Mariah wrote:

QUOTE:
Borna

QUOTE:
By my opinion, chancellors should have protectors too since they were after the King most important figures of any country....

That`s not good, cause a King can make chanellors as often as he wants and at any time

Its realistic and logical, beside I think country can only have 5 chancellors

Protectors for chancellors not for free, linking with a building maybe. Small nations don't have more than one chancellor, possibly none.
We appoint chancellors because they are good experienced players, being able to help the king. It is normal that such players to have a protector. Maybe 1 chancellor with protector for free for all the nations (like WM)?

Let`s just make protectors cost silver (let`s say 5 silvers/every protector/day) - silver taken from the player own pocket - and only with one rule => one can`t change more than once at every 1 or even 3 RL months the number of his protectors.

From that moment anyone would be able to have a max number of protectors (for example the king - max 5, the chancellors - max 4, the counts - max 3, a warrior - max 2. Is just an example, the numbers and costs should be discussed more)

I disagree with direct payment, having a building give a strategic value to the shire and make the game more interesting.

About a protector with better parameters or second protector for extended militia I would say that is better to have a protector with better parameters.
Having too many protectors will slow down the battles, making unnecessary longer and knights actions in battle (like lance hits) less important.

I don't think it's too difficult to implement a building in the castle, like Chancellery, giving a protector to one or two chancellors.

I agree that should be some way for chancellors to get protector.

often we got idea that just before battle if it is possible king strip away chancellor position for me etc. and give me shire to make strenght of us usefull,it is silly that chancellors dont have protector and count have.

Marcus de Wolfe wrote:

QUOTE:
...
We appoint chancellors because they are good experienced players, being able to help the king. It is normal that such players to have a protector. Maybe 1 chancellor with protector for free for all the nations (like WM)?

The hard choice between making an experienced player a Chancellor (without a protector, nor the possibility to get one) and making him/her a Count (with a protector or at least the possibility to have one) is one of the key choices in RH/KH etc. It is somewhat like the differences between Knights, Bishops and Rooks in Chess. An experienced player would know this.

James wrote:

QUOTE:
I disagree with direct payment, having a building give a strategic value to the shire and make the game more interesting.

...

The is simply the difference between capital and operational expenditure. It's an important distinction for the taxation office, and one of the key concerns of accountants. Can you explain why you think it is important here.

James wrote:

QUOTE:
I disagree with direct payment, having a building give a strategic value to the shire and make the game more interesting.

About a protector with better parameters or second protector for extended militia I would say that is better to have a protector with better parameters.
Having too many protectors will slow down the battles, making unnecessary longer and knights actions in battle (like lance hits) less important.

I don't think it's too difficult to implement a building in the castle, like Chancellery, giving a protector to one or two chancellors.

I understand your statement but I think that too much strategic value of the shires is an obstacle to starting wars, even now is hard to defend your provinces and same time to attack another nation. It is already not-economical to have a military-developped province .... I agree about buildings, but how about this - the building should be in the warrior village, not in the province ???
For example let`s say we have an option to build in our villages huts, every hut should allow the owner a protector. One could build as many huts as he want but every hut should cost much more than the precedent (at least in wood and stone) Let`s do the costs in such a way that almost no one could afford more than 5 protectors .... Also every protector should cost the owner some silver/day (or the nation some silver/day but the warrior should also pay something ... 1 wood + 1 stone/day for every protector ?? ) - exactly as it was in real life, the rich nobles were able to hire and send to war more warriors than the poor ones. The important thing is to not allow the change of protector number overnight (but in my opinion by building those huts, each more costly than the previous, we solve this problem)
Also I think that in real battles there were not-so-many full-armored knights, I think the most part of every army consisted in light-armored warriors. Yep, I agree that the lance would be not-so-efficient anymore .... but I think it would be much more realistic. The real knights would still be the heroes of the battles - as long as protectors will not change their values too much

James wrote:

QUOTE:
I don't think it's too difficult to implement a building in the castle, like Chancellery, giving a protector to one or two chancellors.

This is the only good suggestion I've seen out of all the posts. If you are to give Protectors to the Chancellors than you might as well pay for it.

But it's not enough. There has to be another, more costly limiting factor, otherwise we're all going to name Chancellors over and over again. And kingdoms with high incomes could surely name many Chancellors.

To add some flavor to the game, some new titles could be included. Instead of just having three or more chancellors, something like this.

Each title can only be given to 1 knight.

Having specific titles may help increase role-playing or for diplomacy. For example a king's champion might have a duel / show-fight to resolve a matter of honor with another kingdom's champion. With 2 protectors the king's champion title would obviously be given to the strongest knight in the kingdom (prestige, respect etc)

The above table is an example. The titles, building requirements, costs and benefits can be changed to ensure balance.

At the moment you can have 3 chancellors for no cost then you pay for extra. You could replace foreign minister title with chancellor title (1 protector), war minister with marshal (1 protector).