Bro there were kingdoms within the HRE. You dont think someone owning +20% of all HRE territory cant threaten the emperor for a king title? Making it impossible is simply silly.
- 2
- 2
-
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 have nothing against the notion that one could coerce the emperor into having a kingdom title, but what are those kingdoms you refer to, beside Prussia, which was granted by the emperor to the electorate of Brandenburg?
- 4
The Kingdoms of the Empire relevant to the time period were Germany, Italy, and Bohemia - of which Germany (and I'm pretty sure Italy too) was part of the titles of the Emperor. Other kings who were also vassals of the Emperor held their titles outside the Empire, like Prussia and Poland-Saxony.
Which other kingdoms are you referring to? Which ones formed within the Empire during the time period without a legal loophole like Prussia?
Even the Habsburgs only elevated Austria to an Archduchy.
- 3
Bohemia is a exception to the rule as its the only kingdom not a part of the HRE's constitutional structure to be a kingdom, i.e. it was a kingdom that was a subject to the emperor, not a kingdom tied to the title of emperor. Germany, Italy and Burgundy were all constitutionally tied to the emperorship. The three ecclesiastical electors; Trier, Cologne and Mainz, were the archchancelors of Burgundy, Italy and Germany respectively. The Austrian Habsburg used a clever way around it by forging a document that made Austria a archduchy, the equivalent of a kingdom without naming it as such. The HRE should force that kind of chicanery, and if you can't play by those rules you should set out to destroy the HRE and pick up a crown from the gutter afterwards. A wholly viable path as well, just different
- 12
Personally as long as these TAGs that are formed don't provide you with too much strength just simply from having formed them (e.g. having new advances that are so much stronger than starting nation ones) then I don't think it really matters, although I can see how it can be quite jarring to see TAGs known to exist in a specific period of time being formed way earlier.
- 1
I don't think there's a way to make conditions for new tags that it won't be possible to rush if that's your aim. Historically countries would not base their national policy on meeting any set of arbitrary requirements like that but there's no way to stop a player from doing some probably ill advised rapid conquest of territory they can't hope to integrate because it checks boxes and lets them change their map color.
It does seem like the various anti-blobbing mechanics still need some tweaking as early game expansion looks like it might be a little fast, but I imagine those adjustments will be an ongoing process all the way up to release and beyond
It does seem like the various anti-blobbing mechanics still need some tweaking as early game expansion looks like it might be a little fast, but I imagine those adjustments will be an ongoing process all the way up to release and beyond
Kingdom of Italy,
Kingdom of Burgundy,
Kingdom of Prussia
Kingdom of Bohemia.
That is enough of a sample size to say that it should not be impossible to get a king title while being within the HRE. I am sure you can argue about all of them, but the point is that we are going to play a game with a-historic timelines. I dont see why we can have 4 kingdoms part of the HRE irl and suddenly none in game.
- 4
- 2
You would be called King of Prussia, Margrave (or prince-elector) of Brandenburg, duke of Pomerania,... . Not king of both.
Ancient, defunct title.
Also defunct, but this would be the title that the dukes of Burgundy strove for.
Not part of the HRE, hence could be formed as a loophole
Granted by the emperor during the middle ages.
You actually forgot the Kingdom of Germany..
All the HRE-kingdoms were titles granted by the emperor, hence the rule of not raising your rank yourself..
- 7
- 1
If it was just the name then I'd be happy to exclude societal values.
I think this is the key bit though. If becoming Prussia unlocks a whole lot of content around being a militaristic land state (like tech, buildings, units, events, situations & disasters) then I think it's fair to lock it behind societal values somehow.
If Brandenburg inherits Prussia from the Teutonic order, but is a peaceful trading, naval country then it doesn't makes sense for it to get all the Prussian historical bonuses and content. You could solve this by allowing the tag switch then adding more preques on all the content (more work but better outcome), or by blocking the tag switch (rough and ready solution).
In particular I've not seen any societal prerequisites over country specific technologies or buildings.
- 2
Alright. Just limit the game and make it impossible then. Sounds like a lot of fun. I love to be limited for no particular reason, especially when I am the strongest force in the HRE and dont want to become the emperor.
- 2
- 1
A decision requiring you both to have a very good relationship with the emperor and to be strong relative to him should do the trick.
Is there any mechanical advantages to become a kingdom anyway? I know in EUIV there is one.
Is there any mechanical advantages to become a kingdom anyway? I know in EUIV there is one.
- 1
- 1
If you're "the strongest force in the HRE" and not the Emperor, then the Emperor has utterly failed in his role and it's time to dismantle.
- 1
Yes.
Tinto Talks #35 - 30th of October
Hello everyone and welcome to another Tinto Talks, as it's a Happy Wednesday, the day of the week where we spill information about our super-mega-fantastically-secret game with the code name of Project Caesar. Today we’ll talk about three...
The role of the emperor is not the f+ck around with HRE members, nor it is about staying the strongest force. For argument's sake: I can also be equally as strong or about as strong. It is simply stupid to deny me the kingdom rank. It just translates to:
You either become the HRE emperor or you leave/dismantle once you are strong enough. No in between. That is most definetly not what happened to the HRE.
- 4
- 1
The "particular reason" that limits you is being a subordinate power inside the HRE, despite your actual power. The emperor is your liege, after all.
No, the change in rank for HRE members should simply come with an additional requirement that corresponds to the emperor's (and likely the imperial diet's) agreement. This could be modelled as a certain relation or defeating them in a war (like happened historically with Prussia) or by some great favor to them (modelling after the Bohemian crown), but should not be left out. Fight the emperor for the right to be king of X, if you are so strong. If the emperor is wise, they will grant you the title to placate you.
If you want to circumvent the rules of the empire, you should leave it instead.
- 4
We dont have to start with the semantics here. My point is not that anyone should easily get a kingdom rank. My point is that if you are an equal/stronger power, you should be able to force the emperor to grant you the title. How do you guys even imagen the conversation here? Imagen I am Prussia owning half of the HRE and Austria about 25%.
"Give me the kingdom rank or I will leave/declare war/dismantle the HRE. I am not interested in becoming the emperor"
"Hohoho! NO! I WOULD RATHER DESTROY THE HRE!"
Is absolutely illogical and utter nonsense. I have many playthroughs with just being fine being in the HRE, but not wanting to get involved with emperor mechanics and stuff. Why force me to leave or be an emperor? Make the kingdom rank difficult to obtain for all I care, but imo it should be obtainable and not a magical "no you cannot have it" nonsense.
And I never argue against any of this. I am all good with that. I just disagree with a magical "you cannot obtain" card.
- 1