The new Emperor update includes Government Reforms in the base game and the Dev Diaries touched on reform progress being tied to Republican Tradition (RT). The Strenghten Government mechanic introduced in the "Rights of Man" DLC is one of the only ways, the player can directly increase their legitimacy or legitimacy equivalent (LE). For every government form that button works the same way, which makes it not only rather uninteresting, but also really weird thematically.
The biggest problem here are republics. You spent military power, therefore force, to gain RT and, starting in the Age of Absolutism, absolutism. For once there shouldn't be a single button in the game that gives RT and absolutism, since these two are almost polar opposites of each other. There is a reason that all republics give a malus to maximum absolutism. Also it deems contradicting to spent military power to raise RT, as the name shows.
I therefore propose a change to the "Strengthen Government" mechanic, which wouldn't only make more sense thematically but help to distinguish between the different governments, giving players more meaningful choices about what kind of government they want according to their goals. Since most players play monarchies with the goal to blob as good as they can and since it fits thematically i would retain the current costs and effect for monarchies and adjust the rest:
Monarchies using legitimacy:
Emperor of China (monarchy using meritocracy):
Republics using republican tradition:
Republican dictatorships:
Tribal governments using legitimacy/horde unity:
Theocracies using "Monastic Order" government reform
Theocracies not using "Monastic Order" government reform
In the following paragraphs i will explain in detail, why i chose which costs and effects.
Monarchies using legitimacy:
The standard monarchy is the de facto standard for a government and clearly the government the "Strengthen Government" feature was originally intended for. Therefore it would be unreasonable to change it from a gameplay point. Also it is not unrealistic, monarchs using military might to consolidate their power is not uncommen, and the bigger stick has always been the most trusted form of legitimacy. Therefore cost and both effects are warranted.
Emperor of China using meritocracy:
The Empire of China uses a different resource. While it would be realistic for them to use military power to strengthen their legitimacy, legitimacy isn't the value that is intended to be increased. Therefore the question is what kind of resource would be used to increase the meritocracy of a country. While multiple options are possible i chose to stick with monarch power as the only cost, since they are accumulated in the same way and have therefore a similar value (people might disagree, but only because that type of government isn't intended for their playstyle). The choice was between diplomatic and administrative power. Since the selection process for chinese imperial bureaucrats was a massive administrative undertaking it makes sense that an optimisation of this process would increase meritocracy and cost administrative effort. The age of absolutism bonus would also need to be changed, since an administrative effort to improve the bureaucratic apparatus wouldn't result in a more centralized power structure by any means. Thinking about the chinese empire Harmony and Mandate are the obvious options. Harmony is a religious component, and while the imperial chinese bureaucracy wasn't exactly secularised there is no argument, why optimising the bureaucracy to be more meritocratic would impact religious harmony. Mandate would have been a good option, if it would be legitimacy. But we ae looking for an administrative value. To stay close to the effect of the original effects, i ruled out any timed modifiers like increased tax modifier. The remaining options were corruption, mercantilism, and flat amounts of money. The third option is boring, the second is traditionally related to the "dip" sphere of the game and already has a flat inncrease button and the first option, reducing corruption perfectly hits the theme. Meritocratic means chosing offices based on merit. If that value is high it automatically rules out corruption, the two things can even be understood as interchangeble. While it might not make sense to lock this effect behind the age of absolutism i wanted to keep the same structure for all governments.
Republics using republican tradition:
The gross thing that is the "Strengthen Government" button in republics was the original reason for this rework concept. Incresing the control that the government has over the country by military might would realistically only hurt the republican tradition of the country. The most prime example in history is the question of dictatorship in roman republic history. The question was if administrative or diplomatic power are the more likely possibility to streghten republican tradition. Realistically "tradition" values shouldn't have the possibility to be flatly increased anyway. But there are gameplay arguments for it. It wouldn't be a question of administrative capabilites. But a diplomatic effort could increase how republican the country is perceived. The option in question is basically propaganda. Reinforcing republican values by communicating commitment to them. This also means that absolutism MUST decrease with this option, since commiting to republican values means committing to a power monopoly of the electorate. This is also the point where probably most of this forums members will lynch me for attacking their favourite gameplay stat, absolutism. But truly republican Republics are not meant to be absolutistic, they are not meant to blob to world conquest. If you want to do that as a republic take the roman approach and turn into a ruthless dictatorship. Since this reduction also has massive gameplay implication there needs to be a massive but fitting buff in exchange. Government reform progress seems like hte obvious choice here. Reinforcing republican values means easy access to reform of the system. Also with the added option to turn reform progress into government capacity it gives strong buffs to larger republics. The +20 value seems high, but it needs to not only offset the absolutism malus but also be a positive value in itself, since all other governments get an additional bonus when hitting the age of absolutism.
Republican dictatorships:
Republican dictaorships represent a unique case. There are only two reasons a country hits dictatorship, wanting to get rid of the republican government form or accidentally. This presents a unique dilemma. Gameplaywise the "Strengthen Government" button is one of the few ways to get out of an unwanted dictatorship but realistically a dictatorship strengthening their own power wouldn't result in them going back to republican values. I chose the realistic option, since in my opinion using a gameplay option to act exactly against what it implies to do, just to achieve an edge case is just poor game development. For paradox that would mean, that they would need to give the player additional tools to get out of a dictatorship without the "Strengthen Government" option, which would realistically mean upping the frequency of RT events in dictatorships. Still it should be a struggle to prevent dictatorships turning into monarchies. So uniquely this means that "Strengthen government" should actually decrease republican tradition even further. Also the cost should obviously be military, since military power (and a bunch of populism) is usually the only tool a dictator actually has available to solidify his position. Unlike the other republic the loss of one modifier doesn't need to be offset, since the loss is often neglibible for a dictatorshp. The question is now what should be gained. An increase in military might seems like the obvious choice. Since i ruled out temporary modifiers the remaining choices are "Army Tradition", "Army Professionalism" and actual troops. Actual troops are not in line with all other effects of the button and it is questionable if a stronger control in the hands of a dictator would magically produce soldiers. It might just do that in case of strong propaganda, but that would more likely be a diplomatic investment. I would usually advocate against flat increases in "tradition" values, but since army professionalism is sadly still a DLC-locked feature (and one of the most impactful ones next to tier 5 advisors and innovativeness and probably this feature if it would be implemented this way) i would choose army tradition for players without "Cradle of Civilization", and for army professionalism for players with that DLC. As for the age of absolutism bonus there is no reason why the effect should deviate from the standard monachy effect of +2 absolutism. It is fitting.
Tribal governments using legitimacy/horde unity:
These governments function as budget versions of monarchies, especially the first one. Therefore it makes sense for them to use the same basic mechanic as monarchies do. For the age of absolutism bonus i chose to differ from the monarchy opion. Tribes and monarchies mostly differ in their extend and centralization of administration. It didn't seem right to give absolutism to less consolidated governments. There is an argument for it since "Strengthen Govenrment" might imply to do exactly that, but i chose to understand it as getting firmer control within the state. This might be done by increasing the loyalty of the individual tribes. I admit that this might just be for the sake of giving tribes incentives to reform into monarchies and to differentiate between.
Theocracies using "Monastic Order" government reform:
Monastic Orders in this game usually represent knightly orders and are therefore highly militaristic. Therefore i chose to keep the military cost, although im not sure on what to imagine when orders turn their military power into devotion. The base reward stays the same as for all governments (except dictatorships). For the age of absolutism i chose to not give them absolutism. Yes, more zeal and devotion can correlate with higher centralization and government power monopolies but there is not necessarily a causal relationship. Instead i chose the same military modifier dictatorships get in their standard effect. Since strenghtenen the government of a knightly order means strengthening the knightly order itself and therefore its military capabilities i felt that that modifier was fitting.
Lastly i would kindly asks the devs that if this system will get reworked in this way or a similar way to make it part of the basegame. It would represent a major gameplay part concerning all nations.
The biggest problem here are republics. You spent military power, therefore force, to gain RT and, starting in the Age of Absolutism, absolutism. For once there shouldn't be a single button in the game that gives RT and absolutism, since these two are almost polar opposites of each other. There is a reason that all republics give a malus to maximum absolutism. Also it deems contradicting to spent military power to raise RT, as the name shows.
I therefore propose a change to the "Strengthen Government" mechanic, which wouldn't only make more sense thematically but help to distinguish between the different governments, giving players more meaningful choices about what kind of government they want according to their goals. Since most players play monarchies with the goal to blob as good as they can and since it fits thematically i would retain the current costs and effect for monarchies and adjust the rest:
Monarchies using legitimacy:
Cost: 100 military power
Effect: 10 legitimacy
Bonus effect in age of absolutism: 2 absolutism
Effect: 10 legitimacy
Bonus effect in age of absolutism: 2 absolutism
Emperor of China (monarchy using meritocracy):
Cost: 100 administrative power
Effect: 10 meritocracy
Bonus effect in age of absolutism: -2 corruption
Effect: 10 meritocracy
Bonus effect in age of absolutism: -2 corruption
Republics using republican tradition:
Cost: 100 diplomatic power
Effect: 3 republican tradition
Bonus effect in age of absolutism: 20 government reform progress, -2 absolutism
Effect: 3 republican tradition
Bonus effect in age of absolutism: 20 government reform progress, -2 absolutism
Republican dictatorships:
Cost: 100 military power
Effect: -5 republican tradition, without CoC 10 army tradition, with CoC 2 army professionalism
Bonus effect in age of absolutism: 2 absolutism
Effect: -5 republican tradition, without CoC 10 army tradition, with CoC 2 army professionalism
Bonus effect in age of absolutism: 2 absolutism
Tribal governments using legitimacy/horde unity:
Cost: 100 military power
Effect: 10 legitimacy/horde unity
Bonus effect in age of absolutism: +10 Tribes loyalty
Effect: 10 legitimacy/horde unity
Bonus effect in age of absolutism: +10 Tribes loyalty
Theocracies using "Monastic Order" government reform
Cost: 100 military power
Effect: 10 devotion
Bonus effect in age of absolutism: wihtout CoC:10 army tradition with CoC: 2 army professionalism
Effect: 10 devotion
Bonus effect in age of absolutism: wihtout CoC:10 army tradition with CoC: 2 army professionalism
Theocracies not using "Monastic Order" government reform
Cost: 100 administrative power
Effect: 10 devotion
Bonus effect in age of absolutism: +10 clergy loyalty
Effect: 10 devotion
Bonus effect in age of absolutism: +10 clergy loyalty
In the following paragraphs i will explain in detail, why i chose which costs and effects.
Monarchies using legitimacy:
The standard monarchy is the de facto standard for a government and clearly the government the "Strengthen Government" feature was originally intended for. Therefore it would be unreasonable to change it from a gameplay point. Also it is not unrealistic, monarchs using military might to consolidate their power is not uncommen, and the bigger stick has always been the most trusted form of legitimacy. Therefore cost and both effects are warranted.
Emperor of China using meritocracy:
The Empire of China uses a different resource. While it would be realistic for them to use military power to strengthen their legitimacy, legitimacy isn't the value that is intended to be increased. Therefore the question is what kind of resource would be used to increase the meritocracy of a country. While multiple options are possible i chose to stick with monarch power as the only cost, since they are accumulated in the same way and have therefore a similar value (people might disagree, but only because that type of government isn't intended for their playstyle). The choice was between diplomatic and administrative power. Since the selection process for chinese imperial bureaucrats was a massive administrative undertaking it makes sense that an optimisation of this process would increase meritocracy and cost administrative effort. The age of absolutism bonus would also need to be changed, since an administrative effort to improve the bureaucratic apparatus wouldn't result in a more centralized power structure by any means. Thinking about the chinese empire Harmony and Mandate are the obvious options. Harmony is a religious component, and while the imperial chinese bureaucracy wasn't exactly secularised there is no argument, why optimising the bureaucracy to be more meritocratic would impact religious harmony. Mandate would have been a good option, if it would be legitimacy. But we ae looking for an administrative value. To stay close to the effect of the original effects, i ruled out any timed modifiers like increased tax modifier. The remaining options were corruption, mercantilism, and flat amounts of money. The third option is boring, the second is traditionally related to the "dip" sphere of the game and already has a flat inncrease button and the first option, reducing corruption perfectly hits the theme. Meritocratic means chosing offices based on merit. If that value is high it automatically rules out corruption, the two things can even be understood as interchangeble. While it might not make sense to lock this effect behind the age of absolutism i wanted to keep the same structure for all governments.
Republics using republican tradition:
The gross thing that is the "Strengthen Government" button in republics was the original reason for this rework concept. Incresing the control that the government has over the country by military might would realistically only hurt the republican tradition of the country. The most prime example in history is the question of dictatorship in roman republic history. The question was if administrative or diplomatic power are the more likely possibility to streghten republican tradition. Realistically "tradition" values shouldn't have the possibility to be flatly increased anyway. But there are gameplay arguments for it. It wouldn't be a question of administrative capabilites. But a diplomatic effort could increase how republican the country is perceived. The option in question is basically propaganda. Reinforcing republican values by communicating commitment to them. This also means that absolutism MUST decrease with this option, since commiting to republican values means committing to a power monopoly of the electorate. This is also the point where probably most of this forums members will lynch me for attacking their favourite gameplay stat, absolutism. But truly republican Republics are not meant to be absolutistic, they are not meant to blob to world conquest. If you want to do that as a republic take the roman approach and turn into a ruthless dictatorship. Since this reduction also has massive gameplay implication there needs to be a massive but fitting buff in exchange. Government reform progress seems like hte obvious choice here. Reinforcing republican values means easy access to reform of the system. Also with the added option to turn reform progress into government capacity it gives strong buffs to larger republics. The +20 value seems high, but it needs to not only offset the absolutism malus but also be a positive value in itself, since all other governments get an additional bonus when hitting the age of absolutism.
Republican dictatorships:
Republican dictaorships represent a unique case. There are only two reasons a country hits dictatorship, wanting to get rid of the republican government form or accidentally. This presents a unique dilemma. Gameplaywise the "Strengthen Government" button is one of the few ways to get out of an unwanted dictatorship but realistically a dictatorship strengthening their own power wouldn't result in them going back to republican values. I chose the realistic option, since in my opinion using a gameplay option to act exactly against what it implies to do, just to achieve an edge case is just poor game development. For paradox that would mean, that they would need to give the player additional tools to get out of a dictatorship without the "Strengthen Government" option, which would realistically mean upping the frequency of RT events in dictatorships. Still it should be a struggle to prevent dictatorships turning into monarchies. So uniquely this means that "Strengthen government" should actually decrease republican tradition even further. Also the cost should obviously be military, since military power (and a bunch of populism) is usually the only tool a dictator actually has available to solidify his position. Unlike the other republic the loss of one modifier doesn't need to be offset, since the loss is often neglibible for a dictatorshp. The question is now what should be gained. An increase in military might seems like the obvious choice. Since i ruled out temporary modifiers the remaining choices are "Army Tradition", "Army Professionalism" and actual troops. Actual troops are not in line with all other effects of the button and it is questionable if a stronger control in the hands of a dictator would magically produce soldiers. It might just do that in case of strong propaganda, but that would more likely be a diplomatic investment. I would usually advocate against flat increases in "tradition" values, but since army professionalism is sadly still a DLC-locked feature (and one of the most impactful ones next to tier 5 advisors and innovativeness and probably this feature if it would be implemented this way) i would choose army tradition for players without "Cradle of Civilization", and for army professionalism for players with that DLC. As for the age of absolutism bonus there is no reason why the effect should deviate from the standard monachy effect of +2 absolutism. It is fitting.
Tribal governments using legitimacy/horde unity:
These governments function as budget versions of monarchies, especially the first one. Therefore it makes sense for them to use the same basic mechanic as monarchies do. For the age of absolutism bonus i chose to differ from the monarchy opion. Tribes and monarchies mostly differ in their extend and centralization of administration. It didn't seem right to give absolutism to less consolidated governments. There is an argument for it since "Strengthen Govenrment" might imply to do exactly that, but i chose to understand it as getting firmer control within the state. This might be done by increasing the loyalty of the individual tribes. I admit that this might just be for the sake of giving tribes incentives to reform into monarchies and to differentiate between.
Theocracies using "Monastic Order" government reform:
Monastic Orders in this game usually represent knightly orders and are therefore highly militaristic. Therefore i chose to keep the military cost, although im not sure on what to imagine when orders turn their military power into devotion. The base reward stays the same as for all governments (except dictatorships). For the age of absolutism i chose to not give them absolutism. Yes, more zeal and devotion can correlate with higher centralization and government power monopolies but there is not necessarily a causal relationship. Instead i chose the same military modifier dictatorships get in their standard effect. Since strenghtenen the government of a knightly order means strengthening the knightly order itself and therefore its military capabilities i felt that that modifier was fitting.
Lastly i would kindly asks the devs that if this system will get reworked in this way or a similar way to make it part of the basegame. It would represent a major gameplay part concerning all nations.
- 1
Upvote
0
