"A random candidate will be elected"

[GuyIncognito26]

Apologies if this has been answered and I just couldn't find it, but did we ever get confirmation on how elections actually work if the player doesn't attempt to influence them?

The election screen says "If we do not interfere a random candidate will be elected."

Is it truly random, i.e. arbitrary, among the four choices? Or are the candidates weighted by variables like your pops and ethos?

What I'm trying to get at is: if I decide I don't want to rig the elections with my omnipotence, can I have any faith at all that my civilization will make reasonable choices or does each candidate just have a flat 25% chance of winning regardless?

Thanks!

 

[ashbery76]

I get the feeling looking at the streams people are always going to pick their candidate.The cost is very low unless the balance has changed.

 

[Safehold]

Apologies if this has been answered and I just couldn't find it, but did we ever get confirmation on how elections actually work if the player doesn't attempt to influence them?

The election screen says "If we do not interfere a random candidate will be elected."

View attachment 174216

Is it truly random, i.e. arbitrary, among the four choices? Or are the candidates weighted by variables like your pops and ethos?

What I'm trying to get at is: if I decide I don't want to rig the elections with my omnipotence, can I have any faith at all that my civilization will make reasonable choices or does each candidate just have a flat 25% chance of winning regardless?

Thanks!

I would think the elections would work something like merchant republics in CK2. I haven't seen any exact details or explanations of the election mechanic in that detail. Any AI weightings would be in a file or hard coded C++.

I'll probably take a look at the governments and ethos files just to see if there's anything easy to read there. And then I'll experiment with ftl and some govs first hand.

 

[Sapidianus]

I wonder if democracies have the election cost adjusted and if autocracies have good enough bonuses to counter modifiers provided by agenda. For example: the Despotic hegemony has +5% research bonus, +10% survey speed bonus and elite assault army, while the Science directorate has +1 research card, can get +10% research bonus via agenda. I doubt that +10% survey speed bonus is good enough to compete with extra +5% research bonus, so elite armies must be elite enough to close the gap, especially when you can build only one in ruler's lifetime.

 

[Zorromorph]

I'm very interested in how this will work as well.

 

[Wulfram]

The dev diary on elections says

This brings us to Elections and how they tie into the overall scheme. All of the Democratic Government Forms in the game have Elections, though the terms might vary. One difference between the various forms of democracy is which leader characters are the most valid and supported candidates for the chief executive office. In a Military Republic, for example, your Admirals and Generals tend to win the elections. However, all of the Faction leaders are also valid candidates; even the ones who seek independence for their species. If a Faction leader wins an election, that does not mean that their demands are immediately met, however. Instead, what happens is that the Faction becomes passive and will not revolt, which is great for you. Unfortunately, it also increases the attraction of the Faction, which means that it is likely to get far more member Pops…

Does the player have any direct control over Election outcomes? Yes, you can spend Influence in order to campaign for the candidate of your choice, but it’s not a sure thing, and the cost can be prohibitive if the candidate enjoys little popular support.

Which makes it sound like its not totally random? Maybe its a weighted probability, depending on their population support an leader type?

 

[Zorromorph]

Yeah I read that before and it doesn't sound like what I've seen in the streams in a couple of aspects:

** 'Not a sure thing' -- they've been able to appoint whoever they want. That IS a sure thing .
** 'cost can be prohibitive if the candidate enjoys little popular support' -- haven't seen popular support anywhere, and every time the cost has been the same.

Something I'll have to try out I think unless we get more official info.

 

[GuyIncognito26]

Right, thanks. I read that as well and it's just not clear to me.

That could just be a reference to who the game chooses as the four candidates, for instance. And you aren't given any indication of which candidates are the "supported" ones and which aren't, at least that I can see.

I might prefer to let my people choose their leader, but if they're just flipping coins then I might take a more interventionist role.

 

[Tiaexz]

Yeah I read that before and it doesn't sound like what I've seen in the streams in a couple of aspects:

** 'Not a sure thing' -- they've been able to appoint whoever they want. That IS a sure thing .
** 'cost can be prohibitive if the candidate enjoys little popular support' -- haven't seen popular support anywhere, and every time the cost has been the same.

Something I'll have to try out I think unless we get more official info.

It was changed from the Stream due to feedback. It used to be totally random, and you could appoint someone. But it has been changed since the stream due to the feedback from the community that it is based on your pops/factions/etc and you investing culture gives your choice a 'boost'. So if you boost someone with no support against someone with a lot, they would lose. But if it was very similar variables, you basically are picking the winner.

 

[Zorromorph]

That's good to know. I like the new way a lot better .

 

[Mesina2]

I get the feeling looking at the streams people are always going to pick their candidate.The cost is very low unless the balance has changed.

Only in Oligarchy, which Blog Communality is.

Autocracies will be stuck with whoever is your heir( Military dictatorship can choose an heir though), while Democracies will work like democracies. Although no idea how voting process will go among pops as of yet. Especially since you can still influence your preferred candidate to win, but not guaranteed. Meanwhile in Oligarchies you get to pick whoever you want from selected candidates, but if you choose to abstain then it will picked randomly.

 

[jaredstanko]

democracies vote every 5 years. this means that electing your leader will NOT always be worth the cost

this is an inherent advantage in an oligarchy, just as there are disadvantages(cant be rid of your canidate for a very long time)

 

[Sapidianus]

democracies vote every 5 years. this means that electing your leader will NOT always be worth the cost

this is an inherent advantage in an oligarchy, just as there are disadvantages(cant be rid of your canidate for a very long time)

The cost could be scaling for democracies and oligarchies have emergency elections.

 

[Xykon]

I get the feeling looking at the streams people are always going to pick their candidate.The cost is very low unless the balance has changed.

I read somewhere (though I can't for the life of me remember where) that the influence cost to select the current leader will change quite a bit depending on a number of factors. If the current ruler is extremely unpopular, it will apparently cost an exorbitant amount of influence to keep them in power. As well, the influence spent supposedly doesn't guarantee that your current ruler will get elected, it just increases the chance of them getting elected. This I think will make the system more interesting.

 

[GuyIncognito26]

That's my understanding as well Xykon. And like you I don't remember where I saw it but I do remember it.

And it seems to imply that the candidates are weighted in their chances of being elected, I'd just like to have that confirmed and ask if there is any way for us to get any insight into it in-game.

 

[Person012345]

That's my understanding as well Xykon. And like you I don't remember where I saw it but I do remember it.

And it seems to imply that the candidates are weighted in their chances of being elected, I'd just like to have that confirmed and ask if there is any way for us to get any insight into it in-game.

Try reading this thread, you may find the confirmation you desire.

 

[xsubtownerx]

I get the feeling looking at the streams people are always going to pick their candidate.The cost is very low unless the balance has changed.

"Cost is low" is subjective. If you're a democracy, you have to pick a new leader every 5 years. That might get expensive after a while, especially in the early stages of the game. So I suspect the "random" leader is for those who plan to play as a democracy.

 

[barny]

"Cost is low" is subjective. If you're a democracy, you have to pick a new leader every 5 years. That might get expensive after a while, especially in the early stages of the game. So I suspect the "random" leader is for those who plan to play as a democracy.

200 influence is actually not that cheap. I don't know, if the life span of the race has something to do with the length of the terms, but considering how rare elections in the Blorg empire are and that they are venerable, this might be the case. It would make sense and it would be another strong perk of that trait.

Having to spend 200 influence (that is a very limited resource) every few years will likely be too much to always do it. How much Influence do you get? Like 7 per month or so and that can actually be reduced a lot by diplomacy treaties or other things? So you don't even gain 100 per year and stuff like edicts also costs quite a bit. That would seem to indicate that you are not really supposed to always control the outcome of the elections and only step in every now and then when a ruler is really good or you really need a certain bonus.

BTW: Considering, that hiring new leaders also costs influence if I remember correctly, it seems, that venerable will in many ways save you a lot of influence over the years in addition to have longer living and there more experienced leaders.

 

[kolpo]

Yeah it is good that ethos of pops affects their voting, it would be strange if xenophile pacifists would vote for the "secure the border president". It would be as strange as if a nation build by religious freedom loving immigrants would vote for a guy who hates immigrants and religious freedom ...

 

[xsubtownerx]

@barny Bingo. Couldn't agree more. I think you only want to step in if you "really" want a specific leader (in a democracy). I think however playing an Autocracy makes more sense to always pick your leader as he/she will rule until death.