emperor was other thing. Catholic ruler needed "permission" to become one. And as long as HRE exists- this sit is taken. Currently HRE is highly underestimated in CK2 (as well as many aspects of feudalism. Or despotism in case of Byzantium).

 

[arctvrvs]

And by the way nobody said what they though of the idea of having HRE being able to become Francia once again. What do you think ?

we would have :
HRE----->Francia------------>
+------------------------------> Roman empire
Latin empire----------------->
ERE------------------------->