Faction on monarchies

[lucaluca]

differently from the first game, the sequel will have factions in monarchies as well. How will the work?

 

[Denkt]

Hint:

Different Government Types: Manage the senate in a Republic, hold your court together in a monarchy, answer to the clans in a tribal system.

Faction will probably be tied to the court but how it will work is not known.

 

[Captain Frakas]

In my humble opinion factions should be ideally tied to people's and elite's opinions in republics (populists, imperials, optimates...), to ruler's family in despotisms (the faction of the uncle, the faction of the cousin...) and to clans in tribal regimes (the faction of this clan, the faction of this other clan).

 

[Nyrael]

If nothing else, I imagine that the Faction System will be used to make it easier to see what political decisions each Minister will like, and allow those Ministers to find people of common opinion.

 

[Puking Panda]

From what we've seen from screenshots so far it seems that factions are linked to attributes. There has been shown a Militarist faction, a Religious and a Civic faction. I do hope that this is subject to change because it seems awfully bland to me.

 

[Nyrael]

From what we've seen from screenshots so far it seems that factions are linked to attributes. There has been shown a Militarist faction, a Religious and a Civic faction. I do hope that this is subject to change because it seems awfully bland to me.

All the faction are from EU:R, introduced with the VV expansion. There are Militarists, Traders, Civics, Religious, and Populist factions. And honestly, you don't really need any more.

 

[Gurkhal]

Forgive me for my potential ignorance but it was years and years since I played EU: Rome. But what was the difference between the Civic and Populist factions?

 

[Kliwarrior]

Forgive me for my potential ignorance but it was years and years since I played EU: Rome. But what was the difference between the Civic and Populist factions?

The "Populist" faction was usually the "bad guys" you never want to keep the power , because all the other factions have some bonuses ( according to their names: tax, trades etc..) and the Populist have just maluses.

I really hope this will be changed in a more balanced way. The Gracchus brothers, Caius Marius and Julius Caesar all were exponents of the Populares faction, trying to improve the condition of the Plebs against the Optimates ( Sulla, Pompeius , Cicero .. )

In game terms, all the faction should have bonus and malus to make them playable.

 

[AKronblad]

The "Populist" faction was usually the "bad guys" you never want to keep the power , because all the other factions have some bonuses ( according to their names: tax, trades etc..) and the Populist have just maluses.

I really hope this will be changed in a more balanced way. The Gracchus brothers, Caius Marius and Julius Caesar all were exponents of the Populares faction, trying to improve the condition of the Plebs against the Optimates ( Sulla, Pompeius , Cicero .. )

In game terms, all the faction should have bonus and malus to make them playable.

Agree: all factions should have bonuses and maluses. Including "populists", if there's even a role for them to play still.

 

[Captain Frakas]

All the faction are from EU:R, introduced with the VV expansion. There are Militarists, Traders, Civics, Religious, and Populist factions. And honestly, you don't really need any more.

Except in societies with a strong monotheist religion, I can't really get what would represent the religious faction.

 

[AKronblad]

Except in societies with a strong monotheist religion, I can't really get what would represent the religious faction.

The Amon priests of Egypt?

 

[Kliwarrior]

Except in societies with a strong monotheist religion, I can't really get what would represent the religious faction.

Generic conservative faction: supporters of good old times and enemies of any foreign innovations, which may corrupt the society ?

 

[Captain Frakas]

The Amon priests of Egypt?

Perhaps, I have close to no knowledge on Egypt. But it would still suggest that this faction wouldn't be much generic but should have some requirement to exist.

Generic conservative faction: supporters of good old times and enemies of any foreign innovations, which may corrupt the society ?

Well perhaps, but I am not sure to be convinced it would qualify to be a faction (other than for game play reasons) as the conservation faction might be well represented by the civic faction, against imperials and populists, for example. I doubt even more that it would be qualify to be a religious rather than traditional faction.

There was clearly a religious faction in the Roman empire, but I feel it was late, against monotheist leaning well established religions or, once the Empire become a Christian empire, against other religions.

Forgive me for my potential ignorance but it was years and years since I played EU: Rome. But what was the difference between the Civic and Populist factions?

The Civic faction could represent aristocrats, or optimates and their ideal regime could be either an aristocracy, or a mixed regime such as the republic, also called politia, three regimes who tended to be considered being virtuous par political philosophers of that time. Alas it wouldn't be inconceivable that it would turn the various oligarchic regime, who, on the contrary, tended to be considered being vicious.

The Populist faction could represent democrats, or populares and their ideal regime could be either a democracy but might turn to ochlocracy or anarchy, all those regimes tended to be considered being vicious by political philosophers of that time.

Those both factions constitute the main rivalry, not only in Rome (with the famous optimates versus populares rivalry) but also in the Hellenic world... (In Athens, however, there was a moderate faction, against pure aristocracy and against pure democracy, favoring the mixed regime).

The Military faction could represent imperials, corps of army officers who where prone to defy disapproved augusts by proclaiming one of them -sometime without his consent- as a new August. It was an important faction in the Roman imperial era, and one of the three necessary legitimacy of any august (the legion, that is to say the corps of officers, the senate, and the people, that is to say the fraction of people who came to acclaim the new august). Their ideal regime might represent the various monarchic ones, virtuous (such as kingly) or vicious (such as despotic or tyrannic).

The Trade faction could represent plutocrats. Conceptually less important, but still a specific regime. They would favor oligarchic regimes such as plutocratic, timocratic or dynastic, as their ideal regime.

 

[Thure]

Generic conservative faction: supporters of good old times and enemies of any foreign innovations, which may corrupt the society ?

That's not even fitting for Catholics... less for Roman era religions.

 

[Kliwarrior]

These were the modifiers in EU:Rome .

Spoiler: Old factions

ruler_party_military = {
    discipline = 0.1
    land_morale = 0.5
    naval_morale = 0.5
    war_exhaustion = -0.02
}

ruler_party_mercantile = {
    tribute_income_modifier = 0.2
    trade_income_modifier = 0.2
    diplomatic_missions = 0.25
    intrigue_missions = 0.25
}

ruler_party_religious = {
    stability_cost_modifier = -0.25
    global_revolt_risk = -4
    omen_chance = 0.10
    omen_power = 0.20
}

ruler_party_civic = {
    build_cost = -0.2
    build_time = -0.2
    global_population_growth = 0.025
    global_tax_modifier = 0.2
}

ruler_party_populist = {
    global_revolt_risk = 2
    stability_cost_modifier = 0.25
}

I don't know what will be migrated to I:R , but (besides the "bad populares" ) the role of factions according to the devs is quite clear.
I hope these factions will be even better designed in the new games, anyway talking about real history, I can see
- Optimates (old patricians families) = civic + religious
- Equites (rich plebeian, merchants ecc) = merchant
- Populares = populist faction
(there is no real equivalent for "military faction" , at least in the mid / late republic period )

 

[DreadLindwyrm]

Except in societies with a strong monotheist religion, I can't really get what would represent the religious faction.

They get boosts in support when optional festivals are held (or compulsory ones are done "better", and with more effort and expense; they gain and lose support depending on omens and how they're handled; they grant bigger bonuses when seeking "the will of the gods" by augury.

An awful lot of Roman positions were technically priesthoods, so you could get a strong religious faction if pious people are given those offices rather than treating them as political sinecures.

A weak religious faction could cause stability issues, and maybe even legitimacy issues for the state as a whole (or uprisings based on "the gods being angry for being ignored", or "As you have abandoned the gods, so shall they abandon you" leading to cross-empire morale issues.

 

[Sabotage13]

From what we've seen from screenshots so far it seems that factions are linked to attributes. There has been shown a Militarist faction, a Religious and a Civic faction. I do hope that this is subject to change because it seems awfully bland to me.

Paradox's development teams love their symmetric designs.

 

[lucaluca]

There should be:

Conservatives religious
Populists civic?
Plutocrats traders
Philosophers civic
Veterans militaristic

 

[DreadLindwyrm]

There should be:

Conservatives religious
Populists civic?
Plutocrats traders
Philosophers civic
Veterans militaristic

Religious and conservative don't automatically go together.
Your veterans could be very conservative as an example, and potentially your religious could be progressive, or (especially with Rome) being civic minded.

 

[AKronblad]

Religious and conservative don't automatically go together.
Your veterans could be very conservative as an example, and potentially your religious could be progressive, or (especially with Rome) being civic minded.

True, Mazdak was highly progressive, and so was Mani. Persian examples, but still.