..why with 40% ecological party support I got an Industrial representative in this system? The representative is a Sophon. Official support went to ecologists.

Kinda ruined the game for me. My strategy with sophons relies heavily on pushing ecologists turn 20 and I usually get there without much struggle. I needed that 1 vote from Yersh to achieve my goals and I was pretty sure I'd get it, but nope.. I hate save scumming in those kinda games as well, so I guess I'll end the run here. I think smth is wrong with calculations for elections in this game, sometimes results are weird like in my example.

Frogsquadron wrote:

This is the politics graph of the Sophons. Pacifist support gives an equal support to the Scientist party, whose votes go to the Industrialists.

Wait, why do scientist votes go to the industrialists rather than industrialists going to the scientists?

Right. My only guess is that there's a fair bit of swing in the polls to the actual results, so the scientists had a bad run, the industrialists had a much better one, and the scientists teamed up with the industrialists to beat the ecologists, so the representative is industrial. 

In the final tally for the leading parties in the senate, it looks tied between those three. I guess pacifist would team with either scientist or ecologist to put either one in charge. Given your dissapointment, I assume you ended up with a scientist leading the senate OP?

This is the politics graph of the Sophons. Pacifist support gives an equal support to the Scientist party, whose votes go to the Industrialists. If you add up 40% ecologists and 13% pacifists, you're still under the total of 13% industrialists + 33% scientists + 13% pacifists, so I think this is working as intended?

Oh, I think I get what you are talking about - so the votes of adjacent parties pass checks in both directions and then the successor is chosen? But in that case shouldn't I get a scientist rather than industrialist in Yersh?

Dragar wrote:

Right. My only guess is that there's a fair bit of swing in the polls to the actual results, so the scientists had a bad run, the industrialists had a much better one, and the scientists teamed up with the industrialists to beat the ecologists, so the representative is industrial. In the final tally for the leading parties, it looks tied between those three. I guess pacifist could go either scientist or ecologist to put either one in charge. I assume you ended up with a scientist leading the senate OP?

It is even more conspiratorial, industrialists and pacifists teamed up to beat ecologists! Those bastards!
And yeah, scientists became my leading party, I think it has something to do with political leaning of the sophons, becasue you can see in the second picture that vote distribution is equal between those 3 parties in the end.

mamarider wrote:

This is the politics graph of the Sophons. Pacifist support gives an equal support to the Scientist party, whose votes go to the Industrialists. If you add up 40% ecologists and 13% pacifists, you're still under the total of 13% industrialists + 33% scientists + 13% pacifists, so I think this is working as intended?

Oh, I think I get what you are talking about - so the votes of adjacent parties pass checks in both directions and then the successor is chosen? But in that case shouldn't I get a scientist rather than industrialist in Yersh?

Dragar wrote:

Right. My only guess is that there's a fair bit of swing in the polls to the actual results, so the scientists had a bad run, the industrialists had a much better one, and the scientists teamed up with the industrialists to beat the ecologists, so the representative is industrial. In the final tally for the leading parties, it looks tied between those three. I guess pacifist could go either scientist or ecologist to put either one in charge. I assume you ended up with a scientist leading the senate OP?

It is even more conspiratorial, industrialists and pacifists teamed up to beat ecologists! Those bastards!
And yeah, scientists became my leading party, I think it has something to do with political leaning of the sophons, becasue you can see in the second picture that vote distribution is equal between those 3 parties in the end.

Yeah, I'm not sure at all how the ties are broken. But industrialists will vote for scientists, but never ecologists, so maybe that factored into it. 

To sum this up, can we tell that boosting adjacent parties a little bit is important for boosting the party you need? I guess so.. Because otherwise they will team up against you and push some randoms into your senate..
Anyway, this micromanagement is only important first 40 turns. Later you can neither keep up with your people's opinions nor control them.. xD

Fun fact, according to this screenshot Pacifists devided their votes between both parties, but in fact they only boosted scientists turning them into the main party?

Can you hover over the pacifist symbol? It might say how many votes were allocated. 

ItsAHoax wrote:

MonAmiral wrote:

Then, for each vote, it will randomly pick a politics to vote for, based on the support of the politics.

In Yersh's case, at the end of the turn Ecologists have 60% support, and Industrialists and Scientists have 20% each.

So what you are saying is that a system break down of
50% Military
10% Scientist
20% Ecologist

20% Industrialist

Population of (10)

Has a 50% chance of randomly picking Military as a representative first?

Why doesn't this system Guarantee that the majority support is Picked at a rate that properly represents the percentages? 

Because: 

a) It's got some elements of chance involved (i.e. the computer is rolling some dice).

b) "If there are several votes to cast at once, the ones that aren't randomly selected become slightly more likely to be selected next, so that there are more chances of getting a balanced system. " So after picking a militarist, the next representative being picked will have less than 50% chance of being picked. This ensures one system doesn't return (easily, commonly) tons of the same political representative, and keeps politics a bit more lively.

It creates an RNG related system especially on newly colonized systems with one population unit. This should not be the case as the highest represented political party should be represented first and fairly, not left the the devices of an RNG roll. I can understand for every other political leaning that is not in the majority lead, that is where the cross representation should come in and other Political parties can coordinate to push another above the threshhold. However, as dictated above even if calculated the other political parties combined do not represent more %'age than the current leading party RNG can push that party into representation despite how the %'age of votes are displayed to the end user.

What seems Logical is that a System of 10 Population:

40% Militarist
20% Pacifist
20% Industrialist
10% Ecologist

10% Religious

Should Return:
4 Militarist Representitives First and Foremost
The remaining Representitives Should Follow the Rules Set Forth and either Lobby together as their Traits dictate and Push one of the 2 Secondary Parties above the Threshhold, or Stalemate according to their traits.

Another Example: 

40% Militarist
20% Religious
10% Industrialist
10% Ecologist
10% Scientific

10% Pacifist

Should Return:

4 Militarist Representitives First and Foremost
The remaining Representitives Should Follow the Rules Set Forth and either Lobby together as their Traits dictate and Push the 1 Secondary Party as lobbied by the lesser political leaning traits. (i.e. The 10% Scientific would not Boost Relgious because of conflics in their political beliefs)

________________

For Democracies they should be represented according to their %'age without RNG and rounded up or down as dictated by the Population total. The final Senate Vote regarding the 3 available senate seats should be focused, instead of the TOP 2 (for Republic/Federation). That means that Any lesser 3rd/4th/5th and 6th place political parties representatives should lobby into a 3rd Political Party dictated by their Political relationships. i.e. In the second example above as a democracy the representatives would be:

4 Militarist
2 Religious
1 Industrialist

1 Ecologist

1 Scientific

1 Pacifist

in the Final vote, using the system above we would have two guaranteed Senators

(1) Militarist
(1) Religious
The third senator slot would be lobbied together with the remaining political parties representatives. Pacifist obviously wouldn't vote for Militarist the same Scientist would not for Religious. So using the weight of each remaining political parties leaning towards another we could deduce who could be the 3rd senator of the tied 4 remaining parties, in the event of a stalemate obviously RNG would be the final call.

What seems Logical is that a System of 10 Population:

40% Militarist
20% Pacifist
20% Industrialist
10% Ecologist

Should Return:
4 Militarist Representitives First and Foremost

And it will I guess? Because each time a militarist is not picked the chance for it being picked next increases? And that is on top of an already big chance. MonAmiral stated that. However it'd be great to know the exact value of that growth. Because mb if this growth is significant enough then 40% Militarist will result into 4 militarist representatives 90% of the time, with 10% chance of unexpected result which makes the whole thing more interesting. But if the growth is insignificant and those 40% become 4 representatives only 50% of the time, then yeah, I can agree with you.

I hate games where you can calculate everything. I hate games where anything is RNG. In the end you do influence the politics by your actions and it has the effect you aim for. Good design decision thic case from my point of view. Else I don't need to play a game. I can make calculation about... No offense, not to be misunderstood.

Well, this is too embarassing. Was trying to record a video/guide on that specific strategy of mine and it FAILED in the end because of that rng system (I guess?) ...

Here is a political opinion for Ukdah.

Here is a political opinion for Trappist-1.

???

?????????????????????????????????????!

...

The game before I had much lower Ecologists support, it was actually 1% lower than scientists and ECOLOGISTS WOOOON!!! I changed my opinion and think that this politics system needs a revisit from devs. That is the kind of an rng that frustrates me. The rng should be controlable - like getting ecolosists as your leading party 100% but having some unpleasant representatives from other parties because of some randomness. Not this kind of RNG, sacrifice a lot for achieveing your goals and don't achieve them because of the rng.