Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Inheriting a Country

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(1746)

unmerged(1746)

Sergeant
Mar 12, 2001
96
0
www.heavengames.com
Sorry if this has been mentioned before, but I couldn't find a thread about it, so here we go...

Whenever you take over a country peacefully when the previous ruling family dies out and leaves you as heir, does this have an effect on your badboy rating?

Also, how come the inhabitants of that country seem to treat the takeover as a hostile one, and the revolt risk goes up? I can understand revolts if you take over by force, but surely it shouldn't apply (at least as much, anyway) if you inherit?
 
Yes, it's considered as annexing the country so ur badboy will go up and ur relations with the rest will drop. And unless u have CB shields on those provinces the population will revolt.
 
I am not sure... I think it is like this. We need one rule here however this one rule doesn't fit every possible circumstance. However, the 'overtaken' people was rarely all loving to the knew royal family of a different origin.

Ex1. Sweden was inherited by Sigismund, who was already the King of Poland-Lithuania where he were brought up into a good catholic. But he fast got himself hated in Sweden and was finally, after something that could maybe called a civil war, thrown out of Sweden.

Ex2. Kill me if I am wrong here, but wasn't it so that the Stuarts had a hard time on the English throne at a start. Both from the english wariness of scots (a great number of borderwars do that :)) and there staunch catholicism just after Elisabeth I finally had created religious stability by introducing the Church of England.

Ex3. The Austrian Archduke always had problems with the parts of his cosmopolitan federation (hmpf). Hungary, Bohemia, Croatia, Slovenia...none of these easily became an integral part of Habsburg territory if ever...

So... Well I will concede that the revolt percentage might be a tiny bit to large...

/Greven
Who would gladly inherite any country :D
 
Basically the Netherlands and Spain also became joined together thru a serie of dynastical inheritage.

When Felipe II became King, he didn't exactly make himself popular either and we all know what that led to :D
 
Fair points there Greven, I thought about George I and the Jacobites just after I'd posted the thread ;). That said, I do think the revolt %age should be reduced a tiny bit.

I think it's highly unfair, however, if your badboy rating goes up. After all, there's no way of making inheritance happen, and no way of declining the offer of the throne (something I wouldn't have minded when Lorraine came to me as Austria, since I had no ambitions in Western Europe, and it gave France an excuse to attack me). Seems like you're being penalised for being a good neighbour.
 
I think there is some missunderstanding about what the BB value is supposed to represent.

It's not really a punishment for people playing the game 'wrong' but rather a way of representing other nations beeing weary of a former neighbur country suddenly reising in power & importance. It would upset the familiar 'balance' of things and thus not be very well liked.
IOW, inheriting another nation IMO should indeed also increase BB, although less then if you would take the same nation with military force (which I'm fairly confident in is how it works currently).
 
It's not really a punishment for people playing the game 'wrong' but rather a way of representing other nations beeing weary of a former neighbur country suddenly reising in power & importance. It would upset the familiar 'balance' of things and thus not be very well liked.
Click to expand...
I get that, and I support the principle of a BB rating to keep a check on people and AI nations who just go all-out for aggressive conquest and forced annexations. However, the thing about inheriting countries is that there's very little you can do about it. If there was an option to refuse the territory being offered, then I'd see a case for increasing the BB. As it is, however, it cannot IMHO be justified.

Perhaps instead there is a case for having countries with a CB on the newly-inherited territory going to war over it because they feel that they should have inherited it? Again however, this would only really be implementable if one could refuse the inheritance offer.
 
Hmm, never think I've heard of a Monarch in this timeperiod refusing to accept land for 'free' though an inheritance. Indeed this was the ultimate goal/jackpot any nation could even hope for.
Beeing able to refuse would certainly be MOST unhistorical (anyone more knowledgable in this please correct me if I'm wrong).

I get that... ...If there was an option to refuse the territory being offered, then I'd see a case for increasing the BB. As it is, however, it cannot IMHO be justified

No, obviously your not getting it. At least not the part about 'nations beeing weary of a former neighbur country suddenly raising in power & importance'.
Your still locked into the 'BB = penalize the player' thinking.
 
Originally posted by BiB
If dynasties die out countries tend to go to war over it though, not someone ending up just getting it.
Click to expand...

So infact your suggesting it should give higher BB then ? ;)

Seriously though, I do agree with you. Lots and lost of wars where fought becurse more then 1 person thought themselves to be the rightfull inheriter =)
 
BiB,


quote:
____________________________________
Originally posted by BiB

'And unless u have CB shields on those provinces the population will revolt.'
____________________________


I don't understand, what do you mean by this statement? Is there a way to avoid revolts?
 
There isn't much of a dynastic model in EU sadly seeing it was quite very important then. Inheriting sommink would fall under some kind of dynastic model. It's like implementing something that is part of a dynastic model when there really isn't a dynastic model at work so basically it won't work very well.

I can uderstand the badboy value rising when a country inherits a ncie piece of land as they'r emore of a threat then but ur relations with about everyone will drop which doesn't seem right to me as u inherit it, nothing much u can do about it, it's just the way it is.

For example Spain and France getting constantly involved in Italy to get their cronies on thrones there instead of the others :D

I once inherited Hannover as England. I didn't need that and I mean that. Europe all hovering up on me as if I did sommink bad but in fact I can't help it the otehr dynasty died out. Wouldn't turn down sommink bigger though :D
 
Originally posted by Carl Deppen
BiB,


quote:
____________________________________
Originally posted by BiB

'And unless u have CB shields on those provinces the population will revolt.'
____________________________


I don't understand, what do you mean by this statement? Is there a way to avoid revolts?
Click to expand...

There's a certain type of revolt, the nationalist type. Usually at 3%. But countries which have ur CB shield on it, so who are considered ur home provinces, don't get that nationalistic revolt risk as they are fine being a part of ur empire. They still can revolt for stability reasons, religious reasons and so on though.
 
Originally posted by Greven
Ex2. Kill me if I am wrong here, but wasn't it so that the Stuarts had a hard time on the English throne at a start. Both from the english wariness of scots (a great number of borderwars do that :)) and there staunch catholicism just after Elisabeth I finally had created religious stability by introducing the Church of England.
Click to expand...

IMHO, James I (the first of England, that is :)) Stuart caused himself a lot of his problems. His dealings with Parliment were almost as clumsy as his son's, and endless new taxes and general throwing around of weight didn't help much either.

Which brings us to James II and what I'm curious about: I haven't played as England or Holland during the appropriate time but do William and Mary pop up in the Grand Campaign and, if so, how are the politics between Holland and England handled?
 
IMHO, James I (the first of England, that is ) Stuart caused himself a lot of his problems. His dealings with Parliament were almost as clumsy as his son's, and endless new taxes and general throwing around of weight didn't help much either.
Click to expand...
James actually did rather well in England, but that's a whole different debate for a different forum ;).

To Greven: James I wasn't a Catholic, he was a member of the Scottish Protestant Kirk. The only Stuart to rule as a Catholic was James II (though it is believed Charles II converted a couple of days before he died).

Which brings us to James II and what I'm curious about: I haven't played as England or Holland during the appropriate time but do William and Mary pop up in the Grand Campaign and, if so, how are the politics between Holland and England handled?
Click to expand...
William III becomes king of England in 1688 in the GC, without a mention of Mary. Relations with Holland are unaffected, just like those between Austria and Spain under Emperor Charles V. If you want to have a war between England and Holland when William III's on the throne, the game has no problem with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back