INTRO: To begin, I’ve been absolutely loving the 2.0 update. I bought the game at launch and haven’t really touched it until 1.5.3. The improvement has been remarkable to say the least and I’ve been thoroughly pleased with all the new changes in 2.0. Though I am no speed-running or achievement hunting expert, I have played through a few campaigns of 2.0 so far and took the time to write down some of my thoughts, which I hope can provide some inspiration to the dev team on how to add even greater depth to the game. I've written this thread addressed to the devs directly, rather than as a typical discussion post. Apologies if that's not the proper form, but I never really post on the forums much I only recently felt compelled to come here and offer my thoughts. My goal with these comments is NOT to focus on huge overhauls, like how military got reworked in 2.0 or how trade will presumably be reworked in 2.X, but rather how to use the tools already in place to make the game feel more alive and give more weight to each decision. , By in large, I think the game could stand to have some of the existing systems not expanded per se, but rather be more filled out with the spaces they already occupy. As the goal of Imperator is to be a historical 'civilization builder' game with a focus on characters, I feel additional character interaction and decision making should be even more prominent. The specific areas I’d like to focus on are Diplomacy, Espionage, Declaring War, Subject Interaction, and Events.
Diplomacy: TL;DR incorporate additional interaction function "Send Diplomatic Mission" that allows for countries to try to secure truces, rather than alliances, for nations who hate each other, but also don't want to go to war.
I think there is a key interaction missing from the diplomacy tab options that is really glaring, namely sending diplomatic missions (wording here can be altered to prevent confusion with the missions tab. Perhaps commission or operation). Diplomatic missions have been undertaken by neighborly and hostile nations alike for millennia and could offer some extremely interesting choices in game.
Here’s my attempt at writing out how this could work: Egypt attempts a diplomatic mission with Macedon. The two countries have negative opinions of each other and even might have good reasons to go to war with one another, yet the reality of the political landscape, namely a victorious Seleucid empire over the now splintered Antigonid Kingdom now poses threats to both nations, making a diplomatic mission a necessary expedient. Egypt selects the Send Diplomatic Mission option from Macedon’s diplomacy screen. Egypt is prompted to select a character (the Chancellor, the Magistrate, the Co-Counsel/Co-Suffete, the Consort, or the Primary Heir) to lead the expedition and then spends 100 diplomatic influence to begin the event chain. The events that follow should be more or less successful based on the leading character’s finesse/oratory skill; whether or not the target nation has been insulted in the last 10 years; and whether or not the ruler of the target nation is a friend or rival.
The goal of the mission is to secure at minimum a 10-year truce with the target nation. A moderate success would gain a 10-year truce plus one or all of the following selected at random: gain a small amount of manpower/gold, target nation sells territory belonging to the province of the player nation, or target nation renounces claims to a province that the player nation has claims to. A resounding success (low chance dice roll) would be all of the previous plus an alliance (or a guarantee) between the two nations, regardless of previous opinion modifiers. Not having to worry about getting stabbed in the back is a very valuable thing and something nations historically tried to seek prior to starting a war with a third nation. If non-aggression pacts come to exist in Imperator, these should also be incorporated.
However, diplomatic missions should also have some costs in addition to the character selection and diplomatic influence spend at the task start. Costs should vary/be random and can include any of the following: a political marriage (resulting in a female family member of the ruler/or great family joining the court of the target), gold, manpower, renouncing claims, selling territory, turning over an exiled pretender/rival of target nation’s ruler for a tyranny hit, or in rare cases, the transfer of a vassal. This option shouldn’t be selected lightly, and should have a high risk, high reward feeling to it. There should also be a tiny chance for two bad events to occur. One event is your diplomatic mission gets Red Wedding’d and results in character deaths/imprisonment. Another bad event would be a Paris and Helen event, where the diplomatic leader cuckolds the target nation’s ruler, absconds with their consort, and gives them a “Honor Besmirched” casus belli that they’re highly motivated to act on. Tell me that doesn’t sound like fun!
Espionage: TL;DR Give spies specific goals in order to allow for more interaction, give spies more events, and make other nations spy on us.
I think the newly added espionage mechanic provide a much-needed outlet for court intrigue and character interaction; thus, it should be expanded upon. First, additional information while spying would be better. Seeing manpower and gold amount doesn’t seem like enough to justify the initial cost.
Additional information, and corresponding events, might be better served if spies are given a specify goal to work towards? Some espionage categories might be Military, Diplomatic, and Maritime. Military would allow for better scouting of levy sizes (currently visible in the ledger) and possibly removing fog of war around a particular general the spy is attached to. Diplomatic spies would increase efficacy of improve opinions and assassinations. Diplomatic spies might also be able to identify a serious pretender/claimant to the throne and promise them that you’ll install them on the throne as a puppet client (a subject that can’t be integrated) if they start a civil war. Obviously, this needs to be balanced it feels like a rare opportunity and requires some serious investment to prevent overuse. Maritime could affect trade by denying them access to X goods in their capital region, upsetting their merchants, or antagonizing their tributaries/league cities. Maritime could also gain access to their technology progress and have a chance to steal inventions, not unlike the Intellectual Property event.
Another espionage thought would be to have your character visible in the nation diplomacy screen for easy access.
As a general comment, more spy events would be great. The Intellectual Property event, while extremely powerful, is EXACTLY the kind of awesome flavor and boost I want from committing the resources to be good at espionage! Specific inventions, character health, character wages, and gold investment per spy are significant investment and should yield, from time to time, rather substantial payoffs.
As a final comment, if we’re able to spy on enemy nations, then enemy nations should be spying on us. Events informing us that we’ve had blueprints stolen, we suspect a rival nation’s involvement in a recent assassination, that an enemy is reporting the movements of our generals, etc would be awesome.
Government Interaction when Declaring War: TL;DR Lengthen the time and process of declaring war on another nation, add immersion and greater character interaction.
Instead of just immediately declaring war, like how most PDX games currently work, what if there were interactions with your government offices when you announce your intention to declare war? Depending on their expertise, the existing political landscape, and their own biases and dispositions, they might encourage or discourage certain actions.
I think the process I’ve described helps to make the act of declaring war feel more engaging than just pushing a button, giving the player more opportunity to roleplay as well as presenting different challenges. I wouldn’t these events to all be mandatory all of the time, as it might feel like an arbitrary mini-game but I think this aspect of the game could stand to be fleshed out.
A small after-thought: The process of declaring war should be delayed a bunch in the fall months of the year. Many in the nation would rather be home in their fields for the harvest season than getting marshalled to go to war just as winter is approaching. I feel like having seasons feel important has always been a challenge for GSGs and this could be an easy way to make them feel represented.
Subject Interaction: TL;DR Add another subject type "puppet Kingdom" that's semi-autonomous and can't be integrated, give subjects more events, and change integration process.
As it currently stands, tributes, feudatories, client states, etc. all play an important role in your nation’s economy and military, however, they don’t offer much interaction with the nation from a character or diplomatic standpoint. There are very few ways to interact with subject nations once they are your vassal and very few events trigger where they show they still exist in any meaningful way. I believe there are a couple of easy ways to fix this.
The first and most obvious is to include more relevant events that help remind the player that while they are your subjects, they are still nations unto themselves. I’ve drafted some events that speak to this below as examples (Events 1, 2 & 3).
A second fix would be to make some changes to subject types and subject integration that establish clearer rules on how subjects behave and how they can more realistically be integrated into an overlord’s nation. I believe the amount of client types in the game (tribal vassal, tributary, feudatory, client state, league city, mercenary state) offer lots of different flavor and tactical considerations. That said, I think that the integration of these subject types should better reflect a gradual increase in direct administration and corresponding reduction in autonomy. The path to full annexation should have clearly defined steps and considerations with regards to profitability, autonomy, and diplo slots. I don’t think much needs to change for tributaries. A tributary will occasionally have the chance to become a feudatory (or league city/mercenary state if that option exists) but otherwise cannot be integrated. A feudatory/league city/mercenary state will no longer be eligible for direct integration but instead will undergo an integration process to then become a client state. A client state can be integrated as normal with one small change: any recently integrated province MUST have the governor policy set to Local Autonomy for the first 5-10 years, in order to reflect the ongoing process of establishing your nation’s bureaucracy in the province. Alternatively, maybe instead of Local Autonomy, there should be a new governor policy type introduced called “Provincial Integration”, that mimics Local Autonomy with different modifiers. Provincial Integration would then be the automatic policy of a recently integrated subject and cannot be changed for a brief time, after which, a new policy is chosen by the provincial governor.
I think these extra steps allow for greater management decisions, introduce additional historical realism, and present a clearer path to becoming part of an overlord’s nation. Coupled with these changes, I really believe that integration progress can operate at roughly the same speed it does now, but I think the actual progress should be hidden (literally, just don’t include the percentage integrated amount).
Another change I’d like to see is the subject type “puppet kingdom/state” introduced. This subject type should work similarly to a tributary with some key differences. A puppet kingdom always provides military access to overlord, provides a small amount of tribute income & manpower per month, is much more likely to sell territories it controls that belong to your provinces, offers mercenaries at a discounted rate, and cannot be integrated through traditional means. A puppet kingdom cannot be made through traditional diplomatic means, it must be either enforced through war or installed via espionage as described earlier. Notably, a puppet kingdom gets a reduced number of diplomatic relation slots BUT can still make alliances. This gives them a better shot at becoming independent in the future and illustrates their autonomy relative to other subject types. Furthermore, once a puppet is installed, if that puppet’s family line dies out, a different pretender rises to the throne, or if they lose a civil war, two things happen: the nation ceases to be a puppet kingdom and its former overlord gains the “Re-install Puppet” casus belli. I think this allows for more interesting tall play, introduces more interesting regional politics, and allows for more opportunities for meaningful character interaction. The reasons a player or a computer might want this subject type rather than pure conquest or installing a client state are: 1. It gains the overlord nation the aforementioned bonuses, 2. It can be used to conquer a much larger nation than you typically could (this could run as an alternate option to the War of the Diadochi wargoal type), 3. it could offer less aggressive expansion hit on success than other options (which could be the deciding factor for a nation with very high AE already or one with low stability), and 4. It allows a means to gain influence and resources from an area with the wrong culture and religion type (Egypt and Seleucids for example, would benefit from this, as they already suffer from internal issues).
My ideas on how this client type works has largely been inspired by my understanding of how Pergamum and Armenia functioned during the Late Roman Republic and Roman Empire, respectively. Speaking of which, there should be a small chance that upon the death of a puppet, they gift the entire nation over to the overlord to be automatically annexed/integrated (Like how Pergamum did during the Gracchi times). I relish the idea of trying to woo or undermine an enemy’s puppet kingdom, only to be find that my last 5 years of planning goes down the toilet as their puppet dies and all of a sudden, Egypt controls Ionia or something.
Events: Sample Events for Subjects/Vassals
Event 1: [Character Name] has recently begun to petition our offices about their rights in foreign lands. It seems every time [Ruler name] turns a corner, [Character Name] is there and once again asking about their familial rights to a holding in [Subject Name]! A official bureaucrat has already reviewed the documents and has found them to be dicey at best, however this does present a unique opportunity to sway an important member of the [Government Type Name e.g. court/senate/tribal assembly]. If we acquiesce to their request, [Subject Name] will surely be displeased!
Decision 1: Grant [Character Name]’s request. [Character Name] receives a holding in [Subject Name]. [Character Name] gets +10 Loyalty for 60 months. [Subject Name] loses -10 Loyalty for 60 months. [Ruler Name] receives 40 gold. “These documents seem in to be order…”
Decision 2: Deny [Character Name]’s request. [Subject Name] gains +5 Loyalty for 60 months. [Subject Name] provides additional +10% tribute income for 60 months. [Character Name] loses -10 Loyalty for 60 months (Request Denied). “These documents are a sham! We would never dishonor [Subject Name] this way!”
Event 2: A representative from [Subject Name] has asked to speak before the council today. He relayed the concerns of the ruling classes in [Subject Name] regarding the treatment of their brethren within our borders. Following a stirring oration, the representative proposed a series of reforms that would simultaneously build the trust between our two nations and enhance the rights of [Subject Nation Primary Culture] in our nation.
Decision 1: Set [Subject Name’s Primary Culture] civic rights to Citizen. [Subject Name] gains +10 Loyalty (for as long as the rights remain at citizen). [Subject Name] provides additional +10% tribute income for 120 months. [Player Nation] loses -5 Stability. “For too long have our subjects suffered legal slights!”
Decision 2: Grant [Randomize Option: Right of Inheritance, Right to Enter Legal Contracts, or Protection against Torture] to [Subject Name’s Primary Culture. [Subject Name] gains +10 Loyalty for 60 months. [Player Nation] loses -5 Stability. “Perhaps some adjustments can be made…”
Decision 3: Deny request. [Subject Name’s Primary Culture] gains -6% happiness for 120 months. [Subject Name] loses -25 Loyalty for 120 months. [Player Nation] integrated cultures gain 3% happiness for 120 months. “We are in charge here!”
Event 3: One of our scholars has recently returned from a trip to [Subject Name] and was astounded with the progress they’ve made in an advanced technical field! ‘Surely, we cannot be outdone by our own vassals?’, the scholar goes on. Efforts must be made to bring these techniques and practices to our own glorious nation.
Decision 1: Gain 1 free Innovation. [Player Nation] gains -20% research efficiency for 36 months due to lax scholars. “Their success is our success! Go forth and study their methods!”
Decision 2: [Player Nation] gains +20% research efficiency for 36 months. “Clearly, we must re-double our efforts. Search the lands for the wisest minds in our lands.”
Diplomacy: TL;DR incorporate additional interaction function "Send Diplomatic Mission" that allows for countries to try to secure truces, rather than alliances, for nations who hate each other, but also don't want to go to war.
I think there is a key interaction missing from the diplomacy tab options that is really glaring, namely sending diplomatic missions (wording here can be altered to prevent confusion with the missions tab. Perhaps commission or operation). Diplomatic missions have been undertaken by neighborly and hostile nations alike for millennia and could offer some extremely interesting choices in game.
Here’s my attempt at writing out how this could work: Egypt attempts a diplomatic mission with Macedon. The two countries have negative opinions of each other and even might have good reasons to go to war with one another, yet the reality of the political landscape, namely a victorious Seleucid empire over the now splintered Antigonid Kingdom now poses threats to both nations, making a diplomatic mission a necessary expedient. Egypt selects the Send Diplomatic Mission option from Macedon’s diplomacy screen. Egypt is prompted to select a character (the Chancellor, the Magistrate, the Co-Counsel/Co-Suffete, the Consort, or the Primary Heir) to lead the expedition and then spends 100 diplomatic influence to begin the event chain. The events that follow should be more or less successful based on the leading character’s finesse/oratory skill; whether or not the target nation has been insulted in the last 10 years; and whether or not the ruler of the target nation is a friend or rival.
The goal of the mission is to secure at minimum a 10-year truce with the target nation. A moderate success would gain a 10-year truce plus one or all of the following selected at random: gain a small amount of manpower/gold, target nation sells territory belonging to the province of the player nation, or target nation renounces claims to a province that the player nation has claims to. A resounding success (low chance dice roll) would be all of the previous plus an alliance (or a guarantee) between the two nations, regardless of previous opinion modifiers. Not having to worry about getting stabbed in the back is a very valuable thing and something nations historically tried to seek prior to starting a war with a third nation. If non-aggression pacts come to exist in Imperator, these should also be incorporated.
However, diplomatic missions should also have some costs in addition to the character selection and diplomatic influence spend at the task start. Costs should vary/be random and can include any of the following: a political marriage (resulting in a female family member of the ruler/or great family joining the court of the target), gold, manpower, renouncing claims, selling territory, turning over an exiled pretender/rival of target nation’s ruler for a tyranny hit, or in rare cases, the transfer of a vassal. This option shouldn’t be selected lightly, and should have a high risk, high reward feeling to it. There should also be a tiny chance for two bad events to occur. One event is your diplomatic mission gets Red Wedding’d and results in character deaths/imprisonment. Another bad event would be a Paris and Helen event, where the diplomatic leader cuckolds the target nation’s ruler, absconds with their consort, and gives them a “Honor Besmirched” casus belli that they’re highly motivated to act on. Tell me that doesn’t sound like fun!
Espionage: TL;DR Give spies specific goals in order to allow for more interaction, give spies more events, and make other nations spy on us.
I think the newly added espionage mechanic provide a much-needed outlet for court intrigue and character interaction; thus, it should be expanded upon. First, additional information while spying would be better. Seeing manpower and gold amount doesn’t seem like enough to justify the initial cost.
Additional information, and corresponding events, might be better served if spies are given a specify goal to work towards? Some espionage categories might be Military, Diplomatic, and Maritime. Military would allow for better scouting of levy sizes (currently visible in the ledger) and possibly removing fog of war around a particular general the spy is attached to. Diplomatic spies would increase efficacy of improve opinions and assassinations. Diplomatic spies might also be able to identify a serious pretender/claimant to the throne and promise them that you’ll install them on the throne as a puppet client (a subject that can’t be integrated) if they start a civil war. Obviously, this needs to be balanced it feels like a rare opportunity and requires some serious investment to prevent overuse. Maritime could affect trade by denying them access to X goods in their capital region, upsetting their merchants, or antagonizing their tributaries/league cities. Maritime could also gain access to their technology progress and have a chance to steal inventions, not unlike the Intellectual Property event.
Another espionage thought would be to have your character visible in the nation diplomacy screen for easy access.
As a general comment, more spy events would be great. The Intellectual Property event, while extremely powerful, is EXACTLY the kind of awesome flavor and boost I want from committing the resources to be good at espionage! Specific inventions, character health, character wages, and gold investment per spy are significant investment and should yield, from time to time, rather substantial payoffs.
As a final comment, if we’re able to spy on enemy nations, then enemy nations should be spying on us. Events informing us that we’ve had blueprints stolen, we suspect a rival nation’s involvement in a recent assassination, that an enemy is reporting the movements of our generals, etc would be awesome.
Government Interaction when Declaring War: TL;DR Lengthen the time and process of declaring war on another nation, add immersion and greater character interaction.
Instead of just immediately declaring war, like how most PDX games currently work, what if there were interactions with your government offices when you announce your intention to declare war? Depending on their expertise, the existing political landscape, and their own biases and dispositions, they might encourage or discourage certain actions.
- A military officer might advise against war against a significantly stronger opponent or might coax you unprompted to try to declare war against a distracted or weakened opponent.
- A finesse officer might try to suggest one war goal over another depending on the cultural/religious makeup or tax base of different provinces where you have claims. Spontaneous events might even fire granting temporary reduced mercenary maintenance or additional province claims right before the war declaration.
- An oratory officer might try to drum up support from the great families, providing additional gold, manpower, diplo influence, temporary character loyalty, etc. Maybe an event could where a Great family member asks to be made legate/tribune for a bonus? Additional events might positively or negatively affect stability or war declaration time.
- A religious officer might take auguries and give blessings or warnings against the war (Sparta v Persia) and could result in a delay time between when “seek war” button is pressed and when war is declared.
I think the process I’ve described helps to make the act of declaring war feel more engaging than just pushing a button, giving the player more opportunity to roleplay as well as presenting different challenges. I wouldn’t these events to all be mandatory all of the time, as it might feel like an arbitrary mini-game but I think this aspect of the game could stand to be fleshed out.
A small after-thought: The process of declaring war should be delayed a bunch in the fall months of the year. Many in the nation would rather be home in their fields for the harvest season than getting marshalled to go to war just as winter is approaching. I feel like having seasons feel important has always been a challenge for GSGs and this could be an easy way to make them feel represented.
Subject Interaction: TL;DR Add another subject type "puppet Kingdom" that's semi-autonomous and can't be integrated, give subjects more events, and change integration process.
As it currently stands, tributes, feudatories, client states, etc. all play an important role in your nation’s economy and military, however, they don’t offer much interaction with the nation from a character or diplomatic standpoint. There are very few ways to interact with subject nations once they are your vassal and very few events trigger where they show they still exist in any meaningful way. I believe there are a couple of easy ways to fix this.
The first and most obvious is to include more relevant events that help remind the player that while they are your subjects, they are still nations unto themselves. I’ve drafted some events that speak to this below as examples (Events 1, 2 & 3).
A second fix would be to make some changes to subject types and subject integration that establish clearer rules on how subjects behave and how they can more realistically be integrated into an overlord’s nation. I believe the amount of client types in the game (tribal vassal, tributary, feudatory, client state, league city, mercenary state) offer lots of different flavor and tactical considerations. That said, I think that the integration of these subject types should better reflect a gradual increase in direct administration and corresponding reduction in autonomy. The path to full annexation should have clearly defined steps and considerations with regards to profitability, autonomy, and diplo slots. I don’t think much needs to change for tributaries. A tributary will occasionally have the chance to become a feudatory (or league city/mercenary state if that option exists) but otherwise cannot be integrated. A feudatory/league city/mercenary state will no longer be eligible for direct integration but instead will undergo an integration process to then become a client state. A client state can be integrated as normal with one small change: any recently integrated province MUST have the governor policy set to Local Autonomy for the first 5-10 years, in order to reflect the ongoing process of establishing your nation’s bureaucracy in the province. Alternatively, maybe instead of Local Autonomy, there should be a new governor policy type introduced called “Provincial Integration”, that mimics Local Autonomy with different modifiers. Provincial Integration would then be the automatic policy of a recently integrated subject and cannot be changed for a brief time, after which, a new policy is chosen by the provincial governor.
I think these extra steps allow for greater management decisions, introduce additional historical realism, and present a clearer path to becoming part of an overlord’s nation. Coupled with these changes, I really believe that integration progress can operate at roughly the same speed it does now, but I think the actual progress should be hidden (literally, just don’t include the percentage integrated amount).
Another change I’d like to see is the subject type “puppet kingdom/state” introduced. This subject type should work similarly to a tributary with some key differences. A puppet kingdom always provides military access to overlord, provides a small amount of tribute income & manpower per month, is much more likely to sell territories it controls that belong to your provinces, offers mercenaries at a discounted rate, and cannot be integrated through traditional means. A puppet kingdom cannot be made through traditional diplomatic means, it must be either enforced through war or installed via espionage as described earlier. Notably, a puppet kingdom gets a reduced number of diplomatic relation slots BUT can still make alliances. This gives them a better shot at becoming independent in the future and illustrates their autonomy relative to other subject types. Furthermore, once a puppet is installed, if that puppet’s family line dies out, a different pretender rises to the throne, or if they lose a civil war, two things happen: the nation ceases to be a puppet kingdom and its former overlord gains the “Re-install Puppet” casus belli. I think this allows for more interesting tall play, introduces more interesting regional politics, and allows for more opportunities for meaningful character interaction. The reasons a player or a computer might want this subject type rather than pure conquest or installing a client state are: 1. It gains the overlord nation the aforementioned bonuses, 2. It can be used to conquer a much larger nation than you typically could (this could run as an alternate option to the War of the Diadochi wargoal type), 3. it could offer less aggressive expansion hit on success than other options (which could be the deciding factor for a nation with very high AE already or one with low stability), and 4. It allows a means to gain influence and resources from an area with the wrong culture and religion type (Egypt and Seleucids for example, would benefit from this, as they already suffer from internal issues).
My ideas on how this client type works has largely been inspired by my understanding of how Pergamum and Armenia functioned during the Late Roman Republic and Roman Empire, respectively. Speaking of which, there should be a small chance that upon the death of a puppet, they gift the entire nation over to the overlord to be automatically annexed/integrated (Like how Pergamum did during the Gracchi times). I relish the idea of trying to woo or undermine an enemy’s puppet kingdom, only to be find that my last 5 years of planning goes down the toilet as their puppet dies and all of a sudden, Egypt controls Ionia or something.
Events: Sample Events for Subjects/Vassals
Event 1: [Character Name] has recently begun to petition our offices about their rights in foreign lands. It seems every time [Ruler name] turns a corner, [Character Name] is there and once again asking about their familial rights to a holding in [Subject Name]! A official bureaucrat has already reviewed the documents and has found them to be dicey at best, however this does present a unique opportunity to sway an important member of the [Government Type Name e.g. court/senate/tribal assembly]. If we acquiesce to their request, [Subject Name] will surely be displeased!
Decision 1: Grant [Character Name]’s request. [Character Name] receives a holding in [Subject Name]. [Character Name] gets +10 Loyalty for 60 months. [Subject Name] loses -10 Loyalty for 60 months. [Ruler Name] receives 40 gold. “These documents seem in to be order…”
Decision 2: Deny [Character Name]’s request. [Subject Name] gains +5 Loyalty for 60 months. [Subject Name] provides additional +10% tribute income for 60 months. [Character Name] loses -10 Loyalty for 60 months (Request Denied). “These documents are a sham! We would never dishonor [Subject Name] this way!”
Event 2: A representative from [Subject Name] has asked to speak before the council today. He relayed the concerns of the ruling classes in [Subject Name] regarding the treatment of their brethren within our borders. Following a stirring oration, the representative proposed a series of reforms that would simultaneously build the trust between our two nations and enhance the rights of [Subject Nation Primary Culture] in our nation.
Decision 1: Set [Subject Name’s Primary Culture] civic rights to Citizen. [Subject Name] gains +10 Loyalty (for as long as the rights remain at citizen). [Subject Name] provides additional +10% tribute income for 120 months. [Player Nation] loses -5 Stability. “For too long have our subjects suffered legal slights!”
Decision 2: Grant [Randomize Option: Right of Inheritance, Right to Enter Legal Contracts, or Protection against Torture] to [Subject Name’s Primary Culture. [Subject Name] gains +10 Loyalty for 60 months. [Player Nation] loses -5 Stability. “Perhaps some adjustments can be made…”
Decision 3: Deny request. [Subject Name’s Primary Culture] gains -6% happiness for 120 months. [Subject Name] loses -25 Loyalty for 120 months. [Player Nation] integrated cultures gain 3% happiness for 120 months. “We are in charge here!”
Event 3: One of our scholars has recently returned from a trip to [Subject Name] and was astounded with the progress they’ve made in an advanced technical field! ‘Surely, we cannot be outdone by our own vassals?’, the scholar goes on. Efforts must be made to bring these techniques and practices to our own glorious nation.
Decision 1: Gain 1 free Innovation. [Player Nation] gains -20% research efficiency for 36 months due to lax scholars. “Their success is our success! Go forth and study their methods!”
Decision 2: [Player Nation] gains +20% research efficiency for 36 months. “Clearly, we must re-double our efforts. Search the lands for the wisest minds in our lands.”
Last edited:
- 3
- 3
