Some nice posts here, nice read. Seems to me the kingdom of Frisia can better be removed all together, Flanders moved to France. In ck2 terms Frisia was a petty kingdom, e.a. the dutchy of Gelre.
Why is Flanders considered de jure part of the HRE?
- Thread starter M@ni@c
- 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 thought it was Holland and Gelre? Anyways, I'm actually fine with keeping Frisia, but I'd like Flanders to be partitioned between itself and Artois. Flanders is an incredibly powerful duchy, and it would do wonders for making the de jure map a lot more attractive.
I think more generally, it would be good if the de jure situation changed more between the various start dates. Flanders was not a very integrated part of France in 1066, but closer to the end date it was. The same could be said for Aquitaine, I guess.
If you put Flanders in France and the other Dutch duchies (hehe) into Lotharingia, you basically end up with the real life de jure split between West and Middle Francia. Dutch as a separate culture is pushing it at the early start dates (especially TOG), and putting in a wonky de jure set up to give it a cultural kingdom is a bad move IMO. I'd be perfectly happy with a creatable titular Kingdom of the Netherlands (it's perfectly plausible for the time period, if the region wasn't so bent towards city-states and distributed power), or, better, to be contnet with the last speakers of Low Franconian (which is basically what Dutch is) having to strive to re-create one of the Frankish kingdoms.
EDIT: I just remembered that, under the current revoke vassal system, any titular title in the HRE is going to see never-ending requests by the Kaiser to take over all of their duchies. IMO, it'd be best to simply remove that ability from the Kaiser, unless the target has an insanely large realm which includes non-de jure duke vassals. Even then, though, the option needs to have a cooldown, as in my last game in the HRE, the realm has been racked by an endless back and forth between uber-Lotharinga+Bavaria and the Kaiser, with the emperor trying to revoke a new vassal immediately after each war, and Lotharingia giving him the finger. Oddly, the king has ended up with 5+ "treaty breaker" penalties, while the Kaiser is the one who initiates everything.
EDIT: I just remembered that, under the current revoke vassal system, any titular title in the HRE is going to see never-ending requests by the Kaiser to take over all of their duchies. IMO, it'd be best to simply remove that ability from the Kaiser, unless the target has an insanely large realm which includes non-de jure duke vassals. Even then, though, the option needs to have a cooldown, as in my last game in the HRE, the realm has been racked by an endless back and forth between uber-Lotharinga+Bavaria and the Kaiser, with the emperor trying to revoke a new vassal immediately after each war, and Lotharingia giving him the finger. Oddly, the king has ended up with 5+ "treaty breaker" penalties, while the Kaiser is the one who initiates everything.
Last edited:
It's been reported in the bug forum.
Ok, I disagree with your suggestion there, of making Flanders de jure France in 1066. In the 12th or 13th century, sure, but not the 11th. Even a somewhat misplaced Neustria or a totally invented kingdom title would be better as a way to move it from HRE to Francia.
That is your right, of course. I'm after a simple, workable compromise: creating a new de jure kingdom just for Flanders is not one. Those areas were parts of France according to any medieval map, regardless of their relative autonomy.
How is this for serendipity?
I was thinking about the available Coats of Arms in CKII and remembered that when I was a teenager I had a keyring with my family's CoA, but I only vaguely remembered what it looked like. A simple google and I found it in a matter of seconds. One of the pages google gave me included a history of the family name, and discusses how it goes back to before the Norman Conquest of England... and that it seems to have originated in Flanders. In fact, it was one of the titles of the Counts of Flanders. While reading the history I came to the mention of one Baldwin IV, Count of Flanders and remembered seeing this thread (though I hadn't read it).
Baldwin IV (980-1035) fought, at different times, against both the Capets and Henry II. Presumably as a result of fighting the Capets, Henry II granted him fiefs, one of which was Zeeland. Flanders thus became a part of both the Capetian Kingdom and the HRE, with the lands known as "Crown Flanders" for the French portion and "Imperial Flanders" for the Imperial.
I was thinking about the available Coats of Arms in CKII and remembered that when I was a teenager I had a keyring with my family's CoA, but I only vaguely remembered what it looked like. A simple google and I found it in a matter of seconds. One of the pages google gave me included a history of the family name, and discusses how it goes back to before the Norman Conquest of England... and that it seems to have originated in Flanders. In fact, it was one of the titles of the Counts of Flanders. While reading the history I came to the mention of one Baldwin IV, Count of Flanders and remembered seeing this thread (though I hadn't read it).
Baldwin IV (980-1035) fought, at different times, against both the Capets and Henry II. Presumably as a result of fighting the Capets, Henry II granted him fiefs, one of which was Zeeland. Flanders thus became a part of both the Capetian Kingdom and the HRE, with the lands known as "Crown Flanders" for the French portion and "Imperial Flanders" for the Imperial.
Sure, but it would also work to have the de jure situation change only for later starts than 1066. Since France as such was only really established with the Capetians, it could change e.g. in 1087.
(If you go by maps only, you'd also make Aquitaine de jure France in all the starts after 1066.)
But Flanders shouldn't be part of the HRE or Frisia. France is the much better choice.
It depends on what you think is a worse problem, a more stable France or some de jure wars between them and the HRE. Also, Frisia minus Flanders would be very easy to form.
If anything such a kingdom ought to be named Brabant
.On a more serious note, this would make things worse. Flanders historically would be better off in West Francia/France, but Brabant should be a part of Lotharingia.
Zeeland remained contested between Flanders and Holland, until the count of Holland was king of the Romans and he made himself count of Zeeland.
Also Imperial Flanders was Flanders east of the river Schelde and Crown Flanders was west of it.
867 Start: It looks like I am going against some in this thread by suggesting that for balance and gameplay reasons, it is best to have it de jure HRE. By shifting it into Francia's de jure territory, there would be a shift in both balance and gameplay for the worse. As others stated before: at this time, Lotharingia is more of a political construct then a cultural/societal reality. With all of this as given, switching the de jure territory to Francia would have consequences from economic to strategic (especially with a human Francia or HRE player).
As far as the area being "part" of either at this time - it wasn't. The following centuries for this entire region's history was that of playing one against the other and switching allegiance from one de jure entity to the other. Creating a de jure kingdom of Lotharingia for those troublesome areas that managed to survive by playing east against west is the best solution. Even if I do not like the idea of "fanciful" kingdoms and empires, this is a case that stands alone as needed.
As far as the area being "part" of either at this time - it wasn't. The following centuries for this entire region's history was that of playing one against the other and switching allegiance from one de jure entity to the other. Creating a de jure kingdom of Lotharingia for those troublesome areas that managed to survive by playing east against west is the best solution. Even if I do not like the idea of "fanciful" kingdoms and empires, this is a case that stands alone as needed.
Moving Frisia to Francia would be interesting as it would mean that the HRE wouldn't be able to wage de jure wars over Flanders (or Holland, Gelre or Brabant) should they manage to successfully declare independence, nor would the HRE be able to go to war with France over Flanders. Equally, should Flanders successfully break free from France then it'd be safe from de jure wars from them, too.
There are no historical emperors of Francia, and so Frisia would be free from intervention (aside from direct claims) until someone managed to form it.
Thoughts?
There are no historical emperors of Francia, and so Frisia would be free from intervention (aside from direct claims) until someone managed to form it.
Thoughts?
Moving Frisia to Francia would be interesting as it would mean that the HRE wouldn't be able to wage de jure wars over Flanders (or Holland, Gelre or Brabant) should they manage to successfully declare independence, nor would the HRE be able to go to war with France over Flanders. Equally, should Flanders successfully break free from France then it'd be safe from de jure wars from them, too.
There are no historical emperors of Francia, and so Frisia would be free from intervention (aside from direct claims) until someone managed to form it.
Thoughts?
Since the entire game's time period was about this area's rulers playing both east and west against one and the other, my thoughts are this is exactly why it should stay in the HRE. We want intervention from both to be imminent and involved by both.
Under the current setup Flemish rulers don't get the chance to play one against the other. They simple get eaten by the HRE a month after the game starts.
Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy and Brabant and and and and, tried to get himself the title "King of Frisia" from the HREmperor, by using that ancient title and sticking it on his "dutch" territories. The HREmperor at first was interested, but later had second thoughts.
So my guess is Paradox used this chapter in history to give the dutchies their de jure kingdom. I mod it to The Netherlands, cos that's how i like it better.
So my guess is Paradox used this chapter in history to give the dutchies their de jure kingdom. I mod it to The Netherlands, cos that's how i like it better.
I think the Burgundian dukes wanted to resurrect the old Lotharingian crown, not Frisia. Still, a crown's a crown.