Abstract: If they vote yes, why am I still a tyrant? If my councilors give me a green light, then I should not accrue tyranny. Therefore, if I can circumvent acts of tyranny or truce-breaking by giving the council power, does that not give me an incentive to actually empower the council vs shoot for sovereignty, thereby making the strategy of the game more rich?
Okay, so I'm clear, I'm not talking about the possible bug where I have most member's on the 'yeah' sign but I still have a red 'x' next to the send button. I have the green check, but will still be liable for tyranny.
So, you won the war and you got that unruly vassal in the dungeon. You get to revoke his first title, the council approves, he was a duke but now he's a triple count, all is still well. But then you think to yourself, "this guy may still be a threat, and he is a traitor, he should lose everything or die or both." Not so fast, though the council votes yes to either action, you still are viewed as a tyrant.
So I get that paradox wants to give us a challenge with Conclave, but shouldn't old rules be updated to accommodate the new mechanics? What I mean is, tyranny opinion modifiers were once powerful mechanics that curtailed our use of absolute power. But we have an active council for that now. So if the council receives power, either through voting or surrendering to faction demands, then I don't have absolute power anymore.
And so if I do something that the administration approves, provided they are all or mostly powerful vassals and not my own landless cronies, then I shouldn't have to deal with opinion modifiers, which now last a ridiculous 30 YEARS.
Okay, so I'm clear, I'm not talking about the possible bug where I have most member's on the 'yeah' sign but I still have a red 'x' next to the send button. I have the green check, but will still be liable for tyranny.
So, you won the war and you got that unruly vassal in the dungeon. You get to revoke his first title, the council approves, he was a duke but now he's a triple count, all is still well. But then you think to yourself, "this guy may still be a threat, and he is a traitor, he should lose everything or die or both." Not so fast, though the council votes yes to either action, you still are viewed as a tyrant.
So I get that paradox wants to give us a challenge with Conclave, but shouldn't old rules be updated to accommodate the new mechanics? What I mean is, tyranny opinion modifiers were once powerful mechanics that curtailed our use of absolute power. But we have an active council for that now. So if the council receives power, either through voting or surrendering to faction demands, then I don't have absolute power anymore.
And so if I do something that the administration approves, provided they are all or mostly powerful vassals and not my own landless cronies, then I shouldn't have to deal with opinion modifiers, which now last a ridiculous 30 YEARS.
- 3
