Ok than, so as long as you are republic, your RR is lower, but unless you have the 100% tradition, you have to pay more for stability. Seems legit over all. 
Plutocracy vs Aristocracy
- Thread starter Hallwood-Ingham
- Start date
-
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.
Anyone know if you can choose the Plutocratic tree, change to a monarchy, and continue to buy Plutocratic ideas on the tree? Or vice-versa with the Aristocratic tree?
Don´t know, but I suppose yes (wanted to try with Venice, but apparently, you can´t change your government type if you are a merchant republic - or it was just in demo, who knows). But I don´t know if you can have both (pick one, change government, pick another). Here I think the answer would be no.
Perhaps England gained Plutocracy during its Regency after King Mac 0-0-0, might be a grace period for Monarchies to make "plutocratic" approaches? Whether or not thats how it works i got no clue, but i cant see any other way England would get Plutocracy by 1492, and since in the toturial the English dont have the Plutocratic national idea avaliable... and the entire English civil war is quite abit later..
Last edited:
You cannot use the "change government" mechanics to become, or stop being, a republic. To become one, you have to provoke the burghers into revolting against the aristocracy. To stop being one, you have to drive down your Republican Tradition so that you revert to monarchy.
You missunderstand me. I want to become noble republic, but It couldn´t be done. When I was playing as monarchy, I could go from feudal monarchy to despotic monarchy, but with merchant republics, it can´t be done. Or maybe you just can´t go to noble republic, I don´t know.
Last edited:
I tried to play Venice, get plutocracy and than change to monarchy, unfortunately, Ottomans allied Austria. AGAIN! My tradition was still 78 when they were doing genocide all over my land. I mean which sadistic person programed this that the first thing those two nations do is allying each other. Really?! Austria-Hung I mean Austria-Ottoman empire? I rage quit, And I underline RAGE. I didn´t want to conquest, or make money. I just wanted to fast forward experiment, but they made Venice only for hard core players in this demo. Either you have to slaughter millions of innocent people or they will slaughter you. That is just no fun - I couldn´t watch that bloodshed.
Gosh. But the concept still stays. So, can someone manage to survive long enough to try this? Getting plutocracy ideas is pretty easy. You can even get first few of them. The difficult part is to don´t get yourself killed and somehow manage to turn yourself into kingdom. If there is someone so hardcore he can do it I´d be really thankful for results.
Note: Also, it would be great to save some mil points to see if you actually can open the next plutocracy idea as kingdom.
Gosh. But the concept still stays. So, can someone manage to survive long enough to try this? Getting plutocracy ideas is pretty easy. You can even get first few of them. The difficult part is to don´t get yourself killed and somehow manage to turn yourself into kingdom. If there is someone so hardcore he can do it I´d be really thankful for results.
Note: Also, it would be great to save some mil points to see if you actually can open the next plutocracy idea as kingdom.
Yes, you can. While modding I accidentally encountered that and was amused at having taken both opposites at once.
Yes, you can. While modding I accidentally encountered that and was amused at having taken both opposites at once.
WAAAAAAT?!? You actually can have BOTH? That is the most sadistic combo I can imagine. I´ll surely go for that in some of my games.
It all shows again that locking the player into specific idea tracks forever was a bad idea. Your whole flexibility to adapt to the circumstances is gone.
It's odd that plutocracy should be completely locked out for monarchies. The two are not mutually exclusive. Throughout the game's time period, the idea and practice of non-noble wealthy landowners and merchants gaining power in government gained considerable momentum, especially in England but also in France (Rentiers). One of the ways in which feudal monarchies became less feudal was by shifting power from the feudal aristocrats to wealthy plutocrats and bureaucrats. Aristocracy <> Plutocracy simply represents the shift from power through birthright to power through wealth, which occurred to some extent throughout European monarchies in the Early Modern Period.
This is all correct, but I don't think everyone is appreciating that these idea groups represent your country's national character. While there were likely a lot of rich commoners who were able to buy influence, that doesn't mean the character of the English state should be described as plutocratic. Indeed, because a house of parliament exists specifically for aristocratic lords, I would argue that aristocracy is the more appropriate group. Why is there a House of Lords today? Because the country has a very aristocratic heritage. That's what these ideas are supposed to represent for each country. Any society that has legal mechanisms to protect the inherited nobility should probably fall into the aristocratic group.
The only thing I don't like is that groups are permanent (as far as I know), so you're probably stuck with aristocracy even if your country is turned into a republic by rebels.
I can confirm that England starts with plutocratic ideas locked in at the 1492 start. The AI doesn't choose them through an exception, they actually start with them as their first pre-locked group.
I hope it's not a mistake, because I actually quite like it. The ideas in the Plutocratic group reflect the interesting situation of a lot of the rights and ideals (for a monarchy, that is) that occurred up until becoming an early constitutional monarchy and afterwards. It would be neat to start as England a bit later just to get them I think.
I hope it's not a mistake, because I actually quite like it. The ideas in the Plutocratic group reflect the interesting situation of a lot of the rights and ideals (for a monarchy, that is) that occurred up until becoming an early constitutional monarchy and afterwards. It would be neat to start as England a bit later just to get them I think.
The ideas will always be attenuated by your actual government type and situation. A monarchy with major plutocratic ideals is not a contradiction in terms. The House of Lords, since you brought it up, was more and more populated by wealthy landowners etc. elevated to lordship by the king, not feudal aristocrats, during the game's period - and they could lose that lordship by losing their wealth (a purely plutocratic concept). The fact that these became hereditary does not change their origin - wealthy commoners becoming lords is a plutocratic notion. I don't think having plutocracy as an idea defines your country as a plutocracy, it simply elevates the rich to power of a certain degree.
Last edited:
Because we had a conservative revolution in the 1640s, instead of a liberal one in the 1840s.
There are two houses The house of Commons and the house of Lords that make of the Houses of parliament or parliament. The house of Commons however is the legislative body. The supremacy of Parliament is in reference to the House of Commons not the house of lords. And the Supremacy of parliament was established in the Glorious revolution when the House of Commons said NO we will not accept a catholic king. Yet the influence of parliament begins much before that. It is in fact this growing influence and power that sparks the Civil war. Plutocratic ideals can be seen in the English character going as far back as the Magna Carta, the peasants revolt and adversarial procedural system in the courts vs the inquisitional procedural system and the meritocracy of the Naval promotion.
