Is Absolute Cognatic Primogeniture historically accurate?
- Thread starter Fistleaf
- Start date
InsidiousMage
Emperor
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2021
- Messages
- 1,165
From wiki on the topic....
So, no.
As for the preference for male heirs over women heirs, I'm don't know of any example of women inheriting when there was a male heir available but I'm not super knowledgeable about the subject. Hatsheput was originally a regent and Cleopatra was a co-ruler with her brother but then both seized power for themselves, which how most women gained power from my understanding. They started in a position of power near the ruler then become sole ruler.
So, no.
As for the preference for male heirs over women heirs, I'm don't know of any example of women inheriting when there was a male heir available but I'm not super knowledgeable about the subject. Hatsheput was originally a regent and Cleopatra was a co-ruler with her brother but then both seized power for themselves, which how most women gained power from my understanding. They started in a position of power near the ruler then become sole ruler.
Last edited:
InsidiousMage
Emperor
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2021
- Messages
- 1,165
That would probably be the most historically accurate but you could probably justify Agnatic Cognatic (females can inherit if there are no male heirs) for a couple of nations like Egypt and Ptolemaic Greece given their history of influential women and occasional female rulers. Cleopatra was co-ruler after all. Early Carthaginian history is mostly a big unknown so you could probably justify whatever choice you wanted but Agnatic is the safe choice for historical accuracy for all of the nations in the game.
King Jason
Fleece-bearer
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2005
- Messages
- 2,091
Why? I mean the option is there - but I'm curious why the need to be historically accurate in this particular area feels important.
It's not like Hattusili and Romulus ever went toe-to-toe; It's not a history sim. It's a videogame that uses history as a point of reference.
In a typical game, there seems to be lots of female leaders, probably 50%. In history, there were only a few known female leaders.
Even if not meant to be historically accurate, many of the game features are based on history. Technology, nations, leaders, geography, laws are based on history. If history is not important in this game, I might as well be playing a fantasy 4x game.
Even if not meant to be historically accurate, many of the game features are based on history. Technology, nations, leaders, geography, laws are based on history. If history is not important in this game, I might as well be playing a fantasy 4x game.
King Jason
Fleece-bearer
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2005
- Messages
- 2,091
Ah.
Well, Egyptians never founded Christianity or had an armada of Dromons landing battalions of blonde-bearded macemen on the shores of Assyria's atlantic coastline to wrest control of the Hagia Sophia from Asur, only to be beaten back by Assyrian cataphracts and windlass crossbows.
So, yes; you might as well be playing a fantasy game.
But I guess it's okay to roleplay a world where the Romans built every single historical wonder known to man - that's just fine.
Alexander the Great's Greece having it's place in history secured by a dynasty of his daughters? Oh no. No no no. That's just absurd.
Well, Egyptians never founded Christianity or had an armada of Dromons landing battalions of blonde-bearded macemen on the shores of Assyria's atlantic coastline to wrest control of the Hagia Sophia from Asur, only to be beaten back by Assyrian cataphracts and windlass crossbows.
So, yes; you might as well be playing a fantasy game.
But I guess it's okay to roleplay a world where the Romans built every single historical wonder known to man - that's just fine.
Alexander the Great's Greece having it's place in history secured by a dynasty of his daughters? Oh no. No no no. That's just absurd.
Forster
Prince
I was going to say every game is a fantasy game. We are not going to change history nor the future, we are playing games. I agree with King Jason. However, I do believe you can change the successiong laws to agree with your view as to how the world should be.
PhoenixMuse
Alchemist
I couldn't disagree more. The fantasy 4X games are my all-time favorites with Endless Legend at the top. The reason why I play any of the vanilla Civ games at all is because of their own unique game-play advantages. Old World offers many things I love (interesting events, unique mechanisms around workers, etc), and the best part about Old World for me is that the history never makes it up to tanks and other pesky real-world stuff which I detest.
Solver, is there a gameplay design reason for setting Absolute Cognatic as the default inheritance? Are heirs more likely to run out on other settings?
An unrelated question: why are Danes selected as a tribe instead of a German tribe (e.g. Saxon, Alemanni)?
An unrelated question: why are Danes selected as a tribe instead of a German tribe (e.g. Saxon, Alemanni)?
Pfeffersack
Deity
If you use the setting only allowing male (or female) children to inherit then yes, as those of the "wrong" gender are locked out - and you might end up with your currecnt ruler just not getting a child of the desired gender or the one(s) you got dying early. Giving one gender preference, but allowing the other to inherit too in case no one is available from the primary gender OTOH should not reduce your chance to get a heir.
Gameplay-wise absolute cognatic ensures more heirs because going full agnatic (only males inherit) would cut half the successors out. It's not only about your heirs actually taking the throne, it's also about them getting all the events related to studies, preparing for leadership, etc.
I think the other "issue" is that the game does not really support the traditional purpose of royal women, marrying them off to other civs for political advantage. While this can happen once in a while as an event, there is no way to trigger it like there is a marriage that brings someone into your court. With those mechanics in I think the Agnatic Succession becomes a lot more interesting, as now you have different levers to pull. without it, effectively that succession path is just increasing the difficulty as you are just cutting out mechanics that help you. Nothing wrong with playing that way of course.
Forster
Prince
I haven't tried it, but can't you use any family male to ask for a marriage?
