No more internal wars is benefitial to the weaker lords, or those from lower countries, focused on colonization.
Proposal: Cuius regio, eius religio should block HRE reforms.
- Thread starter Morboth
- 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.
Disabling internal wars is still beneficial - they can't join a coalition against you any more. As Savoy, I conquered 188% overextension (after a 50% admin efficiency decrease) of France - almost the entire southern half - in a single peace treaty. No coalition! Nobody in the neighboring HRE could join, and France couldn't due to truce (and Spain was my ally).
Ugh, this is what happens when one comes back to the game after few patches worth of hiatus, and failing to see read the updated tooltips. :sad:
I guess that makes sense, though it does seem bit gamy -- but then, coalition management always had been gamey. I haven't thought about it.
I guess that makes sense, though it does seem bit gamy -- but then, coalition management always had been gamey. I haven't thought about it.
Basically, the list of reforms from the perspective of an imperial prince with no ambition to become Emperor is:
Good
Good
Good
Good
Ambivalent (depends on how aggressive you are and whether you have opportunities to expand outside the HRE)
OK (unless you are an elector; non-elector republics/theocracies are indifferent, monarchies get a small benefit)
Mostly bad, but you have an opt-out (albeit a risky one as you are liable to get swarmed by the remainder of the HRE and all the Emperor's allies)
Catastrophic, no opt-out (breaking vassalage will not save you from the grey goo, unless you are able to win and be at peace long enough to press the 'leave HRE' button)
Last edited:
The religious peace is impractical. In my latestgame as a protestant prussia Me and France(my ally) literally won the war against iberia,scandenavia,ottos and austria and my enforcing the religion saw a 1 provice minor elected as a emporer and in the resulting counter war,i took on france,austria ottos and Iberia and what does the fool of an emporer does?after i got 100% war score by controlleing naples who happened to be leader, he demanded vassalization! instead of the religious triumph giving religious peace. I mean we won the war how did i sign for religious peace?
Erbkaisertum is not "good", its catastrophic on a scale larger than Renovation: You cannot influence emperor any more, at all. This means, from a reality perspective, you have no leverage to get them to care about you, because why care about gaining my vassals favor if im emperor no matter what, while from a gameplay, if i don't have the chance top get somebody else elected, i cant try and keep the emoeror distant and not reforming higher up. At this point, all you have left as an option is to get out, and thus if you wanted to remain HRE without having to become emperor, you lost.
OK, it's bad if you're an elector. I should have said 'non-elector HRE member'.
If you're not an elector, you don't have much leverage over the Emperor in the first place, except for by opposing reforms or threatening to leave the Empire (both of which are still options after Erbkaisertum).
I support, I am tired of seeing HRE united in like 80% of my games just because it can only become more centralized with time(we have revoke reform but AI never uses it so it's always up to the human player). It just doesn't make sense as it should be a A LOT harder to unite the empire and seeing it in almost every game is ridiculous.
Why even make this comparison... HRE, in its current state, is a fundamental base mechanic of the game. They're not going to re-work it in a simple expansion pack or a DLC. If anything, that could be re-worked properly in Europa Universalis V, if any ever comes out. But maybe I'm wrong. I just don't really feel like it'd make sense to re-work the game so heavily in an expansion, especially when we consider that not everyone buys the expansions - so that would likely mean abandoning patch support for anyone who didn't buy the expansion, or making two patches separate for both (because I don't think the current model of patches working for everyone would work because HRE is a base game mechanic and a complete overhaul of it would make it hard to make an universal all-compatible patch).
I do like the idea that the Religious Peace at least significantly weakens the Empire. Maybe not completely making it impossible (I dislike hardcoding) but nuking IA and removing all reforms, or giving princes a permanent - opinion to the Emperor, or *something*. Losing the League War should be a significant setback to centralizing the HRE.
I think it should make it impossible for the Emperor to force his religion on any HRE member, whether by 'Enforce Religious Unity' or by war. Also, you could increase the heretic penalty on supporting further reforms. That way, it hurts if it's a genuine impasse, but not if it's a technical draw in which the Emperor's religion is still overwhelmingly dominant within the HRE.
That's a pretty neat idea. Disables forced conversions within the Empire.
Yeah, the AI seems to have trouble prioritizing war goals, as it often picks useless demands instead of taking the 50% enforce religion objective, even thought it is close to the needed war score or already has it. The AI seems to look for the short-term gains, sure, but it also hurts the country pretty badly long-term since, as it is a religious league leader, it would have made it way easier to become the Emperor. And having more electors of the opposing religious denomination really ruins a lot of opportunities.
Indeed. The overhaul of the HRE mechanics would go into the free patch; some other set of desirable things would go into a paid DLC launched alongside the patch.