If you want to cause a "minor" pollution crisis, which sounds unwise, there's a much more straightforward way to do it - build industry.
Paths of Civilization II: Paths of Industrialization
Yes. A little bit. Civil discontent can be a good motivator for government action. As long as we can keep a lid on just how upset people get we can use that.
Lets dip our toes in the new low happiness mechanics. The best way for us to do that is via increased edu.
A demonstration by urban workers over sewage in the streets because we increased education and they now understand just how bad that is could create a crisis that allowes us to make a sewer at a discount.
The last thing we need is a fat and happy populace letting elected officials ride.
Educate the populace and let them demand problems be solved rather than solve problems and educate people afterwords.
Last edited:
Random Member
Gardener of Human Happiness
- Location
- Behind You
Mate, this is a great idea and you'll have my full support!
- Location
- Illinois
Translation of Random to English: This is a terrible idea that is extremely likely to cause a revolution that leads to most of our leaders getting killed, and a large chunk of the nation on fire.
Maybe crisis is the wrong term. I just think we can increase education at the expense of happiness a little bit and THEN work to bring happiness back in line with education.
A little bit.
We can deal with people seeking redress from government.
Maybe 1 or 2 points of happiness decline. Not 10.
Random Member
Gardener of Human Happiness
- Location
- Behind You
Addendum: "In other words, exactly what I want for Christmas!"
Or, hear me out, let's not increase instability in the country when there's already a lot of tension. That just sounds like something that will spiral out of control. Even when I was making my industry plan, I put a lot of effort into not letting Cons be bigger than SoL.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
1. Maybe, depends on how the reorg works out if it is selected (it won't be)
2. Yes
3. a.) Unknown, would be up to who gets the reins at the end of the merger
b.) Unknown, would be up to who gets the reins at the end of the merger
4. Landed. Absolutely landed since it is both their preferred franchise stance.
Random Member
Gardener of Human Happiness
- Location
- Behind You
REEEEEEE!!! So we'd lose the Farmer's support for Service? Good to know.
I'm somewhat suprised the Royalists are not reforming into a Millitarist party. A platform of "Stong army, strong navy, let the generals run things politics get out!" Seems to be a sentiment running through the country at the moment.
It would be a pull away from the royal family who is growing more distant from the millitary with the decision to send the heir to study history of all things.
Basically pro milliterisim, pro high army/navy. Pro interventionism. Absorbing the more outward focused parts of the liberals who leave the Industrial Worker's party this group would fight for a powerful and independant millitary who can be protected from the whims of politics.
Support for service requirement to keep the millitary able to effect politics rather than the other way around.
It would be a pull away from the royal family who is growing more distant from the millitary with the decision to send the heir to study history of all things.
Basically pro milliterisim, pro high army/navy. Pro interventionism. Absorbing the more outward focused parts of the liberals who leave the Industrial Worker's party this group would fight for a powerful and independant millitary who can be protected from the whims of politics.
Support for service requirement to keep the millitary able to effect politics rather than the other way around.
Last edited:
- Pronouns
- He/Him
A Royalist-Rural Farmer's merger will almost certainly result in a policy of massive land grants, which means that they can selectively disenfranchise city dwellers from the Lower House while appearing like they are in fact supporting them getting out of the awful cities, which is entirely wrong.
- Location
- Edmonton
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Is there legitimate discussion happening about forcing a crisis?
Are...are you all insane? Do narrative consequences mean nothing to you?
You cant say we can keep a lid on it because obviously we CANNOT. The very fact that weve gotten to this point proves we cannot.
Im actually baffled.
If that was just spitballing then ignore my statement. But good god Im sick of this poopy time period and the poopy decisions we have to make.
A part of me wants this to all crash and burn so I can claim karma has at last gotten its due for our efficiency driven, narrative belittle-ling, ends justify the means-ing, meta gaming bs.
100% efficiency clearly =/= 100% goodie in this quest.
Note that I didnt say " = baddie," because not being a goodie does not mean you are a baddie.
Are...are you all insane? Do narrative consequences mean nothing to you?
You cant say we can keep a lid on it because obviously we CANNOT. The very fact that weve gotten to this point proves we cannot.
Im actually baffled.
If that was just spitballing then ignore my statement. But good god Im sick of this poopy time period and the poopy decisions we have to make.
A part of me wants this to all crash and burn so I can claim karma has at last gotten its due for our efficiency driven, narrative belittle-ling, ends justify the means-ing, meta gaming bs.
100% efficiency clearly =/= 100% goodie in this quest.
Note that I didnt say " = baddie," because not being a goodie does not mean you are a baddie.
Last edited:
- Pronouns
- He/Him
There will likely be some internal reorg anyway, but if they do an explicit rename and reorg and don't get merged with the Farmers then they will become much more hawkish than they already are, with less focus on the overall health of the nation (with the upper nobility as the stewards of said health, of course) and a tighter focus on military might and the rest of the country being about how to get those resources to the military.
Speaking of which, while there will be no update tonight due to other commitments of my time (rather than sickness, this may be the major delaying factor over the next little while) I just want to explicitly ask @Xepheria if the Royalists are interested in a reorg so as to dodge the unfortunate effects of the latest status and thus have a solid shot at returning to the ruling party within the next twenty years without the thread slapping them down.
I am just saying that perhaps we are not intended to run at high happiness. The country will always have a degree of unrest. That is part of the era.
Allowing the population to drive progress rather than progress dragging the people forward is a good thing.
Spamming pollution and cutting SoL is a bad idea. Raising education and letting the now better educated population tell us what theu want? Maybe a good idea.
Allowing the population to drive progress rather than progress dragging the people forward is a good thing.
Spamming pollution and cutting SoL is a bad idea. Raising education and letting the now better educated population tell us what theu want? Maybe a good idea.
Random Member
Gardener of Human Happiness
- Location
- Behind You
In other words, the Royalists will be awful no matter what. This is why we need a Republic, people!
A hawkish party is great so long as we can hold them in 2nd place. They are horrid if they end up in charge, but they also will keep the army in solid shape with little outside help.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Well, even in explicit republics you have Reactionary and Militarist parties, so just switching to a Republic is unlikely to actually solve the issue. Depending on how it works out, it may in fact make it worse, especially if the transition involves a large amount of populist anger and feelings of national embarrassment.
Random Member
Gardener of Human Happiness
- Location
- Behind You
Ah, but there's an easy solution to that: Dr. Guillotin's miraculous invention, which shortens a man by one head!
Besides, Militarism is fine if the goal is to spread revolutionary ideals.
Where did we leave the republican bug spray? One seems to have gotten in from somewhere. I thought we solved the infestation in Saffron!
Random Member
Gardener of Human Happiness
- Location
- Behind You
Fool, you can never destroy an ideal!
Give me a big enough hammer!
- Pronouns
- He/Him
*cough* Under those circumstances the hawks are the ones most likely to be the ones operating the guillotine *cough*
Honestly, all your parties are going to be awful by modern standards, so if you don't want that then you need to both invest in social tech and spend PW "inefficiently" in order to promote minor parties in the face of upper class opposition. Just sitting around waiting for a revolution will likely give you the opposite of what you want.
Random Member
Gardener of Human Happiness
- Location
- Behind You
Well, that's okay. To oppose the Hawks in that case is counterrevolutionary anyway.
All of SV: "But muh efficieny, muh numbers!"
Having thought about it some more, I don't think that the royalists will go for a full rebrand, with Fyrll instead opting to use this opportunity to clean house of those who more overtly bowed before corporate interests, as well as his own political enemies within the party. I feel like on some level, there would be a sense of aristocratic haughtiness over the public reaction, to the point where a full rebrand would be seen as cowardly. Prideful, yes, but with a savvy politician taking the chance to remove troublesome elements, whilst retaining sufficient power to advance the Royalist agenda. It's not like Mynys is an unknown quantity that hasn't been worked with before.
A speech gracefully calling for a fresh perspective in leadership within parliament and solidly placing most of the blame on those money-grubbing liberals will probably be in order.
I reckon I can spin the consciousness gain as a good thing when it comes to future elections - after all, the Royalists would be a party that causes us to gain innovation simply by existing, which isn't exactly the worst thing in the world.