political parties Political Parties - How would their struggle for power look like

[Redguy325 221]

It's just a little addition to my previous post

Political Parties 

  

 

Introduction 

 

 

In my post about Parliaments, I touched on three very important issues that also extend beyond the topic of just the parliament. These are Political Parties, Elections, and governments. These topics intersect, so I've decided to publish another article, this time titled "Political Parties". I'll try to illustrate my ideas based in AOH3; but I don't have acces to it you know.

 

 

Political Parties 

 

 

Political Parties are the primary entities that can gain power through democratic elections in real-world states. They differ in ideology, management style, and, of course, popularity. Political Parties would be defined within the framework of the parliament file to which they belong. Optionally, they could be independent and assigned to a tag, as I can imagine states that would have Political Parties (for example, those that field presidential candidates or those fighting against autocratic rule) without a parliament. Here I'll paste a slightly expanded version of the Parliament code. 

 

 

{
    CHAMBERS: "2"
    {
        Name:"Sejm",
        ARRANGMENT: C {ANG:180},

        SEATS: 460,
        ELECTS_GOVERNMENT: true,
	VOTE:PROPORTIONAL{BONUS:1.25,TRESHOLD:5} #5 means 5%, in code it could be even 0.05, it isn't important here
    },
    {
        Name:"Senat",
        ARRANGMENT: C {ANG:180},

        SEATS: 100,
	VOTE:ELECTORAL
    },
    LENGTH: 4l,
    TAG: {POL,POL2,POL3},

	POLITIC_PARTIES:
	{
		Name: "Nowa Lewica",
		Sh_Name: "NL",
		R: 129,
		G: 27,
		B: 103,
		BEHAVIOUR: {"Pro-Europeanist","Liberal","Socialist"},
		ANT-BEHAVIOUR:{"Eurosceptic","Conservative","Christian","Freemarket"},
		LEADER:{"leader1","leader2","leader3"},
	},
	{
		Name: "Platforma Obywatelska",
		Sh_Name: "PO",
		R: 249,
		G: 160,
		B: 58,
		BEHAVIOUR: {"Pro-Europeanist","Liberal","Freemarket"},
		ANT-BEHAVIOUR:{"Eurosceptic","Conservative"},
		LEADER:{"leader1","leader2","leader3"},
	},
	{
		Name: "Polskie Stronnictwo Ludowe",
		Sh_Name: "PSL",
		R: 62,
		G: 180,
		B: 61,
		BEHAVIOUR: {"Pro-Europeanist","Christian-Democrat","Freemarket","Agrarian"},
		ANT-BEHAVIOUR:{"Anti-Agrarian","Socialist"},
		LEADER:{"leader1","leader2","leader3"},
	},
	{
		Name: "Prawo i Sprawiedliwość",
		Sh_Name: "PiS",
		R: 7,
		G: 58,
		B: 118,
		BEHAVIOUR: {"Eurosceptic","Conservative","Christian","Socialist"},
		ANT-BEHAVIOUR:{"Pro-Europeanist","Freemarket","liberal"},
		LEADER:{"leader1","leader2","leader3"},
	},
	{
		Name: "Konfederacja Wolność i Niepodległość",
		Sh_Name: "Konfederacja",
		R: 21,
		G: 40,
		B: 68,
		BEHAVIOUR: {"Eurosceptic","Conservative","Christian","Freemarket"},
		ANT-BEHAVIOUR:{"Pro-Europeanist","Socialist","liberal"},
		LEADER:{"leader1","leader2","leader3"},
	},
	{
		Name: "Mniejszość Niemiecka",
		Sh_Name: "MN",
		R: 100,
		G: 100,
		B: 100,
		BEHAVIOUR: {"Pro-Europeanist","pro-German","Freemarket"},
		ANT-BEHAVIOUR:{"Eurosceptic","anti-German"},
		REGION: GER,
		TRESHOLD: false
		LEADER:{"leader1","leader2","leader3"},
	},
},

 

 

I added as an example new party: "Mniejszość Niemiecka". Since this is a party representing the German minority, it operates for Germans, thus exists only in the region where Germans reside. This will be important later on. Tags "BEHAVIOUR" and "ANTI-BEHAVIOUR" illustrate what a particular party supports and opposes. This is crucial for the Laws I mentioned in my Parliament proposal and will be later on. 

 

 

Elections  

 

All parties exist for one purpose - to govern the state. In a democratic country, for which these mechanics are prepared, power is obtained through elections. 

The most important factor is support. My proposal is to make initial support adjustable in the Editor. Here I presented a map where Colombia, marked by Jakowski in one of the videos, is divided into different provinces where various parties have an advantage. Perhaps in each province, there could be a slider similar to the nationality slider in AOH2 - to determine how much support each party has in that province. In the case of countries that would transition to parliamentary democracies during the game, both parties and initial support could be entirely random. 

  

 

 

In Game the Elections would be managed via “Mission” tab (It’s my proposal). 

 

The player would see the percentage of current support for all parties and would be able to support all of them 

Elections themselves would be divided into 2 possible counting methods: 

Proportional (direct) vote 

Electoral (Constituential) vote 

In the Proportional vote, the percentage of popularity would directly correspond to the percentage of control of the seats in Parliament. So, using the example above, if there are 460 seats in parliament, and PiS has 35.5% support, it would receive 163 or 164 seats. 

The Electoral vote would require dividing the country into constituencies. Each constituency would consist of one or several provinces, and each would be entitled to a set number of votes. This would be adjustable in the game editor, although there might also be a way to set this automatically (the game automatically aiming for equal districts based on population) or change it during the game. Direct support wouldn't matter here; only support for each party in each province would count. So, if PiS had the majority of votes in 100 out of 230 electoral districts, each providing two votes, it would garner 200 out of the 460 available seats. 

EDITED:, I would propose the inclusion of an "Electoral Threshold." This mechanism would ensure that parties failing to achieve a defined percentage of popularity would not secure representation in the parliament, with their seats redistributed among larger parties. Such a provision would likely require incorporation into the parliamentary code, I did it in ""VOTE" cathegory. Additionally, it should allow for the exemption of "local" parties from the threshold. For instance, the "Mniejszość Niemiecka" could be exempted due to its representation of a particular group (nationality), acknowledging the practical constraints on its ability to achieve high percentages, as observed in reality.

The Electoral Threshold would have the capacity to exclude entire parties from national representation in proportional voting systems, or simply remove them from specific constituencies in electoral voting systems. This threshold, denoted as "TRESHOLD" in the code, serves as a crucial element in ensuring proportional representation.

Furthermore, I propose the introduction of a variation parameter, labeled as "BONUS" increase the number of seats in the parliament for the greater parties. Drawing inspiration from methods such as the "D'Hondt method," commonly used for seat allocation in parliaments worldwide, this parameter offers increasing the realism of election results in relation to party support. A value of "1" would signify neutrality, where larger parties receive no additional advantage beyond their natural share of seats (Seats would be 1:1 proportional to % of popularity). Values exceeding "1" (e.g., 1.2, 1.5, 2) would result in their disproportionate gain of seats at the expense of smaller parties, with percentages incrementally higher than what they would receive otherwise. Conversely, values lower than "1" (e.g., 0.9, 0.8, 0.7) would indicate a reduction in seats for larger parties, thereby enhancing the representation of smaller parties as it takes place in e.g. "Sainte-Laguë method". It's worth noting that extreme values below 0.8 could lead to disproportionate outcomes, potentially undermining the coherence of parliamentary representation.

 

Result of each elections would be showed in a proper event. 

 

 Governments 

 

 

After the election, there isn't always a clear winner. 

If there is (meaning absolute control in Parliament, or at least in the chamber privileged to appoint the Government), the winner automatically becomes the ruling party. 

If there isn't, the player would, via decisions, try to form a coalition as the party they chose in the earlier event. They could choose one of the two main parties for logical reasons (smaller parties shouldn't "invite" larger ones to a coalition as it makes no sense, despite it being the only way to form a functioning coalition most of the time). 

Forming a coalition would involve offering concessions in certain areas to other parties. Usually, this would result in a random debuff. Each party after the elections would present some of its demands, and the player would have to select the parties whose demands they agree with. Perhaps there would be some indicator of relations between parties, and depending on the level of these relations, different parties would have different costs, from symbolic to painful. However, this is already a complicated addition. BTW relations between countries would be good and there should be the possibility of merge between parties if relations hit 100, 200 or something. 

If the majority needed to form a government is gathered, all functions of governing the state (declaring wars, complex diplomacy, etc.) are automatically unlocked. Until a government is formed, the state would have very limited diplomatic functions, and generally, the states would be incentivized to build a government. 

My additional proposal is to replace Advisors with a "government". This would consist of several positions: instead of the Administrative Advisor, there would be a "Prime Minister", instead of the Economic Advisor, there would be a "Minister of Economy", instead of the Innovation Advisor, there would be a "Minister of Education", and instead of the Military Advisor, there would be a "Minister of Defense" / "Minister of War". They would function the same as Advisors but would be irremovable. Their names would be drawn from among the members of parties (in the order listed). If a party wins independently, it would take all ministries; each coalition partner would lose its ministry unless there are more partners than positions. If there aren't enough names, the game would draw them. 

The government, except for enacting laws, would have a free hand in exercising power and making most decisions until the next elections. And so on in a continuous cycle. 

 

I will once again encourage you to read the first half of the idea: 

 

 

Thank you for reading; I hope this post will also be seen by Jakowski and even will give some inspiration for AOH3 😉

Edited February 13 by Redguy325
added new ideas

[Redguy325 221]

I'm done at this point, nothing more for a while 😉

[Outlawexperience 306]

35 minutes ago, Redguy325 said:

It's just a little addition to my previous post

Political Parties 

  

 

Introduction 

 

 

In my post about Parliaments, I touched on three very important issues that also extend beyond the topic of just the parliament. These are Political Parties, Elections, and governments. These topics intersect, so I've decided to publish another article, this time titled "Political Parties". I'll warn you right away that I'll be illustrating my ideas based on AOH2; this is because it's the only real thing I have access to. 

 

 

Political Parties 

 

 

Political Parties are the primary entities that can gain power through democratic elections in real-world states. They differ in ideology, management style, and, of course, popularity. Political Parties would be defined within the framework of the parliament file to which they belong. Optionally, they could be independent and assigned to a tag, as I can imagine states that would have Political Parties (for example, those that field presidential candidates or those fighting against autocratic rule) without a parliament. Here I'll paste a slightly expanded version of the Parliament code. 

 

 

	POLITIC_PARTIES:
	{
		Name: "Nowa Lewica",
		Sh_Name: "NL",
		R: 129,
		G: 27,
		B: 103,
		BEHAVIOUR: {"Pro-Europeanist","Liberal","Socialist"},
		ANT-BEHAVIOUR:{"Eurosceptic","Conservative","Christian","Freemarket"},
		LEADER:{"leader1","leader2","leader3"},
	},
	{
		Name: "Platforma Obywatelska",
		Sh_Name: "PO",
		R: 249,
		G: 160,
		B: 58,
		BEHAVIOUR: {"Pro-Europeanist","Liberal","Freemarket"},
		ANT-BEHAVIOUR:{"Eurosceptic","Conservative"},
		LEADER:{"leader1","leader2","leader3"},
	},
	{
		Name: "Polskie Stronnictwo Ludowe",
		Sh_Name: "PSL",
		R: 62,
		G: 180,
		B: 61,
		BEHAVIOUR: {"Pro-Europeanist","Christian-Democrat","Freemarket","Agrarian"},
		ANT-BEHAVIOUR:{"Anti-Agrarian","Socialist"},
		LEADER:{"leader1","leader2","leader3"},
	},
	{
		Name: "Prawo i Sprawiedliwość",
		Sh_Name: "PiS",
		R: 7,
		G: 58,
		B: 118,
		BEHAVIOUR: {"Eurosceptic","Conservative","Christian","Socialist"},
		ANT-BEHAVIOUR:{"Pro-Europeanist","Freemarket","liberal"},
		LEADER:{"leader1","leader2","leader3"},
	},
	{
		Name: "Konfederacja Wolność i Niepodległość",
		Sh_Name: "Konfederacja",
		R: 21,
		G: 40,
		B: 68,
		BEHAVIOUR: {"Eurosceptic","Conservative","Christian","Freemarket"},
		ANT-BEHAVIOUR:{"Pro-Europeanist","Socialist","liberal"},
		LEADER:{"leader1","leader2","leader3"},
	},
	{
		Name: "Mniejszość Niemiecka",
		Sh_Name: "MN",
		R: 100,
		G: 100,
		B: 100,
		BEHAVIOUR: {"Pro-Europeanist","pro-German","Freemarket"},
		ANT-BEHAVIOUR:{"Eurosceptic","anti-German"},
		REGION: GER,
		LEADER:{"leader1","leader2","leader3"},
	},
}

 

 

I added as an example new party: "Mniejszość Niemiecka". Since this is a party representing the German minority, it operates for Germans, thus exists only in the region where Germans reside. This will be important later on. Tags "BEHAVIOUR" and "ANTI-BEHAVIOUR" illustrate what a particular party supports and opposes. This is crucial for the Laws I mentioned in my Parliament proposal and will be later on. 

 

 

Elections  

 

All parties exist for one purpose - to govern the state. In a democratic country, for which these mechanics are prepared, power is obtained through elections. 

The most important factor is support. My proposal is to make initial support adjustable in the Editor. Here I presented a map where Colombia, marked by Jakowski in one of the videos, is divided into different provinces where various parties have an advantage. Perhaps in each province, there could be a slider similar to the nationality slider in AOH2 - to determine how much support each party has in that province. In the case of countries that would transition to parliamentary democracies during the game, both parties and initial support could be entirely random. 

  

 

 

In Game the Elections would be managed via “Mission” tab (It’s my proposal). 

 

The player would see the percentage of current support for all parties and would be able to support all of them 

Elections themselves would be divided into 2 possible counting methods: 

Proportional (direct) vote 

Electoral (Constituential) vote 

In the Proportional vote, the percentage of popularity would directly correspond to the percentage of control of the seats in Parliament. So, using the example above, if there are 460 seats in parliament, and PiS has 35.5% support, it would receive 163 or 164 seats. 

The Electoral vote would require dividing the country into constituencies. Each constituency would consist of one or several provinces, and each would be entitled to a set number of votes. This would be adjustable in the game editor, although there might also be a way to set this automatically (the game automatically aiming for equal districts based on population) or change it during the game. Direct support wouldn't matter here; only support for each party in each province would count. So, if PiS had the majority of votes in 100 out of 230 electoral districts, each providing two votes, it would garner 200 out of the 460 available seats. 

 

Result of each elections would be showed in a proper event. 

 

 Governments 

 

 

After the election, there isn't always a clear winner. 

If there is (meaning absolute control in Parliament, or at least in the chamber privileged to appoint the Government), the winner automatically becomes the ruling party. 

If there isn't, the player would, via decisions, try to form a coalition as the party they chose in the earlier event. They could choose one of the two main parties for logical reasons (smaller parties shouldn't "invite" larger ones to a coalition as it makes no sense, despite it being the only way to form a functioning coalition most of the time). 

Forming a coalition would involve offering concessions in certain areas to other parties. Usually, this would result in a random debuff. Each party after the elections would present some of its demands, and the player would have to select the parties whose demands they agree with. Perhaps there would be some indicator of relations between parties, and depending on the level of these relations, different parties would have different costs, from symbolic to painful. However, this is already a complicated addition. BTW relations between countries would be good and there should be the possibility of merge between parties if relations hit 100, 200 or something. 

If the majority needed to form a government is gathered, all functions of governing the state (declaring wars, complex diplomacy, etc.) are automatically unlocked. Until a government is formed, the state would have very limited diplomatic functions, and generally, the states would be incentivized to build a government. 

My additional proposal is to replace Advisors with a "government". This would consist of several positions: instead of the Administrative Advisor, there would be a "Prime Minister", instead of the Economic Advisor, there would be a "Minister of Economy", instead of the Innovation Advisor, there would be a "Minister of Education", and instead of the Military Advisor, there would be a "Minister of Defense" / "Minister of War". They would function the same as Advisors but would be irremovable. Their names would be drawn from among the members of parties (in the order listed). If a party wins independently, it would take all ministries; each coalition partner would lose its ministry unless there are more partners than positions. If there aren't enough names, the game would draw them. 

The government, except for enacting laws, would have a free hand in exercising power and making most decisions until the next elections. And so on in a continuous cycle. 

 

I will once again encourage you to read the first half of the idea: 

 

 

Thank you for reading; I hope this post will also be seen by Jakowski and even will give some inspiration for AOH3 😉

Another very good idea 👍😎

[Unity 652]

i was talking about this but really good

[muhoaga 101]

48 minutes ago, Redguy325 said:

Bu noktada işim bitti, bir süre daha başka bir şey yok  😉

Pls navy and army unit add xd

[Redguy325 221]

3 minutes ago, muhoaga said:

Pls navy and army unit add xd

If you want to propose something, you can write by yourself

Edited February 12 by Redguy325

[muhoaga 101]

1 minute ago, Redguy325 said:

If you want to propose something, you can write by yourself

I did it anyway but they didn't see

[WATER 227]

Your post is going well.

Largely thanks to the comments.

Edited February 12 by WATER

[Nowarhia 59]

@Łukasz Jakowski

[Redguy325 221]

2 minutes ago, Nowarhia said:

@Łukasz Jakowski

He would read it anyway if ever returns to my parliament post, no need of pinging him

[Unity 652]

32 minutes ago, Redguy325 said:

He would read it anyway if ever returns to my parliament post, no need of pinging him

these guys need to stop honestly Lukasz can see everything on the site no need to promote or ping anybody he can clearly read it that's if he wants to

[Outlawexperience 306]

I have a suggestion about parties that when elected, can change the government: for example in 1933 when electing NSDAP as democratic weimar Republic the government type changes to fascism and the civilization becomes the German Reich. Or when electing the Communist party in Russia the government changes to Communism, turning into the Soviet Union. Those parties popularity should vary on how good or well the current government is doing, propaganda campaign or foreign influence from stronger Civilizations with a certain government.

 

In modern day, those parties have very low popular, but in times of crisis (great depression, ww2) these political parties have great popularity and one of them winning would anger the other side and cause unrest.

[Redguy325 221]

Just now, Outlawexperience said:

I have a suggestion about parties that when elected, can change the government: for example in 1933 when electing NSDAP as democratic weimar Republic the government type changes to fascism and the civilization becomes the German Reich. Or when electing the Communist party in Russia the government changes to Communism, turning into the Soviet Union. Those parties popularity should vary on how good or well the current government is doing, propaganda campaign or foreign influence from stronger Civilizations with a certain government.

 

In modern day, those parties have very low popular, but in times of crisis (great depression, ww2) these political parties have great popularity and one of them winning would anger the other side and cause unrest.

This could be the thing for custom events I think

Edited February 12 by Redguy325

[paul2kdj 117]

This is needed in order for the game to survive. It can certainly make some weird strategies like a communist usa in 1969 say so that the cold war can officially end in a communist victory 

Edited February 12 by paul2kdj

[Outlawexperience 306]

I have another another suggestion: there can either be some term limits(1/2/3..) or no term limits (leader can stay leader of the ruling party and president until death or resigning),for example, in the USA there is only 2 terms limit, meaning the same leader of the party can be president only for 2 terms, while in some authoritarian countries the leader can have no term limits and may stay president until their death or resignation

Edited February 13 by Outlawexperience

[Unity 652]

10 minutes ago, Outlawexperience said:

I have another another suggestion: there can either be some term limits(1/2/3..) or no term limits (leader can stay leader of the ruling party and president until death or resigning),for example, in the USA there is only 2 terms limit, meaning the same leader of the party can be president only for 2 terms, while in some authoritarian countries the leader can have no term limits and may stay president until their death or resignation

actually have a ability to edit the term limit's to you liking like 3 10 or ect

Edited February 13 by aunitydevteam

[Outlawexperience 306]

52 minutes ago, aunitydevteam said:

actually have a ability to edit the term limit's to you liking like 3 10 or ect

Yea

[Redguy325 221]

1 hour ago, Outlawexperience said:

I have another another suggestion: there can either be some term limits(1/2/3..) or no term limits (leader can stay leader of the ruling party and president until death or resigning),for example, in the USA there is only 2 terms limit, meaning the same leader of the party can be president only for 2 terms, while in some authoritarian countries the leader can have no term limits and may stay president until their death or resignation

Yeah it would be cool, also naturally leaders would come and go as everyone else due to getting old

[Outlawexperience 306]

41 minutes ago, Redguy325 said:

Yeah it would be cool, also naturally leaders would come and go as everyone else due to getting old

Since there are leaders that are very old like Joe Biden, there should be a feature that they don't die instantly after becoming leader or starting the game due to their old age, instead they should live for around 5-10 years during their rule and can either die by old age after, or with an event that kills the leader 

Edited February 13 by Outlawexperience

[Redguy325 221]

New ideas to my post:

 

"I would propose the inclusion of an "Electoral Threshold." This mechanism would ensure that parties failing to achieve a defined percentage of popularity would not secure representation in the parliament, with their seats redistributed among larger parties. Such a provision would likely require incorporation into the parliamentary code, I did it in ""VOTE" cathegory. Additionally, it should allow for the exemption of "local" parties from the threshold. For instance, the "Mniejszość Niemiecka" could be exempted due to its representation of a particular group (nationality), acknowledging the practical constraints on its ability to achieve high percentages, as observed in reality.

The Electoral Threshold would have the capacity to exclude entire parties from national representation in proportional voting systems, or simply remove them from specific constituencies in electoral voting systems. This threshold, denoted as "TRESHOLD" in the code, serves as a crucial element in ensuring proportional representation.

Furthermore, I propose the introduction of a variation parameter, labeled as "BONUS" increase the number of seats in the parliament for the greater parties. Drawing inspiration from methods such as the "D'Hondt method," commonly used for seat allocation in parliaments worldwide, this parameter offers increasing the realism of election results in relation to party support. A value of "1" would signify neutrality, where larger parties receive no additional advantage beyond their natural share of seats (Seats would be 1:1 proportional to % of popularity). Values exceeding "1" (e.g., 1.2, 1.5, 2) would result in their disproportionate gain of seats at the expense of smaller parties, with percentages incrementally higher than what they would receive otherwise. Conversely, values lower than "1" (e.g., 0.9, 0.8, 0.7) would indicate a reduction in seats for larger parties, thereby enhancing the representation of smaller parties as it takes place in e.g. "Sainte-Laguë method". It's worth noting that extreme values below 0.8 could lead to disproportionate outcomes, potentially undermining the coherence of parliamentary representation."

Already added to the main text

[Warnnexx 134]

This idea is absolutely perfect!!

[Outlawexperience 306]

28 minutes ago, Warnnexx said:

This idea is absolutely perfect!!

Indeed, especially the parliament one

[Erdurgaman 0]

I think there could also be a voting system in totalitarian regimes, like communism. After all, the Politburo can overrule a decision by the Secretary General.

 

Of course, most decisions can be made arbitrarily, but extremely important decisions (such as declaring war) would have to be reviewed by the Politburo and at least 2/3 of the Politburo would have to be against the decision.

[Redguy325 221]

21 minutes ago, Erdurgaman said:

I think there could also be a voting system in totalitarian regimes, like communism. After all, the Politburo can overrule a decision by the Secretary General.

 

Of course, most decisions can be made arbitrarily, but extremely important decisions (such as declaring war) would have to be reviewed by the Politburo and at least 2/3 of the Politburo would have to be against the decision.

Parliament should belong to tags, and creator should decide which countries have them and which do not.

[Evis7 147]

Lukasz, we need this!!