Why Change from Republic to Monarchy?

**lars573** · 04-07-2009, 16:58

Actually it makes perfect sense, from a gamming point of view. Most games that have this sort of system work in threes. With one choice being more or less neutral, in this case constitutional monarchy. With the other two choices getting bonuses in one area and pentalties in others. Usually opposite of each other.

**anweRU** · 04-07-2009, 17:29

The problem is, republic and absolute monarchy BOTH get the same industrialization penalty (more or less). CM gets none. That doesn't make sense. I'm pretty sure GB had as much worker unrest as the USA and continental Europe in the 18th & 19th centuries.

I suppose they could point out to the late-20th century French, Italians and Greeks (among a few others) as examples of industrial unrest in republics.

**Smellycat** · 04-12-2009, 11:07

Originally Posted by anweRU

The problem is, republic and absolute monarchy BOTH get the same industrialization penalty (more or less). CM gets none. That doesn't make sense. I'm pretty sure GB had as much worker unrest as the USA and continental Europe in the 18th & 19th centuries.

I suppose they could point out to the late-20th century French, Italians and Greeks (among a few others) as examples of industrial unrest in republics.

Thats because the republic and absolute monarchy include the lower classes to whom the penalties apply, while the constitutional monarchy has the nobility and the middle classes in power... that also decreases some of the unrest created by the enlightment techs

**al Roumi** · 04-08-2009, 00:42

Originally Posted by lars573

Actually it makes perfect sense, from a gamming point of view. Most games that have this sort of system work in threes. With one choice being more or less neutral, in this case constitutional monarchy. With the other two choices getting bonuses in one area and pentalties in others. Usually opposite of each other.

Of course, but I unfortunately can't play this game blinkered to reality and this is just crazy. I mean, it would have made perfect sense for all three classes to feature in each govt system with varying effects, but for some reason, currently the (dis)content of the working class is more pertinent to an absolute monarchy than to a constitutional one. Arguably, they are as disenfranchised in both -and you could easily make the case for them being so in a republic too!

They kind of got there with this feature, and it's good that they implemented it in the first place but I'm afraid that as with the rest of the game, it doesn't feel like they had time or the inclination to finish it to much beyond 50-60% of where it could have been.

**lars573** · 04-08-2009, 05:30

It's a game, not an 18th century political simulator. CA took it to where they wanted it. And you and they don't agree on the final outcome. Really your choices are 1) live with it 2) see if it can be changed and change it.

**al Roumi** · 04-08-2009, 11:15

Originally Posted by lars573

It's a game, not an 18th century political simulator. CA took it to where they wanted it. And you and they don't agree on the final outcome. Really your choices are 1) live with it 2) see if it can be changed and change it.

Yes indeed and frankly I've no choice but to lump it and exploit it.

**Subotan** · 04-08-2009, 11:37

Revolutions need to be fixed, as if the population rose up against a government, not only would

A. Some soldiers switch sides
B. The revolution would have more support than a few guys with ancient arquebuses

But the whole political climate of the world would change. Countries you are allied with won't just think "Oh, there's been a revolution of the populace in one of the world's superpowers, good thing ideas can't spread and my populace won't get any republican ideas of their own." In my opinion, unrest should spread to other countries after a successful revolution; why do you think everybody in Europe frantically tried to destroy the French revolution? The defeat of such a revolution, e.g. by taking the home region, would automatically put the autocratic monarchy back in place, quell unrest in other countries, and ye olde alliance would be restored.

Besides, there are plenty of examples of revolutions spreading in history, e.g. 1848, 1917 etc. However, the game doesn't represent this at all, and just continues the alliances exactly as before, despite the fact that that would never have happened in reality.

**Fiddling_nero** · 04-08-2009, 13:40

Republics don't have access to Household Cavalry. Makes sense, most cavalry are from the noble classes and they are the best sword cavalry in the game.