• 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.

King

Part Time Game Designer
11 Badges
Dec 7, 2001
12.504
30
49
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Sengoku
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
  • Victoria 2 Beta
This system grew out of the problem of how PoPs pick ideologies. Now, British conservatism is of course all about Queen, Empire, etc. However, you do not see American conservatives going on about how much better it was when George III was in charge; if only the British would allow us back into the Empire... For gameplay purposes we needed the ideologies to mean the same thing for all countries; that way we could have generic scripts for ideology picking. This makes development easier, debugging quicker and those tweaks that make it feel right simpler to do. So, first we sat down and defined exactly what each ideology means.

Conservative: I am happy with the Status Quo
Reactionary: This government has failed to defend the Status Quo
Liberal: I want political reform
Anarcho-Liberal: This government will not give us political reform
Socialist: I want social reform
Communist: This government will not give us social reform
Fascist: I am angry about something but find it difficult to articulate exactly what it is.

Now, this may be a bit generic, but for our purposes it sets up a logical foundation for when POPs should strongly swing towards these ideologies and what they should do in the upper house.

We have divided reforms into two broad categories; social and political. Your ability to enact them also depends on two factors; the upper house composition and the average militancy in your country. Each ideology gives a different effect in the upper house and thus your ability to pass certain reforms depends on what ideologies hold sway in your upper house.

Conservative: Conservatives in the 19th century we see as those that tried to limit reforms to preserve the old order. When the threat of revolution got high enough, the conservatives would seek to give some ground in order to preserve the rest. This new Status Quo would be the one that the Conservatives would now seek to defend. The result is that conservative members of the upper house never support the removal of current reforms. However, they will not support the extension of reforms either. However, under conditions of high militancy some Conservative members of the upper house will break ranks and support either social or political reform.

Reactionary: Well, the name sums it up. Reactionaries don’t like the way things are and instead hanker for the good old days that probably never existed anyway. Reactionary members of the upper house never support the extension of existing reforms and instead support the removal of all reforms.

Liberal: We tie liberalism and political reform together. Liberalism as an ideology is all about seeking reform of the political system. Thus, members of the upper house who have a liberal ideology always support the extension of political reform. Like conservatism, some will support the extension of social reform but only under conditions of high average militancy.

Anarcho-Liberal: Anarcho-Liberals are angry liberals. They will actually seek to prevent the extension of political reforms, because they would much rather overthrow the government than reform it. They also support the rolling back of social reforms, because the government should be as small as possible.

Socialists: The socialists are the opposite of the liberals. Socialists, like their name implies, seek social reforms always. They never want to roll back reforms, and some will support political reform under conditions of high militancy.

Communists: The people who are dedicated to protecting the workers from everyone except the communists. They always support the removal of political reforms and always support the advancement of social reform.

Fascists: Do not support any move on reform unless there is a fascist government. Then they behave the same as communists. Essentially, in opposition the fascists are spoilers in the political system, seeking to force gridlock to allow a fascist revolution.

Thus the shifting dynamic of the upper house alters your options for reforming your country. How the upper house shifts depends in part on events - just to make sure you don’t get to complacent - and partly on your choice of political reform. You have 4 choices of upper house make up:

Ruling party only: Where 100% of the upper house is always the same as the ruling party. Representing things like the Supreme Soviet.
Appointed: The upper house reflects the ideologies of your rich strata. This is akin to the British House of Lords
State Equal Weight: Each state inside the country sends an equal number of representatives to the Upper House. The US senate model.
Population Weight: Each state sends representatives to the upper house based upon their population. Much like the German Bundesrat.

The last two are elected chambers (yes I know the German Bundesrat was not directly elected per se, but we have to make compromises here) and we have also added two additional voting options for your country. Between Wealth and Landed, we have Wealth Weighted; here both the rich and middle strata have the vote but the Rich votes count as double. We also have universal weighted voting. Everyone (except slaves) has the vote, but Rich POPs votes count as 3, middle as 2 and poor get one 1 vote. This allows additional flexibility in moulding your country.

All in all we have sought to add an additional dimension to the game. Political reform is not just a steady advancement toward some socialist utopia; it is much more driven by the internal factors inside your country. As your country’s ideological outlook changes, so too do your reform options.

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • vic2_alpha_feb24.JPG
    vic2_alpha_feb24.JPG
    787,9 KB · Views: 25.768
Last edited by a moderator:
So I give my liberals all the reforms they want, and they suddenly all turn conservative?
 
So given a long enough game, there will only be conservatives, being liberal is not a steady-state equilibrium?
 
So given a long enough game, there will only be conservatives, being liberal is not a steady-state equilibrium?

Depends on the POP type, some POPs have a stronger affinity for Liberalism even if they do wish political refrom. Plus you can be conservative and support free trade and thus vote for a liberal party in the lower house.
 
So given a long enough game, there will only be conservatives, being liberal is not a steady-state equilibrium?

...There will only be ONLY conservatives if EVERYONE is happy with your country..heh, good luck.
 
I really like the new interface, it looks more clean and easy to understand. I think this is the biggest improvement in the game! thanks!
 
Conservative: Conservatives in the 19th century we see as those that tried to limit reforms to preserve the old order. When the threat of revolution got high enough, the conservatives would seek to give some ground in order to preserve the rest. This new Status Quo would be the one that the Conservatives would now seek to defend. The result is that conservative members of the upper house never support the removal of current reforms. However, they will not support the extension of reforms either. However, under conditions of high militancy some Conservative members of the upper house will break ranks and support either social or political reform.

Like Bismarck. Sounds good

Reactionary: Well, the name sums it up. Reactionaries don’t like the way things are and instead hanker for the good old days that probably never existed anyway. Reactionary members of the upper house never support the extension of existing reforms and instead support the removal of all reforms.

This will make Russia interesting ( I presume there's a fair few reactionaries there).

Liberal: We tie liberalism and political reform together. Liberalism as an ideology is all about seeking reform of the political system. Thus, members of the upper house who have a liberal ideology always support the extension of political reform. Like conservatism, some will support the extension of social reform but only under conditions of high average militancy.

Are unions considered political or social reform? And does the 'conditions of high militancy' mean among their voters, or in the country overall?

Anarcho-Liberal: Anarcho-Liberals are angry liberals. They will actually seek to prevent the extension of political reforms, because they would much rather overthrow the government than reform it. They also support the rolling back of social reforms, because the government should be as small as possible.

Which POPs start as AL voters?

Socialists: The socialists are the opposite of the liberals. Socialists, like their name implies, seek social reforms always. They never want to roll back reforms, and some will support political reform under conditions of high militancy.

Only under high militancy? I think Socialist parties should always seek an extension of voting rights.

Communists: The people who are dedicated to protecting the workers from everyone except the communists. They always support the removal of political reforms and always support the advancement of social reform.

OK, this is getting confusing, can you please clarify which are political and which are social reforms?
Fascists: Do not support any move on reform unless there is a fascist government. Then they behave the same as communists. Essentially, in opposition the fascists are spoilers in the political system, seeking to force gridlock to allow a fascist revolution.

You betcha! I presume they are especially against extension of healthcare coverage in the US... ;)

Thus the shifting dynamic of the upper house alters your options for reforming your country. How the upper house shifts depends in part on events - just to make sure you don’t get to complacent - and partly on your choice of political reform. You have 4 choices of upper house make up:

So does the upper house get composed at the same time as a general election? How does that work?

Ruling party only: Where 100% of the upper house is always the same as the ruling party. Representing things like the Supreme Soviet.

Grand
Appointed: The upper house reflects the ideologies of your rich strata. This is akin to the British House of Lords

OK, but can rich POPs get in regardless of ideology?

State Equal Weight: Each state inside the country sends an equal number of representatives to the Upper House. The US senate model.

Population Weight: Each state sends representatives to the upper house based upon their population. Much like the German Bundesrat.

Now this is very interesting... do we still have the same 'grant statehood' option as before? Cause this would make stuff like granting statehood in India unthinkable for the Brits... a huge new dimension to the game


The last two are elected chambers (yes I know the German Bundesrat was not directly elected per se, but we have to make compromises here) and we have also added two additional voting options for your country. Between Wealth and Landed, we have Wealth Weighted; here both the rich and middle strata have the vote but the Rich votes count as double. We also have universal weighted voting. Everyone (except slaves) has the vote, but Rich POPs votes count as 3, middle as 2 and poor get one 1 vote. This allows additional flexibility in moulding your country.

So basically all the time that won't be spent clicking to promote POPs is now going to be spend studying and strategising on POPs? Brilliant. I foresee much pausing to think decisions through.
 
What does the "S" stand for in HMS Government? I'm pretty sure the Royal Navy never had a ship named that :rofl:.
 
What does the "S" stand for in HMS Government? I'm pretty sure the Royal Navy never had a ship named that :rofl:.
Her Majesty's Smartass ;)
 
I wanna congrat you for this DD Chris, is really interesting, and haven't seen better description of fascism than the one you use :D
 
What does the "S" stand for in HMS Government? I'm pretty sure the Royal Navy never had a ship named that :rofl:.
His/Her Majesty'S
 
Considering that conservative is the only status quo ideology... do political parties change ideology? Ie. Would a socialist or liberal party which had achieved its goals transform into a conservative party? It would be somewhat strange to have a successful political party with who people are satisfied with lose elections...

It does explain how George W. became president, but it might be annoying game-wise.
 
Oh and also, have you added some kind of spawn mechanism for new parties, depending on emergence of new issues, but not strictly historical?

To explain - if I'm some backwater state who knows where, and i somehow manage to modernize my country sufficiently for my people to become involved in my policies, but there's no hard coded socialist party for my country (as was possible in V1) - is it possible for the party to suddenly appear? Or do I have to go into the files like in the good old days? :D