This game is already plagued by title hoarders. How many times do you see the signature block "Sir Guy, King of X, General of X, Duke of XX, Count of XXX, Marshal of the Flying Freaking XXXXs"?
If we allowed multiple holdings, you would have realms where one person holds 100% of any available power. I guarantee it.
Wasn't supporting the idea of letting people hold multiple titles. Was explaining one of the problems why dumping was happening. I don't believe people having multiple holdings will be that big of a problem to be honest. If that does happen, you can simply implement that efficiency thing that wasn't implemented with the estate system. That would be enough to control anyone who is trying to own the entire realm. Also, if someone does hold too many titles, people won't just let him hold all of them either. The problem would definitely be the length of your title for sure but that could also be fixed by implementing 'primary title' where you decide one title you wish to be addressed by.
Unless you rule a rich region, people don't have much love for their regions. Any regions outside of city+stronghold+townsland are not that popular. There are of course few exceptions but they are just that, exceptions.
Merge Realms: Unfortunately for us, the game is too small. Like Anaris mentioned, if a realm is too tiny to operate, then yeah they should be allowed to merge into a bigger realm. Even if you are a king, if nobody wants to fight then you are out of luck. You will be the only one fighting and you might be able to hold off for months since the game system is broken and flawed. But in real life, you wouldn't be doing that since you can't recruit endless militias so let's not bring up how you'd act if you were a real medieval king.
Lordship: If I were a baron, then of course I'd give up my region to become a count. If I were offered to be a baron of another dirt poor region, it wouldn't incentivize me enough to move. That isn't what happened in Ikalak. Got an opportunity to move into a stronghold but I worded it wrong and !@#$ just hit the fan. Should probably have said im getting promoted so peace the f out. Like I've explained above, there isn't that many incentives to stop people moving when they are offered a better region. Also, the argument so far has only been it breaks immersion. What immersion? When the game doesn't even have the same system as the actual real medieval era? Not even remotely close to it.
Moving Capital: I don't really see that big of a problem when people want to move their capital away from the front line. If they moved their capital before the war started, I think that is fine. If they did it during the war then probably a big no no. Why is it okay before the war? Because some countries actually moved their capital toward the direction they hoped to expand historically. Of course they didn't put their capital nearby a battlefield but if they wished to expand south, they moved their capital closer to south. There are of course examples where countries moved their capital away but that happened mostly when the battlefield got too near the capital.
Capital Centric: Wish the game would only allow you to recruit from your capital when you only own one city. Otherwise, recruits go to the nearest city or stronghold instead so you actually have to travel to different places to grab the best unit of that region. Giving people some incentives to travel rather than sit in the capital when they have nothing to do.
