I've read dozens of posts about the lack of a unique government type for the Byzantine Empire and was wondering if any of you Byzentinophiles had any thoughts on how to make such a system in-game. The most glaring issue seems to be title management because a viceroy system ala CK2 would be way too micro heavy, so how to solve this issue in a way that works in-game? Any thoughts?
How should a byzantine government type be implemented?
- Thread starter Limbojack
- 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.
Just as a quick thought, and I believe it has been proposed before, but utilizing elements of CK2's Republic and Investiture mechanics could possibly work out well for a more administrative form of government (and thus the Byzantines). Having it so that dynasties have their own family palaces, and thus able to be played even without landed titles, would be good, since few of the families ruled over lands in a hereditary basis. Using CK2's Investiture mechanics could help tone down on the necessary micro as well, allowing the emperor to designate who will get a title even before the holder has passed*. One could also use some manner of CK2's Republic succession model as well, allowing dynasties to compete and bribe to gain titles as well. Again, just to emphasize, these are merely some quick initial thoughts, but it at least uses mechanics that have largely already been coded for before!
Edit: * - And if none are designated, maybe assign to the most prestigious dynasty? Or generate a courtier? Unsure!
Edit: * - And if none are designated, maybe assign to the most prestigious dynasty? Or generate a courtier? Unsure!
Last edited:
Interesting ideas. I can definitely see them getting turned into something that would work in-game, and make the byzantines feel unique. I guess the part about estates, and how they're managed, would require some extra work, but having the Byzantine Empire feel more like a republic than a feudal society (at least in its early days) would make some sense.
Definitely would. The Byzantine Empire only began to incorporate more feudal elements later on with the pronoia system (established under Constantine IX Monomachus, but without inheritance. That would only come late during the 13th century, with the later Komenoi and Palaiologos). It definitely was not feudal pre-eleventh century.
Last edited:
Byzantium was weird, administratively it was always a bureaucratic state, but militarily it evolved and adapted over the course of the games time frame, with 876 being in the hayday of the theme system, the theme system militarily was a set of settled, semi standing armies, each soldier was given a temporary plot of state owned land to manage but was primarily a soldier to the point that the land grants were used more to allow the solders to raise families then as pay. Any soldier in a theme passed there obligations on to there sons who would take the fathers place as per the contract each soldier agreed to. Id suppose its analogous in ck2 to each "theme" having its own set of men at arms upkept by a military governor.
The second system that came into play as the theme system weakened and waned into the 10th and 11th centuries was the Tagmata, they were classical standing armies of professional soldiers that evolved from the Garrison of Constantinople into field armies nominally under the command of the emperor. They were most prominent in the decades before Manzikert and under the komnenos dynasty
the 3rd system which is arguably the hardest to represent due to its evolution was the Pronoia, initially they were just a temporary, non heritable delegation of various things like tax collecting, tolls, customs enforcement, fishing and shipping rights before evolving gradually into military positions complete with salaries and a neat excuse for an emperor to 'banish' anyone he didnt like by giving them a paid position out in the boonies running an garrison or battalion far from the imperial capitol. To a final form as heritable land grants in a feudalesque fashion in the late 13th/early 14th century.
Themes and Tagmata are fairly simple in game terms being analogous to men at arms tied to specific areas and ck2 retinues, the Pronoia system is basically an evolution of minor titles into landed fiefdoms and i'd imagine a lot harder to represent as a gradual evolution.
Administratively it probably best described as an administrative republican monarchy, formally the Senate still existed, unbroken from the days of the republic over 1000 years earlier, and there was no concept of divine right or formal succession laws with the emperor technically being elected by the senate and military, the senate was effectively toothless with regards to succession, with the military almost completely dominating succession, but emperors often gamed the system through bribes, blackmail and declaring family members co-emperors. This uncodified succession was in my opinion one of the empires greatest strengths and weaknesses, on one hand it let some of the best emperors in its history ascend the throne such as Justinian(a farmer from Thrace by birth) Basil the II(slayer of Bulgar's and oversaw the height of byzantine power in the early 11th century) and Alexios(first komnenos emperor and instigator of the komnenian restoration) but also lead to the empires greatest defeats.
Manzikert itself wasn't the decisive defeat that its usually portrayed as, the majority of both the Byzantine and Seljuk armies came out unscathed and the battle itself was in purely military power indecisive with both sides still a major threat to the other, what tipped the scales ironically enough was the anarchy after Romanos IV's deposition and the civil wars that followed, the Byzantines themselves were in strong position to hold on to there Anatolian lands but squandered it in the civil wars that followed. The second is of course 1204 and we all know how that happened.
As for the Aristocracy it waxed and waned over time. In 876 it mainly consisted influential metropolitan families based in the cities and a military aristocracy that held large estates in the country but little in actual military power. At this point there was still a separation of civil and military administration ala the old roman system. Post Manzikert the aristocracy gained much in power with a small group of landed aristocracy being delegated power to run things by the emperor and in contrast to feudalism were very few in number with one source suggesting that by the 11th century the entire empire was ran by only 144 noble families. There is not much I can find on the nature and size of their holdings and weather or not they more like scattered estates or centralized holdings in provinces. If anyone has any info on this id very much appreciate it.
Last edited:
This is really good thinking - remixing preexisting gameplay elements when possible in order to cut down on the dev resources needed. I would potentially also make a suggestion that open titles tend to go to prestigious/powerful dynasties by default, and then the emperor can spend prestige to nominate someone else instead. This cuts down on maintenance micromanagement a bit (you as the emperor intervene in nominations only when you want to promote a specific character or undermine rival great dynasties), and it also makes the system drift towards consolidation of control by powerful nobility if not checked by the top.
I would also link this in with systems that allow powerful vassals to become feudal over time. Via factions, hooks, etc., they could force the emperor to accept greater control over the titles they're appointed to, including making them heritable and irrevocable and ending with the vassal becoming a Feudal vassal (while still being under the Imperial government). And then make the reverse possible as well, so that a powerful emperor can try to re-centralize and re-bureaucratize the empire.
You essentially need an estate system for empire to work. You have numerous estates dotted around the whole map, from tiny estates to grand estates. But owning those estates does not give you any political power at all. All it does is to give you income and influence to gain political offices. And in order to gain political office, you need to gain the favour of those above you in a variety of ways.
You can climb ranks by making sure the person above you likes you enough to promote you to higher offices. And when you get promoted to higher offices, you should be able to recruit and appoint the people you like to lesser positions.
Or you have your officials be in charge of appointing the people under them. The Emperor is in charge of appointing people at the highest political office, but they can't be responsible for choosing which minor clerk to be promoted to the next office. Instead, the Logothete is in charge of appointing their own staff, and their own staff is in charge of appointing the people under them and etc.
Your grand domestikos is in charge of appointing his Protostrator, the Protostrator is in charge of hiring people beneath him and etc.
As an emperor or any high official, you can intervene or by-pass the usual rules of appointment by nominating someone you favour to take the job instead of the designated person. While this might help you gain a loyal follower, it can also breed resentment by those people that feel they ought to be promoted.
In other words, playing as the Byzantine Empire is essentially playing office-politics 101, except deadlier. Anyone you appoint comes with their own personal network of favours and favoured personnel.
The main thing is to make the official post more valuable than the land people are controlling. Strategos only have power because they are the only people allowed to have command of an army in the provinces. Domesticus have power because they control the field-army/elite units standing at the ready all the time. The chancellory have power not because it has control of landed titles but because it controls the finance, executing the law and etc.
You can climb ranks by making sure the person above you likes you enough to promote you to higher offices. And when you get promoted to higher offices, you should be able to recruit and appoint the people you like to lesser positions.
Or you have your officials be in charge of appointing the people under them. The Emperor is in charge of appointing people at the highest political office, but they can't be responsible for choosing which minor clerk to be promoted to the next office. Instead, the Logothete is in charge of appointing their own staff, and their own staff is in charge of appointing the people under them and etc.
Your grand domestikos is in charge of appointing his Protostrator, the Protostrator is in charge of hiring people beneath him and etc.
As an emperor or any high official, you can intervene or by-pass the usual rules of appointment by nominating someone you favour to take the job instead of the designated person. While this might help you gain a loyal follower, it can also breed resentment by those people that feel they ought to be promoted.
In other words, playing as the Byzantine Empire is essentially playing office-politics 101, except deadlier. Anyone you appoint comes with their own personal network of favours and favoured personnel.
The main thing is to make the official post more valuable than the land people are controlling. Strategos only have power because they are the only people allowed to have command of an army in the provinces. Domesticus have power because they control the field-army/elite units standing at the ready all the time. The chancellory have power not because it has control of landed titles but because it controls the finance, executing the law and etc.
The most important thing is the ai can actually play the government type, if Byzantine government type is something the ai don't understand and make the empire collapse in a few decades it would be very bad.
Each settlement in a county should have a number of Estates based on its technology level, development level and type. Cities obviously having the most Estates, Tribes probably having 0.
Estates would be owned by Landowners, who would pay taxes to the Baron.
This would create the middle class that basically didn't exist in CKII and was the single biggest reason why the game was forced into a purely feudal model.
The Roman and Chinese models of government, as well as Republics and Theocracies, all leaned heavily on the upper middle class. They were a source of revenue both with taxes and with strategic marriage in feudal kingdoms, and in Empires, Republics, etc they were the soul and blood of the bureaucracy.
What I'd love to see, is each of the major ministers (Marshal, Chaplain,Steward, etc) should be called on to recruit people to fill the ranks of the bureaucracy. Marshals find Commanders for each province, Stewards find stewards, Spymasters place agents, Chaplains place priests, Chancellors place Ambassadors. Nepotism being what it is they'd tap their family for some of it, and the upper middle class, modeled by Estate holders, for the rest.
The job of the Estate holders is to try to secure government, commercial and religious postings for themselves and their families, yielding them income (to pay their taxes and keep their homes) and Prestige. A sufficiently Prestigious estate holder could suck up to the Royal Steward enough get a posting as a Governor, which is like a feudal holding except the Steward picks the Heir. A sufficiently wealthy estate holdier may find himself courted for strategic marriages of his children by particularly bankrupt nobility, granting them access to higher titles.
From a gameplay standpoint if you're starting from the bottom you want to get yourself or your primary heir selected as a Governor, and from there use the influence of that position to advance your position, expand your Estate holdings (in case your hold on power momentarily slips) and maybe even leverage yourself into the upper nobility of the country. if you're starting from the top you want to find talented, loyal people to surround yourself with, in order to counter the intrigue of your Governors and stay at the top.
But it starts with modeling the upper middle class, and THAT starts with creating Estates that can be bought with money and inherited without conferring a title of nobility.
Estates would be owned by Landowners, who would pay taxes to the Baron.
This would create the middle class that basically didn't exist in CKII and was the single biggest reason why the game was forced into a purely feudal model.
The Roman and Chinese models of government, as well as Republics and Theocracies, all leaned heavily on the upper middle class. They were a source of revenue both with taxes and with strategic marriage in feudal kingdoms, and in Empires, Republics, etc they were the soul and blood of the bureaucracy.
What I'd love to see, is each of the major ministers (Marshal, Chaplain,Steward, etc) should be called on to recruit people to fill the ranks of the bureaucracy. Marshals find Commanders for each province, Stewards find stewards, Spymasters place agents, Chaplains place priests, Chancellors place Ambassadors. Nepotism being what it is they'd tap their family for some of it, and the upper middle class, modeled by Estate holders, for the rest.
The job of the Estate holders is to try to secure government, commercial and religious postings for themselves and their families, yielding them income (to pay their taxes and keep their homes) and Prestige. A sufficiently Prestigious estate holder could suck up to the Royal Steward enough get a posting as a Governor, which is like a feudal holding except the Steward picks the Heir. A sufficiently wealthy estate holdier may find himself courted for strategic marriages of his children by particularly bankrupt nobility, granting them access to higher titles.
From a gameplay standpoint if you're starting from the bottom you want to get yourself or your primary heir selected as a Governor, and from there use the influence of that position to advance your position, expand your Estate holdings (in case your hold on power momentarily slips) and maybe even leverage yourself into the upper nobility of the country. if you're starting from the top you want to find talented, loyal people to surround yourself with, in order to counter the intrigue of your Governors and stay at the top.
But it starts with modeling the upper middle class, and THAT starts with creating Estates that can be bought with money and inherited without conferring a title of nobility.
I think what I'm hearing is that the Byzantine emperor should have what are basically 5 bishops. All of his councilors would function like bishops over a fifth of the land somehow. Not sure how you would work out that split. These 6 would be pulled from a collection of families from three distinct casts. Families of land owners, politicians, and officers. These families would be anchored to holdings but wouldn't actually benefit from holding them in any way. Instead, these families are trying to amass wealth to buy favor, gain popularity, bribe, blackmail each other trying to appointed to higher tiers of bureaucracy before ultimately getting appointed as one of the five bishops. High skills values tends to get you put into a position but the more favor you've amassed the more punishing it is for the emperor to pick someone else over you somehow. Of course for raw troops and money the emperor would prefer someone who he actually likes and who likes him in turn for a position but picking someone without skill or merit could land you in hot water. On top of reasoning with his council, the estates themselves are an ambiguous entity that he has to appease the same way we now have to appease provinces. While the councilors can't rebel, the estates can.
As emperor, you can try to mitigate which estate is unhappy by marrying into it, or appointing positions to it or assigning co-emperors from within it.
Everytime you suffer a civil war, lose a war, get blackmailed, or the dynasty of the emperor changes hands you lose imperial authority. At 50% lost you start having to negotiate with land owners to field standing armies. At 0 you are basically feudal.
Sounds like it could be fun to play as an emperor. I feel like playing as a family in an estate or as a 'landed' office holder trying to make Councillor bishop thing would be frustrating. Like playing in Ireland without the ability to fabricate claims or use jade emperor CBs. You're just really hoping you can nail this marriage game and inherit France while waiting for events to pop up or lifestyle abilities to pay off. Which is actually how I play the game most of the time but theres a decided lack of agency there that would absolutely drive someone who doesn't play that way up the wall. Sounds like we don't have a unique byzantine goverment yet because unless you're emperor it just wouldn't be fun or engaging. Thats a hard sell from a game company to a player. You're basically asking for a second game for them to shove into 1/100 off their game. Its an important 1/100th but I definitely wouldn't expect the game within a game at launch. Thats a lot to put into such a little area comparatively
As emperor, you can try to mitigate which estate is unhappy by marrying into it, or appointing positions to it or assigning co-emperors from within it.
Everytime you suffer a civil war, lose a war, get blackmailed, or the dynasty of the emperor changes hands you lose imperial authority. At 50% lost you start having to negotiate with land owners to field standing armies. At 0 you are basically feudal.
Sounds like it could be fun to play as an emperor. I feel like playing as a family in an estate or as a 'landed' office holder trying to make Councillor bishop thing would be frustrating. Like playing in Ireland without the ability to fabricate claims or use jade emperor CBs. You're just really hoping you can nail this marriage game and inherit France while waiting for events to pop up or lifestyle abilities to pay off. Which is actually how I play the game most of the time but theres a decided lack of agency there that would absolutely drive someone who doesn't play that way up the wall. Sounds like we don't have a unique byzantine goverment yet because unless you're emperor it just wouldn't be fun or engaging. Thats a hard sell from a game company to a player. You're basically asking for a second game for them to shove into 1/100 off their game. Its an important 1/100th but I definitely wouldn't expect the game within a game at launch. Thats a lot to put into such a little area comparatively
Well, you can develop more networking mechanisms to help your character from a small estate "level up" in terms of social hierarchy. Join the army as a junior officer. Perform well in your duties and you'll start to earn attention from more senior members of the aristocracy and military. Develop a reputation as a good commander and good at training your troops.They will want you to marry into their family, or give you better and better postings.
Or perform other duties well. Say you've become good at composing poems, books in the imperial court, and you'll get rewarded with better postings as your fame attracts followers and people willing to back you in all sort of ways and favours. Or be a really good rhetorician, and be involved in settling legal disputes.
Instead of spending your time upgrading your castles, you spend your time commanding troops well, writing great works of literature, settling theological issues or making sure things runs smoothly in your part of the imperial administration. If you do your job well, you'll be rewarded to form a stronger network with more influential people on the basis of your merit. So it's not just a waiting game for the player.