Nobles and Citizens?

[Greene]

I thought that Citizens are the Noble kind of pop for Rome, the one that generates commerce and so on, but I open the game now and I see both Citizens and Nobles on the new Culture screen. I think okay, maybe they were conquered recently, I don’t know. But then I see they are “Roman Hellenic”. What gives?

It is true, I haven’t played since like... February.

 

[Rabid]

Nobles are like super citizens who are harder to keep happy, everyone has both nobles and citizens. Don't think too hard about how this maps to reality, just think of there as being a 4-tier social order with slaves at the bottom and nobles at the top (tribesmen are weird)

 

[Synen]

Nobles are basically the wealthy and influential aristocracy while the citizens are the middle to lowest income landowners.

Tribesmen: Low Tax and Low Manpower
Slaves: Tax
Freemen: Low Tax and High Manpower
Citizens: Low Manpower, Low Research and Low Traderoutes
Nobles: High research and High traderoutes

 

[Greene]

So as a general rule, Freemen are better than Tribesmen. Also, what are the conditions for pop promotion (It’s obviously not just desired ratio as I have less Citizens than the ratio and I still don’t get a pop promoting)?

 

[DukeLeto42]

So as a general rule, Freemen are better than Tribesmen. Also, what are the conditions for pop promotion (It’s obviously not just desired ratio as I have less Citizens than the ratio and I still don’t get a pop promoting)?

Cultures now have individual rights, and non-integrated cultures have citizens as their highest possible right. If you've got a bunch of citizen capacity and nobody's promoting, in all likelihood there just aren't any freemen of an integrated culture who can promote.

 

[Greene]

Cultures now have individual rights, and non-integrated cultures have citizens as their highest possible right. If you've got a bunch of citizen capacity and nobody's promoting, in all likelihood there just aren't any freemen of an integrated culture who can promote.

One last question - What is integrated/non-intrgrated culture?

 

[DukeLeto42]

One last question - What is integrated/non-intrgrated culture?

Haha realized I probably just confused you there if you haven't kept up with Dev Diaries. So, "culture groups" now are just groups that get a lower malus for not being integrated. Non-integrated cultures are those that have not been fully accepted as members of your society, and so pops cannot promote up to citizen or noble status; they have reduced happiness in general (if you've played EUIV it's kind of like non-accepted culture). Integrating cultures into your empire makes them full members of the nation, allowing them to promote to either citizen or noble status, and gives them a far higher base happiness. HOWEVER, integrated cultures don't assimilate to your own (although they have generally the same happiness so it doesn't matter except for map-painting), integrating takes time and reduces stability while it occurs, and each new integrated culture drops the happiness of ALL integrated cultures (so you need to be sparing, only integrating cultures that have big populations in your empire - basically you're always going to integrate Macedonian).

You can see all this in the culture window (accessed via the new bubble on the top bar), though something tells me the UI will get a rework at some point because it's not as intuitive as it probably could be.

 

[Atey]

One last question - What is integrated/non-intrgrated culture?

Integrated culture is any culture with at least citizen civic right.

 

[Tomice]

I had this explanation in another thread (Note that it was written before the most recent changes):

Citizens:
Are the skilled and educated upper-middle class. Landowners, merchants, artisans, craftsmen, priests, clerks, librarians, officers, scholars, artists, philosophers ...
--> People that you wouldn't want to send into battle because they are needed at home (except as officers or heavy cavalry, but not in large numbers). People who are educated and have the potential to advance your nation.
They also have the economic power to buy trade goods or are the ones who profitably sell them.
(They represent the patricians in Rome, maybe also some wealthier plebs)

Nobility:
Previously part of citizens, I'm glad they separated them.
(The wealthiest among the patricians of Rome, the political and economic elite)

Slaves:
Are either literal slaves or other underprivileged serfs/laborers without rights or political representation.
--> They work hard to fill the pockets of their owners/superiors and the state.

Freemen:
Are the hardest to explain to me. I consider them to be the lower middle class, people who are considered members of the state and have some personal rights/freedoms, but are still poor economically. They don't own much and have little formal education.
--> They provide minimal tax because they don't have much to give, and also can't be exploited in the way slaves are - they are still "citizens" to an extent. They might pay some tax, but they also cost the state in the form of "bread and circuses" to keep them content. They may get free access to public baths and other privileges to appease them, diminishing much of their tax revenue.
--> They are the main recruitment pool of your army - loyal enough to the state, but expendable and willing to risk their lives for money.
(They represent the "plebs" and "freed men/freed slaves" in Rome)

Tribesmen:
Are more or less self-explanatory - people who live outside of the more stratified civilized society. They mostly rely on subsistence to survive.

This is a short summary of the new roles by the lead dev:

Tribesmen: Low Tax and Low Manpower
Slaves: Tax
Freemen: Low Tax and High Manpower
Citizens: Low Manpower, Low Research and Low Traderoutes
Nobles: High research and High traderoutes

 

[Greene]

Alright, I said it was the last question but apparently I lied lmao.

1) When you conquer a new territory not of your culture (well, province but we’re talking territory level) you only get slaves, tribesmen and freemen, no?
2) Do slaves promote into Tribesmen or into Freemen?

 

[DukeLeto42]

1) When you conquer a new territory not of your culture (well, province but we’re talking territory level) you only get slaves, tribesmen and freemen, no?

Good you asked, because no - pops not of citizen and noble right can't promote to those levels, but you can get pops of non-integrated cultures at those levels via conquest (they just might demote by chance and not be able to promote again).

2) Do slaves promote into Tribesmen or into Freemen?

Unless the setting for a given culture is "slaves only" (because yeah you can totally be the bad guy), yes they should rise to the highest tier their rights are set to (and that the local conditions pull them towards).

 

[Greene]

Good you asked, because no - pops not of citizen and noble right can't promote to those levels, but you can get pops of non-integrated cultures at those levels via conquest (they just might demote by chance and not be able to promote again).



Unless the setting for a given culture is "slaves only" (because yeah you can totally be the bad guy), yes they should rise to the highest tier their rights are set to (and that the local conditions pull them towards).

Great, thanks for the quick answers! I was always under the impression that Slaves promote to Freemen in Republics and to Tribesmen in tribal realms, Monarchy style.

 

[DukeLeto42]

I was always under the impression that Slaves promote to Freemen in Republics and to Tribesmen in tribal realms, Monarchy style.

So if you hit "view pops" in the territory view (maybe don't do that right now because there's some stability issues with the territory view, but the hotfix should be out soon), you'll see that there's a population proportion the territory should tend towards. By their nature republics and monarchies tend towards a slave / freeman split in settlements (with some citizens and nobles in cities), while tribal realms towards a tribal pop-heavy mix. You can modify that to an extent (barracks give more freemen in settlements and city buildings), so all the new culture system does is cap off how high a given culture's pops can rise. Integrating cultures is basically allowing that culture's pops a greater deal of upward social mobility.

 

[Stars_and_Bars]

Great, thanks for the quick answers! I was always under the impression that Slaves promote to Freemen in Republics and to Tribesmen in tribal realms, Monarchy style.

The interesting thing about Tribesmen right now is that nothing demotes or promotes to them. You have an unbroken hierarchy of Noble <-> Citizen <-> Freemen <-> Slaves, and for tribesmen it's just just Freemen <- Tribesmen -> Slaves. The number of tribesmen will only increase through natural growth or events that spawn them. Tribesmen though are fairly difficult to promote for civilized countries, so they tend to stick around.

 

[Nussor]

Its thematically inconsistent and totally superfluous. They're reworking something that didn't need to be touched.

 

[Greene]

So if you want to do something like historical Rome in barbarian lands you’ll want to assimilate/convert those Druidc Gauls (I think) into Roman Hellenics, NOT give them Citizen+ rights and integrate them. Is it viable then? Also, how would you speed up the process?

 

[Herennius]

So if you want to do something like historical Rome in barbarian lands you’ll want to assimilate/convert those Druidc Gauls (I think) into Roman Hellenics, NOT give them Citizen+ rights and integrate them. Is it viable then? Also, how would you speed up the process?

Yes, that perfectly possible. You just have to decide then, if you leave the default setting and allow them to become at least Freemen (useful for manpower and if you don't like to surpress unrest with force) or if you force everyone into Slavery (a 3rd option if leaving their tribal status, which kind of acts middle way - you don't incur the wrath for putting slave sttus on the entire culture, but you stick with the least productive pop type).

For quicker assimilation the corresponding governor policy (and a skilled governor executing it), the Theatre building in cities (yes, urbanizing helps a lot - cities are even without Theatres already the better places for assimilation), certain inventions and some of the decisions you can enact in the culture tab help.

 

[Herennius]

The interesting thing about Tribesmen right now is that nothing demotes or promotes to them. You have an unbroken hierarchy of Noble <-> Citizen <-> Freemen <-> Slaves, and for tribesmen it's just just Freemen <- Tribesmen -> Slaves. The number of tribesmen will only increase through natural growth or events that spawn them. Tribesmen though are fairly difficult to promote for civilized countries, so they tend to stick around.

Not sure if it is WAI or a bug, but the statement that nothing demotes or promotes towards Tribesmen does not seem to be true in 1.5 anymore

 

[Stars_and_Bars]

Not sure if it is WAI or a bug, but the statement that nothing demotes or promotes towards Tribesmen does not seem to be true in 1.5 anymore

View attachment 609580

Well, then I think it has to be a bug.

slaves = {
    outout_modifier = {
        tax_income = 0.022
    }
    
    count_modifier = {
        pop_food_consumption = -0.1
    }
    
    
    is_slaves = yes
    can_promote_to = freemen
    demotes_to = slaves    #doesnt demote really
    political_weight = 0.35
    
    conquest_demote_chance = 0
    
    base_happyness = -0.3
    
    block_colonization = yes
    
    is_linked_with_holdings = yes

    # Activity Speeds
    growing_pop = 0.0
    convert = 0.6
    assimilate = 0.6
    promote = 4
    demote = 0
    migrant = 0.05
    ui_tier = 4
    
    color = hsv { 0.05 0.7 0.3 }
    

    modification_display = {
        0 = value_income
        1 = value_num_of_goods_produced
    }
}

Not only are slaves not supposed to promote to tribesmen, slaves aren't even supposed to be one of the pop types that increases by natural growth.

 

[maxk94]

slaves aren't even supposed to be one of the pop types that increases by natural growth

Where do you see this?
The growth in data is not decisive.