Is a New Pop Type Needed?

[AggaWackTan]

So 2.0 and levies brought a very nice change I wasn't aware would be happening that I realised from watching Arheo's interview with Lambert. Pop types influence levy composition.
Roman nobles contribute to light cav, citizens contribute to heavy infantry and freeman to light infantry.

This has the knock on effect that planning cities becomes very important., in a way that I never thought of in previous versions. In my Roman playthrough, the province of Latium is awash with courts of laws, libraries and academies not just for research but to increase citizen and noble percentages to increase heavy infantry and cavalry in my levies. Therefore there are lots of Roman citizens in my capital province. As I expand into Magna Graecia and Cisalpine Gaul I build up plenty of mills to increase slave output and forums to increase freeman and thus manpower as their pops initially need to be assimilated/ integrated before contributing to levies. This means the Capital province is far more privileged in contributing to research, education and the elite forces while everyone else toils away to bring in the profits. Citizens are close to Rome, freeman are outside Rome,, generally. As I assimilate these pops, and their cities grow, I then add libraries to these cities previously dedicated to slaves and freeman. I then start pushing the slave cities further afield, unless I've integrated the Greeks.

Before this patch I always struggled to relate to the patrician/ plebian and social rights struggle of the Socii in ancient Rome but this new system has really alleviated a lot of that, it feels so much more realistic. I always thought of citizenship as a concept and didn't think it fitted the 'pop type' concept of IR. But seeing all the updated systems, (the culture rework, buildings, levies) start to flow with one another maybe it can.

But my question lies in how can this be improved upon further. Should all non integrated pops be immediately demoted from citizen? And if they should how then do we maintain their levy composition? Should a generalised new pop be introduced to soften the blow of all these non integrated pops being demoted from citizen?

 

[Maria Theresa]

Very interesting post, however im going to ignore everything what you said and just answer the title of the topic like any good forum-goer would.

I would like to see a new religious pop type, call it "Priests" for example. There's a whole bunch of stuff they could do. They would increase the population conversion speed (and maybe also culture conversion!?) in the settlement and produce little bit of tax income. They could also reduce local unrest if their religion matches the owner or increase the unrest if it doesnt, by agitating the population. I don't mean they should do all of those things but these are just examples of some options.

 

[master_kong]

I would like to see some improvements regarding tribesmen pops such as: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...ration-updated-version.1458615/#post-27313190

Also, I desperately want culture/tag/region-specific content regarding pops and governments. Pops can have different rules for promotion and levy contribution or contribution in general etc.

 

[Vernichtere]

So 2.0 and levies brought a very nice change I wasn't aware would be happening that I realised from watching Arheo's interview with Lambert. Pop types influence levy composition.
Roman nobles contribute to light cav, citizens contribute to heavy infantry and freeman to light infantry.

This has the knock on effect that planning cities becomes very important., in a way that I never thought of in previous versions. In my Roman playthrough, the province of Latium is awash with courts of laws, libraries and academies not just for research but to increase citizen and noble percentages to increase heavy infantry and cavalry in my levies. Therefore there are lots of Roman citizens in my capital province. As I expand into Magna Graecia and Cisalpine Gaul I build up plenty of mills to increase slave output and forums to increase freeman and thus manpower as their pops initially need to be assimilated/ integrated before contributing to levies. This means the Capital province is far more privileged in contributing to research, education and the elite forces while everyone else toils away to bring in the profits. Citizens are close to Rome, freeman are outside Rome,, generally. As I assimilate these pops, and their cities grow, I then add libraries to these cities previously dedicated to slaves and freeman. I then start pushing the slave cities further afield, unless I've integrated the Greeks.

Before this patch I always struggled to relate to the patrician/ plebian and social rights struggle of the Socii in ancient Rome but this new system has really alleviated a lot of that, it feels so much more realistic. I always thought of citizenship as a concept and didn't think it fitted the 'pop type' concept of IR. But seeing all the updated systems, (the culture rework, buildings, levies) start to flow with one another maybe it can.

But my question lies in how can this be improved upon further. Should all non integrated pops be immediately demoted from citizen? And if they should how then do we maintain their levy composition? Should a generalised new pop be introduced to soften the blow of all these non integrated pops being demoted from citizen?

A demotion is already in the game. Its just not instant, depending on tech and infrastructure. You can for example use harsh treatment to enforce faster demotion. I think its ok like this. We speak about ancient times without centralized government. Its more or less a progress of losing rights.

I would like pops actualy consume trade goods.

Laso i would like pops to vote for the senate, when they are based in the capital. Or they vot for the governor, when you give them such an autonomy.

 

[AggaWackTan]

There would be a lot of work needed in introducing a religious pop as varying cultures view them differently. In my view they fit into the ‘noble’ pop type eg Brahman in India and druids in Celtic society were an absolute minority. I would think there would be less than 1% so seeing a city with 10% Druid pop types would be strange. In rome it’s the same for the augurs and the nobles were indistinguishable from priests a lot of the time eg pontifex maximus. I can see a future dlc fleshing out the pantheon with priests/ Druid ceremonies but I don’t know about a pop type.

The tribesman I think should promote first before becoming assimilated unless assimilating to a tribesman of a barbarian culture or same culture group.

My focus of the thread is trying to give more importance to the citizen pop type in the same way the noble pop type gave more speciality to each pop type. As of this update nobles and citizens of integrated cultures give the best units of that culture in levies. So shouldn’t the citizen pop type be a prize? And being a citizen should belong to primary and integrated cultures only.

Currently demoting a citizen is one step away to a Freeman. This is okay but it feels like it’s just one step above slave or tribesman.

In a Roman campaign I would like for all sabines/ etruscans/ samnites/ Bruttians to be immediately demoted as ‘slowly losing citizenship’ doesn’t make sense. But at the same time I don’t think the Freeman pop accurately represents the local elite and allied population that would serve in the army. So I would like to see a pop type introduced that allowed the player to levy troops from but gets no taxes and is a rather unhappy pop.

A pop that can be given certain rights in the culture tab and represents people who were citizens and nobles in the country that was conquered. I know they slowly demote but this leaves an unrealistic situation of a whole class of ‘unintegrated citizens’ demoting who aren’t of any use as they don’t contribute troops, tax or money.

Im trying to think of a good name for a pop to represent Socii pops that want Roman citizenship and contribute troops. I used to think a subject rework was needed for this but now I think a pop to represent the varying cultures socii troops could work better. It just needs to fit with other factions and not be too Rome orientated.

 

[Arthrodira]

Very interesting post, however im going to ignore everything what you said and just answer the title of the topic like any good forum-goer would.

I would like to see a new religious pop type, call it "Priests" for example. There's a whole bunch of stuff they could do. They would increase the population conversion speed (and maybe also culture conversion!?) in the settlement and produce little bit of tax income. They could also reduce local unrest if their religion matches the owner or increase the unrest if it doesnt, by agitating the population. I don't mean they should do all of those things but these are just examples of some options.

Pops represent socioeconomic classes. Professions are not indicated with pops, else we would need pops for farmers, miners, fisherman, pastoralists, laborers, merchants, scholars, artisans, architects, bureaucrats, etc. etc. Priests are already covered by the citizen and noble pop types, it's ridiculous to separate them. If we were to add a new pop, I think the big gain would be from better defining the difference between citizens and freemen. Citizens basically represent equites in game (the professional or upper middle class). And freemen really represent citizen plebeians and freemen. Why not split them? The point would be culture rights. "Citizenship" entitles you to be an equites or plebian - not guaranteed to have money simply because you can vote for example. Freemen are the non-slave non-citizens. So freemen and plebs would have the same base economic output, but one would be inherently happier because they were an integrated culture.

Regarding the op - you now can make:
Freemen = light infantry and archers
plebs = heavy infantry
equites = light cavalry, camels, and cavalry archers
nobles = heavy cavalry, chariots, and elephants
Slaves don't fight

There would be a lot of work needed in introducing a religious pop as varying cultures view them differently. In my view they fit into the ‘noble’ pop type eg Brahman in India and druids in Celtic society were an absolute minority. I would think there would be less than 1% so seeing a city with 10% Druid pop types would be strange. In rome it’s the same for the augurs and the nobles were indistinguishable from priests a lot of the time eg pontifex maximus. I can see a future dlc fleshing out the pantheon with priests/ Druid ceremonies but I don’t know about a pop type.

The tribesman I think should promote first before becoming assimilated unless assimilating to a tribesman of a barbarian culture or same culture group.

My focus of the thread is trying to give more importance to the citizen pop type in the same way the noble pop type gave more speciality to each pop type. As of this update nobles and citizens of integrated cultures give the best units of that culture in levies. So shouldn’t the citizen pop type be a prize? And being a citizen should belong to primary and integrated cultures only.

Currently demoting a citizen is one step away to a Freeman. This is okay but it feels like it’s just one step above slave or tribesman.

In a Roman campaign I would like for all sabines/ etruscans/ samnites/ Bruttians to be immediately demoted as ‘slowly losing citizenship’ doesn’t make sense. But at the same time I don’t think the Freeman pop accurately represents the local elite and allied population that would serve in the army. So I would like to see a pop type introduced that allowed the player to levy troops from but gets no taxes and is a rather unhappy pop.

A pop that can be given certain rights in the culture tab and represents people who were citizens and nobles in the country that was conquered. I know they slowly demote but this leaves an unrealistic situation of a whole class of ‘unintegrated citizens’ demoting who aren’t of any use as they don’t contribute troops, tax or money.

Im trying to think of a good name for a pop to represent Socii pops that want Roman citizenship and contribute troops. I used to think a subject rework was needed for this but now I think a pop to represent the varying cultures socii troops could work better. It just needs to fit with other factions and not be too Rome orientated.

Exactly this - too big of a gulf right now between freemen and citizens

 

[GloryGloryByzantium]

Agreed on the nice immersion elements. But there should be no more pop types; 5 is plenty. Although I am open to changing how it works for tribes.

 

[Arthrodira]

Agreed on the nice immersion elements. But there should be no more pop types; 5 is plenty. Although I am open to changing how it works for tribes.

Why? Not saying you're necessarily wrong, but why is 5 too many?

 

[Bovrick]

I do wish that they would rename the Citizen class to something else to finally do away with this endless confusion. It's pretty clear that the Citizen Class can appear without political rights and obligations (Levy) if they're unintegrated, and Freemen can have political Citizenship, that's how the whole military structure is built now, and it is great. It would be great if the game kept track of "Citizens" as a number: integrated Pops excluding slaves. Show this number per Region on the Levy screen, please.

As to what to call the existing class, there lies a problem. Bourgeoisie isn't time appropriate, but Eques might be too specific. Honestly, call them Shāng for all I care, please spare me from the constant "but actually" threads around Citizenship.

 

[AggaWackTan]

I do wish that they would rename the Citizen class to something else to finally do away with this endless confusion. It's pretty clear that the Citizen Class can appear without political rights and obligations (Levy) if they're unintegrated, and Freemen can have political Citizenship, that's how the whole military structure is built now, and it is great. It would be great if the game kept track of "Citizens" as a number: integrated Pops excluding slaves. Show this number per Region on the Levy screen, please.

As to what to call the existing class, there lies a problem. Bourgeoisie isn't time appropriate, but Eques might be too specific. Honestly, call them Shāng for all I care, please spare me from the constant "but actually" threads around Citizenship.

The point isn’t to end confusion. As of now I think most players know that citizen is just a step up from Freeman and that it doesn’t relate to culture in many ways other than if a culture isn’t integrated they will slowly demote to freeman. The point is to build upon the levy/ pop relation and flesh out the culture mechanics further.

The game is set in a time when citizenship was highly prized and a privilege. There shouldn’t be lots of citizens, and having citizens as a pop type represents this very well since 2.0. Citizenship doesn’t need to be a mechanic like literacy in Vicky2. If we renamed the citizen pop like you suggested we’d lose a massive immersion factor.

Im not trying to separate citizens into patrician/ plebeian, I’m trying to demote an Etruscan citizen into a submissive pop with obligations but without citizen rights as they’re not of an integrated culture (and for this to happen immediately, but is there a pop type that can better represent these probably previously well off citizens than the Freeman pop)

I think having a Roman Freeman makes since. In my play throughs I see these pops as not having citizenship but living under Rome with obligations to protect Rome but not having access to citizenship eg. local latins and campanians. They’re just culturally Roman with the opportunity to gain citizenship through promotion. But I would like for unintegrated cultures to immediately demote to Freeman and have to first assimilate before being promoted to citizen.

 

[Bovrick]

Im not trying to separate citizens into patrician/ plebeian, I’m trying to demote an Etruscan citizen into a submissive pop with obligations but without citizen rights as they’re not of an integrated culture (and for this to happen immediately, but is there a pop type that can better represent these probably previously well off citizens than the Freeman pop)

An Unintegrated Etruscan Citizen does that well enough for me. They have obligations to the state from Tax (including Commerce) and Manpower, at a relatively low rate due to their low happiness, but aren't part of the draft.

As to the Farmer-Artisan distinction, I've mentioned before that I'd be comfortable with the same Class of Freemen working for both, but outputs varying depending on the level of territory they're in - Freemen in Settlements represent your Farmers and would be more tied to Food; Freemen in Cities/Metros would represent your Artisans and should be more inclined towards Tax.

 

[AggaWackTan]

If I’m making it sound granular I don’t mean to.

If you’re having immersion problems with the number of nobles this is also what I’m trying to address. More pop types means a lower percentage of nobles also.

I’m trying to explain that as you conquer there will be citizen pops of unintegrated cultures that should become disenfranchised. These pops will usually be urban dwellers that could be a similar pop type to citizen and is made up of land owners and merchants who can purchase arms. Freeman remind me more of a commoner of humble origins.

So upon being conquered unintegrated citizens should now be demoted to Freeman and an ‘disenfranchised urban dwelling’ pop type.

 

[Jiben]

Agreed on the nice immersion elements. But there should be no more pop types; 5 is plenty. Although I am open to changing how it works for tribes.

Abit off topic of this post but i could totally see tribesmen be split up into tribesmen and nomads if they ever do a steppe/nomad patch.

 

[AggaWackTan]

Tbf the more I play the game the more I realise it’s all about pops, the building update in 2.0 made infrastructure more important but still pops provide trade routes, tax, manpower and levies largely without infrastructure. So more variety to pops would be nice. I don’t want to separate them into professions but along the lines of obligations to state and the levy types they contribute. Separating tribesmen into nomads and tribesmen fit this too I think

 

[Bovrick]

If I’m making it sound granular I don’t mean to.

If you’re having immersion problems with the number of nobles this is also what I’m trying to address. More pop types means a lower percentage of nobles also.

I’m trying to explain that as you conquer there will be citizen pops of unintegrated cultures that should become disenfranchised. These pops will usually be urban dwellers that could be a similar pop type to citizen and is made up of land owners and merchants who can purchase arms. Freeman remind me more of a commoner of humble origins.

So upon being conquered unintegrated citizens should now be demoted to Freeman and an ‘disenfranchised urban dwelling’ pop type.

No I get what you're after, but this is kinda my point with the confusion when you conquer a foreign Citizen, if their Culture doesn't have rights in your state then they're already disenfranchised - they aren't a Political Citizen, because a Political Citizen would be someone who is obligated to be Levied. They're just a Citizen-Class in the sense that they occupy the bourgeois role in the economy, hence they do Trade stuff. Political Citizens are Pops of your integrated cultures, even if their Class is only that of a Freeman or Tribesman. People aren't demoting and promoting their Political Rights, they're promoting and demoting their affluence levels, abstracted into Class.

Changing the nomenclature would really help clear this up.

 

[AggaWackTan]

No I get what you're after, but this is kinda my point with the confusion when you conquer a foreign Citizen, if their Culture doesn't have rights in your state then they're already disenfranchised - they aren't a Political Citizen, because a Political Citizen would be someone who is obligated to be Levied. They're just a Citizen-Class in the sense that they occupy the bourgeois role in the economy, hence they do Trade stuff. Political Citizens are Pops of your integrated cultures, even if their Class is only that of a Freeman or Tribesman. People aren't demoting and promoting their Political Rights, they're promoting and demoting their affluence levels, abstracted into Class.

Changing the nomenclature would really help clear this up.

It’s a fair point and well explained. I’m just having a go at trying to knock 2 birds with one stone. Make citizenship a pop and a mechanic in one go with the use of culture and integration rights.

How you explained it is also how I justify the way it is atm, I would just like more detail and visual differentiation

 

[Vernichtere]

One of the things is already in game. When you conquer Etruscans they slowly demote, but you can not use them as levies instant. They dont serve, but have some power for a while. Of course devs should give a bonus for speed when the culture is not integrated.

Plebeians? Why not But Plebians were not heavy infantry. For romans i would make plebians light and free people archers.

 

[AggaWackTan]

Plebs were heavy infantry. A pleb could still be rich and afford armour. That’s why I don’t wanna split up citizen as it covers patricians and plebs. I would like characters given the patrician/ pleb distinction

 

[Arthrodira]

Abit off topic of this post but i could totally see tribesmen be split up into tribesmen and nomads if they ever do a steppe/nomad patch.

Very good point - probably a better one than my suggestion to redo the citizens-freemen to equites-plebeians-freemen.

I'm especially thinking of the Yuezhi here

 

[Arthrodira]

Plebs were heavy infantry. A pleb could still be rich and afford armour. That’s why I don’t wanna split up citizen as it covers patricians and plebs. I would like characters given the patrician/ pleb distinction

If you take a look at my post where I suggested the split, I have the plebeians as the heavy militia unit. Patricians are nobles, there's nothing else needed there. The missing unit is the plebs because the citizens essentially function primarily as equites in game.