Political capital needed for change needs to be elastic with events. When a group of terroist group blows up a car in my capital enacting police state laws should need less political capital for one or two turns. If a sweatshop scandal happens then increasing border controls should require less political capital. Pirate boat sinking should mean less political capital needed for larger military. Market meltdown should mean less political capital needed for changing taxes and economic things. Skills shortage should mean less political capital needed to improve education, alchohol abuse less political capital needed for stricter alcohol laws.
Very good suggestion. I’ve often thought that there shouldn’t be such resistance to backing off police spending when crime is at 0 and been there for a while, or backing off military spending when there hasn’t been a terrorist attack in years.
With a 80% religous population and 65% conservative population shifting sex education in the favor of abstinence should require less political capital. Both the population groups and situations should be taken into account for political capital.
EDIT: I must be the most demanding and spoiled member of the forum.
I do agree, this would make a lot more sense, but it would also increase the complexity of the game, which already scares off quite a few people I guess the simplest system would be to have events also trigger temporary reductions of political capital requirements for specific policy decisions. That would be still quite complex, because for example, if there is a terrorist attack, increasing intelligence service spending should become easier, but reducing it should become harder etc…
I’m not saying it cannot be done, it could be. The problem is making sure it doesn’t break save games or screw up anything else
Expenditures of Political capital bind with size of changing policy. For example, you should spend 10 points of PC for increasing ‘tax’ by 5 %. For increasing this ‘tax’ by 10 % - 22 points of PC. Use geometric progression for increasing cost of changes in 1 turn. Every policy will have own cost of changing.
Unpopular policies will cost more, popular ones is cheaper cost.
Cost of changing depend on your popularity. If you haven’t support from electorate it will rise cost of any changes. If you have support it will be more easy to change policies.
It adds flexibility and difficulty in game. Now i can rise to max or decrease to min ‘tax’ for 1 turn. It is unreal. Playing with possibility of making only little steps in some policies for 1 turn is more realistic. Economy and society don’t allow to make huge changes in short period. You as ruler of democratic state are forced be popular and be depending of interests of majority. With these changes game becomes as chess and as real simulator of headache of rulers…
P.S. i clearly understand that it demands rebalancing of all game but i hope dreams come true.
[size=125]Why not abolish political capital.[/size]
You have some type of Congress or electorate with different factions and parties and blocks in it depending on population.
To pass a bill they have to approve it.
How much they like it depends on what it is and what situation you are in. So a socialist party with moderate leanings will accept cutting a little healthcare to solve a budget deficit but a hardcore capitalist will oppose almost every tax hike.
Comprimise may work so both greens and capitalist may accept harsher pollution controls if the Corporate or Capital Gains tax is cut depending how hardcore and comprise willing they are.
I guess the simplest system would be to have events also trigger temporary reductions of political capital requirements for specific policy decisions. That would be still quite complex, because for example, if there is a terrorist attack, increasing intelligence service spending should become easier, but reducing it should become harder etc…