• 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.
Welcome back to our weekly series of development diaries about Europa Universalis. This time we’ll talk about two features that will be part of the next expansion.

Theocracies
This is based on something we read in the suggestions forum. Monarchies and Republics have had their Legitimacy and Republican Tradition, but Theocracies haven’t had a unique mechanic yet. The next expansion will add a concept we call Devotion. Devotion ranges for 0 to 100, and impacts several thing.

Devotion impacts your religious abilities, your prestige gain and your tax-income.

You primarily gain devotion from high religious unity and the devoutness idea. Low stability will decrease it, while being Defender of the Faith will increase it.

There are also a lot of events that impact your devotion.

Another unique mechanic for theocracies is the fact that they always have an heir, and they have somewhat of control of it.

If you do not have an heir, you get a chance to select one heir. Heirs are age 40+ with random stats. You can then pick one of the following.

  • A Local Noble – Loses 5 devotion, but gains +10 Prestige
  • A Foreign Noble - Gains +100 relation with a random nation.
  • A Merchant's Son - +25% yearly income, lost 10 devotion
  • A Papal Protege – Catholic only. Gains +10 Papal Influence
  • A Talented Theologian: +10 Devotion
  • A local preacher – +5 Devotion & -10 Prestige


Government Ranks
A new feature in the next expansion is the introduction of proper Government Ranks. In previous versions, most countries would either be simply a Kingdom or a Republic, with a few special cases like Byzantium's Imperial Government and vassalized Kings becoming Dukes. If you don't get the expansion, this changes little, but for those with it most government types will come in three ranks: Duchy, Kingdom and Empire. While these are the names of the ranks, it doesn't mean there aren't any ranks for Republics - Venice's Serene Republic is on the same level as a Kingdom, for example.

Countries will start with whatever is closest to the rank they had historically, so the King of Burgundy becomes the Duke of Burgundy, while Byzantium is very much an Empire despite no longer having a special government form. Vassals, Marches and non-Elector members of the HRE are always Duchy rank, and certain government types only come in a single rank (such as Ming's Celestial Empire, which is always an Empire). Countries that are not locked to a particular rank can raise their rank through the Government screen by fulfilling certain requirements such as a certain level of prestige and total development level of your nation.

So what benefit do you get from a higher government rank, besides a new title and fancier headgear? Well, for one, higher government ranks are able to change their National Focus more often, with the default 25 year cooldown being 20 years for Kingdoms, and a mere 15 years for Empires. The bonuses granted from each government are now also set per rank, with government types getting more autonomy reduction from the higher ranks, while others such as Steppe Hordes have their base government bonuses to force limits, manpower and looting speed increased by higher government ranks.

Finally, this system also comes with a complete and mod-friendly overhaul of how government names and titles are handled. Under the old system, if you wanted to for example call your Greek Emperor a Basileus, you would have to create a particular localisation string that might get overwritten by other localisation strings, and there was no ability to differentiate between the titles of say, a Greek Western Technology Group Emperor and a Greek Eastern Technology Group Emperor. Under the new system, you script specific government name/title entries that might look something like this:


Code:
byzantine_monarchy = {
rank_1 = PRINCIPALITY
rank_2 = KINGDOM
rank_3 = EMPIRE


ruler_1 = AUTOKRATOR
ruler_1_female = AUTOKRATEIRA
ruler_2 = DESPOT
ruler_2_female = DESPOTISSA
ruler_3 = BASILEUS
ruler_3_female = BASILISSA

trigger = {
   government = monarchy
   tag = BYZ
}
}


The game goes through the government entries, picks the first one it finds where the trigger evaluates true, and applies those government titles to that nation. This means that if you so desire, you could create a complete unique set of government names for each and every country in the game!


AQP3Ng9.jpg
 
The difference between county and duchy is not relevant enough on EUs level of simulation, but you could set it up to display them as counties.

But would it hurt just to set only nominal changes? And by "setting it up", you mean modding right? Which can be more than 3 ranks?

Edit : does emperor Austria display Archduke or emperor?
 
I think you should introduce some restrictions:

No country in HRE should be able to reach kingdom rank with exception of united Germany and Italy (there should be event that HRE emperor agreed and grants us those titles). Historically Brandenburg turned into Prussia just becouse they couldn't claim to be kings of Brandenburg becouse Brandenburg was in HRE.
System what you are proposing that electors can be kings doesn't make sense. Also once achived you shouldn't lose your title (for example when kingdom of Burgundy turns into kingdom of Netherlands and joins HRE).

Catholic or maybe even protestant/reformed nations shouldn't be able to claim title of the emperor as long as Holy Roman Empire exists. Revolutionary state should be exception from this rule and be able to became revolutionary empire.

Ortodox nations shouldn't be able to claim title of the emperor as long as Bizantine Empire exists. Ethiopia could be exception.

Some events for catholic nations about emperor's and pope's approval for king title would be nice. Historically duke of Burgundy was close to convincing Holy Roman Emperor to give him king's crown.

But the kingdom of Bohemia was in the HRE, not to mention other real kingdoms.
 
  • 4
  • 3
Reactions:
Landgrave and Margraves are exclusive HRE ranks I believe. They should be included. :)

Can you post the requirements needed to ascend rank? Also if you are in the HRE, does the Emperor need to give you permission to rank up?
Hopefully the emperor's permission is needed.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
  • 1
Reactions:
Exactly. Bohemia got the king title very early before things were really solidified.

Or rather when things were solidified. The HRE consisted of the Kingdoms of Germany, Italy, Bohemia and later also Burgundy. That's why I want to see HRE-Germany or HRE-Italy automatically being promoted to kingdoms, because the rulers of those realms were kings (nevermind that the HRE was pretty much the King of Germany in personal union, so that formable shouldn't even really exist).
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I HAVE AN IDEA!!
Ive had an idea of having two buttons when it comes to colonisation. One called civilising which lets you to take areas that use to be colonisable where the religion changes and the cultures change. But in this case you would only be taking an area by sending a colonist to civilis the people and would face alot of resistance. This would be a great tool as it would work with other mechanics you have had added such as the cliant states. Like if you have an area in siberia and you are a WESTERN (only available for western, eastern and muslim) nation then you can make that province a cliant state. Which is what that culture there would consider it as its own nation. so if it gets taken and revolts it would form that nation but it wont be your cliant state any more(and would keep there tach same as you had when civilising them). This would be great to have as paradox knows that africa and some areas of the world like the middleast and north africa was put into a civilising program in various time in history. This would keep your colonists busy too.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
I think you should introduce some restrictions:

No country in HRE should be able to reach kingdom rank with exception of united Germany and Italy (there should be event that HRE emperor agreed and grants us those titles). Historically Brandenburg turned into Prussia just becouse they couldn't claim to be kings of Brandenburg becouse Brandenburg was in HRE.
System what you are proposing that electors can be kings doesn't make sense. Also once achived you shouldn't lose your title (for example when kingdom of Burgundy turns into kingdom of Netherlands and joins HRE).

Catholic or maybe even protestant/reformed nations shouldn't be able to claim title of the emperor as long as Holy Roman Empire exists. Revolutionary state should be exception from this rule and be able to became revolutionary empire.

Ortodox nations shouldn't be able to claim title of the emperor as long as Bizantine Empire exists. Ethiopia could be exception.

Some events for catholic nations about emperor's and pope's approval for king title would be nice. Historically duke of Burgundy was close to convincing Holy Roman Emperor to give him king's crown.

Ugh, not these restrictions again, I've grown extremely annoyed with the in the CK2 forums already. The only reasonable "hard" restriction would be that you can't be an empire within the HRE since you're nominally a vassal. But otherwise constructing extremely rigid parameters for when you can or cannot do stuff simply on the basis that that's how it happened in our history is quite boring. And you're just running into lots of necessary exemptions anyway.
 
  • 5
  • 5
Reactions:
Or rather when things were solidified. The HRE consisted of the Kingdoms of Germany, Italy, Bohemia and later also Burgundy. That's why I want to see HRE-Germany or HRE-Italy automatically being promoted to kingdoms, because the rulers of those realms were kings (nevermind that the HRE was pretty much the King of Germany in personal union, so that formable shouldn't even really exist).
Good point.
I HAVE AN IDEA!!
Ive had an idea of having two buttons when it comes to colonisation. One called civilising which lets you to take areas that use to be colonisable where the religion changes and the cultures change. But in this case you would only be taking an area by sending a colonist to civilis the people and would face alot of resistance. This would be a great tool as it would work with other mechanics you have had added such as the cliant states. Like if you have an area in siberia and you are a WESTERN (only available for western, eastern and muslim) nation then you can make that province a cliant state. Which is what that culture there would consider it as its own nation. so if it gets taken and revolts it would form that nation but it wont be your cliant state any more(and would keep there tach same as you had when civilising them). This would be great to have as paradox knows that africa and some areas of the world like the middleast and north africa was put into a civilising program in various time in history. This would keep your colonists busy too.
Civilising the savages is more 19th century though.


Ugh, not these restrictions again, I've grown extremely annoyed with the in the CK2 forums already. The only reasonable "hard" restriction would be that you can't be an empire within the HRE since you're nominally a vassal. But otherwise constructing extremely rigid parameters for when you can or cannot do stuff simply on the basis that that's how it happened in our history is quite boring. And you're just running into lots of necessary exemptions anyway.
It is unrealistic for catholics and probably also protestants/reformed to proclaim an empire in this time frame---as long as the HRE still stands at least.
And the kingdom of Germany still existed, so the duchies of the HRE couldn't just raise themselves to kingdoms as they were already under a kingdom (and an empire).
 
  • 7
Reactions:
Will all countries get historical localisation for their ranks (for example will "dukes" be called "counts" in the Palatinate, "margraves" in Baden, etc.) or is that left for modders to do?
 
Why is there no hint as to the subject of the next DD? We need something to speculate on!

Also: interesting how we once again got to see Burgundy, to put an end to the debate of how it will work. I wonder if there are any other changes to the 1444 setup especially outside of Europe.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Ugh, not these restrictions again, I've grown extremely annoyed with the in the CK2 forums already. The only reasonable "hard" restriction would be that you can't be an empire within the HRE since you're nominally a vassal. But otherwise constructing extremely rigid parameters for when you can or cannot do stuff simply on the basis that that's how it happened in our history is quite boring. And you're just running into lots of necessary exemptions anyway.

You clearly just know nothing about roman imperial ideology. Empire is no just some fancy title that anyone can claim if he is big enough. There is deep meaning behind this. Roman empire is universal - Emperor is the ruler of the whole world. Anyone who would claim emperor's title other that Roman Emperor would be usurper. There are two powers in this world - pope in spiritual sphere (for catholics) and Roman Emperor in political. Good christian can't acknowledge any other imperial title as long as there is rightfull Roman Emperor. So it should be exacly how it happened in history - Napoleon claimed imperial title becouse of revolutionary and nationalistic ideology. Austria and Prussia/Germany claimed imperial titles after Holy Roman Empire was destroyed. Russia claimed imperial title as a succesor of Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine) that was always acknowledged as only rightfull Roman Empire by ortodox christians.
 
Last edited:
  • 11
  • 8
  • 2
Reactions:
please consider also some penalties! both for balance and "realism".

Considering that we don't even know yet the exact requirements for rank progression I'd say that calling for penalties based on balance [which many will agree is, together with exploit and gamey, somewhat of a boogeyman in these forums] and realism doesn't really add up. Especially since we have no idea wether it will be possible for a nation to advance ranks without necessarily increasing territory, it'd be a ludicrous idea for the Duchy of Switzerland [for example] to fulfill all the international relation requirements to get recognized as the Kingdom of Switzerland and suddenly have its grip on its populations and administrative institutions slip for... nebulous reasons. While the earlier argument about wether or not autonomy reduction was a justifiable bonus for rank progression [which I disagree, but fully understand the justifications for it even if Wiz' original response was rather... terse] had its merits, wanting to already slap the seal of balanced mechanic on a system whose specifics and whose overall nature is not yet clear is unadvisable, considering Balance is not the overall goal of the game nor the genre, Plausibility is. Balance is, instead, a highly desirable but secondary goal.

Eventual penalties to rank progression, if said progression is based primarily on diplomatic achievements and not territorial conquest, should reflect that fact and have a primarily diplomatic nature. Although, to be honest, I completely fail to see any diplomatic burden that could be reasonably said to fall on the shoulders of any nation that rose in prestige and international recognition within the time period.
 
You clearly just know nothing about roman imperial ideology. Empire is no just some fancy title that anyone can claim if he is big enough. There is deep meaning behind this. Roman empire is universal - Emperor is the ruler of the whole world. Anyone who would claim emperor's title other that Roman Emperor would be usurper. There are two powers in this world - pope in spiritual sphere and Roman Emperor in political. Good christian can't acknowledge any other imperial title as long as there is rightfull Roman Emperor. So it should be exacly how it happened in history - Napoleon claimed imperial title becouse of revolutionary, nationalistic ideology. Austria and Prussia/Germany claimed imperial titles after Holy Roman Empire was destroyed. Russia claimed imperial title as a succesor of Western Roman Empire (Byzantine) that was acknowledged as only rightfull Roman Empire by ortodox christians.

Yes, I know this argument and have heard a few dozen times on these forums, I just don't care. And of course these restrictions would just mean that only Muslims, Pagans and other non-Christian religions would have full access to the new content. Seriously, who here wants to have the empire -tier locked away for Catholics (and as was said, possible other denominations as well) unless you manage to destroy the HRE?
 
  • 12
  • 4
Reactions:
You clearly just know nothing about roman imperial ideology. Empire is no just some fancy title that anyone can claim if he is big enough. There is deep meaning behind this. Roman empire is universal - Emperor is the ruler of the whole world. Anyone who would claim emperor's title other that Roman Emperor would be usurper. There are two powers in this world - pope in spiritual sphere (for catholics) and Roman Emperor in political. Good christian can't acknowledge any other imperial title as long as there is rightfull Roman Emperor. So it should be exacly how it happened in history - Napoleon claimed imperial title becouse of revolutionary and nationalistic ideology. Austria and Prussia/Germany claimed imperial titles after Holy Roman Empire was destroyed. Russia claimed imperial title as a succesor of Western Roman Empire (Byzantine) that was always acknowledged as only rightfull Roman Empire by ortodox christians.
So true. Though a little nitpick: The byzzies were the Eastern Roman Empire and not the Western Roman Empire.
8YahOJf.gif


Yes, I know this argument and have heard a few dozen times on these forums, I just don't care. And of course these restrictions would just mean that only Muslims, Pagans and other non-Christian religions would have full access to the new content.
And what is wrong with that? Why should ROTW be punished for Europe having strict defnitions of what an empire is and what an emperor rules over? They weren't even called empires in ROTW; that is just something we call them as they approximately equal our empires in size and power.
Seriously, who here wants to have the empire -tier locked away for Catholics (and as was said, possible other denominations as well) unless you manage to destroy the HRE?
It is completely unrealistic and there would have been no chance of an empire being proclaimed in say 1678 while the HRE still existed. Why do you think that the HRE emperor still was regarded as the first among the rulers of Europe in the late 18th century even though he didn't really have any power over his empire?
 
  • 6
Reactions:
And of course these restrictions would just mean that only Muslims, Pagans and other non-Christian religions would have full access to the new content. Seriously, who here wants to have the empire -tier locked away for Catholics (and as was said, possible other denominations as well) unless you manage to destroy the HRE?

Rest of the world should also have special restrictions, just forgot about them. There should be only one sunni Caliph and one Shiite Caliph obviously. For Asian region there should be two empires - Japanese (as an exception) and Chinese. China had similar imperial ideology to Roman - they considered themselves as rulers of the whole known world. So as long as imperial China exists no nation in China, Korea or Indochina region should be able to easily claim imperial title. It could be possible but with severe relations penalties and casus belli for chinese emperor to force that country to abandon their imperial ambition. Historically for example Korea became Empire of Korea becouse Japanese wanted them to fully cut their connections to Chinese Empire whose power at that time was long gone.

I play paradox games becouse I want games that are more historically accurate. If you want to freely build some weird empires of anything go and play Civilization V or other crap.
 
Last edited:
  • 8
  • 8
Reactions: