Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Legislative bodies

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Victoria 2 17560 After Action Reports (AAR)
lizardo

lizardo

Major
65 Badges
Feb 16, 2003
782
56
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Pride of Nations
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Surviving Mars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall Sign Up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Commander: Conquest of the Americas
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Ancient Space
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
It isn't necessary and it is needlessly complex to have bicamaral legislative bodies. A simple 'house' will do fine.

The main issues should be whether there is a 'written' constitution and if representation is proportionate or winner take all.

Voting blocks should have multiple issues so that not everything is lock step down a single set of issues.

Democracies should be very limited in how they can declare war. This is the major reason the US never never took over the two times it could. In the game sense moving a democratic nation to conquest would require the consent of the legislature, if that's part of the constitution.

A lot of governance issues should be set in the 'constitution', political issues should be set elsewhere. Immigration for example, constitutionally you could have full citizenship, but legislatively you could limit immigration.

The limitations for expansion should be intrinsic to the nature of political structure.

To use the US an example, it's probably the most efficient structure with federal system.
 
lizardo said:
To use the US an example, it's probably the most efficient structure with federal system.
Click to expand...


WIth a bicameral legislature, with the potential for each of the two houses to be controlled by separate political parties, and thus frustrate the attempt to find common legislative proposals that can be signed into law.

Read a bit into 19th C US internal political history, never mind the past fifty years. The reality in the US is that it was (and is) more common for the legislative process to either deadlock and then eventually find compromise that a majority will accept than to actually get a one-side supported piece of political legislation through the system.

What looks like efficiency from the outsider's viewpoint hides a lot of horse trading and sausage making political squabbling going on within the confines of the American legislative process. And it's been that way for most of the last two centuries.
 
I agree with your analysis but isn't it a bit much for Vicky?

There's a lot of stuff that needs coding, especially for the AI, isn't one legislature enough for now?

The legislative process adds a fair degree of complexity, and frustration, to the game play. That's desirable but it can go too far. As much as I want the realism hours of political deadlock doesn't make for good sustainable game play. :rofl:
 
I want the most realistic politic simulation possible for Victoria II, so bicameral legislature is important to me. I hope only that the game would have enought politicals systems to fit barely for all countries.

In USA and modern Germany, Senate represent States, in United Kingdom, it represent nobles (at least in XIX century), but I don't know very much for others countries. What for France or unified Germany, Austria-Hungary, Ottoman Empire, Russia, Spain?
 
OHgamer said:
WIth a bicameral legislature, with the potential for each of the two houses to be controlled by separate political parties, and thus frustrate the attempt to find common legislative proposals that can be signed into law.

Read a bit into 19th C US internal political history, never mind the past fifty years. The reality in the US is that it was (and is) more common for the legislative process to either deadlock and then eventually find compromise that a majority will accept than to actually get a one-side supported piece of political legislation through the system.

What looks like efficiency from the outsider's viewpoint hides a lot of horse trading and sausage making political squabbling going on within the confines of the American legislative process. And it's been that way for most of the last two centuries.
Click to expand...
The question is, how do you make political parties that a)accurately represent two different aspects of the political spectrum (in this case liberal vs conservative) and b)each political party having nearly 50% of the vote each. In vicky 1 since all craftsmen and clerks were liberals, the more you industrialised the more liberal you became, until you have 80% liberal polulace so the liberals win EVERY election from 1860 to 1936.
 
How do these two houses function? Like what does the Upper House do, and what does the Lower House do? In Vicky 2 I mean, like what's the point of two houses? Just curious.
 
Im hoping that two houses will mean that when you make a decision there will a period of time between you clicking the decision and it coming into effect. To pass a majority of both houses must support it and during that time events would occur to simulate the debate and compromises of the process. but this is probably a dream of the pipe sort
 
I don't think the legislative system should be overdone. I am not sure what the point of having a bicameral system in the game would be.

I like the system in Vic1 with the limitations on budget, pop changes etc. as imposed by the ruling party. Limits your possibilities, but you still have plenty of choices. Any more than that and it only frustratres the player as he can't do what he wants anymore.

That said, I think the limitations should not be hard, but rather soft this time. If you cross them, you'll get much higher militancy or so from the supporters of the party in power.

To add to that system, I'd like to see some party specific decisions or events. E.g. if you have a social-democrat party in power, events demanding social reforms pop up more often. If you have a jingoist party in power, you'll get more events to acquire colonies or build fortresses etc.
It would also be nice if you get better relationships with countries that have a similar political system and/or similar ruling parties in power.
 
Orinsul said:
Im hoping that two houses will mean that when you make a decision there will a period of time between you clicking the decision and it coming into effect. To pass a majority of both houses must support it and during that time events would occur to simulate the debate and compromises of the process. but this is probably a dream of the pipe sort
Click to expand...
I don't quite get this fascination with lag time for decisions or orders. If I enact a better health insurance level going from adequate to good, how does it matter or add to my fun if it takes two months to actually have an effect? :confused: The game is 100 years long after all so in the big picture it does not matter at all if the health insurance comes in April 1885 or in June 1885.
 
Zanza said:
I don't quite get this fascination with lag time for decisions or orders. If I enact a better health insurance level going from adequate to good, how does it matter or add to my fun if it takes two months to actually have an effect? :confused: The game is 100 years long after all so in the big picture it does not matter at all if the health insurance comes in April 1885 or in June 1885.
Click to expand...

But it does matter wheter war is declared now or in a few months time.

The real fun about having a two-chamber parlament is that it allows disparities of power. One of the chambers may only have representetives from the nobility, and the other chamber from everyone else. A proposal must pass both chambers with a majority supporting it in both. This gives the aristocratic minority large amounts of power, without completly removing it from everyone else like restricting voting rights would.
There are a lot more fun things one can do with a two-chamber parlament!
 
Lower camera will give you one party (with its ideology) on charge, like in Vicky, and upper an instance able to block reforms (and maybe also other decisions), maybe like in EU-Rome. IIRC upper camera we'll exist even in uniparliamentary countries, representing 'de facto' interests (maybe church, landowners, industrials...).

That's my assumption from developers comments (look sticked thread).
 
lizardo said:
The main issues should be whether there is a 'written' constitution and if representation is proportionate or winner take all.
Click to expand...

I don't see any difference whether constitution is written or not. A constitution saying "King decides everything" written on piece of paper doesn't make it more liberal.

Democracies should be very limited in how they can declare war. This is the major reason the US never never took over the two times it could. In the game sense moving a democratic nation to conquest would require the consent of the legislature, if that's part of the constitution.
Click to expand...

Modern demoracies indeed tend not to declare wars. But being a democracy didn't make UK behave only defensively during Victorian era, even on the contrary.
 
Temrek said:
But it does matter wheter war is declared now or in a few months time.
Click to expand...
Parliaments didn't declare war back then though. Kings or Queens did. Except perhaps for the USA, but I suspect that there was something that allowed an immediate reaction by the president too.

The real fun about having a two-chamber parlament is that it allows disparities of power. One of the chambers may only have representetives from the nobility, and the other chamber from everyone else. A proposal must pass both chambers with a majority supporting it in both. This gives the aristocratic minority large amounts of power, without completly removing it from everyone else like restricting voting rights would.
There are a lot more fun things one can do with a two-chamber parlament!
Click to expand...
Alright. Can you now translate that to game mechanics? Let's say I have a full citizenship party in the lower house and a residence party in the upper house. Which policy is active?
 
Zanza said:
Alright. Can you now translate that to game mechanics? Let's say I have a full citizenship party in the lower house and a residence party in the upper house. Which policy is active?
Click to expand...

Assume that any party policy do not automatically affect immigration policy, but the party may try to change that policy however. If the policy before the current government settled was limited citizenship, the upper house may try to change it to residence but the lower house may block that reform. The upper house will likewise block any attempts to extend citizenship rights for immigrants. Thus the policy will remain limited citizenship until the balance is shifted, perhaps one pary successfuly lobbies the other into voting for their reforms and the change will go though or political pressure forces one of the differnet houses to vote for a reform that they really are against.

If done correctly, it could add a lot to the game.
 
I can imagine that spread over all the nations as the game engine strains to keep up with it and all the other things it needs to do.

I agree it could be fun but I think a simple black box legislature (we don't know or care how many chambers) is best. If you want to simulate a bicameral institution just delay any decision it makes and make fewer decisions. However it is structured it is the 'legislature'.

Even if done simply, each 'seat' in the legislature will be held by a 'representative' with multiple interests to be resolved. As the program is crunching through that it will consume not just cpu time but programming resources. There's a budget limit to how much stuff you can program and I'd say bicameral is really low on the priority list.

Election structures are important, some are proportional and some are winner take all. US has a lot of winner take all (by precinct) that results in winner who lost the popular vote or the appearance of a 'landslide' that did not really occur.

More important is if the constitution is written or not.

A 'non written' constitution means that all laws are equal and easily changeable. In game turns it means that a conservative party can impose immigration or citizenship limits if it has the votes.

A 'written' constitution means having a basic law superior to the legislature and they can't simply put into practice their interests if it isn't supported.

No nation needs its legislature to recognize a situation of war, legislative approval is required only for initiating war. At least if you click off that button on your constitution.

What legislatures normally control is the budget.

I'd be interested in how a communist society will be modeled, as the official positions in the government are subject to and inferior to the party.
 
Last edited:
lizardo said:
More important is if the constitution is written or not.

A 'non written' constitution means that all laws are equal and easily changeable. In game turns it means that a conservative party can impose immigration or citizenship limits if it has the votes.

A 'written' constitution means having a basic law superior to the legislature and they can't simply put into practice their interests if it isn't supported.
Click to expand...

This is something that indeed needs to be fixed. In V1, I had these silly situations where the ruling party had Limited Citizenship, my liberal primary culture POPs would elect a liberal, Full Citizenship government, giving the vote to my conservative minority culture POPs, who would then elect a conservative Residence/Lim. Citizenship party, who would take away the vote from the minority that helped them to power. Then in the next elections, the primary culture POPs would again elect the liberals, et cetera ad infinitum. :rolleyes:
 
Mmm, America during this time period was far from a peaceloving, easy going country. Though we tend only to think of the "major" wars that we were involved in, and feel like there was a loooong time inbetween each one, the U.S was almost constantly in some form of conflict (undeclared wars, border skirmishes, political ones).

And a lot of that's not counting the numerous wars fought against the Native American tribes on our drive to the west.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back