Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Centralization...

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
unmerged(6324)

unmerged(6324)

Colonel
Nov 12, 2001
962
0
Visit site
Will there be centralized nations or could you become a centralized nation? I would like to be the sole ruler of a good Empire but will I be able to do that? I mean it could me certain difficulty for me, and take a lot of effort, but I think it would be cool if somehow in some very difficult way you could become the sole ruler of the land.:)
 
Feuding with the nobility will certainly be part of the game, so there should be opportunities to improve your control and make your nobles more subordinate.

However, I think problems with internal authority are going to be more of a factor in CK than in EU.
 
Sole ruler of the land..I think that in order to fully appreciate a game with this timespan, you must have read some history..the ideas were quite different during the early feudal period, the idea of a nation in our way of thinking is much later in time..
 
From what I've heard so far you will get serious problems with your nobles if you expand your demesne (direct controlled land) too much on expense of the nobility...
 
From what I've heard so far you will get serious problems with your nobles if you expand your demesne (direct controlled land) too much on expense of the nobility...
Click to expand...
It would be very interesting to know what exactly those serios problems will be....as far as I remember you will be allowed to have 1 demesne province for every 3 vasals.
 
Yeah, but I would like to see how the real ruler struggle for centralize like Frederick I of Holy Roman Empire, for example. Beside I want to have my own Empire without quarrelous nobles so, I want to see how I will hand those people and see how far I can go for creating the Centralized Empire instead of a mere kingdom. But it would be very hard for if nobles panicked, you could end like King John of England.
 
Originally posted by Wasa
Sole ruler of the land..I think that in order to fully appreciate a game with this timespan, you must have read some history..the ideas were quite different during the early feudal period, the idea of a nation in our way of thinking is much later in time..
Click to expand...

Yes but I think it would be much more fun if you were at least ABLE though very VERY difficult to be able to make these changes in policies...
 
Originally posted by Wasa


Well, we just have to wait for the game..Your guess is as good as mine..;)
Click to expand...

No our guesses are as good as the Bishop's hohoho!!!:D ;)
 
Originally posted by Crook


So if you have no vassals, you can have no land?
Click to expand...

The way I interpret it is that no more than 1/3 of your land can be your demesne land or else your barons will get upset . So if you have 9 provinces you can/should have no more than 3 under your direct control and the other 6 should be enfoeffed to your favorite court members. As time goes on this ration may change in favor of the monarch to simulate the beginnings of nationalism.:)
 
Correct me if Im wrong, but didn't Phillip II of France centralize that country a fair bit? I think that various instances of certian rulers taking up Baron's lands without too much trouble(ie the nobles didn't revolt) shpuld be somehow simulated.
 
So if you have no vassals, you can have no land?
Click to expand...
Sonny explained it better than me :)
anyway IMO no vassals + big demesne= war with everyone arround and lots of other nasty problems :D
 
Originally posted by David Comnenus
Correct me if Im wrong, but didn't Phillip II of France centralize that country a fair bit? I think that various instances of certian rulers taking up Baron's lands without too much trouble(ie the nobles didn't revolt) shpuld be somehow simulated.
Click to expand...

Well, for France it a more complicated than that. Final centralization was reached only by Louis XIV after the Fronde.

Drakken
 
Originally posted by Drakken


Well, for France it a more complicated than that. Final centralization was reached only by Louis XIV after the Fronde.

Drakken
Click to expand...

Well, I would say that in certain respects it isn´t even to this very day..:p
In general I would say that this question varies from time to time, country to country and ruler to ruler, there is no given "formula", you cannot say that from 1413 this or that country was centralized..;)
 
It depends on the King and nobles for centralization of a state. No one can say one thing will lead to centralize or even decentralize. It is usual depend on the region also.
 
Originally posted by Zhai
It depends on the King and nobles for centralization of a state. No one can say one thing will lead to centralize or even decentralize. It is usual depend on the region also.
Click to expand...

Hmmm....quite right I think, also didn't William the Conquerer help establish a more centralized government in England?:confused:
 
Hmmm....quite right I think, also didn't William the Conquerer help establish a more centralized government in England?
Click to expand...

No, he helped feudalize England, decentralized it. Under Anglo-Saxon rule, it was much more centralized (not as centralized as nowtoday through.)
 
Originally posted by Zhai


No, he helped feudalize England, decentralized it. Under Anglo-Saxon rule, it was much more centralized (not as centralized as nowtoday through.)
Click to expand...

Oh okay thank you!;)
 
Welcome, I recommend that u ask somebody with more knowledge in that time period, my is general but not deep. But I am sure William decentralized England. Anyway, you are very welcomed!:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back