![]() ![]() Playing Venice without trade, which Crusader Kings II does lack, seems rather odd and almost pointless to me. However the main problem would be the handful of republic that existed at this time were heavily focused on trading or were trading republics. ![]() Republics would play very differently, which to me is always a good thing. I imagine it would be pretty brutal at times with all the amount of intrigue. Playing as a wealthy land owner who has his tendrils in all political decissions and is able to change laws on a whim, able to easily vote in a puppet who will blindy follow his orders, fighting in the crusade to gain some favour, all while filling his own coffers would be the real goal. ![]() I guess it would be a little like the Imperial Politics, but the main goal wouldn't be taking the head postion. Sure it might give you a nice prestiage bonus but the real power would come in forming voting blocks, grooming puppets, enacting favourable laws and gaining more land for your dynasty. However as far as I think republics would function in the game, becoming an elective head of the republic wouldn't be the main focus. However I still think it could still work.Īs far as I know Noble Republics almost always voted in an elective of a handful of the most powerful families in the country. ![]() I wasn't thinking all that much when I wrote it. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |