Parliaments

[Mr_Hobo]

The addition of Parliaments in the new expansion is a great opportunity to deepen the EUIV peacetime experience. However, I think the system could be improved upon by reworking voting, as well as by expanding which government forms have Parliaments.

While seats voting on proposals is a good idea, I think each seat should lean for or against debates based on the goods they produce and the development level of the province. For example, seats producing Naval Supplies should support naval expansions automatically, while requiring large concessions to vote for a land expansion. Low-development, wheat-producing provinces may want colonial tariffs increased, and will never support tax increases. Giving seats only to one type of province (i.e., not giving seats to agrarian provinces) would increase unrest in these provinces until a seat is granted.

Beyond just the English monarchy, constitutional monarchy, and constitutional republic, I think that the elective monarchy, Dutch republic, federal republic, and American republic. They would each have specific localizations (also based on culture) for their Parliaments: Congress for the American and federal republics, States General for the Dutch republic, Sejm for the elective monarchy, etc. The penalties for each seat of parliament could also be reduced depending on governmental form.

For my ideas relating Parliaments to NI's, see this thread:
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/ni-changes-for-new-expansion.853756/

 

[Titanius Puffin]

While seats voting on proposals is a good idea, I think each seat should lean for or against debates based on the goods they produce and the development level of the province. For example, seats producing Naval Supplies should support naval expansions automatically, while requiring large concessions to vote for a land expansion.

Yeah. I think that having all seats automatically against a motion is a little too simple, and rather boring. Perhaps there should be at least one seat in favour of any law trying to be passed. It would simulate at the very least the english parliamentary system where individual members actually propose a bill, and the majority must approve for it to become law.
I imagine other parliaments are quite similar. And Even a random seat endorsing a policy is better than nothing.

If you passed a law which that one seat wanted from the beginning, you might get a (small) kind of political discount with them when you need their support for something later. You might even get such a discount for having lavished attention & monarch points on them in the past.

I'm also in full agreement with you on the context of each seat determining its (initial) vote. In addition to trade goods and developmental level, what about local rebels? Local religion?
Would the parliament be more (or less) accommodating if stability was high? What about war exhaustion? Inflation? Prestige? I think the more aspects that are tied into the parliamentary system the better. I think it'd be nice to feel like you're trying to balance the (somewhat coherent) internal politics of the realm with your own goals.

Without enough context informing each vote, I do worry a little that the parliamentary system could resemble a collection of missions (meet narrow conditions, get reward, rinse & repeat) rather than an assembly of various interests. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

 

[Mr_Hobo]

Without enough context informing each vote, I do worry a little that the parliamentary system could resemble a collection of missions (meet narrow conditions, get reward, rinse & repeat) rather than an assembly of various interests. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Yeah it basically sounds like "Make as few seats as possible to avoid granting too many concessions. Figure out which seats will cost you the least in order to get a reward. Go down list clicking buttons until you get reward."

The give-and-take should be more dynamic, involving long-term actions and policies.

 

[joe9594]

Agreed a system in which you can actually interact with parliament rather than just dumping resources on them every decade would be a lot more fun.

 

[Mr_Hobo]

Any dev feedback?

 

[white army]

These are good ideas, however, Parliaments should have also negetive cases like if the kings hasn't created any debate for many years, or raised taxes not in favour of them, it should bring into chaos and even civil war as historicaly happened. That's why the AI should lean to the Absolutist path in the rest of Europe and the world (beacuse Magna Carta couldn't limit the monarch power), while in England it should prevent any chaos and struggle with the parliament (the English gameplay should lean on patience and calm periods that meanwhile increasing support for passing reforms much as possible).

 

[Mr_Hobo]

These are good ideas, however, Parliaments should have also negetive cases like if the kings hasn't created any debate for many years, or raised taxes not in favour of them, it should bring into chaos and even civil war as historicaly happened. That's why the AI should lean to the Absolutist path in the rest of Europe and the world (beacuse Magna Carta couldn't limit the monarch power), while in England it should prevent any chaos and struggle with the parliament (the English gameplay should lean on patience and calm periods that meanwhile increasing support for passing reforms much as possible).

Yeah, and I think if you consistently don't address a seat's key issues then unrest should rise.

 

[joe9594]

These are good ideas, however, Parliaments should have also negetive cases like if the kings hasn't created any debate for many years, or raised taxes not in favour of them, it should bring into chaos and even civil war as historicaly happened. That's why the AI should lean to the Absolutist path in the rest of Europe and the world (beacuse Magna Carta couldn't limit the monarch power), while in England it should prevent any chaos and struggle with the parliament (the English gameplay should lean on patience and calm periods that meanwhile increasing support for passing reforms much as possible).

\Well the developer diary already said that if you aren't having a debate every decade you will get negative modifiers. But obviously if the system is made more interative this element of it should be too.

 

[Mr_Hobo]

I'm gonna bump this, because I think it's still very relevant. The percentages change to Parliaments, while nice, didn't really fix the core problem of not being interactive or dynamic.