rebels should be taken out of this game

JimboOmega said:

Voting franchise does nothing for an appointed upper house, though changing the franchise requires you to be able to do reforms which is the whole point of my argument, that you often can't.

Click to expand...

You can appoint the lower house, but the upper house is either non-existent or elected. It can never be appointed. Voting franchise (outside of none) only affects the Upper House. Did you mean Lower House? If you can't change the franchise then you need to get your upper house to allow the reform. It's one of the many simple systems that when combined with the whole of the political system becomes quite complex. If you want political reforms without high MIL you'll have to snub your socialists and conservatives. You'll be upsetting your empire, but that's the trade-off.

JimboOmega said:

As an unciv or a very small country of a few states what you say is true... election events, and other popups, can be used to sway the opinions of people (though how their issues stack up against the ideology of the upper house, I don't quite follow...). But once you aer past 10 or so states, which is not a huge number for a great power (even one not on a WC rampage), all these effects start to become trivial against the general tide of things like lit producing con, etc. in my eyes.

Click to expand...

Are you expecting to shift ideology and primary issue in 1 election cycle? Political shifts take decades. It sounds like you want too much too quickly. Or just that you want something you can't have.

If you really want to end the problem with rebels do the following. Go into the common folder, then defines and find the following entry. MIL_TO_JOIN_REBEL = 7, -- Rebels over this will join a faction
MIL_TO_JOIN_RISING = 8, -- Rebels over this will join a general rising
MIL_TO_AUTORISE = 9, -- Rebels over this rise no matter what
Change the numbers to 10 and there will be no more rebels in the game for any country ever.

marnues said:

You can appoint the lower house, but the upper house is either non-existent or elected. It can never be appointed. Voting franchise (outside of none) only affects the Upper House. Did you mean Lower House? If you can't change the franchise then you need to get your upper house to allow the reform. It's one of the many simple systems that when combined with the whole of the political system becomes quite complex. If you want political reforms without high MIL you'll have to snub your socialists and conservatives. You'll be upsetting your empire, but that's the trade-off.

Click to expand...

The upper house can be appointed, two per state, ruling party only... right?

Voting franchise affects who votes for the lower house, since that's what gets elected, though you (as regent) in some circumstances reserve the right to change it (I'm not clear what those circumstances are... that's what I was asking)

I have chosen liberal positions in election events for decades and decades, but my upper house is a muddled mess of idiots who would never pass a reform without high MIL. After socialists started eating up large shares, I gave up on it. What tools do I have anyway? Taxes and election events? Meh, I'm unimpressed. Why do I have to choose between political and social reform, anyway?

For reform, you need militancy or to mod the % of the upper house that vote "yes" for reform.
For my games, I added the effect at every 0.5 point of militancy instead of every 1 point (this part doesn't really improve the thing, exept that instead of waiting for 5 militancy, I may have to wait only for 4.5). I also added a bonus depending on consciousness.

JimboOmega said:

Voting franchise does nothing for an appointed upper house, though changing the franchise requires you to be able to do reforms which is the whole point of my argument, that you often can't.

As an unciv or a very small country of a few states what you say is true... election events, and other popups, can be used to sway the opinions of people (though how their issues stack up against the ideology of the upper house, I don't quite follow...). But once you aer past 10 or so states, which is not a huge number for a great power (even one not on a WC rampage), all these effects start to become trivial against the general tide of things like lit producing con, etc.

What you need in that case is things that globally raise millitancy, like... WE and militancy from losing war goals. Taxes do diddly for me; almost everyone meets luxury needs anyway.

I have found that adding a few war goals with the intent of failing them so I can do reforms is de rigeur, and I have found no other way to do reforms. It's a benefit of a war, that you get to fail a few wargoals. at least in my eyes.

Click to expand...

By voting franchise, I also refer to the composition of upper house, which looks like voting franchise to me as the various options enfranchise various populations with voting rights in the UH.

Building up a political platform requires time and continuity. Large countries must show higher inertia to political changes, especially as they are likely to encompass various populations on various dynamics, the policy of the average is therefore less easy to bring on.

I am somehow skeptical that players who dont bother to tackle their rebels issues before they flare out have the required stamina and dedication to build up a consistent platform with large countries.

ChienAboyeur said:

By voting franchise, I also refer to the composition of upper house, which looks like voting franchise to me as the various options enfranchise various populations with voting rights in the UH.

Building up a political platform requires time and continuity. Large countries must show higher inertia to political changes, especially as they are likely to encompass various populations on various dynamics, the policy of the average is therefore less easy to bring on.

I am somehow skeptical that players who dont bother to tackle their rebels issues before they flare out have the required stamina and dedication to build up a consistent platform with large countries.

Click to expand...

When I say appointed, I am referring to the appointed upper house, which is "appointed" as a political reform on the reforms screen. It really just means "upper class only", as I understand it. It is this upper house that blocks reforms and causes me to pursue high mil. Becuase it is "appointed", not proportional, not two per state, not ruling party only - appointed. With such a government, voting franchise has no effect, because it is not elected (the lower house is elected, but so what? I can select the one I want there). This upper house is "appointed", but again, in practice, it is upper class only. It's impossible to create a situation like the Days of May where you, as the regent, threaten to create new seats and thus change the composition of the upper house.

I am also able to change the government in the lower house at will, but I am unclear what reform enables me to do so, and if a certain political reform will take away that ability. I rather like that, since I need to be socialist from time to time, for instance, to set up factories in newly minted states quickly or to create barrel factories or etc.

Once again, though, I must ask - what tools do I have to "tackle my rebel issues" "before they flare out" (which, for every AI nation as well as mine, meant the year became 1890 - at which point every GP was overrun by rebels save the US). Is it granting of reforms? Because my obstinate, appointed upper house refuses to be socialist or liberal enough. My people, of course, always elect a liberal government, but that is of no help; it is the upper house that grants reforms, and it never will, because it is "appointed".

What does that leave? Taxes? Everyone meeting their luxury needs was never enough to stop these problems. Election events? No matter how hard I work to encourage them to be secularized, free trade, lassiez-faire, etc, their primary issues are always military (I somehow have something like 40% of people and negative 42% of voters with pro military as their primary issue). The women's suffrage events are nice and I always try to gain liberal as much as I can, but I have no hope of getting enough to enact reforms - like the kind of reforms that would end this stupid upper house (would that mean giving up control of the lower house as well?)

The only thing left are other events that let me do things like raise militancy for the immigrant group de jour... that is too blunt a tool to really impact things.

Also - how on earth can I roll back my social reforms? Health care has run amok, and I need to stop it.

I wonder if I change to a party that is full citizenship, will that cuase the other cultures to get representation in the UH, and thus radically change its makeup (probably for the worse, but... any change is good...)

safferli said:

All non-democracies can set the ruling party (with some restriction, e.g. Absolute Monarchies cannot set communists as ruling party).

Click to expand...

What makes you a "democracy", as reforms go? If I reform enough will I wind up with a "democracy"? Or will I become a "HM's government" which is 'good enough' as these things go?

safferli said:

If you don't start as a democracy, the only way you get there is via rebel-controlled (Jacobin) capitals. Enacting voting rights will turn your monarchy into a HM government, and you can still change the ruling party under HM government.

Click to expand...

I will have to switch my upper house to two per state next time I get the MIL for it, and see what happens. If it goes anything like what happened in the lower house, it will answer my prayers. Though I think something is making my lower house behave weird. My population is not 90%+ anarcho-liberal, but that's how the votes turn out... (rotten boroughs? non-secret ballots? well, I'll take what I can get...)

JimboOmega said:

Once again, though, I must ask - what tools do I have to "tackle my rebel issues" "before they flare out" (which, for every AI nation as well as mine, meant the year became 1890 - at which point every GP was overrun by rebels save the US). Is it granting of reforms? Because my obstinate, appointed upper house refuses to be socialist or liberal enough. My people, of course, always elect a liberal government, but that is of no help; it is the upper house that grants reforms, and it never will, because it is "appointed".

Click to expand...

For the other point, I thought I made clear that I encompassed appointed chamber, two per states and proportional in voting franchise. Whether or not UH representatives are all upper classes is very secondary. What matters is that whether through indirect representation or direct representation, the voters are infranchised in UH. They get a right to vote on the various matters.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

On the topic: once again, reforms are not ultimately here to tackle rebels issues. When it comes to rebels, reforms are a last resort measure that can buy time. They cant deal with rebels on the long term.

What deals with rebels is to think the developpment policy of the country, the path to progress.

Countries are generally composed with various provinces with various resources. Macro policies define an average and avoiding too big spreads around the average is the key to prevent and stop rebellions from developping.

The tools are multiple and can be summed up to funnelling wealth where it is needed.

Reforms are not the tools to deal with rebels. In my last game under 1.1 with Japan, I had very few rebellions until 1910. I passed three political reforms. Reforms are a last resort measure to use when the usual tools to deal with rebellions can not work. Usually, it happens when too many populations on different dynamics are ruled by the same policy.

Balancing and getting the wealth to circulate among the various states and populations is the key to rebels tackling.

I suggest you start a game with a low number of states countries, analyze it, what states are naturally leading to rich populations, what states are leading naturally to poor populations, decide a policy to help the country of the path of the progress in a smooth way, avoiding the differences between various states to stretch too much.
In case, I give the conclusion: reforms are not needed to tackle rebels issues.

ChienAboyeur said:

On the topic: once again, reforms are not ultimately here to tackle rebels issues. When it comes to rebels, reforms are a last resort measure that can buy time. They cant deal with rebels on the long term.

Click to expand...

Well nearly all of all my strata meet their luxury needs; and I find the reason they are rebellious is huge amounts of reform desire. I am confused as to how reform desire is not solved by reforms...?

Extremely weird. The game balance was such that pops meeting their luxury goods would return a militancy decrease in most of cases.
That was the way dictatures could achieve stability.

This said, several modifiers were introduced that might have swayed the old balance.

Militancy increase scales with consciousness. Maybe your pops are full on consciousness, therefore their militancy increase is maximum. Plus the various political reform modifiers etc...

I have not checked this peculiarly because through the few games I had under 1.2, it seems to me that stuff was similar to 1.1 in this regard and pop meeting their luxury goods needs enjoy a decreasing militancy.

So better to check it up. Because most of the population is not the way to deal with rebels. The way to deal with rebels is to make sure the rest somehow grow less militant.