HIP and CK2+ just axed Viceroyalties

[kmh42]

They replaced it with a new Imperial-Goverment-Type. I welcome this change very much and I look forward to try it out. But the current devs should worried about that. There is this Viceroy-feature which is really really bad, just look at all the issues.It's not a game breaker but many people, me included, stop using this feature because its so bad.

PS: CK2+ also removed India form the default install! You still can on it with an submod. No complete India in non of the major Overhaul Mods!

 

[ThatDaniel]

uh......im sure they didn't hack it.

 

[kmh42]

uh......im sure they didn't hack it.

Ups! The axed it! Can I edit the title?

 

[starwarsfan541]

Ups! The axed it! Can I edit the title?

Axeing features is not a good thing in some of our opinions.

Some of us greatly enjoy India

 

[Dryhad]

So I followed the links in the OP and the comprehensive community issues thread lists all of four issues associated with viceroys, none of which is particularly big (one is actually just 'I don't like handing out viceroy titles'), whereas the HIP thread identifies a bug wherein the ruler designer causes the ERE to become nomadic.

But no, it's viceroys that are "just bad".

 

[Azarias59]

Axeing features is not a good thing in some of our opinions.

Some of us greatly enjoy India

Some of us less than others.

 

[starwarsfan541]

Some of us less than others.

Fair enough, an option to disable it would be good for those who dislike it

 

[Zooboss]

So I followed the links in the OP and the comprehensive community issues thread lists all of four issues associated with viceroys, none of which is particularly big (one is actually just 'I don't like handing out viceroy titles'), whereas the HIP thread identifies a bug wherein the ruler designer causes the ERE to become nomadic.

But no, it's viceroys that are "just bad".

How about this issue: you're the Emperor and for whatever reason in a regency. A viceroy dies and you get a new title. When you try to hand it out, your regent and/or the Council block it. You can circumvent the Council (IIRC) and get tyranny or you hold on to the duchy and likely face a too many duchies modifier. Possibly go over vassal limit.

And if it's a long regency this can happen many times stacking negative modifiers. Then most of the realm will hate you even more than usual.

This way it can be assumed that a vassal (among several choices) will get the title unless the Emperor specifically decides to revoke it. Which, in my opinion, works better than the constant inheritance of viceroyalty titles

 

[Atlantians]

EDIT: They axed it, not hacked it. Sorry!

They replaced it with a new Imperial-Goverment-Type. I welcome this change very much and I look forward to try it out. But the current devs should worried about that. There is this Viceroy-feature which is really really bad, just look at all the issues.It's not a game breaker but many people, me included, stop using this feature because its so bad.

PS: CK2+ also hacked India! So no complete India in non of the major Overhaul Mods!

Can you please repost this post on Imperial Government Type here?
I can't access the mod forums.

 

[kmh42]

*Ahem*
View attachment 174317

Thx

 

[kmh42]

Can you please repost this post on Imperial Government Type here?
I can't access the mod forums.

Viceroyalty Update (brought over from CK2Plus and implemented by @Rylock):

• Due to myriad bugs and gameplay-suboptimal restrictions with the Charlemagne DLC's implementation of viceroyalties, how they work has been radically changed compared to vanilla CK2:
  • There is no separate law for establishing viceroyalties - it comes into play only once the Imperial Administration law has been implemented.
  • Under the Imperial Administration law, the government type will change to Imperial (or al-Mulk for Muslims - all references to Imperial government from this point will apply equally to the al-Mulk variant). This government type allows free revocation ("free" meaning no tyranny opinion malus; it still costs Prestige) of all Duke- and King-tier vassal titles, with the al-Mulk variant also getting free transfer of vassals.
  • All feudal vassals of Duke or King tier who also have Imperial government are automatically considered viceroys. This means that, whenever their title is usurped or inherited, the emperor (or their King-tier liege, even if he is also a viceroy) receives an event to assent to their assumption of the title. If the emperor refuses, the viceroy has the opportunity to bribe their liege with favors and/or coin, but failing that the emperor's council will then suggest up to three alternatives - which may include the original heir/usurper if they are liked enough or are the only available ruler in range. The emperor may select one of their options or spend 200 Prestige to override them and usurp the title personally.
  • The emperor has access to a 'Make Title Inheritable' option, which will make an Imperial vassal change to Feudal government instead - their title will be inheritable and will not need the assent of the emperor from that point on, until and unless it is usurped or revoked by the liege. Feudal government status also automatically applies to rulers who are subjugated through war.
  • Note that, when first establishing the Imperial Administration law, all vassals will have Feudal government. The only way to turn them to Imperial government is through new titles being granted, or existing Duke/King titles being revoked and re-granted by the emperor.

 

[kviiri]

Fair enough, an option to disable it would be good for those who dislike it

Saying that CK2+ axed India makes it sound far more radical than what was actually done. They removed India in the core CK2+ mod and are distributing a sub-mod that returns India along the main mod. People who want to play with India get their India, people who don't get to remove it by unchecking the India submod.

 

[Dryhad]

How about this issue: you're the Emperor and for whatever reason in a regency. A viceroy dies and you get a new title. When you try to hand it out, your regent and/or the Council block it. You can circumvent the Council (IIRC) and get tyranny or you hold on to the duchy and likely face a too many duchies modifier. Possibly go over vassal limit.

And if it's a long regency this can happen many times stacking negative modifiers. Then most of the realm will hate you even more than usual.

This way it can be assumed that a vassal (among several choices) will get the title unless the Emperor specifically decides to revoke it. Which, in my opinion, works better than the constant inheritance of viceroyalty titles

Look, I'm not saying there's nothing wrong with viceroys, I'm saying that the OP didn't give any reason to think there was and instead just assumed everyone already hated them. And the fact that you've fixed this issue doesn't mean you haven't introduced new issues, like the Byzantine nomad thing I mentioned. I'd like a reason why I should trade one buggy mechanic for another buggy mechanic that's not "It's just bad".

 

[kmh42]

Axeing features is not a good thing in some of our opinions.

Some of us greatly enjoy India

Me too. Even I don't play many campaigns in this region.

So I followed the links in the OP and the comprehensive community issues thread lists all of four issues associated with viceroys, none of which is particularly big (one is actually just 'I don't like handing out viceroy titles'), whereas the HIP thread identifies a bug wherein the ruler designer causes the ERE to become nomadic.

But no, it's viceroys that are "just bad".

Every issue on it's own is not big. But when you play in a huge Empire and give out a lots of viceroy's, those little thing combing to one big issue with one feature. I already sayed it's not a game breaker but it's a feature breaker for me. It's just a shame because this feature could be awesome with a little effort put into it. I don't say the Imperial government is a good replacement. They just introduced it and time will tell if it's a good feature

 

[kmh42]

Fair enough, an option to disable it would be good for those who dislike it

Saying that CK2+ axed India makes it sound far more radical than what was actually done. They removed India in the core CK2+ mod and are distributing a sub-mod that returns India along the main mod. People who want to play with India get their India, people who don't get to remove it by unchecking the India submod.

Yes they just disabled it and you can easily add it in again,that's true. I think the symbolic weights more then the actual execution.

 

[kmh42]

I'm saying that the OP didn't give any reason to think there was and instead just assumed everyone already hated them

Many people, including me ≠ everyone

 

[Kapitalisti]

I'm kinda confused about the point of this thread.

 

[Rognvaldr19]

I'm kinda confused about the point of this thread.

Another attempt by that small minority of forumites that think the way they play the game or the features they use should be forced onto everyone else?

If I want CK2+ or HIP mechanics, I'll play CK2+ or HIP.

 

[kmh42]

I'm kinda confused about the point of this thread.

I admit, there is no much of a point. I just wanna show of the interesting idea to tackle the viceroys flaws. I just find it interesting that the two major mod replaced a hole feature in the game.

Another attempt by that small minority of forumites that think the way they play the game or the features they use should be forced onto everyone else?

If I want CK2+ or HIP mechanics, I'll play CK2+ or HIP.

I do not want to force anyone to do anything. Maybe ask the devs to tackle viceroys. like I say above I just wanna show of something interesting for me. Sorry when I didn't make that clear.

 

[yezhanquan]

The two major mods generally did what was possible with the code. With the game at this stage in its lifespan, pretty much anything which can be done to improve the experience has been tried. Main consideration is whether it'll make the game too slow.