Religious War and the New Emperor

[Alyosha]

Playing as Great Britain, I led the Protestant League to victory in the religious war (over Bohemia). I was leader of the league and expected to become Emperor after the war ended. However, Brandenburg (protestant) was the sole elector remaining after the victory and they voted for themselves.

So far, so normal, you may say - the system worked as intended.

However, Brandenburg fought with the Catholic League (the losing side).

It's obviously a less than normal situation, but it seems that a participant on the losing side should not be able to become Emperor, at least in that first "election." Perhaps a -1000 modifier for being on the losing side? Or instead of the typical election mechanics the leader of the Protestant League automatically "wins" that first election.

Needless to say my efforts to get control of the Empire (if only for one cycle) are doomed following Brandenburg's election.

 

[Dominion]

That's more a case of "it happened to me and I don't like it, please change it" than an actual issue worth discussing.

If it was like that and you'd still lose your idea would be the highest war participation needs to be crowned emperor. If it was like that and you... etc., ad infinitum

 

[Aythne]

It also makes sense: Electorship is a hereditary right that's central to HRE authority. Just because you overthrew the Emperor doesn't mean you get to rewrite the foundational rules, it's just that you hung a "No Catholics Need Apply" sign on the front door.

 

[Alyosha]

It also makes sense: Electorship is a hereditary right that's central to HRE authority. Just because you overthrew the Emperor doesn't mean you get to rewrite the foundational rules, it's just that you hung a "No Catholics Need Apply" sign on the front door.

Then why do Catholic electors lose their electorship following the war? By your logic electors should not be changed following the war.

I get it, it's a very specific situation. An alternative suggestion would be: protestant electors should not be able to join the Catholic League, as then they would be fighting for their disenfranchisement. Those electors should be limited to neutrality or supporting the Protestant cause (and vice versa for catholic electors).

 

[Aythne]

Then why do Catholic electors lose their electorship following the war? By your logic electors should not be changed following the war.

I get it, it's a very specific situation. An alternative suggestion would be: protestant electors should not be able to join the Catholic League, as then they would be fighting for their disenfranchisement. Those electors should be limited to neutrality or supporting the Protestant cause (and vice versa for catholic electors).

"No Catholics Need Apply"

Religious victory essentially demotes the members of the losing religion (this never happened historically, because the 30 years war was not a total victory), so Catholic Electors lose their privilege.

Also, there is nothing crazy about Catholics joining the Protestant side, or vice versa. Historically, nations had many reasons for joining either side in the conflict that were not related to religion, and had one side exerted dominance many "heretic winners" would have found themselves worse off in a lot of ways. I get that you wanted to be emperor and are salty, but them's the breaks.

 

[Alyosha]

Also, there is nothing crazy about Catholics joining the Protestant side, or vice versa. Historically, nations had many reasons for joining either side in the conflict that were not related to religion, and had one side exerted dominance many "heretic winners" would have found themselves worse off in a lot of ways. I get that you wanted to be emperor and are salty, but them's the breaks.

Right - it's a game mechanic, so there's not a historic basis for it to be the way it is - so don't act like it "has to be" some way. The AI balances when it comes to religious leagues, but it would seem a large leap to throw in one's lot with a league that would vacate one's electoral privileges. At least one war was fought in the history of the HRE to control those privileges (succession, etc.) and I'd wager that few electors would willingly give up those privileges to "balance" against neighbors.

If a league leader has enforced an official religion on the empire and vacated the hereditary privileges of his opponents, why not vacate the privileges of an enemy who took up arms for the other side?

 

[Aythne]

Right - it's a game mechanic, so there's not a historic basis for it to be the way it is - so don't act like it "has to be" some way. The AI balances when it comes to religious leagues, but it would seem a large leap to throw in one's lot with a league that would vacate one's electoral privileges. At least one war was fought in the history of the HRE to control those privileges (succession, etc.) and I'd wager that few electors would willingly give up those privileges to "balance" against neighbors.

If a league leader has enforced an official religion on the empire and vacated the hereditary privileges of his opponents, why not vacate the privileges of an enemy who took up arms for the other side?

The mechanic works from both a gameplay and historical basis. Could it be different? Sure, but then we'd have just as many people complaining that it isn't some other way.

You happen to want it to work differently. That's fine. I happen to like that AIs join against their particular interests if it means harming their rivals, which the current system does. We disagree on what we want, but there's nothing about the game that's broken or illogical.