With the forthcoming upgrades to Governor, we are still looking for more King upgrades to ensure that the King role remain the most important, even mechanic-wise.

1)Governor Appointment
This is the first upgrade we thought of. Details can be found here

2)Kings issue the Letter of the Marque
While this is still an idea under discussion, we could replace the issuing criteria by the King's will. We could additionally require a rule of at least 3 days old before a king starts issuing such letters.

3)Diplomacy Related Ideas
We could upgrade the King role in diplomacy. Still, it receives a de facto upgrade thanks to his Veto ability. But we could add more. Any such ideas are welcome.

How do you feel about these suggestions? I am especially interested for the view of current Kings. Would you even think to desert your current position for a Governor position once Plantations comes? Are the proposed upgrades enough to keep such thoughts away?

I like the appointment of Governors, but I think that all Governor's should be appointed. Influence should have no affect. Failure to appoint would result in no Governor at the port, and the rolls and responsibilites delegated to the Governor would be unfilled and unused.

King gets 10% profit from all plantations owned by his nation that goes directly in his influence... this way King will surely help governors since that way he gets free influence, King need to sign papers for plantations.... King can thriw party every 7 days he needs to spend some of his gold coins and small part goes from nation treasury as a result of the party is X ammount of fame risen up (for those seeking fame)

For me CJ, it is hard to put this fully into perspective as we don't yet know what kind of "Income" the Governor will be making off of Plantations. Having said that, the King of any nation is carrying the largest load as far as influence and therefore takes the biggest hit in regards to influence drop daily (game %, conspiracies). Would it be fair to give some sort of % of plantations to the king (not the nation treasury) but straight to kings pocket? Or what if, if you are King you only lose .5% of influence a day and not the 1%...

I love the fact that you have put in that Governors can "hide" income from Plantation. Many of them did back in that time period. They just prayed the King would not find out...

DezNutz wrote:I like the appointment of Governors, but I think that all Governor's should be appointed. Influence should have no affect. Failure to appoint would result in no Governor at the port, and the rolls and responsibilites delegated to the Governor would be unfilled and unused.

So you could technically have a Governor that has zero influence, but since they were appointed by the king they get extra perks? That seems like it could have a negative effect. I agree that the Governor should be appointed and what port. But there should be some minimums involved. Right?

I would suggest for functionality - king assigns preference up 21

Should governor positions become available they would be filled or removed based upon the kings preference rating.
so #1 gets first seat, # 21 gets last seat. The higher the number the first to loose the seat if a port is lost.

Governors still select their port preference but that is now based on the kings bias instead of influence.

I would suggest a vacant seat or a seat filled with an inactive player should result in some sort of port stability issues.
suggestions vacant seat = NPC conspiracy and NPC Black Death
inactive seat = port goes vacant after 30 days of inactivity

vacant port - means previously controlling nation losses all claim to the port for 14 days. Their influence remains but does not affect the port for 14 days. The port is under rebellion control and will fly non nation flag of some sort for 7 days. The nation with the highest influence in that port at reset at the end of 7 days will claim the port. The previous owner will not have an opportunity to retake the port for another 7 days.

Governor should be appointed from the Council only : so already a basic level of influence has been achieved whilst ranking : in natiosn with more marquesses than duke slots, influence is key to a council slot. So, influence will tend to always matter.

William one eye wrote:
{b]vacant port[/b] - means previously controlling nation losses all claim to the port for 14 days. Their influence remains but does not affect the port for 14 days. The port is under rebellion control and will fly non nation flag of some sort for 7 days. The nation with the highest influence in that port at reset at the end of 7 days will claim the port. The previous owner will not have an opportunity to retake the port for another 7 days.

This would effectively wipe out port ownership for most small nations whose main strength is their King, who, of course, cant be a governor.

kings who choose governors who were willing to support the nation and place influence,
rather than choosing the person who they like the best will probably be more successful,
and influence will still be important in nations.

However this will essentially remove treasury raids as a possibility, unless you are very clever and
plan very far ahead.

Danik wrote:

William one eye wrote:
{b]vacant port[/b] - means previously controlling nation losses all claim to the port for 14 days. Their influence remains but does not affect the port for 14 days. The port is under rebellion control and will fly non nation flag of some sort for 7 days. The nation with the highest influence in that port at reset at the end of 7 days will claim the port. The previous owner will not have an opportunity to retake the port for another 7 days.

This would effectively wipe out port ownership for most small nations whose main strength is their King, who, of course, cant be a governor.

One player cannot sustain a port on their own, if the nation cannot manage to get 1 king and 1 governor, they should probably not be trying to control a port.