Can anyone explain to me the reasoning behind only Austria getting the Pragmatic Sanction event? I mean, the whole story behind that IRL was that the Habsburgs didn't want to lose their rights to their posessions. The Pragmatic Sanction had in fact nothing to do, Charles VII of house Wittelsbach was voted Emperor, and the whole mess of a female ruler being considered weak led to the War of Austria Sucession, which Bavaria lost and Austria and Prussia (depite being on different sides) won.
However, in the game the a-historical pragmatic sanction can only be triggered by an Austrian Emperor, despite their being no guarantee that the Habsburg will be able to hold on to the Imperial Crown for the event to trigger (and sometimes it even passes in like 1447. or even hilariously when the Leagues form). For instance, my Prussia had pushed the borders of the HRE up north to Kurland and Gotland, an into Poland, commands the by far largest army in the HRE and has been the emperor since the Protestand League crushed the weak catholics, and has modernized the Empire into a much more efficient confederation (I was just about to pass Ewiger Landfriede when my Princess became Queen). Instead of the current Pragmatic Sanction, I would propose such an event/decision/whatever:
Conditions that must be met:
It should in any case be a harsh disruption of Imperial Authority, eating the better part of one reform, and throwing the empire in at least some internal turmoil. It may not be the best solution, but is is without doubt more realistic than a 40 province/219 BT Prussia losing emperorship to 10 BT OPM Cologne. Which shares a border with Prussia. With Prussias armies only a few provinces away.
However, in the game the a-historical pragmatic sanction can only be triggered by an Austrian Emperor, despite their being no guarantee that the Habsburg will be able to hold on to the Imperial Crown for the event to trigger (and sometimes it even passes in like 1447. or even hilariously when the Leagues form). For instance, my Prussia had pushed the borders of the HRE up north to Kurland and Gotland, an into Poland, commands the by far largest army in the HRE and has been the emperor since the Protestand League crushed the weak catholics, and has modernized the Empire into a much more efficient confederation (I was just about to pass Ewiger Landfriede when my Princess became Queen). Instead of the current Pragmatic Sanction, I would propose such an event/decision/whatever:
Conditions that must be met:
- Is Emperor
- Religious Leagues have been disabled (passing such a reform in a unstable Empire? good luck)
- heir is female
- has the support of at least 3 electors/is about to be reelected (if you control 3 electors, you're pretty secure to be reelected)
- has passed at least 4 Imperial Reforms (to signify that the nation wields at least some authority over the HRE)
- has passed less than 6 Imperial Reforms (Erbkaisertum makes it moot, anyway)
- Legitimacy over 90
- Imperial Authority over 40
- females can from now on become emperor
- set Imperial Authority to 0
- lose 2 stability
- all HRE members with negative oppinion of the Emperor get a casus belli
- add a -dip. Reputation modifier until the ruler dies, triggering a second modifier for the female emperor until her death
It should in any case be a harsh disruption of Imperial Authority, eating the better part of one reform, and throwing the empire in at least some internal turmoil. It may not be the best solution, but is is without doubt more realistic than a 40 province/219 BT Prussia losing emperorship to 10 BT OPM Cologne. Which shares a border with Prussia. With Prussias armies only a few provinces away.
The emperorship passed to my ally and they passed the Erbkaisertum. . .
.png){kind=avatar}
