|
B!
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 21:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 00:36 |
|
|
B is the only real answer! Feuding Feudal Lords Lording it up in the House of Lords.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 21:51
|
|
|
I vote B!
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 21:53
|
|
|
A to make life as interesting as possible for the Hanseatic League during our remaining time in CK2.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 22:01
|
|
|
B. Because honestly I think it might be the only way the Republic of France survives to EU4.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 22:05
|
|
|
B sounds like it will be the most stable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 22:45
|
|
|
Throwing in another vote for B.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 23:00
|
|
|
Bobbin Threadbare posted:B sounds like the only solution the French nobility would accept without revolting en masse. If you think you are going to avoid revolts in CK2, you might be in for a surprise  A because that sounds like the most fun.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 23:17
|
|
|
B! Stability and mercantilism, best we can do in the circumstances.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 23:24
|
|
|
B Why make a friend competition?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 23:27
|
|
|
The FrAnsa!
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 23:28
|
|
|
C
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 23:35
|
|
|
meatbag posted:If you think you are going to avoid revolts in CK2, you might be in for a surprise Oh, I don't think the country will last that long regardless, but hey, one can dream. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 23:44
|
|
|
B seems like the most logical choice.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 23:44
|
|
|
meatbag posted:If you think you are going to avoid revolts in CK2, you might be in for a surprise Still, there's a difference between dealing with the occasional succession war and having every single vassal up in arms at once.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 23:48
|
|
|
C because it sounds like it will crash and burn the most spectacularly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 00:05
|
|
|
A. I don't want the competition from another merchant republic... But then, you're the on who will have to deal with it. They'll try and keep us out of France, and we can fight for control of the divded English/Aztec markets.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 00:08
|
|
|
B is the way.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 00:08
|
|
|
I don't really mind what we go for, but just in case we go for A, remember that a dynasty cannot control more than one merchant house, so Gotthard cannot found another Von Goon house in merchant france. So I would like to suggest that if France becomes a merchant republic, Gotthard and any children he may have should found a cadet branch of the Von Goons. Perhaps he might choose to build his new family manor out near the village of Escaudain, and name his cadet branch De Goon-Escadre.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 00:10
|
|
|
A! Absolutely A!
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 00:35
|
|
|
B may be sensible, but A is the Van Goon way.  I didn't expect this to come back after I asked. Sadly this kind of stuff probably couldn't happen in real life - medieval nobility (outside of Italy, perhaps) and burghers didn't intermarry as a rule. The kings certainly didn't marry merchants. Also seconding what Reveilled said.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 01:12
|
|
|
B! Hanseatic hegemony! No competition in the northern seas!
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 01:13
|
|
|
C
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 01:22
|
|
|
And supporting Reveilled's suggestion as well. Although I think that "de Goon" should be enough to differentiate the houses for the purposes of CK2. ...in fact, let's make that a new goal. Put as many variations of the name "of Goon" into power as possible across Europe. We shall have the von Goons, the van Goons, the de Goons, the O'Goons, the di Goons, and any other versions I didn't list yet, all claiming to be "totally different families, our names are in different languages and everything". The Sandman fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Nov 20, 2013 |
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 02:47
|
|
|
C
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 02:57
|
|
|
That would be an interesting one. I'll keep an eye open for opportunities in the 92 years of CK2 we have left, but no promises, as setting up heirs/claimants takes some time, specially if you are not gaming the system. You can see from how long it took until we placed Gotthard in France.Reveilled posted:I don't really mind what we go for, but just in case we go for A, remember that a dynasty cannot control more than one merchant house, so Gotthard cannot found another Von Goon house in merchant france. That is actually a good point, might be the reason why the Merchant Republic didn't stick originally.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 02:59
|
|
|
B
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 05:24
|
|
|
B
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 06:43
|
|
|
C
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 10:30
|
|
|
C We don't want to compete with the French
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 11:17
|
|
|
The Sandman posted:C. Mayors all the way down. Yes, but then people won't be able to complain about de Goon-Escadre being terrible griefers out to destroy everyone else's kingdoms and ruining Europe. Also, remember that if we do not pick A, the succession law will be Open Elective and every leader of France after Gotthard will be a randomly generated character. The only way to set up cadet branches of the Von Goons is to establish kingdoms or merchant republics. To repeat The French Von Goons will cease to exist on Gotthard's death if A does not win. [This is not a vote for A, just an informative thing] Reveilled fucked around with this message at 11:35 on Nov 20, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 11:25
|
|
|
I'm putting a vote down for B.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 11:47
|
|
|
A, competition is a necessity for capitalism to function in everyone's benefit. Plus come on, Merchant Republic France!
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 12:31
|
|
|
A so the von Goons continue to exist.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 12:45
|
|
|
The Sandman posted:...in fact, let's make that a new goal. Put as many variations of the name "of Goon" into power as possible across Europe. We shall have the von Goons, the van Goons, the de Goons, the O'Goons, the di Goons, and any other versions I didn't list yet, all claiming to be "totally different families, our names are in different languages and everything". How about the Swedish af Goon? Other than that I love the Russian Goonovich and the Spanish Goonzales.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 13:51
|
|
|
Luhood posted:How about the Swedish af Goon? Other than that I love the Russian Goonovich and the Spanish Goonzales. Surely the Swedish version should be Goonstavus?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 14:22
|
|
|
Vonting A!
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 14:34
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Surely the Swedish version should be Goonstavus? More likely it would be Goonstavsson.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 14:35
|
|
|
A. The family line must live on.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 18:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 00:36 |
|
|
It should obviously be A.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 18:53
|
|
