Just tell me We're Dealing with Seperate Classes..

[unmerged(19057)]

so in this forum we've basically suggested and argued about every single fine point of this upcoming game..and i've missed a lot so we've probably hit this one already but here goes.

if it hasn't already been decided, this game should definately involve a sort of POPs way of dealing with Population. I hated whenever a revolt would happen in the old EU and it would just be a mass of people without any clear demands or reason to fight. This game should deal a lot more with gentry/burghers/peasents(and maybe clerical, though they can usually be clumped with nobility). A ruler should have different options of internal policy...that effect the loyalty and power of a class(power being its strength to resist you if they aren't loyal)
-freeing the peasents(which would make the peasents love you and gentry hate you, and thus change their power)
-revoking town charters(resulting in a plummit of the burgher's loyalty and their power, a little extra income, and a small manpwr loss)
-taxation w/ representation(meaning taxes cant be changed without approval of a governing body~more on that below)
-Habeus Corpus(maybe turn on or off events like 'trouble brews in a certain provice, you can arrest the leaders to prevent an incendent)
-Levee en Masse(makes everyone a little ticked but helps your manpower pool)
-other rights, all of which can be either turned on or off
the basis of this system would be to characterize the struggle for power most countries underwent in the 16th cnentury, usually in reaction to a monarch's attemt at centralization.

in addition to these basic yes/no options(each with a specific advantage and disadvantage) there should be a crude form of constitution.

Monarchy / Dictatorship / Republic


no assembly / assembly on summons / regular assembly


estates general / parliament / national assembly
(based on old ---- (based on English ---- (based on New French
French model, ---- model, favor gentry ---- model, favors peasents)
favor the gentry) ---- and burghers)

this is just my model but, basically it allows further manipulation of which classes to give power and therefore rely on(or try to balance your rule out
playing one group against another)

finally there would the ability to shift the tax burden between the three classes(Tarrifs(burghers), Property Tax(Gentry), FlatTax(Peasents))
This way you can alter where your money comes from , but if you have tax w/ representation then it must be OKed by the governing body(so the powers at be would not allow themselves to be taxed heavily)

to me the constitutional aspect, along with the religion, dynasty, and exploration, are four main themes of the period, and to me the old EU did only one(exploration) justice. I love the new enthusiasm for court intrgue and technology, but i think this game should be much more abstract on how exactly the country is actually ruled. I'm not saying my model is the best, but i'd like to here what anyone else has to say

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

AFAIK it already has been decided, EUIII will not have a 'POP' system

 

[MattyG]

Thank heavens. The Pops thing was what killed Victoria for me. Not just the fiddly-faddly of it all, but also the ability of a leader government to move people from one class/profession to another. Impossible. Absolutely impossible. Maybe in Stalinist Russia or the Khmer Rouge. If you're going to detail Pops (and the period we are looking at here, there were, like, 3 different classes, maybe 4, 99% of which were peasants) then the best a ruler can do is set up the conditions by which people my change/improve themselves.

Pops ... baaaaaad idea.

 

[Calantyr]

Pops are like marmite. You either love them or hate them.

 

[OHgamer]

Thank heavens. The Pops thing was what killed Victoria for me. Not just the fiddly-faddly of it all, but also the ability of a leader government to move people from one class/profession to another. Impossible. Absolutely impossible. Maybe in Stalinist Russia or the Khmer Rouge. If you're going to detail Pops (and the period we are looking at here, there were, like, 3 different classes, maybe 4, 99% of which were peasants) then the best a ruler can do is set up the conditions by which people my change/improve themselves.

Pops ... baaaaaad idea.

Perhaps, but at least the player can not scream at the game enging for taking away control over what he wants to do with his POPs because he has some slider set at 60% instead of 65%. Micromanagement yes, but it also gives the player total control over how he plays the game. And better to have the player feel he is in control of his destiny in the game than be at the mercy of predetermined algorhythms that might not have any sembelance of what the individual player might want to do in the game.

But I digress....

 

[Sute]{h]

Thank heavens. The Pops thing was what killed Victoria for me. Not just the fiddly-faddly of it all, but also the ability of a leader government to move people from one class/profession to another. Impossible. Absolutely impossible. Maybe in Stalinist Russia or the Khmer Rouge. If you're going to detail Pops (and the period we are looking at here, there were, like, 3 different classes, maybe 4, 99% of which were peasants) then the best a ruler can do is set up the conditions by which people my change/improve themselves.

Pops ... baaaaaad idea.

The player ISN'T the leader of the country. The player is the guiding spirit of the country. Otherwise you could only rule a country for the lifetime of a single leader.

 

[Flori]

No POPs.

 

[Jayavarman]

Thank heavens. The Pops thing was what killed Victoria for me. Not just the fiddly-faddly of it all, but also the ability of a leader government to move people from one class/profession to another. Impossible. Absolutely impossible. Maybe in Stalinist Russia or the Khmer Rouge. If you're going to detail Pops (and the period we are looking at here, there were, like, 3 different classes, maybe 4, 99% of which were peasants) then the best a ruler can do is set up the conditions by which people my change/improve themselves.

Pops ... baaaaaad idea.

Who said having POPs meant we had to control them?

 

[Sute]{h]

No POPs.

Hey! Where is that free game code.

 

[unmerged(7313)]

Who said having POPs meant we had to control them?

Adding features that the player is unable to cotrol - bad idea.

 

[Jayavarman]

Adding features that the player is unable to cotrol - bad idea.

The POPs would just represent the population data. I do not think any players would expect that they should be able to promote and assign these POPs in EU3.

 

[unmerged(7313)]

The POPs would just represent the population data. I do not think any players would expect that they should be able to promote and assign these POPs in EU3.

If you want something to represent data population, then a simple chart is enough. Why POPs then?

 

[unmerged(19057)]

hm i see my suggestion of a 'sort of POPs' system has been misunderstood, and i appologize
i wasnt talking about being able to convert pops or move pops or change pops, but merely for the population to be considered as belonging to different groups(because while the peasents were the vast majority, they were not 99% and had much less a % of control in the country). the fact is that most civil struggles during the period were either about religion or the position of the social classes. i guess the system im refering to would be more closely related to the CK system; but i'm not talking about mimicking either one.

And I'm not talking about Micromanagement..im talking about the constitution structures that the monarchs of the period had to deal with.

And in response to Sute]{h :
Yes, the Paradox series does not put you in the seat of one ruler, but rather as the giest or spirit of an entire country. But what about, say, civil wars for example. Why is it that you fight for the side of the current regime against the opposing rebels? Or raise taxes or do any of the things you do internally? The fact is that you are playing a wider spectrum of a country, but your basically seeing it through the eyes of the administration. If you don't have different classes to oppose you, or verious laws that limit you, then your destroying the essence of the game. Administrations during the period did'nt have absolute power; they were overthrown because they thought they did. Couldn't there be a more interactive system to display this; rather then a variable between -3 and 3 that determines how your citizens feel about you?

 

[crazy canuck]

Adding features that the player is unable to cotrol - bad idea.

Didnt you like MOO III

 

[Jayavarman]

If you want something to represent data population, then a simple chart is enough. Why POPs then?

Can a chart migrate, revolt, and convert?

 

[KaiserChicken]

Vicky also commited the mistake of giving the player full control over the country's industrial and economic base, as if we were in Soviet Russia, during the height of the five-year plan models. And this when the Victorian age was marked by the rise and affirmation of capitalism as a global economic model based around private enterprise. Which did not mean I did not love Vicky

 

[unmerged(34993)]

You are not the ruler of country in Vicky, you should understand this. You ARE a country. A spirit of it.

You don't build factories. You stimulate the development of this area. You don't convert POPs, you stimulate migration to cities.

It is just abstracted a bit, so you can actually play, you know

 

[MattyG]

Adding features that the player is unable to cotrol - bad idea.

Adding features a player can't FULLY control - critically good idea.

 

[Gebhard Blucher]

Adding features a player can't FULLY control - critically good idea.

MOO3 did that and just about everybody hated it. There are some who love the macro-management of MOO3, but there are very few of them around. People like being in control, but they hate micro-management. Kind of a paradox, until you think of micro-management as control but with inadequate management tools (like digging through nested menus constantly, or not being able to set up exact rules for automation features).

 

[unmerged(7313)]

Didnt you like MOO III

Good word would be: loathe.