Changes for Faction Political System?

[broodwarjc]

This is another annoying play thing that frustrates me .
I am fine with tough games, but I hate random events with no build-up or reaction time from the player.
I will start a normal turn and this will happen(sometimes both on the same turn.

1. Random General wounded, I have a General with good bonuses and randomly I lose him for 4-5 turns due to some unnamed douche in my faction trying to kill him. I then have to pay for some guy who might not even be in my family to take over the guy's army while he is away, with his stock crappy bonuses.

2. Random adoption attempts for a General, I am saving up for an expensive, but awesome building upgrade, when I am suddenly set back several turns by incredibly expensive adoption attempt. I don't want to lose my family member, because I want the faction control bonuses, but the amount of money requested is always like 50-80% of your TOTAL! I have 4000 gold and these douches request 2000-3000 to prevent the adoption and another time time I had 22,000 and they requested 18,000...the guy was even married already! It happens at random with no warning and pisses me off.

Any chance these are getting addressed in 1.1? Is there any strategy to prevent these from happening in-game?

[FlashHeart07]

I will not comment on this as it wouldnt lead to anything usefull atm... I will leave it up to Dresden or the others to adress this problem

[Ygraine]

I've been advocating for the removal of these random "events" completely if they cannot be changed. I had to pay 181 000 gold to stop my kings son from being "adopted" by the enemy faction (lol). Just another example on how dumb this is. I don't recall if Dresden said that it was possible or not to change the %-value of the payments these events prompt you to make.
If the emergent-faction idea about rebellions will work via scripts, then this vanilla nonsense can more or less be removed completely including the "civil war".

[Ivan_Moscavich]

The political dilemmas have been in the game since Rome 1.

While some of them can be annoying, they do break up the monotony when you've got nothing to do but hit end turn.

And for the one or two that pretty much have unavoidable consequences (assassination and adoption), there are a significantly higher number of positive result events.

I wouldn't be in favor of removing them.

[Ygraine]

The political dilemmas have been in the game since Rome 1.

While some of them can be annoying, they do break up the monotony when you've got nothing to do but hit end turn.

And for the one or two that pretty much have unavoidable consequences (assassination and adoption), there are a significantly higher number of positive result events.

I wouldn't be in favor of removing them.

The Rome 1 events were nowhere near the ones we have now in Rome 2. You are confusing the political events with the general ones.
My issue here isn't with events like "Trader", "White Stag" etc - it's purely with the silly assassinate this, blackmail that. How does this add anything to the dimension of the game? It's not like they present a backstory or anything, it's just another layer of monotomy. At least the general events have a small story that can immerse the player to what their choice might be.

[Ivan_Moscavich]

You had events where a general could be married to an opposing family's daughter in Rome 1. That one I remember.
Though I don't remember what effect it had besides giving that general a wife. It may have influenced something in the senate.

[broodwarjc]

You had events where a general could be married to an opposing family's daughter in Rome 1. That one I remember.
Though I don't remember what effect it had besides giving that general a wife. It may have influenced something in the senate.

You got money for marrying certain members, but NO penalties for not accepting. This game RAPES your treasury if you do marry and you lose a lot of faction bonuses if you don't. The political events in Rome 1 were simply there to give you more money, this ones in this game either give you mediocre bonuses(+5% trade bonus for 4 turns) or huge negatives(-4 happiness for 6 turns in every province).

[Kassandros]

You got money for marrying certain members, but NO penalties for not accepting. This game RAPES your treasury if you do marry and you lose a lot of faction bonuses if you don't. The political events in Rome 1 were simply there to give you more money, this ones in this game either give you mediocre bonuses(+5% trade bonus for 4 turns) or huge negatives(-4 happiness for 6 turns in every province).

The game sexually forces itself on my treasury? Wtf?

[zonks40]

This game RAPES your treasury if you do marry and you lose a lot of faction bonuses if you don't.

I think it's very realistic, any guy who is married knows that the treasury gets raped

[Ivan_Moscavich]

The game sexually forces itself on my treasury? Wtf?

Some people have an unnatural lust for money.

I think it's very realistic, any guy who is married knows that the treasury gets raped

So I guess we can file this under historical accuracy.

[Dresden]

We will be addressing the political system most likely in 1.15 or 1.2. Some of these may be looked at or changed, but a lot of the system is just the way it is.

[Linke]

Imagine of your taxes went to the king bribing(?) nobles to not adopt his son, when he as the king could easily prevent that. Does it make any logical sense?

[Ivan_Moscavich]

Imagine of your taxes went to the king bribing(?) nobles to not adopt his son, when he as the king could easily prevent that. Does it make any logical sense?

Actually yes.

In an unstable government, a group of ambitious nobles could easily attempt to win the current leader's son to their side.

In that situation, the leader would bribe those nobles to stay in line. There are plenty of historical examples of weak leaders paying the court to keep things stable.

Adoption is a rough way to short hand any way someone is won over to a different side. It isn't necessarily adoption in the sense of making someone your child when they were previously someone else's child.

[Ygraine]

Actually yes.

In an unstable government, a group of ambitious nobles could easily attempt to win the current leader's son to their side.

In that situation, the leader would bribe those nobles to stay in line. There are plenty of historical examples of weak leaders paying the court to keep things stable.

Adoption is a rough way to short hand any way someone is won over to a different side. It isn't necessarily adoption in the sense of making someone your child when they were previously someone else's child.

There are also hundreds of examples where leaders exiled/killed rival noble families and political enemies. In Rome 2 you can't exterminate the enemy political factions any more (since the stupid update that made civil wars infinite) - so there goes "historical authenticity" out of the window.
If the current stuff cannot be changed in the code, I rather see it removed completely due to to the gaping hole it creates for immersion.

[Ivan_Moscavich]

There are also just as many examples of children or heirs turning on their parents to gain the throne more quickly.

And I still disagree that it is a bad thing, and to me it is certainly not immersion breaking.

Politics in the past was just as stupid and messy as today, it just happened to also involve more bloodshed as well.

I feel like this is the kind of thing that a submod would be fitting if a few people are this upset about it.

Personally I'd rather not dumb down the campaign side of things even further by removing political events.

[Ygraine]

There are also just as many examples of children or heirs turning on their parents to gain the throne more quickly.

And I still disagree that it is a bad thing, and to me it is certainly not immersion breaking.

Politics in the past was just as stupid and messy as today, it just happened to also involve more bloodshed as well.

I feel like this is the kind of thing that a submod would be fitting if a few people are this upset about it.

Personally I'd rather not dumb down the campaign side of things even further by removing political events.

Those heirs usually created their own political parties, or used the opposite one until their goals were met and then had them exiled/killed so they wouldn't threaten their rule. None of these things are possible (from what I understand) to mod in the game right now.

For me it's very immersion-breaking! I just sigh every time I get a pop-up like that. I guess we can agree to disagree. You know this being a matter of opinion and the subjectiveness of the topic.

[Kassandros]

There's no such thing as 100% political uniformity. There's always some sort of (at least) clandestine opposition. I like the way it works.

[broodwarjc]

What really irks me about it is the insane amount of money requested and how it comes the hell out of nowhere. Same with assassination attempts that never succeed, but always wound for several turns. No warning just...End Turn...BAM...No Money, No General.