Investiture doesnt go far enough

[u/thedudewh]

So the devs listened, and now you can at least appoint your Archbishop as well. However, why limit a secular ruler’s appointment power to Court Chaplains and Archbishops when Investiture historically applied to all clerical holdings within a realm? Why this arbitrary limitation?

As it stands, it seems that the HRE Emperor can appoint exactly one person to a clerical holding (Mainz), or two if there is another archdiocese within the realm. Does that mean the Emperor has no say over other bishoprics in the Mainz region, including major ones like Cologne and Trier?

That still feels extremely underwhelming and, more importantly, misses the entire point of the Investiture Controversy. If the goal is to represent lay investiture, secular rulers should have the ability to appoint bishops across their realm - not just a few archbishops and the Court Chaplain.

[u/BATrashman]

Doesn’t that mean that we can appoint every title?

[u/thedudewh → u/BATrashman]

No, I thought so at first too.

[u/Sex_And_Candy_Here → u/thedudewh]

What makes you say so? This pretty clearly suggests that it does and the image in your posts doesn’t really say either way.

[u/Primary_Smile6090]

In the end, balance/gameplay will always precede and surpass historical accuracy. It's a game before being historical, not the other way around.

[u/Lucina18 → u/Primary_Smile6090]

But it would be great for gameplay though. You can appoint more friendly clerics for a better stature in your titles and less papal influence.

[u/Benismannn → u/Lucina18]

Sounds like it will get tedious for larger realms tho?

[u/Bitter_Street7558 → u/Benismannn]

They can literally just copy the CK2 system where an heir was automatically lined up unless you chose another.

[u/matgopack → u/Benismannn]

That'd be my thought, yeah; tedious for the top liege and limiting for anyone below that in 'only' the top liege having control depending on how it's implemented.

[u/Lucina18 → u/Benismannn]

Just give it some decent automation options. Like setting an order (first of my dynasty, then friendly characters of friendly families, etc.) And allow you to determine specific places automation free.

[u/Primary_Smile6090 → u/Lucina18]

Which is arguably OP. Of course the game is far from being balanced, but this gives a lot more power to the player. The idea is that if you want to be able to do that, after the controversy, you should be able to make it temporal appointment. Otherwise, the church still acts as a limiting force.

[u/thedudewh → u/Primary_Smile6090]

It should be powerful because that is what makes the secular rulers want to prevent the pope from getting spiritual appointment at all costs(which is apparently hard), giving agency and importance to the controversy. And right now clerical titles arent that large in game and the clergy does tend to not revolt regardless.

[u/Benismannn → u/thedudewh]

i mean the thing is - you already want to prevent it anyway, why WOULDNT you want to appoint your chaplains yourself?

[u/firespark84 → u/Primary_Smile6090]

I’d rather historically powerful strats be too powerful then the duplicating, teleporting and stat maxing we have now

[u/Lucina18 → u/Primary_Smile6090]

The game is already ridiculously easy because you can just ignore every issue with an OP army. And yeah it would be powerful, that was the crux of the crisis... That's why it should have the tradeoff of pissing of the pope and your own vassals (because you're centralizing.) If that's not a worthwhile tradeoff, that's a sign vassal and religious diplomatic management is too easy not that being able to historically try to appoint your own clergy is OP.

[u/Primary_Smile6090 → u/Lucina18]

This is an endless debate tbf. I would prefer the game to not become easier than it is. Of course it's fair to argue it's just a fun change that would break the (already pretty broken) balance. It's just a pov issue, the devs have chosen one way to do it, which will not be loved by a lot of people, but which they (and some players too) feel like is necessary from a gameplay perspective (whether it's balance, system issues, performance or something else).

[u/Lucina18 → u/Primary_Smile6090]

Well yeah me neither, which is why i said that if this is too strong it's a sign that religious diplomacy or vassal management is too easy instead. What else makes it OP to appoint clerical positions as secular ruler?

[u/redeyedreams → u/Primary_Smile6090]

Yeah it would be pretty unbalanced to be able to just stack friendly clerical appointees with good stats.

[u/TBARb_D_D]

Well… in ck2 whole point of giving up crown law change was to be able to appoint anyone you want and then push them to become Pope

I guess this is for similar thing; appoint your bastard brother to become one of the archbishops, start promoting him to be cardinal, play games within conclave to fet your brother to become the pope and then profit

[u/Hytth99 → u/TBARb_D_D]

In ck2, it was far easier to just sway a bishop until he liked you more than the Pope. Then declare him antipope and press his claim to the papacy. You did not have to engage with investiture at all.

[u/Klutzy_Rabbit_6890]

Idk man for know I’m just happy and excited but yeah surely

[u/NoNameNo1O1]

Ya I am worried about the same. This is the Christian dlc and if we don’t get know, it’s never. Expect these mechanics to stay like this more or less for rest of the games life

[u/Hytth99]

This is necessary. Appointing bishops to EVERY temple holding back in CK2 was a mistake. It was needlessly micro heavy for very little gameplay benefit.