'Unite the Spanish Thrones' decision is too easy to pass/too strong

[gianlucad]

Why would pressing a magical button suddenly delete the other spanish kingdom titles and increase crown authority? Shouldn't this at least give a massive opinion malus with the vassals inside the kingdom titles being destroyed? Why would getting a few kingdom titles in iberia suddenly maximize the crown authority of a feudal state?

The screenshot is from the paradox livestream on twitch.

 

[Aquamancer]

I would assume that the decision was added due to the player spending more time dealing with gavelkind succession in CK3. In CK2, you were able to "unite the Spanish thrones" early on simply by switching their succession law to primogeniture, something that was relatively easy to do when playing as members of the Jiména dynasty. Since this is no longer available in CK3, a new decision had to be added so players had access to similar level of stability for their realm and not have their realm split apart every succession.

 

[gianlucad]

I would assume that the decision was added due to the player spending more time dealing with gavelkind succession in CK3. In CK2, you were able to "unite the Spanish thrones" early on simply by switching their succession law to primogeniture, something that was relatively easy to do when playing as members of the Jiména dynasty. Since this is no longer available in CK3, a new decision had to be added so players had access to similar level of stability for their realm and not have their realm split apart every succession.

And why shouldn't these kingdom split apart if you have multiple sons in a gavelkind-based system of succession?

In CK2 you still have to maneuver around the council to implement late feudal administration, make your vassals friendly (or at least not have a negative opinion), rule for 10 years and only then can you pass primogeniture. You can also destroy each title individually, granding a -50 opinion malus to the vassals of the destroyed kingdoms (which can still be reformed, as would make sense). And now juxtapose that to what we have in CK3, which employs the "press this button and all your problems are gone" solution. On one you actually have to use politics and intrigue while on the other you ignore hundreds of years of iberian political evolution in favor of a single decision.

 

[GingerContingent]

And why shouldn't these kingdom split apart if you have multiple sons in a gavelkind-based system of succession?

In CK2 you still have to maneuver around the council to implement late feudal administration, make your vassals friendly (or at least not have a negative opition), rule for 10 years and only then can you pass primogeniture. You can also destroy each title individually, granding a -50 opinion malus to the vassals of the destroyed kingdoms (which can still be reformed, as would make sense). And now juxtapose that to what we have in CK3, which is the "press this button and all your problems are gone" solution.

While I agree that the player should have more input into how his kingdom is split up (room for a rework?), completely removing this layer of strategy in a grand... strategy... game is just lazy.

It's because in this case there is a long tradition of the realm being both united and divided. It's not like there will be similar decisions for every area. I think it is a little too OP at the moment what with increasing the authority, but not insane, and as we saw they ended up needing to lower it again anyway.

Like, in roleplay I think it makes sense for a king who has waged several wars to reunite and defend the borders of the larger kingdom his ancestors used to hold to be able to name only one of his kids as the next king. He still has to deal with the splitting of his actual lands. It's basically like he moved up one partition level to high partition.

 

[gianlucad]

Like, in roleplay I think it makes sense for a king who has waged several wars to reunite and defend the borders of the larger kingdom his ancestors used to hold to be able to name only one of his kids as the next king. He still has to deal with the splitting of his actual lands. It's basically like he moved up one partition level to high partition.

Yep, so that would be called implementing primogeniture. What we have here is the complete erasure of titles such as the kingdom of Galicia (hundreds of years old by 1066), the concept of which would not suddenly cease to exist just because one of the Jimena brothers decided to unite north-western Iberia.

 

[Vityviktor]

I think it makes sense, although I think it should be a bit harder to achieve.

"Uniting the thrones" could represent something like when the kingdoms of Leon (including Galicia,and excluding the new Kingdom of Portugal) and Castile (including conquered Taifas like Toledo) merged their Courts in the 13th century, and formed what would be known as the "Crown of Castile" (some sort of Kingdom of Kingdoms, or a union or different titular kingdoms under the main title of Castile).

Maybe some other requisit could be added, like reaching the High or Late Medieval Era.

 

[Lordy's]

Agree. For the three Jimena Kingdoms, this decision does make some sense as they are rather small.
But the increase in crown authority (they haven't even unlocked it...) should not come with it.
Also, it seems like you could use if after you conquered all of Iberia to quickly turn all of it into one kingdom without dejure drift. Seems to be a bit too much, so maybe limit it to the three original kingdoms.

 

[gianlucad]

I think it makes sense, although I think it should be a bit harder to achieve.

"Uniting the thrones" could represent the kingdoms of Leon (including Galicia,and excluding the new Kingdom of Portugal) and Castile (including conquered Taifas like Toledo) merged their Courts in the 13th century, and formed what would be known as the "Crown of Castile" (some sort of Kingdom of Kingdoms, or a union or different titular kingdoms under the main title of Castile).

Maybe some other requisit could be added, like reaching the High or Late Medieval Era.

I think another compromise could be to make the decision only passable once all required Iberian kingdoms are under primogeniture succession as well as under a single king. That would symbolize a more permanent union between these titles, at which point a dynamic/union title could be created as you suggested.

 

[GingerContingent]

I think it makes sense, although I think it should be a bit harder to achieve.

"Uniting the thrones" could represent the kingdoms of Leon (including Galicia,and excluding the new Kingdom of Portugal) and Castile (including conquered Taifas like Toledo) merged their Courts in the 13th century, and formed what would be known as the "Crown of Castile" (some sort of Kingdom of Kingdoms, or a union or different titular kingdoms under the main title of Castile).

Maybe some other requisit could be added, like reaching the High or Late Medieval Era.

Don't see why this needs to be locked in an era, since this is a sandbox game.

I do think it should be harder to pull off in terms of costing more to take the decision and upsetting some vassals, and it should not increase crown authority, but I have no problem with this being an option that players are given. And since this is a 1.0 build, some balance things are bound to be wonky.

 

[PhilzuNeide]

So I think we all agree that the authority maxing should go.

But this still leaves the issue of the change in de jure territory. This would make the game significantly easier because your realm cannot split anymore.
I have two different proposals to nerf this a bit.
1. The decision creates a titular empire while leaving the kingdoms under gavelkind. This prevents your realm from splintering on succession but creates internal conflicts to counter the United power of the three crowns.
2. Keep all titles around but change their inheritance to primogeniture. This also keeps the realm together during inheritance but still retains the possibility of splintering if a claimant gets enough support to wrestle one of the crowns away from you.

 

[Battlex]

View attachment 608043
Why would pressing a magical button suddenly delete the other spanish kingdom titles and increase crown authority? Shouldn't this at least give a massive opinion malus with the vassals inside the kingdom titles being destroyed? Why would getting a few kingdom titles in iberia suddenly maximize the crown authority of a feudal state?

The screenshot is from the paradox livestream on twitch.

Because there's no other easy way to represent the formation of the Crown of Castile in game. You get an opinion malus from the high crown authority, but you also want to prevent opinion being so low so that the king can't get levies high enough to win vs the taifas when they declare holy wars most of the time.

So I think we all agree that the authority maxing should go.

But this still leaves the issue of the change in de jure territory. This would make the game significantly easier because your realm cannot split anymore.
I have two different proposals to nerf this a bit.
1. The decision creates a titular empire while leaving the kingdoms under gavelkind. This prevents your realm from splintering on succession but creates internal conflicts to counter the United power of the three crowns.
2. Keep all titles around but change their inheritance to primogeniture. This also keeps the realm together during inheritance but still retains the possibility of splintering if a claimant gets enough support to wrestle one of the crowns away from you.

The "Emperor of the Spanish" title really didn't last long at all, you could argue Spanish duchies should be termed kingdoms, much like Anglo saxon duchies

 

[Aquamancer]

Because there's no other easy way to represent the formation of the Crown of Castile in game. You get an opinion malus from the high crown authority, but you also want to prevent opinion being so low so that the king can't get levies high enough to win vs the taifas when they declare holy wars most of the time.

The "Emperor of the Spanish" title really didn't last long at all, you could argue Spanish duchies should be termed kingdoms, much like Anglo saxon duchies

True: many of the Spanish kingdoms were compareable in size to duchies, rather than kingdoms. However, diplomatically they were considered kingdoms rather than duchies, so the distinction remains important. And if most of the Spanish kingdoms would be duchies, how would the kingdom-tier titles be laid out?

 

[Battlex]

True: many of the Spanish kingdoms were compareable in size to duchies, rather than kingdoms. However, diplomatically they were considered kingdoms rather than duchies, so the distinction remains important. And if most of the Spanish kingdoms would be duchies, how would the kingdom-tier titles be laid out?

Use de jure asturias? Lithuania has danzig as de jure, zaprozhia and caucasus are also de jure kingdom names so wouldn't be too remiss

 

[Chlodio]

Since this is no longer available in CK3, a new decision

It isn't?

 

[Skales]

Because there's no other easy way to represent the formation of the Crown of Castile in game.

There actually is. Just make every kingdom's succession law primogeniture...

 

[Aquamancer]

Use de jure asturias? Lithuania has danzig as de jure, zaprozhia and caucasus are also de jure kingdom names so wouldn't be too remiss

Given that the kingdom of Asturias ceased to exist in 924, the game would spend more time with the kingdom not existing than with it existing. And if the kingdom of Asturias was treated as the only Christian kingdom-tier title in Iberia, it'd be impossible to represent the partition of the kingdom into León, Castile and Galicia (and later Portugal). I mean, how could the game mechanics represent a kingdom disintegrating into three duchies? Nevermind how the transition of kingdom of Asturias into the kingdom of Léon would be handled, or the unification of the kingdoms of Léon and Castile.

As for four other counterpoints:

• Danzig isn't part of de jure Lithuania, it is part of Pomerania instead (under the duchy of Pomerelia).
• Zaporozhia really shouldn't be the de jure term for the region of the Pontic-Caspian Steppe south of Rus'. Then again, what other term would fit the region that roughly compasses the area ruled by Pechenegs, Cumans and Crimean Tatars?
• Same goes for Caucasus, although in the case of Caucasus, I would argue that the entire region is in need of an overhaul, with more provinces, cultures and religions, which would allow the current kingdom of Caucasus to be split into smaller and more realistic kingdom-tier titles (like Circassia and Alania). I mean, currently the Caucasian duchies are the size of small European kingdoms, and the counties are the size of small duchies, so the region really would benefit from more detail.

It isn't?

From what the devs have told us about the succession laws, primogeniture becomes only available relatively late into the game, so it is reasonable to assume that in 1066, the Spanish nations are unable to pass primogeniture laws.

 

[fredrikslicer]

Feel the crown authority should be a req in the primary title perhaps

 

[gianlucad]

Because there's no other easy way to represent the formation of the Crown of Castile in game

Isn't there? In CK2 terms, the crown of Castille overtaking its neighboring kingdoms can be very easily represented through de jure drift and the institution of primogeniture.

 

[Battlex]

Isn't there? In CK2 terms, the crown of Castille overtaking its neighboring kingdoms can be very easily represented through de jure drift and the institution of primogeniture.

you cant get de jure drift from one kingdom to another kingdom if you own both of the titles, and destroying titles is useless as the shortest setting for de jure drift is 50 years which the average king wont live to, so theyd break free on monarch death if you have multiple kids cuz gavelkind

Given that the kingdom of Asturias ceased to exist in 924, the game would spend more time with the kingdom not existing than with it existing. And if the kingdom of Asturias was treated as the only Christian kingdom-tier title in Iberia, it'd be impossible to represent the partition of the kingdom into León, Castile and Galicia (and later Portugal). I mean, how could the game mechanics represent a kingdom disintegrating into three duchies? Nevermind how the transition of kingdom of Asturias into the kingdom of Léon would be handled, or the unification of the kingdoms of Léon and Castile.

As for four other counterpoints:

• Danzig isn't part of de jure Lithuania, it is part of Pomerania instead (under the duchy of Pomerelia).
• Zaporozhia really shouldn't be the de jure term for the region of the Pontic-Caspian Steppe south of Rus'. Then again, what other term would fit the region that roughly compasses the area ruled by Pechenegs, Cumans and Crimean Tatars?
• Same goes for Caucasus, although in the case of Caucasus, I would argue that the entire region is in need of an overhaul, with more provinces, cultures and religions, which would allow the current kingdom of Caucasus to be split into smaller and more realistic kingdom-tier titles (like Circassia and Alania). I mean, currently the Caucasian duchies are the size of small European kingdoms, and the counties are the size of small duchies, so the region really would benefit from more detail.

From what the devs have told us about the succession laws, primogeniture becomes only available relatively late into the game, so it is reasonable to assume that in 1066, the Spanish nations are unable to pass primogeniture laws.

Asturias gets just renamed Leon, and in ck2 via decision, Castile also becomes a de jure crown via decision when its just the duchy of Castile you need, same with forming Aragon and Portugal

 

[DreadLindwyrm]

Yep, so that would be called implementing primogeniture. What we have here is the complete erasure of titles such as the kingdom of Galicia (hundreds of years old by 1066), the concept of which would not suddenly cease to exist just because one of the Jimena brothers decided to unite north-western Iberia.

And yet there is no other way to create Castille-Leon via inheritance. You cannot drift one into the other, and certainly neither crown was or should be abolished.

It's a strong decision, especially if you can hold off until you have more kingdoms, but all the while (at least for the early game) you're sat there waiting to take the decision, you're sat on a weak succession with little way to get out of it. It does also have a weakness - now you can have a faction demand that one title that now holds everything.

It's also representing, to a certain extent, returning the titles to the recurring state of being unified, and formalising that status.


The "hundreds of years old" Galicia had been lost when the visigothic kingdoms crumbled, and was relatively recently re-erected at this point, having been merged into other titles at various points in its history.