Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Augustus - Teaser #9 - 4th of August 2015

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.
Stellaris 51303 Bug Reports 32020 Suggestions 19796 Tech Support 2993 Multiplayer 383 User Mods 4698 Stellaris AAR (After Action Reports) Console edition 1237
Show only dev responses
Axe99 said:
It's not that they didn't last a long time, it's that the transitions in power often came with a fair degree of upheaval and uncertainty. If you were looking at a historical atlas, say, you'd see no change at all, but if you were reading the actual history of the country in question, it was a different story altogether (the Roman empire in particular - that's a poster boy of internal instability due to leadership transition!)
Click to expand...

The individuals changed places just like there is a new President of the US every 4 or 8 years.
Whether by election or by force there are changes of power at the top.
But the institution itself is stable.
Even wars of royal succession are in a way part of normal functioning and perpetuation of the institution itself.
 
If I was the one to come up with mean hints, my hint for tomorrow would be: "You win. It's exactly what you think it is."
 
RealGrognard said:
Don't follow you, squire. It was all visible in the original image. I don't know what you're on about.
Click to expand...

I was just agreeing with you.

Read my post again.
 
2074yu4sw2.gif
 
RealGrognard said:
The individuals changed places just like there is a new President of the US every 4 or 8 years.
Whether by election or by force there are changes of power at the top.
But the institution itself is stable.
Even wars of royal succession are in a way part of normal functioning and perpetuation of the institution itself.
Click to expand...

The 'institution' may be stable, but the society around it wasn't, and I think that's what the Imperial administration in Dune was interested in, not if 'even if there's a civil war and thousands die, there'll still be an emperor at the end of it so it'll still be OK' :). By your definition, the institution is indeed relatively stable, but by the definition of someone living in the actual society, it was very often anything but.
 
Zoston said:
Except this isn't true. Edward III did not have the omnipotent power you grant him. He had to contend with nobles and lower classes who could and would frustrate his plans if they did not agree. Legally he may have more power but he was still beholden to the support and loyalty of the people beneath him.

Similarly, Cameron can't just up and declare war, but he can push for it intensively and convince parliament and then start a war. Just like Bush pushed and convinced Congress to agree to the Iraq war. Saying Cameron's desire to attack France is irrelevant is to misrepresent the importance of individual leadership within the system.

In fact for example the whole issue around the Commons vote on Syria action. This could not be properly captured in a game with some kind of nebulous 'war desire' percentage. It was about a conflict between individuals at the top and their parliament. Without representing the prime minister as an individual with individual opinions and desires you can't capture those kind of political events that are the core of modern government dynamics.
Click to expand...

I see what you mean, though my original point still holds credence in my belief. It is the collective action of democracy that makes the will of one much harder to exact than it was under a feudal system. Perhaps a better example to illustrate this would be an absolute monarchy, L'Etat c'est moi simply doesn't hold for a ruler in the modern world.
 
SerialCereal said:
I see what you mean, though my original point still holds credence in my belief. It is the collective action of democracy that makes the will of one much harder to exact than it was under a feudal system. Perhaps a better example to illustrate this would be an absolute monarchy, L'Etat c'est moi simply doesn't hold for a ruler in the modern world.
Click to expand...

Actually absolute monarchies weren't absolutistic at all...

Actually wikipedia has it on their second paragraph:

"In theory, the absolute monarch exercises total power over the land, yet in practice the monarchy is counterbalanced by political groups from among the social classes and castes of the realm, such as the aristocracy, clergy, and middle and lower classes."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_monarchy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back