The mother of all DLCs
- Thread starter Sam L
- 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.
What is wrong with a DLC events pack that covers many chains, especially those that can fire for all players anywhere.
That could work very well. Just one event chain would be a bit of a limited DLC
I'm sorry but I disagree with everything apart from women leading armies in some limited situations (I've proposed this but with a stipulation that it should be limited to women with specific Martial education, rulers, have a small chance of actually happening etc., mostly be limited to commanding siege defence because this is what female rulers and relatives of rulers historically did, and so it makes no sense to have a commanderless 0 Martial no character siege defence) and more events (which I never have a problem with) and maybe female stewards (a chancellor was a formal position, though, and Chaplain and Marshal are obvious). The idea with women leading armies is that sometimes it was a necessity or the local tradition wasn't much against it for royal or otherwise high-class women (i.e. the ruling family or close to it), especially in defensive situations. But simply appointing a generic female courtier as general shouldn't work. I say this even though I've written a lengthy AAR narrative about a woman (queen/spymaster) leading an battle and consistently insisted on female siege defence leaders and female independent rulers, especially queens, being able to elect to lead an army (even with penalties).
But I disagree with the feminist empowerment making it into the game, especially in the form of ideological statements amounting to an attempt at correcting our European past. Sure, if one of the existing exotic cultures actually had enatic succession or female heads of religions or something of the kind (e.g. Lithuanian paganism had priestesses and inheritance through the mother's line wasn't unheard of in the east), then it could/should be in the game. But a Catholic pope idea goes back to a legend according to which a woman disguised herself as a man, become a cleric and eventually got elected Pope, supposedly some time in the earlier ages (the so called pope Joan after which supposedly papal candidates or winners were checked more scrupulously), which is false. It's theologically impossible to have female clergy in Catholicism and Orthodoxy regardless of the issues of equality between the sexes (it's not a matter of "better" or "worse" sex).
This said, it would be great to see territorial abbesses, often sisters of ruling kings and holding much power. We should have dedicated nunneries in the game (as well as monasteries for men). This as well as more use for the excellent talents that princesses and other ladies in the court often have and don't have a way to put in use other than simply existing on the character sheet. IMHO especially the female Steward should really be there and more female regents, especially with preference to a royal mother, daughter or sister before any simple courtier or especially a burgher as regent of a realm (come on, a mayor being the regent of a western European kingdom in the middle ages?). There could also be some mechanism favouring female tutors. And you should probably get more attention if you have a particularly striking daughter or sister in your court.
Plus, there needs to be a smarter solution than female heirs marrying lowborns matrilineally (e.g. marry liege, marry liege's junior son, ask permission for marriage with another powerful vassal and get an opinion hit if refused).
Sounds like a patch change, yeah.
Well, the Pope and some kings (e.g. Louis IX aboud mid-13th century) did send emissaries to the far east and some of them actually returned. I would like to see more about Marco Polo travels. Also, a Christian king could sponsor such a journey, sparing a good enough courtier/bishop (who can't be used from then on but e.g. remains the ruling bishop for as long as he lives) and monetary resources on it (including gifts for rulers met on the way, which means serious cash). The opportunity to convert the Mongols was just too hard to pass up on in real life, same should be true here, I think.
This, and simple trade links. Everybody wanted trade with far-off lands for the curious wares and better markets to sell your own produce.As for a buff to Abyssinia, I think it should get a free merc band vassal representing the tribes of the south or something similar, as IMHO the current make-up of counties and duchies at the bottom end of the map doesn't adequately represent the strength of real Abyssinia. Or Nubia, which is in de iure Egypt, which means doom. In fact, even Trebisond usely goes off the map very quickly, while in reality it held out until 1461, which is 8 years after Constantinople. Georgia gets wiped out or replaced by Mongol vassals in later historical starts, while really it should be more of a loose but difficult vassalage (e.g. high tribute low interference).
Last edited: