Make Changing Capitals Easier

[Sappho of Lesbos]

My usual playstyle is to take a minor European nation, and make them a colonial power. If possible, I like to transfer my capital to the New World. However, this is hard for three reasons:
1. You can only move your capital overseas if it is isolated.
2. You must be at +2 stability and have 1000 ducats.
3. You must be at peace.

In one recent game, I had established a solid colonial base as the Hansa. But just as I was prepared to move my capital, I got invaded by Pommerania, and Lubeck was occupied. What I wish I could have done is have my government flee to the New World (I'm imagining a bunch of terrified government officials carrying boxes full of important documents running to the port while the city is overrun), and surrender Lubeck to Pommerania. As I recall, the one historical case of a European nation transferring its capital to the New World - Portugal, which moved its court to Brazil - occurred in a time of war (the Napoleonic Wars). And Portugal was certainly no OPM.

I think that transferring your capital should always be possible. Here would be some limitations:
- If you move your capital in a time of war, you instantly drop to -3 stab.
- Transferring your capital overseas in a time of war has a chance of triggering a revolt in your older provinces.
- Transferring your capital for any reason increases the former capital's revolt risk.
- Transferring your capital overseas imposes a prestige penalty.

 

[Andy_Dandy]

I think transfering the cap to the new world should be almost impossible, preferably not possible at all. Far too easy as it is. It's rather gamey pluss it's really not realistic that an european nation would have done that what so ever.

 

[PMLF]

I think transfering the cap to the new world should be almost impossible, preferably not possible at all. Far too easy as it is. It's rather gamey pluss it's really not realistic that an european nation would have done that what so ever.

It has actually already happened in real life as was mentioned above: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transfer_of_the_Portuguese_Court_to_Brazil

It shouldn't be easy to happen, but should be possible under certain circumstances (ex: if all your non-colonial provinces are occupied by a foreign country).

 

[Hydro Globus]

IIRC, changing capitals will now have an ADM cost in the hundreds.

 

[ptan54]

Changing capital for the sake of it should be difficult.

Changing capital if your capital is cut off from more than 2/3s of your provinces = matter of practicality. If Russia's capital is St. Petersburg and I have taken all the provinces around it such that St. Petersburg is totally surrounded by a hostile country....it should be easy for Russia to relocate the capital elsewhere. I think EU3 allows capital shift for the AI if the capital is totally surrounded AND landlocked, i.e. the rule doesn't apply to St. Petersburg.

Changing capital if 100% of your European provinces are occupied for more than 5 years = fait accompli. The court has long since escaped to the New World, the de facto capital is already in the New World, just reduce the cost for moving capital in such an instance. If the invader is later pushed out, certainly have a cheaper modifier for returning the capital to Europe.

 

[Jia Xu]

Moving the capital should be possible, but it should never be done lightly. It should be a costly action that makes you not want to consider it at all except under exceptional circumstances. A heavy cost would be like 500 of every monarch point type and five stability, perhaps? It should also be something the AI doesn't do except via special decisions and such.

 

[Andy_Dandy]

It has actually already happened in real life as was mentioned above: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transfer_of_the_Portuguese_Court_to_Brazil

It shouldn't be easy to happen, but should be possible under certain circumstances (ex: if all your non-colonial provinces are occupied by a foreign country).

Well, that was far from permanent, but because of french occupation of Portugal. Nothing to do with the kind of moving of capital as we se in EU3. They stayed some few years after the french had gone, but anyways, far from a permanent solution, and they left just because of the war. The same way the norwegian government fled to London during WW2, and the british would have fled to Canada if England was to be occupied by the germans.

 

[Ruwaard]

Moving the capital should be possible, but it should never be done lightly. It should be a costly action that makes you not want to consider it at all except under exceptional circumstances. A heavy cost would be like 500 of every monarch point type and five stability, perhaps? It should also be something the AI doesn't do except via special decisions and such.

I agree, another limitation could be that it may only be done once per reign/term in office.

 

[xcrissxcrossx]

Changing capital if your capital is cut off from more than 2/3s of your provinces = matter of practicality. If Russia's capital is St. Petersburg and I have taken all the provinces around it such that St. Petersburg is totally surrounded by a hostile country....it should be easy for Russia to relocate the capital elsewhere. I think EU3 allows capital shift for the AI if the capital is totally surrounded AND landlocked, i.e. the rule doesn't apply to St. Petersburg.

I can completely agree with that. I have a script that does exactly that in my EU3 mod and it just seems to fit really well and improve the game.

 

[Featauril]

The problem is that it's hard to figure out whether a capital is isolated or the holdings are just disparate.

For instance take Venice - they are an island without any adjacent provinces. Does their capital move to Veneto for this reason?

 

[maxirage]

Changing capital if your capital is cut off from more than 2/3s of your provinces = matter of practicality. If Russia's capital is St. Petersburg and I have taken all the provinces around it such that St. Petersburg is totally surrounded by a hostile country....it should be easy for Russia to relocate the capital elsewhere. I think EU3 allows capital shift for the AI if the capital is totally surrounded AND landlocked, i.e. the rule doesn't apply to St. Petersburg.
.

That reminds me, they really need to get rid of the magical forcefield around capitals that make them immune to annexation. When the heck did a conquering army annex every territory around a capital, leaving it surrounded like that, while leaving the capital itself independent? That situation shouldn't even happen in the first place. If you totally defeat a country than the capital province should be treated like any other one.

 

[Mackus]

That reminds me, they really need to get rid of the magical forcefield around capitals that make them immune to annexation. When the heck did a conquering army annex every territory around a capital, leaving it surrounded like that, while leaving the capital itself independent? That situation shouldn't even happen in the first place. If you totally defeat a country than the capital province should be treated like any other one.

Good idea. Perhaps making capital conquerable, but cost two or three times more unless its isolated.

 

[TheDarkMaster]

I think one good solution would be to have capital movements be a two step process. The first step is to relocate your capital to another location when under severe duress, such as in a war or something similar. The old capital maintains a status as the rightful capital, and you can always relocate back to it with minimal costs while in this first step. The second step of actually moving your capital permanently to the new location, is the one that needs additional restrictions, and that should only be possible to do either very infrequently, or at a fairly high cost. I do not think that permanent capital movement should have an extreme cost though, since at that point you might as well just say, no, you can never move your capital.

I'd also suggest having the costs to move the capital permanently should also be somewhat lessened in certain circumstances. Say the permanent capital is blockaded from your temporary one, or the permanent capital is under enemy occupation, or has been ceded to your enemies.

 

[maxirage]

I don't see why moving the capital has to be complicated and destabilizing; it's not like it matters that much. I say it should involve nothing more than money, which simulates the cost of moving and rebuilding the country's administration.

Russia for example only relocated its capital for convenience and symbolism. China did it for strategic reasons. But in-game, neither country would ever make such a movement willingly, because the penalties are so harsh. The realistic discouragement from moving one's capital is the high cost and trouble for no major benefit. The problem in EUIII came because there was a huge benefit to moving the capital to far away places, and that's it. You don't need to ruin capital movement for everybody else just to make some niche strategies slightly harder to perform.

Crusader Kings 2 lets you move your capital completely for free, for example, but limits it to only once per lifetime. It works fine.

 

[zdlugasz]

I think one good solution would be to have capital movements be a two step process. The first step is to relocate your capital to another location when under severe duress, such as in a war or something similar. The old capital maintains a status as the rightful capital, and you can always relocate back to it with minimal costs while in this first step.

What I do not like in this picture is that my enemy would be able to hop its capital every time I occupy it's capital, forcing me to go for total war/occupation if I wanted to get favorable peace terms.
And imagine mainland France or British isles occupied while they move their capital to e.g. Indian Ocean refusing peace treaty.

And answering another post: yes, capital move does matter because it's position influences war score and peace resolution

 

[Ruwaard]

@ maxirage: while I do agree with the once per rule restriction in CK2; the position of a capital in that era might be a bit different in that era than the EU4 era. In the CK2 era a country capital and the place where the monarch held court (may be at a number of places) are not necessarily the same, whereas in the EU4 era that became much more common and besides EU4 is more abstract in that regard (in CK2 personal relations matter more).

 

[AlHasanAlbaghdadi]

A big fat no. In fact, they should make changing your capital harder and more expensive

 

[TheDarkMaster]

What I do not like in this picture is that my enemy would be able to hop its capital every time I occupy it's capital, forcing me to go for total war/occupation if I wanted to get favorable peace terms.
And imagine mainland France or British isles occupied while they move their capital to e.g. Indian Ocean refusing peace treaty.

And answering another post: yes, capital move does matter because it's position influences war score and peace resolution

I'm talking about having a single temporary capital, while also retaining the traditional capital. The longer you maintain the temporary capital, the greater the costs are to you. If it would cause too many problems, there could also be the restriction that you can't change the permanent capital location while at war, or that doing so incurs a significant warscore advantage to your opponent.

The other thing is that historical capital movement happened all the time, and it wasn't all that big of a deal for the nations that did it, save the costs of the new administration buildings.

 

[mudcrabmerchant]

What if the cost could have several different modifiers? So, increase the cost in money, stability, prestige, and monarch points, if the province is far away, especially if its overseas, and decrease the cost in money but increase the cost in stab and prestige (not sure what to do with monarch points), and alter the price in all categories based on the development and overall wealth of the new capital province, so that Nanjing > Beijing wouldn't be that big of a deal, but Lisbon > poor Brazilian trade post would throw the entire country into chaos, or just be impossible.

It should also be easier to move the capital to provinces that are "natural" capitals, such as Rome, London, Paris, Cairo, Baghdad, or Constantinople. I imagine decisions exist for most of these, but it'd be nice to have something for any country that takes these provinces, even if they aren't one of the blessed tags such as FRA or TUR or ENG. Moving your capital to one of these should at the very least give you a significant prestige boost.

 

[maxirage]

It should also be easier to move the capital to provinces that are "natural" capitals, such as Rome, London, Paris, Cairo, Baghdad, or Constantinople. I imagine decisions exist for most of these, but it'd be nice to have something for any country that takes these provinces, even if they aren't one of the blessed tags such as FRA or TUR or ENG. Moving your capital to one of these should at the very least give you a significant prestige boost.

Now that sounds like a neat idea. It would lessen the tag bias towards certain countries, while also making moving your capital in such logical scenerios much easier.