The game is too forceful about banning slavery

[Desperadoscres]

If you dont have slavery ban you will get an event about it not being banned EVERY couple of weeks, acting like your still debating banning it or not
Like you dont get tone of event when you dont have it banned telling you to legalize it, why that

[Burma Jones]

Because the devs are delusional European socialists who lack the intelligence to comprehend how out of place and antihistorical their modern identity politics are in this game.

[TheDongsmasher]

Originally posted by Burma Jones:

Because the devs are delusional European socialists who lack the intelligence to comprehend how out of place and antihistorical their modern identity politics are in this game.

300 IQ internet dweller here insists that the problems with maintaining the institution of slavery at a time when the global economic hegemon was crusading to abolish it everywhere and the triumphs of the capital making it obsolete is "antihistorical"(lol) and has to do with "identity politics" and everyone who disagrees with him is delusional and dumb. lol you've been watching too much rick and morty, your IQ's too high brother, time to touch grass.

[clayffo]

It has more to do with the freedom to play as you please. Just to give a few examples, both India and China employ slave labor today. If i want to play as either one or other nation options like Russia much of the middle east, why can't i play it realistically?

[kubluu]

Yeah. The devs took the easy route, meaning PC and woke.
Another failed opportunity to create historical immersion.

[Ole "Slim Jolo" the Hobo Hero]

They took the easy route of historical immersion by showing how slavery in these industrializing nations ended historically / etc?

I mean nothing stopping you from taking the historical route too and cancelling the whole 40 acres and a Mule thing since the post-civil war in the states for example has paths for both - you think you'd like the option to cancel it, which was also, ykno, the historical outcome, since that immersion is so important to you :p

I think the real problem you guys miss is much of the game is placeholder, what you guys see as propaganda pushing for this or that is literally just progression in the game being tied to recreating things that generally happened historically, that's why certain laws are locked behind tech by yrs etc - banning slavery raises standard of living of those pops, womens suffrage etc raises standard of living of those pops.

What you guys confuse as 'devs forcing narrative' etc is literally just abstracting history to reflect that on SoL since it's the main mechanic of progression in general, and yes, you'll probably generally also find people enjoy not being a slave vs being a slave etc so yea that'll increase SoL, probably. Maybe it is a cheese-able mechanic, sure, it's hardly forcing a narrative.

You'd think you guys would actually relish in the challenge of imaging those pops and their SoL suffering within your backwater states, not just be angry an alternative is also in game lol.

[Desperadoscres]

Originally posted by Ole "Slim Jolo" the Hobo Hero:

They took the easy route of historical immersion by showing how slavery in these industrializing nations ended historically / etc?

I mean nothing stopping you from taking the historical route too and cancelling the whole 40 acres and a Mule thing since the post-civil war in the states for example has paths for both - you think you'd like the option to cancel it, which was also, ykno, the historical outcome, since that immersion is so important to you :p

I think the real problem you guys miss is much of the game is placeholder, what you guys see as propaganda pushing for this or that is literally just progression in the game being tied to recreating things that generally happened historically, that's why certain laws are locked behind tech by yrs etc - banning slavery raises standard of living of those pops, womens suffrage etc raises standard of living of those pops.

What you guys confuse as 'devs forcing narrative' etc is literally just abstracting history to reflect that on SoL since it's the main mechanic of progression in general, and yes, you'll probably generally also find people enjoy not being a slave vs being a slave etc so yea that'll increase SoL, probably. Maybe it is a cheese-able mechanic, sure, it's hardly forcing a narrative.

You'd think you guys would actually relish in the challenge of imaging those pops and their SoL suffering within your backwater states, not just be angry an alternative is also in game lol.

Not everygame should be the same, otherwise you would never be playing the same nation twice
Like yes I could try to reach 40SOL has america, since last game I did 35, but ive allready done that
I wan't to be able to take a different route and actually put to use the different law the game offer

[Ole "Slim Jolo" the Hobo Hero]

Originally posted by Desperadoscres:

Not everygame should be the same, otherwise you would never be playing the same nation twice

But that's kind of what I mean about the game just being under-baked. It's mechanics aren't really fleshed out enough and they continuously change how interest groups and pops are working with each update, the laws they're supporting and things around that, and every single nation basically plays the same way. From a point of game dev they probably want the player to have to engage with things always opposite of whatever their government is, like abolishment movements, labor movements etc because the challenge of progression is tied to a sandbox of events general to the period and that's how they take advantage of suffering SoL to make your 'enemies,' laws and so on being unlocked by tech slowly adding to the pool of things pops will agitate for or against, etc.

Its more that the gameplay loop in general is probably always going to result in something like an abolishment movement of some kind in a country with slavery, that kinda thing, because thats how political alignment of pops is basically measured based on the the laws there are

The game is not pushing a narrative, it's just kind of too generic in how it handles progression in general and the types of laws that get agitated for with time, making those plays of maintaining the status quo you start out with more difficult to sustain with time because it's the very avenue the game is supposed to introduce its pop-related/SoL-related challenges through

[Desperadoscres]

Originally posted by Ole "Slim Jolo" the Hobo Hero:

Originally posted by Desperadoscres:

Not everygame should be the same, otherwise you would never be playing the same nation twice

But that's kind of what I mean about the game just being under-baked. It's mechanics aren't really fleshed out enough and they continuously change how interest groups and pops are working with each update, the laws they're supporting and things around that, and every single nation basically plays the same way. From a point of game dev they probably want the player to have to engage with things always opposite of whatever their government is, like abolishment movements, labor movements etc because the challenge of progression is tied to a sandbox of events general to the period and that's how they take advantage of suffering SoL to make your 'enemies,' laws and so on being unlocked by tech slowly adding to the pool of things pops will agitate for or against, etc.

Its more that the gameplay loop in general is probably always going to result in something like an abolishment movement of some kind in a country with slavery, that kinda thing, because thats how political alignment of pops is basically measured based on the the laws there are

The game is not pushing a narrative, it's just kind of too generic in how it handles progression in general and the types of laws that get agitated for with time, making those plays of maintaining the status quo you start out with more difficult to sustain with time because it's the very avenue the game is supposed to introduce its pop-related/SoL-related challenges through

I think every direction should have it's oposite
Like by example stamp out monarchism should have a desciscion like stamb out republicanism, which make interest group lose the republican ideologies
Same thing with land owner stoppig to be slaver, their should be something for inteligensia to stop being abolitionist

[Average Ligurian]

Originally posted by kubluu:

Yeah. The devs took the easy route, meaning PC and woke.
Another failed opportunity to create historical immersion.

It's woke to represent the strong abolitionist movement and the economical inefficiency of slavery in the 800s? Definitely not trying to defend racism here, right

[Average Ligurian]

Originally posted by Desperadoscres:

Originally posted by Ole "Slim Jolo" the Hobo Hero:

But that's kind of what I mean about the game just being under-baked. It's mechanics aren't really fleshed out enough and they continuously change how interest groups and pops are working with each update, the laws they're supporting and things around that, and every single nation basically plays the same way. From a point of game dev they probably want the player to have to engage with things always opposite of whatever their government is, like abolishment movements, labor movements etc because the challenge of progression is tied to a sandbox of events general to the period and that's how they take advantage of suffering SoL to make your 'enemies,' laws and so on being unlocked by tech slowly adding to the pool of things pops will agitate for or against, etc.

Its more that the gameplay loop in general is probably always going to result in something like an abolishment movement of some kind in a country with slavery, that kinda thing, because thats how political alignment of pops is basically measured based on the the laws there are

The game is not pushing a narrative, it's just kind of too generic in how it handles progression in general and the types of laws that get agitated for with time, making those plays of maintaining the status quo you start out with more difficult to sustain with time because it's the very avenue the game is supposed to introduce its pop-related/SoL-related challenges through

I think every direction should have it's oposite
Like by example stamp out monarchism should have a desciscion like stamb out republicanism, which make interest group lose the republican ideologies
Same thing with land owner stoppig to be slaver, their should be something for inteligensia to stop being abolitionist

Stamp out monarchism exists because constitutional/absolute monarchism starts to naturally fade or disappear when the monarchy is abolished in every single historical example on Earth and "stamp out monarchism" represents the fading of the monarchist sentiments, with the right adapting to become a republican force. The player can still make a restoration in that period if the game forces a republic on you like it happened in some historical examples.

"Stamp out republicanism" is already there and it's called "Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality" which is basically traditionalists trying not to lose privileges like Nicholas I tried to do in the Russian Empire, but republicanism can't simply disappear by entrenching traditionalism as an ideal, it can just be sidelined by a mix of giving political concessions (constitutions), good economy for everyone and repression of dissent. The material development of a society means that monarchies must adapt to the political demand of the new bourgeoisie class and eventually the proletarian masses that have demands that are naturally opposed to an autocratic kingdom.

Monarchy on the other hand stop being a force after it falls, it quickly becomes irrelevant because restoring it would be painful and almost impossible thanks to constitutional limits. Similarly but not exactly the same as how communism and left-wing ideologies in general lost all appeal in most of eastern europe after the fall of communism.

I'm with you with one thing: in certain nations, such as the United Kingdom, the monarchy is particularly modern for historical reasons, and even the socialists adapted to the idea, considering the monarchy as a national symbol difficult to remove and/or harmless enough if limited politically. We can see this "monarchical socialism" in the philosophy of the late Orwell and also in the Chartist movement which wanted a democracy but not necessarily a republic (and directed the people's charter to the Queen herself). Republicanism would still be ideal for any egalitarian tho.

You can easily fix all of this by making different parties instead of this idiotic system of pressure groups that are too few to be realistic and some of them are highly unrealistic (the intelligentsia isn't that unified and "naturally liberal", that's actually stupid)

[Ebolite Saint]

i've also noticed that in my last 5 or so games elections are broken, every IG joins the same party and remains in the uniparty for the rest of the game.

[Burma Jones]

Originally posted by Ebolite Saint:

i've also noticed that in my last 5 or so games elections are broken, every IG joins the same party and remains in the uniparty for the rest of the game.

Because the devs think all of history is racist barbarism that transitions, converges and peaks into European authoritarian socialism. That's the only way you can optimally play every single nation. The game is cookie clicker garbage with zero historical accuracy outside of the most basic and superficial things (which even then they get many little things wrong).

[Nats]

Trying to make a historical game woke is the compete antithesis of what the game is meant to be portraying. It's trying to rewrite history into a nice soft squishy game of acceptability. If they can't show cruel violent historical events as they happened they need to start making console games.

[BlitzMike91]

Originally posted by Nats:

Trying to make a historical game woke is the compete antithesis of what the game is meant to be portraying. It's trying to rewrite history into a nice soft squishy game of acceptability. If they can't show cruel violent historical events as they happened they need to start making console games.

Pakistan and co literally have even today slavery....

[Nats]

Originally posted by BlitzMike91:

Originally posted by Nats:

Trying to make a historical game woke is the compete antithesis of what the game is meant to be portraying. It's trying to rewrite history into a nice soft squishy game of acceptability. If they can't show cruel violent historical events as they happened they need to start making console games.

Pakistan and co literally have even today slavery....

Loads of countries have slavery. And even developed nations have a form of slavery it's called full time employment.