Federal States

[Arizal]

I would like to share a dream I have about this game, that some may have to. I'm pretty sure there have been posts about that in the past.

I wish the game would include a portrayal of federations. By that I mean their constraints, their internal workings and the possibility to play either as the federal government or the subentity one.

Functionally, it would mean adding a ton of TAGs to the game. Not only the 50 American States, but also the Canadian, German, Australian, Mexican ones. I am not sure this would be feasable. But since I'm trying to lay out what I would like to see, allow me the fantasy. Of course, many of those states could be reduced to the in-game "States".

What, then, would happen with the gameplay? It could differ a lot, depending on the level of centralization a State has, and it would involve building ownerships and institutions.

Currently, all institutions are centralized, and a country can possess buildings inside its borders and outside of them. To simulate a federation, all that would be required would be for a (playable) State to control some of those buildings, and for its relationship with the federal State to be determined via Constitutional laws.

Those laws would regulate who, out of the federal or the provincial layer, would control institutions, but also who could make some buildings, and, ultimately, whether the member States could have armies, at which point the State would ressemble more a confederation. To push the idea even further, maybe some member States could have different arrangements depending on some factors.

The game could then become slightly more difficult for players of federations, as they wouldn't have all the tools in their hands from the start. They might be pushed to centralize. Or maybe they are content to let some aspects of governance to the member States. Moreover, maybe that's necessary or else minorities wouldn't be happy. With the content coming up about Austria-Hungary, it feels like a nice moment to pitch such ideas.

You could of course reform Austria to become Austria Hungary, and choose which States get which autonomy.

Member States would be playable, but of course it wouldn't be guaranteed to be "fun". Playing Rhode Island might be quite limited, about as much as playing Luxemburg. What the member states could do would be ask for more autonomy, even becoming subjects or independant, but also play the good partners and focus on their economy and to push reforms they like inside the country.

Additionnally, with such a system, you could portray almost perfectly the story behind the American Civil War. You wouldn't have to force the CSA to exist, you would have clear pro and anti-slavery States from the start of the game, and the struggle between them could be the starting sickness of the USA.

 

[elbiotipo]

I absolutely agree that there should be federal mechanics, especially to simulate things like the Argentine civil war, which was a major feature of this period and simply cannot be simulated without some degree of federal mechanics, as well as other civil wars. The issue of federalism vs. centralism was a key conflict everywhere. Many of these ideas sound great.

What I really don't understand is why they should be separate tags. I don't think they need to be separate or playable unless we're talking about the loosest confederations, I don't even think something like Argentina should have independent tags, let alone a tighter federation like the US at the time. I think it would be fine if each province or state had its own governor and be its own 'entity', perhaps having separate laws in some cases, and also, much needed parliament and cabinet mechanics.

One idea I have is to have the concept of a constitution with a set of laws that states (and subjects) can't change unless with a constitutional reform, which should not be an easy process unless there's a revolution. The lack of a constitution, like in Argentina's case, would lead to a more loose confederation with an ongoing conflict.

But I don't think they should be separate tags. I really don't understand how the gameplay of an individual state or province would work, since you would not have any way to have a separate diplomacy, military, things like separate research would make little sense, all you're left to do is just managing your buildings and some laws, unless they become independent.

 

[Arizal]

This was a "dream" proposal. What I think is that once you gave so much autonomy to the provinces, it becomes a very easy to imagine them crossing the threshold to be playable. Didn't Gorbatchev say : "take as much sovereignty as you can?"

But you are right, there wouldn't be a lot of things to do with federated States. Though, as a Quebecker, it was funny to play Lower Canada inside the British Empire. It's sad to see the diversity of the world being slowly erased as countries annex each others.

 

[Desseabar]

Let's see what changes happen with the Austria DLC coming out soon, as we know from the map that it's going to be broken into subjects. If that's successful and fun, I'd like to see it expanded elsewhere.

I know a lot of people opposed "vassal swarm" mechanics for federal governments, but the trend of every DLC has been to break down countries into more granular subject agglomerations (eg, Persia losing much of its coast, the dozens of Princely States, Baltic Governorates, etc). Adding 'vassal swarms' to the US or the Americas shouldn't dramatically impact performance since these countries should unify over time.

 

[Shiny Dog]

Making the USA into separate tags would be a real headache, because you'd have to simulate the State Governments' politics in the federal government. DC is not really a functional state in-game either. It starts with 34% of the population starving.

 

[Arizal]

Let's see what changes happen with the Austria DLC coming out soon, as we know from the map that it's going to be broken into subjects. If that's successful and fun, I'd like to see it expanded elsewhere.

I know a lot of people opposed "vassal swarm" mechanics for federal governments, but the trend of every DLC has been to break down countries into more granular subject agglomerations (eg, Persia losing much of its coast, the dozens of Princely States, Baltic Governorates, etc). Adding 'vassal swarms' to the US or the Americas shouldn't dramatically impact performance since these countries should unify over time.

They don't have to be portrayed as autonomous countries having armies, though. You just have to leave barracks under the control of the main country.

Making the USA into separate tags would be a real headache, because you'd have to simulate the State Governments' politics in the federal government. DC is not really a functional state in-game either. It starts with 34% of the population starving.

Again, the USA doesn't have to be only DC. It can keep being the entire country, but with mechanics it has less or no access to.