Remove ads

Paths of Civilization II: Paths of Industrialization

Reader mode
[X] Plan Democracy and Industrialization
-[X] [UH] 1 PW - Veto
-[X] [LH] 3 PW - Veto (+1 Temp Happiness)
-[X] [Franchise] 3 PW - Poll tax
-[X] [Officers] +1 PW - Easy non-inheritable titles
-[X] [LO] 2 PW - Anyone with the money
-[X] [Movement] 3 PW - Free Internal Movement (+1 Temp Happiness)
-[X] [Assembly] 0 PW - Restricted
-[X] [Press] +1 PW - Free ownership with Crown Censorship (-1 Temp Happiness)
-[X] [Guilds] +2 PW - Expand their sphere of influence (+1 Temp Happiness)
-[X] [Academy] 0 PW - No

This plan is designed to screw the nobility as hard as possible, give more power to the commoners by allowing more people to vote, and allow for capitalism. Freedom of movement and ability to own land are vital for industrialization. Freedom of assembly isn't important because our government doesn't have the tech for political suppression and the territory is too vast to effectively police it. This plan also increases Temp Happiness, which is good.

To all voting for plans that give nobility more political power than the commoners, please rethink that. The nobles will just use it to oppress the commoners.
 
Last edited:
Something I am curious about, why is limited assembly being pushed rather than having Universal Officers?

I imagine that would be more helpful in the next conflict.
Timewinders said:
This plan is designed to screw the nobility as hard as possible, give more power to the commoners, and allow for capitalism.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well...
Academia Nut said:
Should there be a Lower House and what should it do? Current Status Quo: None (Cannot be stronger than the Upper House this Constitution)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Denied by AN
 
Sivantic said:
Something I am curious about, why is limited assembly being pushed rather than having Universal Officers?

I imagine that would be more helpful in the next conflict.

Well...

Denied by AN
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Baby steps, I'm assuming. Going for free assembly immediately might backfire spectacularly if we gen a republican wave, but at the same time some limited assembly might act as a safety valve to dissatisfied commoners. And while officers would still be just nobility, having a bunch of easily handed out non-inheritable titles would create the same effect of universal officers in effect.
 
Sivantic said:
Something I am curious about, why is limited assembly being pushed rather than having Universal Officers?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If Political Will rained from the heavens like manna and we had, idk, more of it than we do, I'd go for that. I reall want it but Limited Assembly was something I took with the spare PW after shifting the upper house back to Advisory.

Universal officers and civil service is something we need to push through at the next Constitutional Convention, which I would suggest we hold every 25 years starting in 1824 (so we can have them in 1824, 1849, 1874, 1899 and 1924 to keep things on track).
 
tryrar said:
I don't see how @Cornuthaum 's combo would result in any unrest, it is net happiness neutral after all.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That's not what i mean, both Corn and mine are shifting a lot of power to the lower nobility with a lot of space opening up in military due to military reforms. So Upper nobility power in government and military are both heavily curtailed, BUT Crown base also happens to be a lot of upper nobility; so we are hurting the crown power too. Thus, danger of heavily militarized focus for the state with militancy.
 
At this point, the difference between my and Cornuthaum's plans is whether we break guilds now or leave them for later. So, if you want to deal with the guilds in this half of the century, vote for [] Plan Road to capitalism, and if you want to save a bit of happiness and get various little things, at the cost of leaving that ineffective institution to stew a little bit, vote for him. Their inefficiency should be more clear later on anyway.
Sivantic said:
?

[] [Officers] 2 PW - Universal

That is one more than the one used right now. Where are you getting 3?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
-[] [Officers] +1 PW - Easy non-inheritable titles
 
Sivantic said:
Something I am curious about, why is limited assembly being pushed rather than having Universal Officers?

I imagine that would be more helpful in the next conflict.

Well...

Denied by AN
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Okay, fixed. Now the nobles have a veto but the commoners do as well and the commoners can vote. That requires giving the guilds more influence but hopefully freedom of movement and ability to own land will help capitalism start up anyway, and we can just break guild influence later. Right now I'm more concerned about liberalizing freedom of movement, land ownership, franchise, and the political power of the commoners.
 
Cornuthaum said:
If Political Will rained from the heavens like manna and we had, idk, more of it than we do, I'd go for that. I reall want it but Limited Assembly was something I took with the spare PW after shifting the upper house back to Advisory.

Universal officers and civil service is something we need to push through at the next Constitutional Convention, which I would suggest we hold every 25 years starting in 1824 (so we can have them in 1824, 1849, 1874, 1899 and 1924 to keep things on track).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No, I was more wondering why it was put into creating limited assembly rather tham upgrading to Universal.


Oohhhh

Fail

I thought it cost 1 point rather than gave that point.

Nvm
 
Last edited:
I mean, at this point I have to concede that I can't create a plan to immediately write the Guilds out of the constitution, stay Happiness neutral, and still have my other priorities, so onto the bandwagon I jump:

[X] Cornuthaum
 
Massive government reform, wooooo!

Hopefully things go better then that time we tried to do proportional taxes in the middle of the Bronze age.
 
I really think it's important to give the commoners more political power now so we can prevent regressive laws and make an early transition toward democracy and freedom of information, movement, land, etc.
 
Timewinders said:
Okay, fixed. Now the nobles have a veto but the commoners do as well and the commoners can vote. That requires giving the guilds more influence but hopefully freedom of movement and ability to own land will help capitalism start up anyway, and we can just break guild influence later. Right now I'm more concerned about liberalizing freedom of movement, land ownership, franchise, and the political power of the commoners.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Timewinders said:
-[X] [Guilds] +2 PW - Expand their sphere of influence (+1 Temp Happiness)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Tbh, the guilds are a far bigger danger than the nobility is right now. The nobility might throw their weight around, but their own interests do run alongside the country's.

The guilds are profit motivated, and won't give a shit that they are standing in the way of more production. And without that production, we can't protect our country, and we'll be crushed by the rapidly expanding industrialized nations.
 
Citino said:
Tbh, the guilds are a far bigger danger than the nobility is right now. The nobility might throw their weight around, but their own interests do run alongside the country's.

The guilds are profit motivated, and won't give a shit that they are standing in the way of more production. And without that production, we can't protect our country, and we'll be crushed by the rapidly expanding industrialized nations.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I agree that the guilds need to be broken eventually. I just think that the priority of the constitution should be liberalization of land, movement, and the vote. No matter what the economic system is, those things will allow for greater efficiency.
 
Timewinders said:
I really think it's important to give the commoners more political power now so we can prevent regressive laws and make an early transition toward democracy and freedom of information, movement, land, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Isn't it dangerous to give veto power to everyone? Upper and Lower can shot each other's plan due to different focused and agenda.
 
huhYeahGoodPoint said:
I mean, at this point I have to concede that I can't create a plan to immediately write the Guilds out of the constitution, stay Happiness neutral, and still have my other priorities, so onto the bandwagon I jump:

[X] Cornuthaum
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Does losing 1 temp happiness matters that much? We're probably gonna drop a lot of Cons after the constitution anyway, improving it, and even in the worst case scenario we drop to 2, which is worryingly low, but not "revolt/coup now" low.
 
Timewinders said:
I really think it's important to give the commoners more political power now so we can prevent regressive laws and make an early transition toward democracy and freedom of information, movement, land, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
....I'd rather break the guilds and get industrialized first. Then we can worry about more democratic institutions
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top