I like the idea of tying expansion to edicts again. If land is going to be so important. It would certainly encourage less anemic Senate sessions.
So if a province was taken in war an edict would be required to keep it, and yet another to give it to a specific player.
How far would we want to go in tying land to influence? I would say there should be some sort of cap, or diminishing returns. Would landed vassals count? Would the King's authority be tied to the size of his "demesne"?
I think it's pretty much certain we're keeping the rule/edict/etc. enforcement system from LotR.However, how would this mesh with edicts to keep land. If someone takes a settlement and decides to keep it against an edict (say, by squatting in it) would it be his for purposes of counting influence until the powers that be enforce the law?
Edit: Will add France when it comes time to poll for faction choices. They do have some advantages like being able to absorb a larger number of players early on. So far probably France, Spain, and England have the most room to "grow" without coming into conflict with the pope for attacking christian factions.
Bookmarks