View difference between Paste ID: VWZRmdVn and D3vuaX2G

- but i think that there should be imperial "circles" which did exist
+there should be imperial "circles" which did exist. the head of those circles would be the state appointed by the emperor in or out of the defined region as the President there but there's also a distinction between temporal and spiritual leaders, as well as some circles having different leaders. (So theocracies function with different circles and presidents than the others) they pretty much function like little empires with their own court positions and little reforms and effects that can be passed with member approval.  Actual reforms in the empire will cause the circle system to happen and further reforms after that will only be referred to circle leaders instead of every individual state.
- the head of those circles would be the state holding the elector seat in the region but there's also a distinction between temporal and spiritual leaders
+
- so like while the palatinate has jurisdiction in bavaria and the rhineland they only have say over the fiefs and not the bishoprics
+
- and members of the empire can request gold, approval of their monarch, permission to invade another from them
+ There should also be an imperial high court or something like that, it would have a jury led over by states appointed by the emperor and they pretty much vote which side it'll go to if there was a conflict over something like land or succession it would through this maybe before war. (If the reform that bans war in the empire is passed, it will do this by default.)
- and they'd also decide if an suit proposed is relevant or not
+ and then the emperor can approve the proposal, acting as an extra juror/judge.
- if its not relevant then they'd make an absolute decision on it
+ deals can still go through without emperor approval but that means that the losing side can fight to keep what they want (in the case after that reform it will keep going through courts and might end up resting on the circle leader's decision.
- if its not then the issue travels up to the imperial high court
+
- the imperial high court will have a jury led over by states appointed by the emperor
+
- and they pretty much vote which side it'll go to
+Also maybe if your ruler or heir has a high military skill, you can get a request from the emperor to have him in his service  which just means you can't use him as a general  and instead the emperor does for prestige on your side if the general is victorious. there should also be other offices that he will appoint, kind of like an extra set of advisors or the court in ck2.  It can get you high prestige to do this and you can occupy multiple positions at once.  Which means there can be a power rating in the empire defined on how many positions you control.  So even if you're an OPM like Nassau or Saxe-Lauenburg, you can technically be the most powerful because your ruler is the Marshal, Steward, and Chancellor as well as a member of the Imperial High Court and appointed
- and then the emperor can approve the proposal, acting as an extra juror/judge
+
- deals can still go through without emperor approval but that means that the losing side can fight to keep what they want
+ If the emperor annexes territory in a war within or even outside of the empire while he is emperor, he has an option to reduce aggressive expansion by releasing a conquered province and losing a general too by making him the ruler there in the province. (They'll have the March government form, which will also be given to places like Brandenburg) If they want to, they'll also grant it to the heir or ruler generals, which means either the state would inherit that or that the heir would then have it as a seperate territory and then have that place be annexed by the state after his father dies.
- does this make sense or is it stupid
+
 I hope this made sense??