Using domiciles /= domain locations to simulate centralization.

[MrSicario]

In All Under Heaven, the new soryō government is feudal-like but also has a domicile which IMO points to the "vanilla" governments also getting access to a domicile eventually, hence my idea.

The game should use the domain /= domicile distinction to a much greater degree and use it to simulate the ebb and flow of centralization.
Understanding your domicile as your point of residence and "private estate", and the capital holding of your domain as where your court is located, the tension arising from the possible distance between these points is an untapped resource for deeper mechanics.

• Want to be in your liege's council? Your domicile must be in the capital duchy, if not the capital county, if your liege has "enough" crown authority.
• Want to increase control in your domain over a given threshold? Your domicile must be within your domain.
• Not attending your liege's activities is a bad idea? Gotta get that domicile closer to the capital.
• Need to manage your courtiers and court more closely? Gotta get back to that old demesne.
• A vassal holds a court position? How close their domicile is to your court affects their effectiveness and perhaps even how long certain actions take. (Gotta wait for the caravan master to arrive before setting out in a journey)
• Your domicile is outside your personal domain? Looks like it's the regent's time to shine.
• Plotting insurrection? Better get out of the capital to avoid arrest.
• Warring with a fellow vassal? Take a quick vacation in the realm capital to watch your legitimacy and prestige plummet or risk getting captured much easily and having to repaint the walls.

The tension between domain, court and domicile location is something that the game would greatly benefit from to add more personal interactions and how tightly the top suzerain controls their realm.

It would also help further distinguish the different governments and how they slide on the centralization scale.

• Tribal and Nomadic rulers always have their domicile in their capital holding.
• Feudal/Clan realms can only have their domicile in their personal domain or their liege's capital, favoring their personal holdings to increase their autonomy.
  • Given enough crown authority the liege can force their vassals to reside in the capital, something many feudal rulers did to centralize their power.
• Administrative rulers can have their domicile anywhere in the realm, with benefits and demerits to being in their assigned domain, the capital or another governorship altogether.
  • The top liege can always force their vassals to either reside in their governorship or the capital, both to keep them closer (perhaps to arrest an entire house) or cutting off their politicking (simulated by appropriate debuffs)

 

[Toleora]

I would like the government types to play differently, giving domiciles to all of them would wash the systems even more imo and then every start plays the same.

 

[ourg]

No vanilla governments won't have domicile

And the estate that magically teleport for admin is already that weird


Best thing to go is enhancing the actual building system

 

[MrSicario]

I would like the government types to play differently, giving domiciles to all of them would wash the systems even more imo and then every start plays the same.

I mean, you can limit what you place inside the domiciles.
Perhaps feudals only get the main manor plus one building

 

[Citizen Caen]

I would like the government types to play differently, giving domiciles to all of them would wash the systems even more imo and then every start plays the same.

Yeah but also domiciles are just straight better than the normal holdings from a game design perspective

They are more interesting mechanically, provide more visual flavor, and have flexibility in a way normal holdings do not.

I think that’s why we see posts like this one. The base-game building system is kinda bad imo, it’s boring building the same three to four buildings everywhere. either it needs an upgrade or people are going to look to solutions with the domiciles

 

[CrazyRat]

Yeah but also domiciles are just straight better than the normal holdings from a game design perspective

They are more interesting mechanically, provide more visual flavor, and have flexibility in a way normal holdings do not.

I think that’s why we see posts like this one. The base-game building system is kinda bad imo, it’s boring building the same three to four buildings everywhere. either it needs an upgrade or people are going to look to solutions with the domiciles

That is very debatable. In fact, I would say that Domiciles – no matter how fun they are sometimes – are increasingly becoming a design problem for me.

Currently, the domiciles may be more flexible and build-able than normal holdings, but they are also far removed from the general territorial system CK3 has.

The normal holdings are imperfect, but they suffer from issues that plague their counties, they can suffer from plagues, sieges (lack of control), the bad handling by your council, they can be night destroyed by Mongol Onslaught, and so on, so on.

On the other hand, various forms of Domiciles are generally impossible to interact on the outside. You can Raid Estate of rival Byzantines family… if you are Byzantine yourself. Other than that, an entire Byzantium can be pillaged by relentless Nomad raids while Black Death is around, but the magical land would somehow be untouched.

That said, Byzantine-ish estates are kinda fine, because they do not really provide that many bonuses. Nomad Capitals are where it gets not-so-fun for me, because – at their core design – these are magic lands that you can do nothing about, and yet they are a very big part of the Nomad strength.

Now, since the Japanese families will probably rely on estates much more than Byzantines, I fear that we may end up with government where a big part of the Houses’ strength is concentrated in an Untouchable Magic Land which no one can do anything about.

PS. and to be precise: I don’t want to deny that the modular structure of Domicile improvements is superior to the way normal buildings work in CK3, but IMHO Domiciles have really, really big slew of problem of their own.

 

[ray243]

That is very debatable. In fact, I would say that Domiciles – no matter how fun they are sometimes – are increasingly becoming a design problem for me.

Currently, the domiciles may be more flexible and build-able than normal holdings, but they are also far removed from the general territorial system CK3 has.

The normal holdings are imperfect, but they suffer from issues that plague their counties, they can suffer from plagues, sieges (lack of control), the bad handling by your council, they can be night destroyed by Mongol Onslaught, and so on, so on.

On the other hand, various forms of Domiciles are generally impossible to interact on the outside. You can Raid Estate of rival Byzantines family… if you are Byzantine yourself. Other than that, an entire Byzantium can be pillaged by relentless Nomad raids while Black Death is around, but the magical land would somehow be untouched.

That said, Byzantine-ish estates are kinda fine, because they do not really provide that many bonuses. Nomad Capitals are where it gets not-so-fun for me, because – at their core design – these are magic lands that you can do nothing about, and yet they are a very big part of the Nomad strength.

Now, since the Japanese families will probably rely on estates much more than Byzantines, I fear that we may end up with government where a big part of the Houses’ strength is concentrated in an Untouchable Magic Land which no one can do anything about.

PS. and to be precise: I don’t want to deny that the modular structure of Domicile improvements is superior to the way normal buildings work in CK3, but IMHO Domiciles have really, really big slew of problem of their own.

Domcile is meant to represent smaller parcels of land, from either a house in capital to some landed estates in the country side. Maybe you just need to tie the health of the county with that of the domicile?

Bad harvests, diseases, poor economic situation/lowering development in the county your domicile is based can all affect your domicile and decrease the wealth you're generating, or even have parts of your domicile be destroyed by wars or natural disasters.

 

[Citizen Caen]

That is very debatable. In fact, I would say that Domiciles – no matter how fun they are sometimes – are increasingly becoming a design problem for me.

Currently, the domiciles may be more flexible and build-able than normal holdings, but they are also far removed from the general territorial system CK3 has.

The normal holdings are imperfect, but they suffer from issues that plague their counties, they can suffer from plagues, sieges (lack of control), the bad handling by your council, they can be night destroyed by Mongol Onslaught, and so on, so on.

On the other hand, various forms of Domiciles are generally impossible to interact on the outside. You can Raid Estate of rival Byzantines family… if you are Byzantine yourself. Other than that, an entire Byzantium can be pillaged by relentless Nomad raids while Black Death is around, but the magical land would somehow be untouched.

That said, Byzantine-ish estates are kinda fine, because they do not really provide that many bonuses. Nomad Capitals are where it gets not-so-fun for me, because – at their core design – these are magic lands that you can do nothing about, and yet they are a very big part of the Nomad strength.

Now, since the Japanese families will probably rely on estates much more than Byzantines, I fear that we may end up with government where a big part of the Houses’ strength is concentrated in an Untouchable Magic Land which no one can do anything about.

PS. and to be precise: I don’t want to deny that the modular structure of Domicile improvements is superior to the way normal buildings work in CK3, but IMHO Domiciles have really, really big slew of problem of their own.

I actually agree that it’s an issue that domiciles don’t have more of a “place” on the map.
But it’s fairly easy to imagine a modification of the system where your “feudal domicile” is literally your house seat castle. Which can be sieged, taken and effected by plagues and control. I just think it be neat to see my family’s main castle and watch it get built up over the years like you can with estates.

The other thing I like about the domicile system is that allows for a more consistent base of power that help the ai not completely spiral when it loses a title from partition.

On the other hand I don’t necessarily like the permanent progression domiciles have. It’s great to build up, but once it’s done it’s done. Of course holdings also have that problem, so that’s an issue with both systems

 

[Videogames]

That is very debatable. In fact, I would say that Domiciles – no matter how fun they are sometimes – are increasingly becoming a design problem for me.

Currently, the domiciles may be more flexible and build-able than normal holdings, but they are also far removed from the general territorial system CK3 has.

The normal holdings are imperfect, but they suffer from issues that plague their counties, they can suffer from plagues, sieges (lack of control), the bad handling by your council, they can be night destroyed by Mongol Onslaught, and so on, so on.

On the other hand, various forms of Domiciles are generally impossible to interact on the outside. You can Raid Estate of rival Byzantines family… if you are Byzantine yourself. Other than that, an entire Byzantium can be pillaged by relentless Nomad raids while Black Death is around, but the magical land would somehow be untouched.

That said, Byzantine-ish estates are kinda fine, because they do not really provide that many bonuses. Nomad Capitals are where it gets not-so-fun for me, because – at their core design – these are magic lands that you can do nothing about, and yet they are a very big part of the Nomad strength.

Now, since the Japanese families will probably rely on estates much more than Byzantines, I fear that we may end up with government where a big part of the Houses’ strength is concentrated in an Untouchable Magic Land which no one can do anything about.

PS. and to be precise: I don’t want to deny that the modular structure of Domicile improvements is superior to the way normal buildings work in CK3, but IMHO Domiciles have really, really big slew of problem of their own.

Yes, I totally agree with this. I think domiciles are a necessary support post on which to design interesting landless playstyles, but they have their drawbacks and shouldn't be overused.

 

[ray243]

I actually agree that it’s an issue that domiciles don’t have more of a “place” on the map.
But it’s fairly easy to imagine a modification of the system where your “feudal domicile” is literally your house seat castle. Which can be sieged, taken and effected by plagues and control. I just think it be neat to see my family’s main castle and watch it get built up over the years like you can with estates.

The other thing I like about the domicile system is that allows for a more consistent base of power that help the ai not completely spiral when it loses a title from partition.

On the other hand I don’t necessarily like the permanent progression domiciles have. It’s great to build up, but once it’s done it’s done. Of course holdings also have that problem, so that’s an issue with both systems

Estates is something that do require a degree of investment and management from the estate noble families in real life. Also there might be contested inheritance of estate, and estates might get broken up by a family over time. Or estates be merged and acquired due to family ties and marriage.

A more dynamic estate system can add a great deal of interesting possibilities.

 

[DiabloDeVille]

I would like the government types to play differently, giving domiciles to all of them would wash the systems even more imo and then every start plays the same.

Its a way to have the numerous historic characters be playable at game start but not wandering adventurers you cant land