How bribes ought to work.

Bribes seem too easy to me, especially with rebels. I used to just resist doing them, figuring it was too unfair. But lately I've been trying some house rules to spice things up:

1. The leader of the rebel army always gets the provincial title. It only makes sense that the guy I had to bribe ought to get the title. Even if he has horrible stats, he's the leader.

2. I can replace him only by assassination or inquisition -- no wimpy stripping him of his titles. If he's a problem, I have to kill him to get rid of him. Strikes me as more medieval.

Otherwise, it's just too easy to bribe a rebel army, pick out the best leader in the deck and shuffle the old guy back into the middle of the stack. It's still too easy to bribe, but this way at least there are some more potential consequences.

Great ideas

Loyalty should also be effected if the Leader is "done away with" before his time.

I do the same as you, except sometimes I'll move the "Leader" to another province and give him title there.

It s/b be more difficult to maintain the loyalty of a bribed rebel "leader" if you start having setbacks.

Personaly I have no problem with bribes the way they are...

I rationalise it like this..

The rebel faction and the general represent the guys in control of the Independent state..

When you bribe them you are buying That general and his soldiers loyalty, it's basically a sponsored invasion... Once they become member of your army you can treat them as any other subject.

Ideally there should be a whole raft of nobles, titles and relationships, but that only covered in a very abstract way in the game and the present system seems ok...

u cand disband the rebel leader's unit and bring ur own leader or even ur army; is not necessary to give to the rebel leader the dignity from that province;
sometimes when he's a good general u can send him in the other part of ur kingdom;is not necessary to assasinate him

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] (Vlad The Impaler @ Nov. 11 2002,17:03)]u cand disband the rebel leader's unit and bring ur own leader or even ur army; is not necessary to give to the rebel leader the dignity from that province;
sometimes when he's a good general u can send him in the other part of ur kingdom;is not necessary to assasinate him

---

I know you don't have to assassinate the old leader -- that's my point: it's too easy to just bribe a leader then just bury him in a stack commanded by a new leader. That strikes me as being very unrealistic, besides being too easy.

In reality, the King couldn't simply "fire" a duke, baron or other noble and take his troops. The feudal loyalty of the fighting man was, first, to his lord, not to the King. If you wanted the men belonging to the Duke of Whatever, you had to take the Duke too, warts and all. Or think of some devious way to get rid of him. You couldn't just demote him; he's a fellow noble and the troops are his.

My way, you have to deal with that relationship.

Thats an interesting suggestion. But I personally feel that the Bribes are too expensive.