How will oligarchies work?

[ForeDaMole]

So we've seen through previous dev diaries a little bit on how the government system in Stellaris will work. In particular, this image has piqued my interest, because it shows a picture of the civilization's (in this case, humanity's) ruler. We can clearly see the ruler's name, portrait, and a couple traits in the image. But more importantly, we can see when the next election will happen.

In a democratic and autocratic society, this system looks fine. There's one leader with a few traits. In a democracy, the ruler is replaced in the next election, while in a monarchy or dictatorship, the position of leadership is inherited either by birthright or the wishes of the previous ruler. The "next election in..." line could easily be replaced by "next-in-line is...".

The problem I'm finding, however, is that this doesn't work well for an oligarchical society, with multiple "rulers". This image springs to mind. While it is just speculation, it makes plenty of sense that its idea of governments organized by columns and rows is how it works. And by extension, it makes sense that the second row would be there for oligarchies.

But this conflicts with what they've shown in previous dev diaries. If a nation has a single ruler, then how would oligarchies work? Would they be a rotating system of rulers chosen from your "pool" of leaders? Yes, this makes sense, but it also defeats the purpose of being an oligarchy in the first place. The very definition of "oligarchy" is "a small group of people having control of a country, organization, or institution". The key word there is group. Unless the power is shared between multiple rulers, it's basically just a retextured monarchy/democracy.

While it's admittedly a little early to worry about things like this (even though Stellaris looks closer and closer to release every time they release a new dev diary ), I'm afraid oligarchies won't be as interesting as they could be.

Any thoughts?

 

[aitaituo]

One alternative is having a variety of cliques that prefer different policies and can wax and wane in influence. Effectively, each clique would still end up being a de facto leader, though, so you could differentiate by having ways to push one into power at some cost. It might be difficult to avoid having this become something like EUIV's faction system.

 

[ForeDaMole]

One alternative is having a variety of cliques that prefer different policies and can wax and wane in influence. Effectively, each clique would still end up being a de facto leader, though, so you could differentiate by having ways to push one into power at some cost. It might be difficult to avoid having this become something like EUIV's faction system.

Well, the idea of factions would make for an interesting way to handle it. While I still don't super love the idea of rotating power when it comes to an oligarchy, I can certainly see how it'd make for an interesting "minigame" of managing each faction. Maybe each leader could have their own faction, and every pop would belong to one of them. The more you appease a faction, the happier they are, but the less happy the other factions are. Ignoring one faction too much could lead to high unrest among its members or even seeing it rebel if it had enough support; but favouring one faction too much would lead to unrest among all the other factions, or even result in that faction simply changing the former oligarchy into a different form of government more suited to its ideals.

I'd still love to see a system similar to the Triarchs of Volantis from Game of Throns/A Song of Ice and Fire (the most underdeveloped thing in that series in my opinion), but a faction like system would definitely be interesting. Still a little too similar to a democracy, however.

 

[Arkangilos]

The Ruler would be the speaker or chairman chosen by the Oligarchy. For example, if it is a Corporate State, the corporation has the Board of Directors, who selects a CEO or Chairman to represent them to the public.

 

[ForeDaMole]

I still feel like "true" oligarchies wouldn't have a single ruler, with the structure instead being based around each one being semi-autonomous and all of them coming together to discuss and vote upon larger decisions. Like a democracy of monarchs, in a sense.

 

[Arkangilos]

They wouldn't have a single ruler, but the single ruler that you would see in place of the "president" would be the current Chariman of the Board of Directors or the the CEO, or something similar.

The group maintains power, but they have a central figure that they give a limited amount of authority to carry out their will. They can easily "fire" him and promote a second person into his place.

 

[aitaituo]

They wouldn't have a single ruler, but the single ruler that you would see in place of the "president" would be the current Chariman of the Board of Directors or the the CEO, or something similar.

The group maintains power, but they have a central figure that they give a limited amount of authority to carry out their will. They can easily "fire" him and promote a second person into his place.

This seems the more probable form of oligarchy. A democracy of monarchs would only make sense in a HRE type situation, which requires some convoluted reasons to develop.

 

[mastermind25]

Theoretically we are talking here about two different things:

1. Who rules or is the leader/leaders/executive

2. Who chooses the leader/leaders/executive - One/few/many

You can have a traditional government setup irrespective of the answer to question 2.

The power concentration within the chosen government may vary.

Responsibility and Power can be given down like a pyramid

x
yyy
zzzzzz


or held by separate and equal people/institutions.

I think they will probably go with the same setup for all governments and only change events/boni.

 

[zukodark]

So we've seen through previous dev diaries a little bit on how the government system in Stellaris will work. In particular, this image has piqued my interest, because it shows a picture of the civilization's (in this case, humanity's) ruler. We can clearly see the ruler's name, portrait, and a couple traits in the image. But more importantly, we can see when the next election will happen.

In a democratic and autocratic society, this system looks fine. There's one leader with a few traits. In a democracy, the ruler is replaced in the next election, while in a monarchy or dictatorship, the position of leadership is inherited either by birthright or the wishes of the previous ruler. The "next election in..." line could easily be replaced by "next-in-line is...".

The problem I'm finding, however, is that this doesn't work well for an oligarchical society, with multiple "rulers". This image springs to mind. While it is just speculation, it makes plenty of sense that its idea of governments organized by columns and rows is how it works. And by extension, it makes sense that the second row would be there for oligarchies.

But this conflicts with what they've shown in previous dev diaries. If a nation has a single ruler, then how would oligarchies work? Would they be a rotating system of rulers chosen from your "pool" of leaders? Yes, this makes sense, but it also defeats the purpose of being an oligarchy in the first place. The very definition of "oligarchy" is "a small group of people having control of a country, organization, or institution". The key word there is group. Unless the power is shared between multiple rulers, it's basically just a retextured monarchy/democracy.

While it's admittedly a little early to worry about things like this (even though Stellaris looks closer and closer to release every time they release a new dev diary ), I'm afraid oligarchies won't be as interesting as they could be.

Any thoughts?

I think they would to a high degree be like a oligarchic republic, like spoken of above. A government were a small group chooses the ruler, instead of a large group/most of the population. An oligarchy wouldn't necessarily have to mean that only 5-30 people rule, but could go to hundreds of oligarchs (which is still a tiny part of the population). In such a system, they would have to choose a person who represent and speaks for the oligarchy, voicing the largest opinion. Democratic republics are in no way the only type of republics in the world. What might in some way be considered a current example of a religious oligarchic republic is the papacy, where a small group of people (the cardinals) choose the pope. And if you look through history, there is many more cases of such a republic.

 

[Alectron]

Maybe player will have to choose a leader from a few possible candidates

 

[Milten]

In a democratic and autocratic society, this system looks fine. There's one leader with a few traits. In a democracy, the ruler is replaced in the next election, while in a monarchy or dictatorship, the position of leadership is inherited either by birthright or the wishes of the previous ruler. The "next election in..." line could easily be replaced by "next-in-line is...".

Oligarchies will probably have 'replace' button with some protection against save-load spam. Like displaying possible candidate, but generating new ones at random time intervals.

 

[kolpo]

Russia under Yeltsin is how I imagine an oligarchy, 1 clear but weak leader who really needs the support of many oligarchs and who is one himself. If this leader is too strong could an oligarchy move in the direction of an autocracy like what happened under Putin who even persecuted some oligarchs.

 

[Thure]

This seems the more probable form of oligarchy. A democracy of monarchs would only make sense in a HRE type situation, which requires some convoluted reasons to develop.

What's about the UAE?

 

[aitaituo]

What's about the UAE?

Good point! Still rather unusual circumstances, but there are more weird politics between heaven and earth than my brain can fathom.