My apologies if these suggestions have been made multiple times before, but here goes.
Feudal Elective Succession Overhaul
The mechanics for elective succession in the game feel awfully unsatisfying. For one, so much of elective succession is opaque. It's not always clear why electors are supporting the candidates they support, and there's no direct means of swaying electors to or from any given candidate. Maybe worst of all, elective succession in the game engenders an ahistorical effect that is nearly directly counter to, at least, the example of elective monarchy in the HRE. In the historical HRE, the middle ages was essentially the story of a gradual devolution of power from the King/Emperor to the Dukes, resulting in the area of the Emperor's influence diminishing. In CK2, the opinion boost from elective monarchy allows the King/Emperor to increase crown authority, expand, etc. with the result being the monster HRE blob that so often appears.
My suggestion is two-fold: an overhaul of the "how" of elective succession, and a change of the "when" of elective succession.
"The How"
This is relatively straightforward. CK2 could adopt a similar mechanic to the College of Cardinals for elective succession where the player can view the leading candidates and see which electors are supporting which candidates. There could even be a "ruler suitability score" that breaks down the reasons why this or that candidate is where they are. To this, I would add a few additional features.
(1) Allow the player to directly seek commitments from electors via the diplomacy interface. The simple solution would be to add a button, and if the elector likes the player's nominated candidate enough, then successfully completing this diplomatic action would lock in that elector for a set number of time...say three years maybe. Things that alter the relationship between the player and the elector could naturally result in that commitment being broken.
(2) Introduce a "horse-trading" mechanic. In order to get commitments from electors, allow rulers to make "promises" to deliver on things the elector wants. For instance, say the Duke of Bavaria "desires the Duchy of Carinthia." The player could promise to revoke the title from the current Duke and give it to him in exchange for Bavaria's votes. If the elected monarch renegs on the promise, it would create a giant malus for that character.
(3) Add a "get elected" ambition. If a character adopts the ambition, it raises their profile somewhat, effects opinion of other rulers, maybe entails some new events revolving around the character's quest to get elected.
(4) Allow for the losers to reject the outcome of the election. When an election happens, the losing candidate(s) and their supporters could be presented with an event or decision to reject the outcome. If a candidate rejected the outcome, they may take a prestige and piety hit, but would then get a strong claim on the throne and automatically form a faction for that claim, perhaps the mechanic would also give an opinion boost for the candidate among the electors who voted for him, making it more likely to join his faction and start a succession war.
The "When"
This may be impossible, but I think it'd be really cool. Instead of having the election and ascension of the new ruler take place immediately upon the death of the previous ruler, the throne would remain empty for a period of time as the electors convene in a Diet to deliberate and choose a new ruler. Some of the campaigning mechanics I suggest (like the "promises" feature) wouldn't become available until the Diet. The length of the interregnum period would vary according to the geographical extent of the realm. So, if you've built a Europe-spanning HRE, settle in for three or four uncertain months as the Duke of Beja makes his way to Aachen. Maybe an event would trigger for electors to decide whether or not to attend the Diet personally, send a representative, or abstain completely. Maybe also candidates could get up to some mischief, such as a decision to assassinate an unfavorable elector while he travels to the Diet.
This all leads to my second big suggestion, Interregnums.
Interregnums
While the succession war mechanics are pretty good, I think they could be expanded somewhat to introduce more instability into large realms as well as new gameplay opportunities.
The way I envision it. An Interregnum would trigger in a few circumstances, such as:
(1) the death of an elected monarch;
(2) when a ruler dies without an eligible child in any European hereditary system;
(3) when a muslim ruler dies.
During the interregnum, a regent would temporarily assume the title, but would be extremely limited in his actions. Essentially, this "regent" would only exist to keep the title intact.
For the elective system, the Diet process would play out above. For the hereditary and muslim systems, the expected heir according to current game mechanics would have an event trigger to assert their claim to the title. Additionally, other characters with claims on the title would also get the event. If multiple characters asserted claims, a succession war would immediately trigger. The expected heir would then have to win the succession war with their own resources instead of getting to step into the title and inherit vassals and money they really wouldn't have yet in order to fight the war.
As those succession wars are playing out, the realm itself remains in Interregnum, so rulers with weak claims could then try for the title as well.
Mediating Succession Wars
A fun related feature to this would be the option for a neighboring ruler to mediate the succession crisis. The way I'd see it working would be if an adjacent realm to yours was in Interregnum and you hold a title of equal rank to the title being contested (and maybe also a prestige threshold, to establish that the contestants would respect your opinion), an event would fire where the contestants seek your help in mediating the dispute.
At this point, you'd maybe three options:
(1) back one side or the other. You'd get a big opinion boost with the person you pick and a malus with the person you shunned. The person you shunned would then get an event to either accept your decision or reject it. If they reject it, it would affect their legitimacy, costing a prestige hit and a malus with the other rulers in their faction of the succession war.
(2) take no action. You don't endorse anyone, and get a malus from both of the claimants.
(3) Claim the title yourself. The Edward Longshanks move. You take a giant malus hit from every de jure ruler in the realm, but you get a strong claim on the title.
I don't know enough about the working parts of the game to know what is or isn't feasible here, but I think they'd be some great ideas to make the core feudal CK2 game a lot deeper and richer.
Feudal Elective Succession Overhaul
The mechanics for elective succession in the game feel awfully unsatisfying. For one, so much of elective succession is opaque. It's not always clear why electors are supporting the candidates they support, and there's no direct means of swaying electors to or from any given candidate. Maybe worst of all, elective succession in the game engenders an ahistorical effect that is nearly directly counter to, at least, the example of elective monarchy in the HRE. In the historical HRE, the middle ages was essentially the story of a gradual devolution of power from the King/Emperor to the Dukes, resulting in the area of the Emperor's influence diminishing. In CK2, the opinion boost from elective monarchy allows the King/Emperor to increase crown authority, expand, etc. with the result being the monster HRE blob that so often appears.
My suggestion is two-fold: an overhaul of the "how" of elective succession, and a change of the "when" of elective succession.
"The How"
This is relatively straightforward. CK2 could adopt a similar mechanic to the College of Cardinals for elective succession where the player can view the leading candidates and see which electors are supporting which candidates. There could even be a "ruler suitability score" that breaks down the reasons why this or that candidate is where they are. To this, I would add a few additional features.
(1) Allow the player to directly seek commitments from electors via the diplomacy interface. The simple solution would be to add a button, and if the elector likes the player's nominated candidate enough, then successfully completing this diplomatic action would lock in that elector for a set number of time...say three years maybe. Things that alter the relationship between the player and the elector could naturally result in that commitment being broken.
(2) Introduce a "horse-trading" mechanic. In order to get commitments from electors, allow rulers to make "promises" to deliver on things the elector wants. For instance, say the Duke of Bavaria "desires the Duchy of Carinthia." The player could promise to revoke the title from the current Duke and give it to him in exchange for Bavaria's votes. If the elected monarch renegs on the promise, it would create a giant malus for that character.
(3) Add a "get elected" ambition. If a character adopts the ambition, it raises their profile somewhat, effects opinion of other rulers, maybe entails some new events revolving around the character's quest to get elected.
(4) Allow for the losers to reject the outcome of the election. When an election happens, the losing candidate(s) and their supporters could be presented with an event or decision to reject the outcome. If a candidate rejected the outcome, they may take a prestige and piety hit, but would then get a strong claim on the throne and automatically form a faction for that claim, perhaps the mechanic would also give an opinion boost for the candidate among the electors who voted for him, making it more likely to join his faction and start a succession war.
The "When"
This may be impossible, but I think it'd be really cool. Instead of having the election and ascension of the new ruler take place immediately upon the death of the previous ruler, the throne would remain empty for a period of time as the electors convene in a Diet to deliberate and choose a new ruler. Some of the campaigning mechanics I suggest (like the "promises" feature) wouldn't become available until the Diet. The length of the interregnum period would vary according to the geographical extent of the realm. So, if you've built a Europe-spanning HRE, settle in for three or four uncertain months as the Duke of Beja makes his way to Aachen. Maybe an event would trigger for electors to decide whether or not to attend the Diet personally, send a representative, or abstain completely. Maybe also candidates could get up to some mischief, such as a decision to assassinate an unfavorable elector while he travels to the Diet.
This all leads to my second big suggestion, Interregnums.
Interregnums
While the succession war mechanics are pretty good, I think they could be expanded somewhat to introduce more instability into large realms as well as new gameplay opportunities.
The way I envision it. An Interregnum would trigger in a few circumstances, such as:
(1) the death of an elected monarch;
(2) when a ruler dies without an eligible child in any European hereditary system;
(3) when a muslim ruler dies.
During the interregnum, a regent would temporarily assume the title, but would be extremely limited in his actions. Essentially, this "regent" would only exist to keep the title intact.
For the elective system, the Diet process would play out above. For the hereditary and muslim systems, the expected heir according to current game mechanics would have an event trigger to assert their claim to the title. Additionally, other characters with claims on the title would also get the event. If multiple characters asserted claims, a succession war would immediately trigger. The expected heir would then have to win the succession war with their own resources instead of getting to step into the title and inherit vassals and money they really wouldn't have yet in order to fight the war.
As those succession wars are playing out, the realm itself remains in Interregnum, so rulers with weak claims could then try for the title as well.
Mediating Succession Wars
A fun related feature to this would be the option for a neighboring ruler to mediate the succession crisis. The way I'd see it working would be if an adjacent realm to yours was in Interregnum and you hold a title of equal rank to the title being contested (and maybe also a prestige threshold, to establish that the contestants would respect your opinion), an event would fire where the contestants seek your help in mediating the dispute.
At this point, you'd maybe three options:
(1) back one side or the other. You'd get a big opinion boost with the person you pick and a malus with the person you shunned. The person you shunned would then get an event to either accept your decision or reject it. If they reject it, it would affect their legitimacy, costing a prestige hit and a malus with the other rulers in their faction of the succession war.
(2) take no action. You don't endorse anyone, and get a malus from both of the claimants.
(3) Claim the title yourself. The Edward Longshanks move. You take a giant malus hit from every de jure ruler in the realm, but you get a strong claim on the title.
I don't know enough about the working parts of the game to know what is or isn't feasible here, but I think they'd be some great ideas to make the core feudal CK2 game a lot deeper and richer.
Upvote
0
