Enemy of the Crown

[sXs]

+1

Being as they are an enemy of the crown, would there be a restriction to them reaching the council? It would seem that if they are an enemy of the crown that they wouldn't be allowed on the King's Council.

This is a good question. To take it one step further, how would someone deemed "an enemy of the crown" get that moniker removed? The one thing I like about PG is the balance. For every action or card there is a counter.

If you do not allow them to reach the council, what is to prevent a rogue king from declaring everyone an enemy of the crown? There needs to be a balance point. A mechanism should be added that would allow a counter.

[Hector Barbossa]

If they are unable to reach council how would they become a rogue king? You need to be atleast duke and hold the most influence to be crowned. I don't think a counter to a rogue king would be needed.

[Sebena]

Make rest council vote. Enemy of the crown is not allowed in council unless other council members approve it. Or make it that for someoone to be enemy of the criwn king need approvment of at least 1 duke that way both positions of dukes and king will be tempting

[sXs]

If they are unable to reach council how would they become a rogue king? You need to be atleast duke and hold the most influence to be crowned. I don't think a counter to a rogue king would be needed.

Someone who is not an enemy of the crown ascends to council with the influence needed to become king. Then goes rogue after.

Also, if you allow council or even just 1 Duke to vote on the enemy of the crown, you take away some of the reason for the update which is to make the king position a desirable and more powerful position. Right now there is no benefit to being king over any other council position. In fact, with the advent of the forthcoming plantation update, you could argue that Governor is the most desirable position. This was one of admins answers to this issue.

I do not have a suggestion here, just pointing out a scenario.

[Sir Thalius Hayle]

Being as they are an enemy of the crown, would there be a restriction to them reaching the council? It would seem that if they are an enemy of the crown that they wouldn't be allowed on the King's Council.

I think it is an interesting dynamic that they can still be allowed on the council should their influence merit it, even with EoC status.

Think about it- If they are declared an enemy of the crown, but other nation members have not hit that player enough to destroy the player's influence, perhaps it is because the other members of the nation do not approve of the "enemy of the crown status" enough to cause the player enough grief to prevent him reaching the council. If the king does declare someone EoC but that player still manages to garner enough support to not be taken out by his/her fellow nation members, or just flat out takes it and still triumphs, then kudos to them! Or perhaps the player manages to ascend the ranks to king despite the attacks of his fellow nation members. If so, they have earned the position, though I can't imagine them keeping it long term.

It should also be noted that a coupe should not be out of the question, should enough members of a nation decided to launch such a thing. EoC as it stands makes that much more difficult, but not impossible. EoC status preventing them from even reaching council would make such a thing unrealistically difficult. You could launch attacks on influence and get into a voodoo war, but that just gets messy with the biggest pockets ruling the day.

EoC status keeping them off the council would also, as Feniks pointed out, allow a rouge king to kick everyone he/she does not like off the council and keep them off until he/she is removed, allowing other council members the king approves of to take those positions whether their influence in the nation merits it or not. Requiring a Duke to approve sort of waters down the king's power unnecessarily, from my point of view. I'm sure there are ways to deal with all of that through voodoo and such, but EoC as it stands looks like it would play out great, in my humble opinion.

[Kangaroo]

One of the proposals CJ floated was that the king appointed the governors, I didn't read that as being for perpetuity so were that to be the mechanism he would simply remove the governor who became the EoC and replace him, ie appoint from the eligible dukes.

A rogue king is a thought I haven't explored properly, I don't intend to ever be one by design.

[Most Lee Harmless]

I think one of the issues that needs addressing is the speed at which a full ranking run : 'citizen to King' : can be carried out : it would become possible to be comfortably on your throne at 23.00 and deposed and declared 'enemy of the crown' at 00.15 by a player who wasnt even a citizen at 23.00 : if that then kicks you off the council, how does one then defend a throne?

[William one eye]

I think one of the issues that needs addressing is the speed at which a full ranking run : 'citizen to King' : can be carried out : it would become possible to be comfortably on your throne at 23.00 and deposed and declared 'enemy of the crown' at 00.15 by a player who wasnt even a citizen at 23.00 : if that then kicks you off the council, how does one then defend a throne?

Agree, with some practice, this is easily possible.
Either this will become the main method for over taking
A nation, or kings would need a protection. An easy fix would be to put a establishment period in place first.
A new king must prove abilty to rule by holding the throne for X number of days before beiing granted the right to declare EoTC

[DezNutz]

I think one of the issues that needs addressing is the speed at which a full ranking run : 'citizen to King' : can be carried out : it would become possible to be comfortably on your throne at 23.00 and deposed and declared 'enemy of the crown' at 00.15 by a player who wasnt even a citizen at 23.00 : if that then kicks you off the council, how does one then defend a throne?

Agree, with some practice, this is easily possible.
Either this will become the main method for over taking
A nation, or kings would need a protection. An easy fix would be to put a establishment period in place first.
A new king must prove abilty to rule by holding the throne for X number of days before beiing granted the right to declare EoTC

That doesn't really solve the problem. The problem that Danik points out is the ease at which Nation Missions can be completed and a King toppled. The only solution that I think works (and I've suggested it before) is almost exactly what you suggested, an establishment period, but not for the kings ability to declare EoTC. The establishment period would be for ranks/titles. A player would have to prove themselves loyal to the nation by being part of the nation for multiple days in order to achieve certain ranks. This eliminates the entire quick rise to power and toppling of the king and government.

[Captain Jack]

One of the requirements to have active EoC list is to be the Rightful King. Check the topic I just created. After all the Rightful King mechanic will be implemented before this one.

I do not see any issues here though. So this is now approved and ready to follow the development chain.