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.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
What will make or break the game for me is having true differences between governments of different cultures.
For example, Muslims, Pagans, Catholics, Byzantines and Indians should have distinct forms of government. The Byzantine form of government should revolve more around administrative offices and plotting.
Indian governments should show a greater variety of caste politics. In practice caste identity is organized more aroun jati (clan) than the four varna (Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya, Shudra). For each varna there are many jati. Although in general, varna hierarchically order jati, the real identity is in the jati. For example, historically the Iyengar clan of Brahmins have enmity with the Iyer clan of Brahmins.
I hope they make many governments like EU4 has done.
Not having distinct governments I think is one of the main problems with Imperator. What do you think.
Well, from what I've gathered from information about CK3 so far, the roleplay and character interaction aspects of the game are receiving the most attention, while other aspects of the game like governments are currently taking the backseat. With the removal of Merchant Republics, Nomads, and the information we have on Clan government, it is pretty clear that unique governments are not the priority for launch. While I'm quite sure governments will be looked at later on with updates and DLC, I think they are trying to establish the foundations of roleplay and character mechanics since that is the core of the gameplay they want to provide.
Well, from what I've gathered from information about CK3 so far, the roleplay and character interaction aspects of the game are receiving the most attention, while other aspects of the game like governments are currently taking the backseat. With the removal of Merchant Republics, Nomads, and the information we have on Clan government, it is pretty clear that unique governments are not the priority for launch. While I'm quite sure governments will be looked at later on with updates and DLC, I think they are trying to establish the foundations of roleplay and character mechanics since that is the core of the gameplay they want to provide.
Well, better would be customizable goverments, where law by law you change goverment structure and realm laws. Like who will be able to be concilors, can noble marry outside of nobity or outside of realm or not and so on.
In The Gupta Empire, the inner core of the empire (home territory) was governed by appointed officials. The outer territories were granted to fedual nobles. So the feudal system with limited demesne could suffice.
There was also the very powerful Brahmin class that would need to be modeled. They were not centralized exactly like Catholics but had a lot of influence and were given benefits by Kings
Speaking of unique governments, it would be nice to see something (perhaps a DLC?) which deals with the extraordinary character of Mamluk government as compared to other Muslim realms.
Presently, there is nothing in CK2 which comes close to adequately portraying the slave soldiers-cum-‘true lords’ of Islamicate society, or indeed their earliest predecessors who brought such turbulence to the ‘Abbasid court in Samarra.
A sort of generic bureaucratic government would work for Byzantium at the start. The bureaucracy evolved significantly over the course of its life and can't really be represented using a single system. Offices and titles were frequently changed, replaced, or simply dropped. Certain titles were used so much they became overvalued and ended up being replaced or abandoned. The government structure also changed over time as the empire's fortunes waxed and waned.
A sort of generic bureaucratic government would work for Byzantium at the start. The bureaucracy evolved significantly over the course of its life and can't really be represented using a single system. Offices and titles were frequently changed, replaced, or simply dropped. Certain titles were used so much they became overvalued and ended up being replaced or abandoned. The government structure also changed over time as the empire's fortunes waxed and waned.
Yeah, it gets very confusing at times. The structure was highly complex and labyrinthine, to the point that we still don't fully understand how it worked or what certain offices actually did.
A sort of generic bureaucratic government would work for Byzantium at the start. The bureaucracy evolved significantly over the course of its life and can't really be represented using a single system. Offices and titles were frequently changed, replaced, or simply dropped. Certain titles were used so much they became overvalued and ended up being replaced or abandoned. The government structure also changed over time as the empire's fortunes waxed and waned.
If the map of CK3 is based on the same area as CK2, then last year I had made a list of government types that could be present on the map, and work really well in my opinion -
Standard governments -
1> Feudal tenure - almost all of western Christendom and Europe would have this government type.
2> Imperial Bureaucracy - the Roman/Byzantine government with a powerful ancient bureaucracy, Themes, centralized powers and so on.
3> Rajamandal - the similarly centralized and organized bureaucratic form of government found in Indian empires since antiquity, based on principles of Dharma and imperial aristocracy.
4> Kaiserreich - a unique government type for Holy Roman Empire, with unique mechanisms and event chains and such to represent it accurately this time.
5> Iqta - non-Abbasid Muslim realms but this time with more features. Have they announced something related to this though?
6> Maritime Republic - coastal mercantile republics like Venice, Genoa, Pisa, Hansa etc. but done correctly this time.
7> Republic - playable inland republics like Florence, Milan, Novgorod, Frankfurt, that one odd restored Roman Republic and so on.
8> Tribe - settled tribes, found mostly in earlier start dates. This time with concepts like Eldership, ritual warfare and such.
9> Horde - the Horde government would be the standard nomadic tribes around the map. But this time it should allow true migration where you abandon your old home to go to other regions (CK2 didn't have that).
10> Theocratic Monarchy - a very religious government type where monarch is partially a member of clergy while still being a noble. Represents both Tibetans and a restored Persian Empire government. This is as close as you could get to play clergy alongside being Caliph.
11> Russian governement - a system for Kievan Rus and its successors. With different succession types and such.
Potentially unique governments -
>Yassa - a unique government for Mongol Empire, which is a bit different from standard nomadic horde. It would involve meritocracy and freedom of religion alongside loyalty to Great Khan...with kingdom-sized realms as main administrative units. It would be ruled by a council called Kurultai. At the same time it would be militaristic and ruthless in nature.
> Great Sultanate - Delhi Sultanate wasn't a standard feudal Muslim Iqta realm from the Middle East. Like all Indian empires it had a powerful centralized bureaucracy, judges and provincial governors as well as a central royal army/navy, but also feudal Iqta elements like a national Ulema and provincial armies (and frequent civil wars). It continued the Indian tradition of leaving existing local rulers in power but demoting them in rank. This government type would reflect that correctly. It would also accurately represent the other Indian Sultanates that broke away from Delhi after Timur sacked the imperial city (like Bahamanis, Jaunpur, Bengal, Gujarat etc. that you see in EU4) since they followed the same system on a smaller scale.
Succession would be the main difference between this and standard Iqta system. There was not a single peaceful succession in entire history of Delhi sultanate from 1206 to 1526. The level of fraternal violence between princes every time their father died, would put Ottomans to shame. And generals had great power in deciding who got the throne, so this can be implemented.
Also notable that Delhi Sultanate almost never recognized the authority of Caliphs, even though the rest of the Muslim world did, and that the title of Sultan was at the time tied to Caliph in the same way as Popes and Kings of western Europe. This government type could reflect that with impacts on gameplay too.
> Caliphate - This is just for the two realms - Shia and Sunni Caliphates and whoever holds them. CK2's Iqta system never managed to represent how complex the government of Abbasid and Fatimid Caliphates were. Especially since Abbasids were like a proper centralized empire until 870 AD. They managed to partially restore their power and authority later (which the player would definitely be able to complete), so this is the government they should have.
> Celestial Empire - the CK3 equivalent of CK2's "adopt Chinese style government" in case they ever introduce that mechanism again. Civil service, potential to hold imperial exams, meritocracy and so on.
Even if they all are ultimately going to be similar, different government types for different areas of map would be nice.
These are just what I think won't be made playable -
- Papacy, because of course
- Clergy in general
- Monastic orders most likely, since they aren't dynasty-based
CK2 code had lots of limitations so all government types ultimately had to be based around the feudal system. Paradox has a chance to fix this with CK3 and actually make all government types more distinct and unique, full of new features and ways to play with.
A large part of India during this time period was under Rajput rule which would have functioned more similarly to Clan Government. Though the South and the East maintained the imperial form of government.
A large part of India during this time period was under Rajput rule which would have functioned more similarly to Clan Government. Though the South and the East maintained the imperial form of government.
Indeed. Rajputs of Pratihara Empire (who rebelled to form their own kingdoms later on) were the ones who adopted feudalism in India in this era, though that said the Indian feudalism didn't go all the way to the bottom. The small core territories of each minor vassal Rajput clan/house were still centralized bureaucracies under their ruler and family's control. It is one of the reasons feudalism didn't survive in India after 1530s.
A key part of feudalism is social stratification, and India already had that in the form of caste system.
Examples include Guhilot-Sisodiya dynasty whose core owned territory was Mewar, but they served under the House of Parmar of Malva kingdom, Solanki dynasty of Gujarat, Chauhan dynasty of Delhi and such until they finally became a kingdom in their own right. Yet within Mewar they had their own organized, directly controlled government.
It will be interesting to see how the game handles this.
Russian principalities had their quirks of course (Rota being most prominent), but they shared a lot of features with rest of europe, only in different time periods.
They were post-tribal, but were still pre-feudal. I'd call them patrimonial monarchy - realm was private property of ruler, often subject to division through gavelkind, there were no strong vassals like in late medieval Europe, but there was court aristocracy and appointed officials administering territories, like Russian Posadniks, Polish Castellans, and (before they turned hereditary) Frankish Counts.
CK2 completely neglected this with simple tribal/feudal dichotomy.
But progression of governmental systems through most of europe actually went like this:
Tribalism - ran by elders, or with ruler/warchief selected by them (Eldership succession), villages run themselves. All is well until some warlord manages to gain enough power, which leads to:
Patrimonialism - hereditary king/chieftain. Gavelkind succession (but with routine palace coups), officials run provinces at behest of ruler, druzhina equivalent granted land to support them, but not always inheritable. But if it is, it eventually leads to:
Early Feudalism - often with some form of Elective succession dominated by one dynasty, and powerful vassals, often former officials who turned hereditary. But if kings manage to centralize power, it becomes:
Late Feudalism - primogeniture (pretence of elective succession is dropped), and large royal demesne, but still plenty of vassals.
So it's say Russian principalities would have patrimonial government, but with some flavour (Rota) unique to Russian cultures.
10> Theocratic Monarchy - a very religious government type where monarch is partially a member of clergy while still being a noble. Represents both Tibetans and a restored Persian Empire government. This is as close as you could get to play clergy alongside being Caliph.
It can also represent any temporal religious heads. (the Fylkirate, for example)
According to developers, the custom religious feature system will be available to all religions, not only pagans. But I am not sure whether leadership of non-pagans can also be changed.
A sort of generic bureaucratic government would work for Byzantium at the start. The bureaucracy evolved significantly over the course of its life and can't really be represented using a single system. Offices and titles were frequently changed, replaced, or simply dropped. Certain titles were used so much they became overvalued and ended up being replaced or abandoned. The government structure also changed over time as the empire's fortunes waxed and waned.
Admittedly I don't know as much as I wish I did with the various forms of the Byzantine bureaucracy. If I was the guy behind planning out what the Byzantine system should be, I would be basing it off the administration of the empire in 1066 since that is probably going to be viewed as the "default" start date in terms of certain mechanics.
If they intend to introduce something like nomads later on I think its not to be done like here everyone in the steps is clanbased etc. Especially Mongol empire was highly complex ans fluid and would be so fun and interesting to play
