Can't play republics?

[italianeddie65]

I love the game but am a bit bummed I can't play as Venice. I think it's way underrepresented in the game as far as territories and influence. I understand part of this is because there is no naval combat and that was Venice's strong point.
There are elections in other factions, it's too bad they couldn't have figured out a way to make Venice playable.

[Central]

in ck2 republics where added with dlc, i have a feeling they will do the same for ck3, just give it some time.

[Abacus]

I have a feeling one of the small DLC will be a "Governments" type thing.

Probably as with religion and soon culture (and of course Lodges ala. Holy Fury.) The approach will be this piecemeal of various concepts you can tweak, just with an overall main feature (Feudal, Republic, trade federation., theocracy.)

Interestingly, Imperative has a pretty nice Government system, notably what CKIII could use. Is deeper Tribal type governments. IE: Federated, migratory, settled, nomadic, etc.) This could make remaining tribal more appealing. A nomadic tribe could have a built in horde feature. Settled tribes could be the fast track to the nest step in organization allowing you a path to Feudalism/Republic/Etc.

Sub-Type mechanics would expand the existing types. Like an Oligarchy, where instead of powerful people in your realm, you can grant dynasties in. Allowing buffs, and extended interations. IE: It could be hard to have a hook on a member within the Oligarchy. However, members must assist in wars or be thrown out. Making a more centralized dynamic.

EUIV is testing of government stuff with it's next DLC. So Hopefully we see something like the Republics DLC.

[madracc00n]

Paradox games.U have to pay money to play them later or mb there is a mod for them.

[CrUsHeR]

Merchant Republics in CK2 were pretty fun.

Trade posts/zones were a good diversion in gameplay, also the Doge was an office were you couldn't lose titles from succession. And the trade zones had a huge effect on the local economy.

Problem was the government form, this basically forced you to do nothing else than murder plots against the rivaling patrician families.
Also the MR could expand territorially like any regular realm, which totally broke the balance with player-ruled MRs spanning half the game world.

So if they want to bring MRs back, they need to find completely new solutions for these problems.

[TheLoneWanderer]

There is a mod that allows you to play as republics.

[Licarious Fenrir]

If you really want republic then here you go
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2478356664

[The Former]

If they're coming (officially), definitely as DLC, that was always going to be the case. Simply because there were rather few republics during this period, and it's not the core focus of the game's identity. It was always going to be a game of feudalism first.

Res Publica does look like a really solid mod, though.

[Abacus]

Originally posted by Lockfågel, the Paradox Knight:

If they're coming (officially), definitely as DLC, that was always going to be the case. Simply because there were rather few republics during this period, and it's not the core focus of the game's identity. It was always going to be a game of feudalism first.

Res Publica does look like a really solid mod, though.

Well, I actually think it's more then just Republics.

I feel a "Governments" DLC may be the approach. So they can stuff Theocracy and extensions on tribes (there are many new concepts they will take from Imporator.)

The biggest factor hinting as to why the DLC would be a overarching government/rulership. Is that they really like the module concept they started with religion creation.

Now we are getting it for cultures with Royal Court (the full modulation on an existing feature), so next is?

Societies from Holy Fury with the ability to make endless possibilities................

Well, maybe after the Governments DLC, which will fully modulate the systems of governing.

[The Former]

Systems of government didn't start getting really complex until later on, but I would absolutely accept such a DLC alongside, say, an extension into the 16th century. It's drifting away from the classic Crusader Kings timeframe, but there's enough monarchy overlap that I'd love to see where such a DLC went.

[Abacus]

Originally posted by Lockfågel, the Paradox Knight:

Systems of government didn't start getting really complex until later on, but I would absolutely accept such a DLC alongside, say, an extension into the 16th century. It's drifting away from the classic Crusader Kings timeframe, but there's enough monarchy overlap that I'd love to see where such a DLC went.

Democracy and republics had existed since ancient times far before this time frame. So it's not to say complex law didn't exist per se (It certainly protected the noble class.), rather society in most nations around the known globe maintained an iron grip on what governments where even allowed to be formed in many instances.

We can get theocracies, and like Knightly orders (Ie. Livonia, which was like a Oligarchy of houses.),

what we need is an extension on tribes ala Imporator.

Like a tribal federation (Just a bunch of "Counts", with a single "Duke" as Head tribe.) You would get a lot of control and dynamics in who has power, and more control on how a civil war partitions (feudal lords were protected by more organized religions that allowed universal doctrines spanning their known world. Ie: A Catholic would have to go to the middle east to escape that dynamic.)

A Settled Tribe would be a single united tribe, but several houses. The houses would have potential to be the head house (ruler). Thus it would create a dynamic of not just keeping control by managing holdings, power, and friendships. You could also cut out the annoyance of civil wars.

Then of course add a real nomadic identity. Looking at Attila Total war, and how the pawn is depicted and its buildings accessed Similarly. While also depicting the idea that mass populations exist around this main feature. Horde could also have an attraction mechanic (Imporator) that increase a unique levy system attributed to hordes.

[The Former]

Originally posted by B:

Originally posted by Lockfågel, the Paradox Knight:

Systems of government didn't start getting really complex until later on, but I would absolutely accept such a DLC alongside, say, an extension into the 16th century. It's drifting away from the classic Crusader Kings timeframe, but there's enough monarchy overlap that I'd love to see where such a DLC went.

Democracy and republics had existed since ancient times far before this time frame. So it's not to say complex law didn't exist per se (It certainly protected the noble class.), rather society in most nations around the known globe maintained an iron grip on what governments where even allowed to be formed in many instances.

This is true, but the level of bureaucracy in them was nothing compared to a modern democracy. When discussing government types, there were really only a handful of broad systems at that time.

Either you were feudal, you were autocratic, you were tribal, or you were democratic. There were small variations within those from place to place, but at their heart, most of them functioned the same way. It wasn't until the 16th century or so that countries really started defining civic identities within their blanket sphere.

[Viktor Von Groyper]

Yet another basic feature missing. So sick of them dribbling out basic content from nearly a decade ago

[The Mind Castle]

Originally posted by Lockfågel, the Paradox Knight:

Originally posted by B:

Democracy and republics had existed since ancient times far before this time frame. So it's not to say complex law didn't exist per se (It certainly protected the noble class.), rather society in most nations around the known globe maintained an iron grip on what governments where even allowed to be formed in many instances.

This is true, but the level of bureaucracy in them was nothing compared to a modern democracy. When discussing government types, there were really only a handful of broad systems at that time.

Either you were feudal, you were autocratic, you were tribal, or you were democratic. There were small variations within those from place to place, but at their heart, most of them functioned the same way. It wasn't until the 16th century or so that countries really started defining civic identities within their blanket sphere.

The roman republic had a killer bureaucracy, which the later empire inherited. Unless by bureaucracy you just mean the amount of paperwork, in which case you'd be mostly correct.

[Oubley]

Originally posted by Lockfågel, the Paradox Knight:

Originally posted by B:

Democracy and republics had existed since ancient times far before this time frame. So it's not to say complex law didn't exist per se (It certainly protected the noble class.), rather society in most nations around the known globe maintained an iron grip on what governments where even allowed to be formed in many instances.

This is true, but the level of bureaucracy in them was nothing compared to a modern democracy. When discussing government types, there were really only a handful of broad systems at that time.

Either you were feudal, you were autocratic, you were tribal, or you were democratic. There were small variations within those from place to place, but at their heart, most of them functioned the same way. It wasn't until the 16th century or so that countries really started defining civic identities within their blanket sphere.

? which democracy are you referring to the USA is a Republic lol

[Abacus]

Originally posted by Oubley:

Originally posted by Lockfågel, the Paradox Knight:

This is true, but the level of bureaucracy in them was nothing compared to a modern democracy. When discussing government types, there were really only a handful of broad systems at that time.

Either you were feudal, you were autocratic, you were tribal, or you were democratic. There were small variations within those from place to place, but at their heart, most of them functioned the same way. It wasn't until the 16th century or so that countries really started defining civic identities within their blanket sphere.

? which democracy are you referring to the USA is a Republic lol

They can be the same thing, as they are two separate concepts. The USA is supposed to be a Democratic Republic (it's more an Oligarchy. Or at least headed by a modern aristocracy.)

I would also disagree with the earlier mentioned take on governments. The middle ages are a thing, the dark ages are a thing. Also when we speak of perspective we are only denoting a portion of the world.

Remember, Things like complex baking are lost at this point....not haven't been, lost. I don't want to accidentally insult anyone. However, It's called Crusader Kings (ya' know for Christianity.)

That should give an indication as to why ignorance supplied by theocratic doctrine literally "tarded" civilization.....and disease. I actually would consider both on the same plane of detriment tbh.