• Crusader Kings III Available Now!

    The realm rejoices as Paradox Interactive announces the launch of Crusader Kings III, the latest entry in the publisher’s grand strategy role-playing game franchise. Advisors may now jockey for positions of influence and adversaries should save their schemes for another day, because on this day Crusader Kings III can be purchased on Steam, the Paradox Store, and other major online retailers.


    Real Strategy Requires Cunning

JaxElite

Captain
38 Badges
Aug 18, 2018
407
1.121
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Victoria 2
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Dungeonland
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II
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:

Cost: 100 military power
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​

Republics using republican tradition:

Cost: 100 diplomatic power
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​

Tribal governments using legitimacy/horde unity:

Cost: 100 military power
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​

Theocracies not using "Monastic Order" government reform

Cost: 100 administrative power
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.
 

Eruth

First Lieutenant
37 Badges
May 27, 2017
255
257
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II
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:

Cost: 100 military power
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​

Republics using republican tradition:

Cost: 100 diplomatic power
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​

Tribal governments using legitimacy/horde unity:

Cost: 100 military power
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​

Theocracies not using "Monastic Order" government reform

Cost: 100 administrative power
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.
Yeah. I like that. It's thematic, fun, balanced, and fairly simple. A+ suggestion, I will be sad if they don't implement it.
 

PyroMegaManZ

Second Lieutenant
38 Badges
Mar 22, 2014
155
181
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife Pre-Order
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Prison Architect
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Victoria 2
  • Cities in Motion
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
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:

Cost: 100 military power
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​

Republics using republican tradition:

Cost: 100 diplomatic power
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​

Tribal governments using legitimacy/horde unity:

Cost: 100 military power
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​

Theocracies not using "Monastic Order" government reform

Cost: 100 administrative power
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.
I most of all like the change to Republics with Strengthen Government. Republics have always had the most option for using Government Reform to gain bonuses to their nation, and now they will be able to use this progress to give themselves additional administrative capacity in the coming patch as per the recent dev diary. I think this and a slight change to absolutism could quite easily make Republics a viable alternative to monarchies for different purposes (I believe absolutism should at the very least give a malus of unrest to nations with high absolutism such that at 100 absolutism they might have a +4 unrest or something like that and a malus to dev cost to prevent wide empires being able to play tall at the same time). This would mean that Republics would be great for multi-cultural/multi-religious nations, or tall playing nations.
 

JaxElite

Captain
38 Badges
Aug 18, 2018
407
1.121
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Victoria 2
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Dungeonland
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II
I most of all like the change to Republics with Strengthen Government. Republics have always had the most option for using Government Reform to gain bonuses to their nation, and now they will be able to use this progress to give themselves additional administrative capacity in the coming patch as per the recent dev diary. I think this and a slight change to absolutism could quite easily make Republics a viable alternative to monarchies for different purposes (I believe absolutism should at the very least give a malus of unrest to nations with high absolutism such that at 100 absolutism they might have a +4 unrest or something like that and a malus to dev cost to prevent wide empires being able to play tall at the same time). This would mean that Republics would be great for multi-cultural/multi-religious nations, or tall playing nations.
I personally don't think that absolutism necessarily needs those nerfs. Yes it is a strong modifier in the late game but its usefulness really depend on what you try to achieve. Yes it is mandatory if you want to blob a lot, but that is the style of gameplay monarchies and dictatorships are meant for. Most campaigns are abandoned in the midgame because unrestricted blobbing is tedious. It is not the only thing the game offers
 

PyroMegaManZ

Second Lieutenant
38 Badges
Mar 22, 2014
155
181
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife Pre-Order
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Prison Architect
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Victoria 2
  • Cities in Motion
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
I personally don't think that absolutism necessarily needs those nerfs. Yes it is a strong modifier in the late game but its usefulness really depend on what you try to achieve. Yes it is mandatory if you want to blob a lot, but that is the style of gameplay monarchies and dictatorships are meant for. Most campaigns are abandoned in the midgame because unrestricted blobbing is tedious. It is not the only thing the game offers
I personally feel that absolutism is just a free bonus with no downsides for anyone, regardless of playstyle. Even if I am playing super tall Netherlands, the admin effiiciency helps heaps for getting level 5 advisors permanently (or 20 colonies at once), for getting extra dev cost reduction, and for reducing local autonomy. There is no penalty for accumulating it or gaining it and as such almost all guides apart from role-playing guides call for all other bonus that decrease your max absolutism to be thrown away since it is seen as such an important bonus (though as you do say many of these guides are for blobbers).

I just feel there needs to be some penalty that goes with a huge national buff that is mostly available just to monarchies. In similar fashion, but unrelated to this post, I believe mercantilism needs a malus because as it stands right now there is no reason not to increase your mercantilism (in EU3 they tried to represent the scale between the two main doctrines of trade policy).
 

Me_

Myself
71 Badges
Jan 14, 2011
8.280
5.663
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Sengoku
  • Semper Fi
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Stellaris
  • Victoria 2
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
Thematically, I agree, but gameplay-wise I'm not so sure. Strengthen government has been conceived as a way to gail "LE", sure, but also as MIL mana sink. Without a replacement we would go back to MIL tech being the only important use of MIL mana for governments that would need other mana for their "LE".
 

JaxElite

Captain
38 Badges
Aug 18, 2018
407
1.121
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Victoria 2
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Dungeonland
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II
Thematically, I agree, but gameplay-wise I'm not so sure. Strengthen government has been conceived as a way to gail "LE", sure, but also as MIL mana sink. Without a replacement we would go back to MIL tech being the only important use of MIL mana for governments that would need other mana for their "LE".
I dont think there is an issue here. Only three governments don't use military power here. EoC, Republics and non monastic order theocracies.
The whole idea behind republics is to choose your ruler according to what is needed, so if you hit a monarch point cap without a sink available you probably should have elected a new ruler earlier.
EoC and non monastic order theocracies might lose that option, but in all honesty, "strengthen government" has always been a horribly bad mil sink, which was almost always used our of pure lazyness. There is almost no case where it wouldn't be more efficient to barrage, get generals for army professionalism or develop low dev provinces for building slots. Aside from that, if you don't play a republic strengthen government is often ineffecient or unavailable, since you hover at 90-100 legitimacy anyway.

EDIT: also maybe don't hire that tier 3/4/5 mil adviser if you don't need the mana, tier 1 has the same effect
 
Last edited: