Why Change from Republic to Monarchy?

[al Roumi]

Why do you want to shift from a republic to a constitutional monarchy?? A republic has the clamour for reform and a research bonus. Const Monarchy has no penalties or bonuses -but longer lived ministers.

Starting as a republic is a definite advantage IMO, despite the bad-will (-15) it generates due to everyone else being an absolute monarchy.

[al Roumi]

sorry, a republic has the lowest clamour for reform of all gov types.

[anweRU]

But a republic has happiness penalties for industrial advances, like absolute monarchy. Constitutional monarchy does not. Hence, as a C.M., I can upgrade all of my mines, farms, ports and industrial buildings with almost no garrison units required in my region capitols.

It is yet another one of those game design choices that irritates me, but we won't go there in this thread.

[Prussian to the Iron]

i want to be a cons monarchy so i can get rid of those damned crappy ministers. it is so annoying having to only kick out 1 per turn, and then either
A) another minister with same stars replaces him
or
B)have my well-groomed ministers taken out in elections >:(

[Monk]

Moved from guides' forum.

[SpiritFox]

As far as I'm aware, the same limitations apply to Constitutional Monarchies. I play Poland and I have to run elections every 9 - 10 turns with the risk of having powerful ministers taken out. I can also only eject one minister per turn. Fortunately, I've been lucky so far and I've only ever had three really crappy ministers, all of whom I ejected swiftly.

Perhaps the only thing that doesn't change is the Head of State - but then I haven't had much chance to test out Absolute Monarchies or Republics.

[Megas Methuselah]

Being in an absolute monarchy gives you divine right and POWER.

[al Roumi]

But a republic has happiness penalties for industrial advances, like absolute monarchy. Constitutional monarchy does not. Hence, as a C.M., I can upgrade all of my mines, farms, ports and industrial buildings with almost no garrison units required in my region capitols.

I have to say (as you can see from my post at the top) that I had understood otherwise; that there was a declining scale of discontent, going from worst to best: Abs. M, C.M., Republic.

Where have you seen that a C.M. gets zero industrial discontent?

And how does that work? I assume schools/universities still cause unrest? So are they the only sources of discontent in a C.M?

If so, I'm appalled and will have to add that to my list of grievances... as you said:

It is yet another one of those game design choices that irritates me, but we won't go there in this thread.

Once we have confirmed what the hell is going on, it would be nice to pull all the data on Govts together...

[SpiritFox]

I haven't been keeping track, but Constitutional Monarchies DEFINITELY receive discontent from schools and universities (Red Flag, Desire for Change). Konigsberg is nearly bursting with revolutionary anger. But that being said, my garrisons are all minimal yet, despite having upgraded everything I have to the 3rd tier (below Factories), I have not experienced any serious trouble in any of my settled provinces. Thus far, I have only upgraded metalworking craft centers in my largest provinces (Warsaw, Konigsberg, Vilnus) to Factories. All three have small garrisons - Warsaw has 6 Winged Hussars, 4 6pdr. Gallopers, 1 Light Dragoon, Vilnus has 3 Uhlans, Konigsberg has 2 Light Dragoons. Konigsberg is also Protestant rather than Catholic owing to my focus on converting the heathen Muslims to my south with my limited religious capacity.

I cannot compare with any of the other government types as I've only played extensively as Poland, but I'm experiencing negligable discontent in most of my cities at this point (Poland, 1749, 98% Industrial Research completed). Some, such as Morovia, aren't garrisoned at all.

[Mr Frost]

Why do you want to shift from a republic to a constitutional monarchy?? A republic has the clamour for reform and a research bonus. Const Monarchy has no penalties or bonuses -but longer lived ministers.

Starting as a republic is a definite advantage IMO, despite the bad-will (-15) it generates due to everyone else being an absolute monarchy.

Absolute monarchies have a big advantage when it comes to ministers . Not only are there no elections as you correctly noticed , but you can freely swap around ministers and choose which "opposition" member you wish to place in your ministry of choice {simply click and drag} .

Have a lackluster treasurer whom would however make a cracking good naval minister then swap them .
The ex-naval minister {now treasury minister} isn't really good for anything but one specific minister has cornered the market of treasury qualifications , swap him up .

You can only boot one minister per turn , but you can swap as many ministers as you want and swapping for an opposition member has the same effect as booting {bad minister gone , new one next turn or so} so in effect you can boot as many as you want each turn .

You can get quite exceptional ministers by careful selection as Absolute Monarch and keep them far longer {especially if you pick them young} thus your empire can actually be more prosperous and stable with some sensible management .

[al Roumi]

I think (unable to check at the momment) that it's mostly only the enlightenment techs that have a direct effect on (dis)content. Industrial techs in themselves don't cause discontent until you build whatever they enable -it's the improvement on the campaign map itself that creates industrial discontent.

Enlightenment buildings on the campaign map also cause discontent (like the industrial ones) but enlightenment techs themselves also cause clamour for reform/discontent accross the regions of your empire.

[Subotan]

Being in an absolute monarchy gives you divine right and POWER.

Also, it's terrible fun to slaughter your populace when they ask for basic needs e.g. the right to vote, free speech, food etc.

[al Roumi]

Absolute monarchies have a big advantage when it comes to ministers . Not only are there no elections as you correctly noticed , but you can freely swap around ministers and choose which "opposition" member you wish to place in your ministry of choice {simply click and drag} .

Have a lackluster treasurer whom would however make a cracking good naval minister then swap them .
The ex-naval minister {now treasury minister} isn't really good for anything but one specific minister has cornered the market of treasury qualifications , swap him up .

ahem, sorry to contradict you old bean but all government types give you the right to shuffle the ministers in office as you like, for the best or worst effect (i.e. put a crap minister in charge of justice to prompt a revolution).

You can only boot one minister per turn , but you can swap as many ministers as you want and swapping for an opposition member has the same effect as booting {bad minister gone , new one next turn or so} so in effect you can boot as many as you want each turn.

Absolute monarchies can fire all ministers in a single turn, but are limited to a finite "stock" of replacements (visible below the list of ministers in office, where the opposition would be in a republic) that refills itself over time.

A republic can "boot" one minister per turn, but as i mentioned above, you can give those ministers already in government, with a job, a different one as many times as you like in a turn.

You can get quite exceptional ministers by careful selection as Absolute Monarch and keep them far longer {especially if you pick them young} thus your empire can actually be more prosperous and stable with some sensible management .

That certainly is true and is the primary advantage (IMO) of an Abs. Monarchy. Republics can also keep their minsters, as long as they are re-elected every 8 years.

[al Roumi]

Sorry, I'm spamming this thread but every time i post someone else says something i want to comment on... :)

Also, it's terrible fun to slaughter your populace when they ask for basic needs e.g. the right to vote, free speech, food etc.

The adviser says you can do this, but I've yet to see a button or other mechanism that allows you to "employ millitary means" to quell the protestors. Do you mean waiting for them to cause a rebellion and raise an army in the field?

[anweRU]

If you look at the building browser while playing an A.M., a C.M. and a republic, you'll see that both A.M. and republic have industrial discontent when you upgrade your industrial buildings to level 3 or higher, and your mines will have it at level 2 or higher. Naval ports also add to industrial discontent, trade ports and fisheries don't seem to.

Farms are odd. Some levels of farms cause industrial discontent to lower classes, while other higher levels don't. The highest level gives a happiness bonus to nobility (which isn't of use in a republic).

A C.M. has 0 industrial discontent. Zilch. Nada. As I mentioned earlier, it is another irritating game design choice.

Clamor for reform only applies to regions with universities (at least in easy through hard, I haven't tried VH yet).

[SpiritFox]

Abolishment of Slavery is the last Enlightenment tech I have left.

I can't recall, but I'm pretty sure I saw Industrial Discontent listed somewhere, but I can't tell if it's directly effecting discontent. Certainly it doesn't seem to appear as a specific factor in my discontent bar (the two divided between Nobility and Plebes). That one is full-up with Clamor for Reform.

But I'm certain I've seen it and I'm pretty sure the tooltip didn't give me a big fat 0.

[anweRU]

Well, as soon as I converted UP to a C.M., all industrial discontent vanished. Both from the building descriptions in the building browser, and the province information page.

[al Roumi]

ok, thanks guys: i believe you now. What a farcical mechanism.

I guess the advantages of a CM are why it would take a minimum 8 turns for most factions to get to.

I am fighting with every iota of resolve i have to avoid detailing how crazy this is.

[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.

[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.

[DisruptorX]

Sorry, I'm spamming this thread but every time i post someone else says something i want to comment on... :)



The adviser says you can do this, but I've yet to see a button or other mechanism that allows you to "employ millitary means" to quell the protestors. Do you mean waiting for them to cause a rebellion and raise an army in the field?

I believe that is what it refers to. A decent garrison of smartly dressed Dragoons is usually sufficient to deter such things, however.

[Subotan]

Peterloo ftw.

Btw, there's the story of a guy who survived Peterloo, due solely to the fact that he had a lump of cheese under his hat. A dragoon's sword cut through his hat, but the cheese blocked it.

[Prussian to the Iron]

lol link please? thats hilarious...talk about "cutting the cheese!"

[Subotan]

CTRL+F cheese

http://www.manchesterconfidential.co...bnIaqiNwF6IHqi

[al Roumi]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[Mr Frost]

all government types give you the right to shuffle the ministers in office as you like, for the best or worst effect (i.e. put a crap minister in charge of justice to prompt a revolution).
.

Not from the opposition they don't .

Fire up a U.P. game and try to "promote" an opposition member to office without an election .
I'm pretty sure Constitutional Monarchies cannot either .

The advantage is you aren't taking pot luck like you do when you merely boot a bad minister {you still get rid of the bad minister permenantly when swapping for an opposition member} so you get effectivly twice the ministers to chose from and can have the exact opposition minister you want whenever you wish .













As for the booting/turn thing , I didn't realise that because lag in the game after booting means it was several seconds before I could boot annother {just tested it} so when I tried it in play previously , it looked like I could only do one per turn {the button isn't really much brighter when "good to go" than when greyed out} .