Rework the Republic Government type

[Bronnen]

I know this was brought up awhile ago and I think people decided it was way too much work to do it properly, but what about simply allowing for a vote that would kick someone out of a position?

[Wimpie]

If you would mean, kick out of a government position, then you can use the protest options.

For other positions, there is no option yet, although knights got the 'protest options' button whenever their estate was reduced or anything. So it was definately intended they could protest their lord, or lord their duke and so on.. There was talk about implementing a broader protest functionality in the entire feudal hierarchy but until now it hasn't been implemented.

[Bronnen]

I was more thinking of any position. Lord, duke, council, ambassador etc

[Victor C]

If you would mean, kick out of a government position, then you can use the protest options.

For other positions, there is no option yet, although knights got the 'protest options' button whenever their estate was reduced or anything. So it was definately intended they could protest their lord, or lord their duke and so on.. There was talk about implementing a broader protest functionality in the entire feudal hierarchy but until now it hasn't been implemented.

My god, please... This would be amazing. I have been fighting a ROYAL duke for the past 2 weeks... There's LITERALLY nothing we can do, specially not exilement because the ruler barely has enough honour and prestige to BE a ruler.

[Vita`]

Royals *should* be an issue. I don't foresee a mechanic being created to weaken that royal protection.

As far as dukes, it is intended that dukes be protested out. But it has not been implemented.

I do not think we will see any title able to be subjected to a popularity contest within their realm. It is intended that there be a balance of powers between different positions to encourage both cooperation amongst teammates and provide opportunities for conflict. Because both are important in BM, cooperation and conflict, and both make a poor game in overabundance.

[Zakilevo]

That doesn't mean royal dukes should be invincible. The only way to deal with them is exile but exile as a feature is garbage and achieves hardly anything meaningful. I haven't seen a ruler managing to beat a royal duke through exile yet.

[Vita`]

No royal dukes should not be invincible. But that is because dukes are too powerful, so when combined with royalty, its a very difficult position to deal with. We already have a solution (duchies protesting their duke), but there is limited volunteer effort to enact it. Deciding we need to come up with a new solution because the approved solution has yet to be created will not result in a sudden volunteer effort to enact the new solution where the old solution was not enacted.

[Zakilevo]

I wonder how many dukes will be able to retain their positions. Let's hope 1 or 2 people disagreeing with their duke won't remove the person.

It feels like BM is becoming less feudal and more democratic

[Anaris]

I wonder how many dukes will be able to retain their positions. Let's hope 1 or 2 people disagreeing with their duke won't remove the person.

It feels like BM is becoming less feudal and more democratic

BM has never been truly feudal. After all, you get to pick your kings, and protest all the government types.

Becoming "more democratic" is really all in service of being more of a fun game, and less of a medieval simulator.

[Vita`]

I wonder how many dukes will be able to retain their positions. Let's hope 1 or 2 people disagreeing with their duke won't remove the person.

Not unless the duchy is that small. Like realms, it should be proportional.

[Constantine]

I'm not entirely sure making all positions vulnerable to be protested out is a good idea. We'll just end up with all important positions being monopolized by cliques.

[Anaris]

I'm not entirely sure making all positions vulnerable to be protested out is a good idea. We'll just end up with all important positions being monopolized by cliques.

I don't see how that follows.

If people could counter-protest to protect their friends, then yes, that would make sense, but if a clique takes control of a realm, and it's large enough that the rest of the realm can't protest them out or rebel...then they own that realm fair and square. (Or as fair and square as such things ever are.)

[Vita`]

Nor are all positions being made vulnerable to protesting. Dukes and lords are technically 'approved', but I would not encourage lord protests being enabled with the current small playerbase. So that would be government council members and dukes protestable, no one else. Dukes have, for a long time, had a lot of power with few checks and, for a long time, it has been desired that there be more balanced checks on them.

[Bronnen]

Instead of it being a current duchy, would it be possible to make it so anyone in the realm can protest dukes? After all, if the issue is with one duke with only a few knights who support him in his duchy, making it so only the duchy can protest really does nothing.

[Bronnen]

I also agree that ROyals and DUkes should be strong, but why in a Republic, does the royal thing even apply? It's a republic, not a monarchy.