Not really. It's entirely up to you, as long as you include the information I ask for.
-
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.
Not really. It's entirely up to you, as long as you include the information I ask for.
First is first. Could it be possible to change the party and/or the house where your character is? (with some conditions, as having new elections, of course)
For example: a reactionary stadtholder accept that old times wil never come back and in the next election he tries to become a conservative Assemblyman.
This looks really interesting, I am wishing to know more and start on it
Only as suggestion, what about this as standard system for give the characters?:
Name:
Background:
Age:
Birthplace:
Party affiliation:
House:
Position he secretly wantsrolleyes:
For example: a reactionary stadtholder accept that old times wil never come back and in the next election he tries to become a conservative Assemblyman.
This looks really interesting, I am wishing to know more and start on it
Only as suggestion, what about this as standard system for give the characters?:
Name:
Background:
Age:
Birthplace:
Party affiliation:
House:
Position he secretly wants
rolleyes:
Hrmmm, the rules so far look OK. The party balance in the executive could end up causing a mess when we start getting extremist parties.
First is first. Could it be possible to change the party and/or the house where your character is? (with some conditions, as having new elections, of course)
For example: a reactionary stadtholder accept that old times wil never come back and in the next election he tries to become a conservative Assemblyman.
This looks really interesting, I am wishing to know more and start on it
Only as suggestion, what about this as standard system for give the characters?:
Name:
Background:
Age:
Birthplace:
Party affiliation:
House:
Position he secretly wants
That's a good boilerplate (although I would not advise including that last bit, for your own sake.
) To answer your question, we have this bit from the rules:As far as changing houses, you could always kill off your character, I suppose. I'd rather not allow wanton switches between houses, given the specific requirements for each position.
That could well be a concern, but my readers, being so intelligent (and handsome/beautiful, as the case may be), should have no problems dealing with that.
If I'm reading the rules right, the POP vote in-game determines the Chancellor but the player vote in-AAR determines yes/no on other votes? Or are the player votes weighted in some way based on the in-game vote?
With regard to the term limit, the wording makes it seem that it's on a per-player basis rather than a per-character basis. I wonder if we could end up in an odd situation where all the regularly-attending members of a party have use up their terms and they win the election again.
With regard to the term limit, the wording makes it seem that it's on a per-player basis rather than a per-character basis. I wonder if we could end up in an odd situation where all the regularly-attending members of a party have use up their terms and they win the election again.
A weighted vote based on the elections would be a great idea. Let's say a party has 40% of the seats, its four players vote yes-yes-yes-no, and all other parties abstain, then 30% of the total vote would be yes, 10% of the total vote would be no, and 60% would be abstentions. Possibly, party leaders could even have modifiers. That kind of system would be a great way to add some meaning to forming a majority government.
I'm not so excited about having the game decide elections, though.
I've been tossing around possible rules for how to fairly have players with influence based on voting, and the conclusion I came to is letting players have some sort of in-game agency that's disconnected from the voting so that they can push and pull on swinging the electorate. A bit like TH's agitation mechanic in Edge of Europe but with vastly more options (e.g. swinging POPs in favour of issues, increasing the power of an party's vote in a region).
It is indeed a per player limit. Basically, we'd be looking at 10 to 15 Chancellors (depending on Early Elections). You do have a point, but I don't think the scenario you describe is likely. We'll take it as/if it comes.
The reason I want the game to decide elections is because it'll force players to think strategically. Weighting is a possibility, but I want to see how many players we get initially before I decide if we'll implement it.
Election NFs are one way of doing that; the other element of push-pull is changing ideology (although I could see everybody switching to the same issue if they knew how the voters were looking). I'm not familiar with the game you describe, but I'm willing to listen.
Firstly congratulations Avindian on the completion of another excellent AAR. In a forum where so many promising stories are abandonned from writer's fatigue, it is a credit to your imagination that you were able to maintain a tension in the personal narrative right to the end notwithstanding the final result in the game was not in doubt after 1700. The story is set up nicely with lots of potential for new plot twists in the next instalment.
By my reckoning, von Arnim will be about 80 at the end of this story (1821) which is too old for when the story picks up in 1835. I will be putting in a new character when you are ready to roll, probably a grandson.
Thank you and well done.
By my reckoning, von Arnim will be about 80 at the end of this story (1821) which is too old for when the story picks up in 1835. I will be putting in a new character when you are ready to roll, probably a grandson.
Thank you and well done.
I look forward to the Victoria 2 chapter! It's seems like I won't be able to revive Von Luxembourg, and I feel that a little bit of Welsh is in order
One issue I see with POPs deciding the government but allowing unweighted player voting is that you could end up with fringe parties having disproportional voting power in the upper or lower houses compared to the actual number of members they'd get elected in-game. For instance, in Edge of Europe our Communist and Socialist parties were equally strong and had about 12% of the vote in 1871 each between the players involved and I've ever seen Commies start off that strongly. Another issue would be if POPs elected a party which had a minority of players, for instance early game where conservatives might have the POP support but players might decisively favour liberals.
I believe that under the current system incumbents could control election events (via early elections), party loyalty focuses, and early Party Reforms advantages, plus the other factors that everyone else has. Clever players could string all those together to set their party up in a commanding position that could only be beaten by an uprising. I ended up coming to the conclusion of player influence on POPs so that if a large number of players want to push the game in a particular way then they could have a mechanism without resorting to revolts (which I think split the playerbase and marginalises one section). The main risk-reward I was thinking of for this influence system would be that players in executive roles (ministers, generals, etc.) would be prevented from acting in this way. Theoretically that would lead to a see-sawing system. Of course, my ideas here are all untested and half-finished otherwise I'd be on my way to trying to start an IAAR of my own.
Thank you, and I'm glad to hear you'll be participating!
I look forward to the Victoria 2 chapter! It's seems like I won't be able to revive Von Luxembourg, and I feel that a little bit of Welsh is in order
You do have some flexibility; I wouldn't dream of restricting from using any character you wish (again, other than the Austrian corporal and his wacky friends).
I actually thought about this quite a bit last night, and I think weighted voting is a great idea, and it will be implemented in the AAR. There will be 500 people in the Assembly and 100 in the Conclave. It is highly unlikely we will get 600 players (although that would be awesome!). Therefore, I will weight each voX te according to the formula:
Assembly -- (500 * X)/Y
Conclave -- (100 * X)/Y
Where X is the percentage of votes received by a given party in the appropriate house and Y is the total number of players of a given party in that house. Thus, if the UAI wins 30% of the vote in the Conclave, and there are 10 players in the UAI, each member would receive 3 votes.
To make Chancellor as accessible as possible, I am also removing the restriction that he be from the upper house. In other words, while the lower house (the Assembly) will technically determine the ruling party, any member of the ruling party is eligible to be Chancellor, provided he has not served two terms. (I've added this to the final rules whenever the AAR starts).
As a design choice, my goal is to force players to act within certain constraints. One of the things I didn't like about the Presidents is that 99% of the reforms were passed like 20 years into the game, so that the Socialists effectively had nothing to work for. That said, I do understand your concern. We'll go with a wait-and-see approach on this issue, I think, and then judge based on the players whether changes need to be made.
The lack of representation of POP voting patterns is my main bugbear with Edge of Europe so I really like the new proposal.
I'm glad that you're glad.
So people can start thinking of characters in earnest (shouldn't be long before I get my Vicky 2 situation straightened out), here are the political parties at game start (if I read the game files correctly):
Anarcho-Liberal: The Alliance
Laissez-Faire/Free Trade/Pluralism/Full Citizenship/Pacifism
Liberal: The UAI
Interventionism/Free Trade/Pluralism/Full Citizenship/Anti-Military
Conservative: The New Society
State Capitalism/Protectionism/Moralism/Residency/Pro-Military
Reactionary: The Imperialists
State Capitalism/Protectionism/Moralism/Residency/Jingoism
In fact, anybody who wants to can go ahead and make their characters now; you should have everything you need for the game (don't worry about specific provinces for Stadtholders right now -- we won't know that until the game is converted). If you want to share (or get your dibs in), post them here!
I'm torn between the UAI and the New Society. The policies-they are so pretty...will conservatives be the ruling party?
I'm a bit late, but I just finished reading the last chapter, and I wanted to say that I enjoyed the EU3 part of this AAR a lot (the CK2 part too ). Thanks for writing it Avindian!
I won't participate in the Victoria 2 part, since I know next to nothing about that game (also, I'm not really a fan of forum-based roleplaying in general). However, it does sound like it will be exciting to read!
). Thanks for writing it Avindian!I won't participate in the Victoria 2 part, since I know next to nothing about that game (also, I'm not really a fan of forum-based roleplaying in general). However, it does sound like it will be exciting to read!
That's a great question, which I will not reveal until the game is already started (mostly because I don't know yet).
I'm a bit late, but I just finished reading the last chapter, and I wanted to say that I enjoyed the EU3 part of this AAR a lot (the CK2 part too
I won't participate in the Victoria 2 part, since I know next to nothing about that game (also, I'm not really a fan of forum-based roleplaying in general). However, it does sound like it will be exciting to read!
Take the path of many, many politicians -- just because you don't know anything about the game doesn't mean you shouldn't participate! I'd be happy to have you as a reader, of course, all the same.
Unless you're tweaking when the ideologies are enabled, I don't think Anarcho-Liberalism should be around until the (historical) 1848 revolutions across Europe.
Will Germany be getting any special accepted cultures apart from Germanic-ish ones? Not that it matters yet since no one has Limited Citizenship.
Hehe
Thanks, but I think I'll stay on the sidelines. Like I said, it's not only that I don't know V2, but also that I don't like to participate in this kind of roleplaying in general (I prefer the pen & paper kind).
I'm not touching the ideology dates, but since I don't have a functioning copy of V2 at the moment, I can only go off of the game files I do have, which indicates an 1830 start date for the A-L party (if I remember right the UK has an A-L party at game start). I will double check and make adjustments as needed.
Hehe
Thanks, but I think I'll stay on the sidelines. Like I said, it's not only that I don't know V2, but also that I don't like to participate in this kind of roleplaying in general (I prefer the pen & paper kind).
No worries, and I'm with you on pen & paper RPGs, when I have the opportunity (which is all too rare these days).