I'm hoping some kingdoms, duchies, etc decide to implement some sort of government structure with many people voicing their concerns, legislating, debating, etc

Personally its directly what I want to do completely in this game.

Examples Counts of a Kingdom could all appoint 1 or 2 Representatives. Which then could be the governing body for one House.

Dukes of that same Kingdom could all appoint say 4 different Representatives. Which then could be the governing body for the second House.

Both Houses would then be able to discuss things daily or even weekly to see if Federal Law should be made or removed.

Then have the King have some sort of Veto power.

Say every 3 real life months, each count and Duke would then have the ability to replace that representative if they wanted.

All of this is just an example. I understand many people dont really care and would prefer to be an adventure, miner, farmer, etc. But government, debating, legislation, are my only focus I want to do in the game

Empire of the Iron Fist.

A server wide empire that has viciously and unquestioningly enforced laws, set down from the Emperors throne of skulls.

Say no to the failure of democracy

Posted By Maulvorn at 4:08 PM - Tue Apr 09 2019

Say no to the failure of democracy

I don't know if you recognize the irony of your link, but I appreciated it.

Honestly, any kingdom that doesn't at least lend an ear to it's citizens will likely go under. The game may be set up to support a monarchial dictatorship, but any king that tries to push a monarchial dictatorship will find himself without peasants. We all live in the 21st century, not the 11th. "Divine right" isn't going to work.

Personally I’d try to keep as much power as I can get away with, but not for the reason you’d expect.

The main problem with sharing/distributing power is bureaucracy. It makes any decision slow because you need to wait for other people’s aproval, which will always take time. The more people you add the slower this becomes.

And I think this will cripple your domain at some point, because dictators can adjust to changes so much faster. Dictators are the most efficient government form for this reason, the main problem with dictators though is that your whole domain relies on one persons vision. If that vision doesn’t align with yours, you’re out of luck. And the vision can drastically change overnight, especially when a new ruler emerges.

Anyway, I hate bureaucracy in real life more than anything, and I won’t be playing bureaucracy simulator, I’d rather deal with 1 ruthless dictator than 100 well intended bureaucrats.

That’s not to say I wouldn’t listen to the people, to the contrary, I will listen to them, and make changes to adjust for the situation quickly. However, if the decisions are time critical, I won’t need to wait for anyone’s approval.

Posted By zimmah at 7:29 PM - Wed Apr 10 2019

Personally I’d try to keep as much power as I can get away with, but not for the reason you’d expect.

The main problem with sharing/distributing power is bureaucracy. It makes any decision slow because you need to wait for other people’s aproval, which will always take time. The more people you add the slower this becomes.

And I think this will cripple your domain at some point, because dictators can adjust to changes so much faster. Dictators are the most efficient government form for this reason, the main problem with dictators though is that your whole domain relies on one persons vision. If that vision doesn’t align with yours, you’re out of luck. And the vision can drastically change overnight, especially when a new ruler emerges.

Anyway, I hate bureaucracy in real life more than anything, and I won’t be playing bureaucracy simulator, I’d rather deal with 1 ruthless dictator than 100 well intended bureaucrats

This is... basically the opposite of true.

Any large system requires bureaucrats. Because, importantly, a single leader cannot be everywhere at once. You NEED to to delegate responsibility down the chain or nothing ever gets done, because if you have to run every decision by the dictator he can only approve so many things before he has to sleep for the night.

Even feudal systems delegrate authority and responsibility down the chain, and at no point in history has any dictator ever been completely responsible for every decision, nor has any dictator ever had complete authority over everything.

You are correct that a spawling bureaucracy can't respond to crises quickly, but neither can a dictatorship if the dictator happens to not be nearby at the time. That's why you grant organisations emergency powers and set up contingency plans!

My solution to the democratic "slowness" is a technocratic form of feudalism, where the ruling noble acts as the guide and executive power of one or more councils where citizens are represented through experts within various fields.

The efficiency is preserved as the noble retains the right to perform urgent decisions without vote, as well as a right to veto the council. At the same time the efficiency is boosted as you got access to the most skilled citizen to delegate any tasks to.

How bureaucratic it is depends on how you structure it. Though the more policies and regulations you have around your executive powers the more you can simulate a democratic rule. Whether you're genuinely caring, or a manipulator, you are likely to have an easier time garnering support and favor this way.

Posted By mickdude2 at 5:35 PM - Tue Apr 09 2019

We all live in the 21st century, not the 11th. "Divine right" isn't going to work.

The issue I see with this is that the NPCs will live in the 11th century. If they are still designing NPCs to vastly outnumber players at least at launch than it's going to be pretty hard to overrule divine right in some societies. . Especially with the notion the studio pushes that NPCs won't be the standard pushovers that you can just mow down if you don't like.

If we look at the Janoa for example, correct me if I am wrong, but I believe if I member right that Janoan leaders are supposed to have sort of divine right in their culture through honor. In the sense that those who would stand against a proven honored warrior like the nobility in Janoan society is immediately dishonorable and looked down on. This would make it pretty hard to cast out a Janoan leader because the second you challenged their honor, the NPC society as a whole would theoretically instantly look down on you and maybe even possible ostracize you or isolate you from their wares. Who knows.

I think a divine right play-style of government is possible in CoE.

Posted By mickdude2 at 07:35 AM - Wed Apr 10 2019

Honestly, any kingdom that doesn't at least lend an ear to it's citizens will likely go under. The game may be set up to support a monarchial dictatorship, but any king that tries to push a monarchial dictatorship will find himself without peasants. We all live in the 21st century, not the 11th. "Divine right" isn't going to work.

contrary to popular belief we in-game will not be living in the 21st century. if you want that please go join Identity this might be more your speed.

my self am joining in a game based in the past that has much different values then the present. every time i see people try and force now day values into this game it makes me laugh...

because whats the point truly? are we not trying to escape reality ??

other wise why play at all?

Posted By mickdude2 at 5:35 PM - Tue Apr 09 2019

Posted By Maulvorn at 4:08 PM - Tue Apr 09 2019

Say no to the failure of democracy

I don't know if you recognize the irony of your link, but I appreciated it.

Honestly, any kingdom that doesn't at least lend an ear to it's citizens will likely go under. The game may be set up to support a monarchial dictatorship, but any king that tries to push a monarchial dictatorship will find himself without peasants. We all live in the 21st century, not the 11th. "Divine right" isn't going to work.

Disagree...some people are fine with experimenting with different government styles. I've never lived in a communist society.....but The Waerd seem like the closest thing to communism in Elyria and I'm very interested in playing in that style.

Posted By YukiAkuma at 1:36 PM - Wed Apr 10 2019

Posted By zimmah at 7:29 PM - Wed Apr 10 2019

Personally I’d try to keep as much power as I can get away with, but not for the reason you’d expect.

The main problem with sharing/distributing power is bureaucracy. It makes any decision slow because you need to wait for other people’s aproval, which will always take time. The more people you add the slower this becomes.

And I think this will cripple your domain at some point, because dictators can adjust to changes so much faster. Dictators are the most efficient government form for this reason, the main problem with dictators though is that your whole domain relies on one persons vision. If that vision doesn’t align with yours, you’re out of luck. And the vision can drastically change overnight, especially when a new ruler emerges.

Anyway, I hate bureaucracy in real life more than anything, and I won’t be playing bureaucracy simulator, I’d rather deal with 1 ruthless dictator than 100 well intended bureaucrats

This is... basically the opposite of true.

Any large system requires bureaucrats. Because, importantly, a single leader cannot be everywhere at once. You NEED to to delegate responsibility down the chain or nothing ever gets done, because if you have to run every decision by the dictator he can only approve so many things before he has to sleep for the night.

Even feudal systems delegrate authority and responsibility down the chain, and at no point in history has any dictator ever been completely responsible for every decision, nor has any dictator ever had complete authority over everything.

You are correct that a spawling bureaucracy can't respond to crises quickly, but neither can a dictatorship if the dictator happens to not be nearby at the time. That's why you grant organisations emergency powers and set up contingency plans!

While delegation is important, you don’t neccesarily have to give authority to whoever you delegate tasks and responsibilities to. They are different things.

Posted By Mozh at 8:26 PM - Wed Apr 10 2019

Posted By mickdude2 at 5:35 PM - Tue Apr 09 2019

Posted By Maulvorn at 4:08 PM - Tue Apr 09 2019

Say no to the failure of democracy

I don't know if you recognize the irony of your link, but I appreciated it.

Honestly, any kingdom that doesn't at least lend an ear to it's citizens will likely go under. The game may be set up to support a monarchial dictatorship, but any king that tries to push a monarchial dictatorship will find himself without peasants. We all live in the 21st century, not the 11th. "Divine right" isn't going to work.

Disagree...some people are fine with experimenting with different government styles. I've never lived in a communist society.....but The Waerd seem like the closest thing to communism in Elyria and I'm very interested in playing in that style.

Agreed, some people like to role play. Do things they’d never do in real life. That includes being “dominated” by someone.

Given that its a game, I don't think representative bodies will as efficient as autocratic governments. Players are not the best democratic citizens nor going to be so involved. In EVE, democratic alliances didnt fare so well.

I think the healthiest system is a charismatic dictator that has the support, trust, respect, and confidence of players below them. Having a propaganda wing to increase popularity and a cult of personality will help too. Itll probably help to deify the royal family in this game too.

He or she will have a strong base of support from an organization around them that is loyal and identifies with the leader. These people provide the logistics, administration, infanstructure and security forces to maintain the base of power and execute the directives of the leader.

He or she will make unilateral decisions but have a good sense of what is acceptable and popular to the playerbase below.

Players generally like to be lead and given a cause to identify with, fight for and take orders for.

Lose those conditions, and the kingdom will probably dissolve.

It'll be interesting to see which Governments do the best overall.