Yes. That is more fun to do. The AI has likely almost never managed to do it though. I don't want exact outcomes. I just want slightly more personal flexibility. This is getting too derailed.
- 1
'Unite the Spanish Thrones' decision is too easy to pass/too strong
- Thread starter gianlucad
- 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.
I haven't seen Badajoz/Lusitania "always" forming. In fact, I wasn't even aware it was a possibility until I looked it up on the wiki, since I've *never* seen it.
If you're seeing it "always" form, then something very different is happening in our games.
Do you want more possible outcomes or not?
If you want more possible outcomes, then Badajoz/Lusitania is a *good* thing. It gives different chain of options for what kingdoms can rise in the peninsula.
Forming Badajoz/Lusitania isn't "100% loopy" at all. It's a very plausible outcome, and a very plausible alternate kingdom to arise out of the situation in Hispania.
I'd also suggest that one of your reasons for not seeing many titular kingdoms arise in Hispania is that there aren't many of them, since most are de jure at the usual starts.
If anything, the forming of the Kingdom of Portugal was the "loopy" and unexpected thing. It came more or less out of nowhere, and with very little precedent for its existence - and with the land being at least nominally claimed by other existing Spanish kingdoms. "Hey, I've taken the southern half of your kingdom, and I'm going to make myself king in it now. KTHX BYE"
- 6
- 3
- 1
Well, I don't think it's necessary to create a new de jure title when you can use your primary title and simply absorb the others. It even changes the coat of arms, now including Castile and Leon.
- 1
I don't think you grasped the idea that it doesn't have to be 100% alt history or 100% accurately representing real life very well. They aren't poles. There is no "do you want more possible outcomes or not" to wanting Portugal to happen more often. It's a spectrum. I didn't say forming Lusitania was loopy. in and of itself. You created a string of scenarios where I'd hypothetically be upset it didn't turn out totally accurate. Yes, if literally nothing that happened in real life ever happened in the game that would kind of suck. Plausible outcomes are fine, but at the end of the day, from a deterministic point of view, a pseudo-historical outcome every once in a while should at least be somewhat possible to happen without active player intervention.
Badajoz/Lusitania is a good thing, but I would prefer if Portugal appeared more often than the current never.
- 1
I think the "Unite the Spanish thrones" decision should set the succession law to Confederate Partition, meaning the kingdom titles will be restored on succession if you have multiple sons -- as far as I understand the mechanic described in 17th dev diary.
And/or the Spanish kingdoms should all start with Confederate Partition.
And/or the Spanish kingdoms should all start with Confederate Partition.
- 3
I don't really understand this suggestion.
What's the point of taking the decision if it sets a a succession type where you lose the kingdoms? Isn't that exactly the same situation as when you managed to obtain the kingdoms, before you took the decision?
Sorry if I'm misunderstanding you here, but it sounds like you're saying you form a greater kingdom but then lose it if you have more than one son, so the only difference would be that the other kingdoms (that are lost) are now titular, because the decision makes everything one de jure kingdom (your primary).
What would the point of the decision be if it worked this way?
- 3
Why would you want to do it that way? When the purpose of the decision is to form the Crown of Castile?
- 1