For the love of God, please change the Regency mechanic.

[balmung60]

And that list of regents is about as applicable as giving a list of presidents of General Motors to someone who asked for a list of presidents, when it was clear that they were asking for presidents of the United States and doubling-down that you gave "a list of presidents from the United States".

As far as the game is concerned, that's not a regency and Sweden is not getting its MP income or foreign policy from a regency council, but from the king of Denmark. It can't freely declare war, not because of regents, but because it's the junior of a personal union. As the junior of a personal union, Sweden does not have its own foreign policy (and while I'm not an expert on the matter, I imagine that the regents' authority was limited by the whims of the king of Denmark because again, subject nation). An independent nation, with or without a regency, however, does have its own foreign policy, which is why using examples from a subject nation for a matter pertaining to an independent nation is hardly appropriate.

And on the flip side of "regents couldn't declare war", I just opened Crusader Kings 2, started with in Norway with a regency and declared a holy war on some Suomenusko tribe. Seems that on November 11, 1444, every regent and future regent simply forgot how to declare war. Say what you will about realism, but Paradox seems to be of two minds about what a regent could and could not do.

 

[Mikalos]

And that list of regents is about as applicable as giving a list of presidents of General Motors to someone who asked for a list of presidents, when it was clear that they were asking for presidents of the United States and doubling-down that you gave "a list of presidents from the United States".

As far as the game is concerned, that's not a regency and Sweden is not getting its MP income or foreign policy from a regency council, but from the king of Denmark. It can't freely declare war, not because of regents, but because it's the junior of a personal union. As the junior of a personal union, Sweden does not have its own foreign policy (and while I'm not an expert on the matter, I imagine that the regents' authority was limited by the whims of the king of Denmark because again, subject nation). An independent nation, with or without a regency, however, does have its own foreign policy, which is why using examples from a subject nation for a matter pertaining to an independent nation is hardly appropriate.

And on the flip side of "regents couldn't declare war", I just opened Crusader Kings 2, started with in Norway with a regency and declared a holy war on some Suomenusko tribe. Seems that on November 11, 1444, every regent and future regent simply forgot how to declare war. Say what you will about realism, but Paradox seems to be of two minds about what a regent could and could not do.

November 11th, 1444 was a strange date in history, where feudal and dynastic mechanisms simply were shed away, and from the heavens came this mana that let people do stuff

 

[zyphial]

A.) Good game design has nothing to do with historical versus ahistorical mechanics, necessarily.

B.) I had 35 years of regency in a 50 year period. Point out to me a case in history where anything even close to that occurred, and I'll start digging for regents that declared war.

That bureaucratic overthrow event should have an increased chance to fire under regencies. It makes sense from a roleplay and plausibility perspective, and it's more fun than NO CHOICES FOR YOU.

(For those curious, it basically is a paper-coup event where your government flips to bureaucratic despotism).

 

[solidprice]

How about option d.) Add a decision for the regent to kill the heir and take the throne for himself. Stab hit and low legitimacy, but instant adult ruler and resumption of normal affairs.

EDIT: Oh, and while we're fixing regencies, can they get names or something? Anything that fetches monarch name looks really stupid during a regency and besmirches your history feed forever.

That bureaucratic overthrow event should have an increased chance to fire under regencies. It makes sense from a roleplay and plausibility perspective, and it's more fun than NO CHOICES FOR YOU.

(For those curious, it basically is a paper-coup event where your government flips to bureaucratic despotism).

i like both of these ideas.

i love that EU4 lets you do a lot of things, but there is a cost to them.

you should be able to usurp the throne as a regent at a cost.

also you should be able to declare war with a regency for certain wars like reconquest and overseas cbs against Asia and natives.
do the aztecs or Ceylon know and/or care if you have a king? lolnope.
maybe even dip 23+ CB's to encourage people to tech up dip.

 

[Lemont Elwood]

There could at least be control over a Regency Council. Maybe you get to pick the Council specialty, like in a Republican election. Maybe there are events where you can seize more power as the Regent in exchange for Legitimacy, possibly even installing the Regent as the new monarch. In fact, a Legitimacy cost for DOWs would work just fine...

 

[Jorlaan]

We SERIOUSLY need at least a few ways to declare war during regencies. I have had some very long stretches in them and they SUCK! Hungary is gimped because of the events and regencies that constantly screw you around for like the first 50 years.

 

[Morricane]

There could at least be control over a Regency Council. Maybe you get to pick the Council specialty, like in a Republican election. Maybe there are events where you can seize more power as the Regent in exchange for Legitimacy, possibly even installing the Regent as the new monarch. In fact, a Legitimacy cost for DOWs would work just fine...

After all are there are more than enough examples of regents seizing power throughout history
So yeah why not.

 

[zephyr7913]

I completely agree. My last game as Ming involved in several more or less consecutive regencies and 2 dynasties died out (really unlucky, huh?) And believe me that's really a few boring hours.

 

[unillogical]

Dear Paradox,

Can I just say that I would rank this change number 1 on my list of changes I would like to see. Regencies ruin games, especially multiplayer games which are much more competitive, they are also ahistoric, my advice would be to give a legitimacy hit for wars declared during a regency as there is really nothing to do while you wait.