Craver was one of the most powerful factions. And when the Dictatorship is upgraded, Autocracy has also been upgraded and Craver has become stronger. Autocracy is a much stronger than dictatorship. It has more law slots than federation and republic. Craver should have Dictatorship, not Autocracy. At least, Autocracy should have same number of law slots as Dictatorship.

Buf if Craver simply has dictatorship, there are some probelms. And I still think dictatorship is a weak government. So I have the following idea.

1. Dictatorship does not elect. Therefore, it doesn't get approval bonus(or penalty) from leading(or not) a political party.
   
   Only the major population can vote in Craver. most population of Horatio is major population. So now it looks like there is no problem. But there is a problem if other faction havs a Dictatorship. Dictatorship can have only one political party. They will get approval penalty from not leading political party.
   
   Dictatorship does not elect. The ruler decides the party. Therefore, there are no representatives. Dictatorship should not receive any approval bonus or penalty from representatives. This will make Craver and Horitio weak. But it will offer a strategic choice to choose a different party.
   
   
   
2. Dictatorship doesn't have more rebellion than other government.
   
   Of course, the reality of Dictatorship causes many rebellion. But this is because the dictatorship is less happy. Conversely, Dictatorship is proficient in suppressing rebellion. Therefore, Dictatorship should have less rebellion than other government. At least, It must be equal to other government.
   
   If dictatorship is equal to other government or is not chainging, please put "Rebellion cannot happen" in Slave Drivers. Craver is strong, so they can suppress the slave Rebellion.
   
   
   
3. Trait is suitable for "can not change government".
   
   Changing the government is not only impossible with Autocracy, but it may not be possible with other governments. I'm talking about something like the Democratic Crusader. In Democratic Crusader, Democracy can not be changed to Dictatorship. Please add a new trait that can not change Government.

with this three idea, Craver is similar to now with Dictatorship. Craver has one less law slot, but Craver is powerful enough.

The reason they have a custom government is because they were having bad problems with rebellion. Granted that's vanilla Cravers, custom Cravers are a whole different beast.

CipherOmega wrote:

The reason they have a custom government is because they were having bad problems with rebellion. Granted that's vanilla Cravers, custom Cravers are a whole different beast.

I have already explained this. If rebellion is a problem, just add a rebel suppression effect to Dictatorship or Craver Trait. That can not be the reason why Craver has unique government.

It's so that slaves can't vote.

Rebellion was the problem with Dictatorship, because Dictatorships entire purpose is making Rebellion more likely in return for more power and control.

So you'd have a vast empire being crippled by the massive unhappiness of all the non-Militarist slaves, on top of the Slave approval malus, on top of the Overcolonization malus. It was a mess that made Cravers nearly impossible to play.

The DEVs could also explain this better but from a lore perspective, the Cravers are an stratocractic society. They are not a true “dictatorship” as the Queen only has theoretical “absolute” power but in reality holds minimal power to approve decisions draw up by the Bishop(s) ‘council’. The Cravers are officially a Stratocracy, so a government ruled by Military leaders, which also happens to be fundamentally different from a military dictatorship (or a dictatorship of any kind), and while a dictatorship may not rely upon the “nobles”, “oligarchs” or other elite groups within their society, an autocracy (historically) has relied upon the elites of society (and sometimes with the “party in charge completely) in this case the bishops, and since we draw government types from history, an Autocracy just fits the Cravers (lore-wise). Furthermore, they are a slavery based society, with non-Cravers being unable to particpate politically as they are both slave labor and a source of food. So unless you want to add that function to a dictatorship or take it away from the Autocracy, it would screw with both the Cravers mechanics and Horatios mechanics. 

Also as @IceGremlin points out, they had problems early on that couldn’t be fixed by just “fixing” a dictatorship to work with the Cravers, as the Cravers were/are not the only faction that was a Dictatorship (i.e. Horatio, whose faction is completely different than the Cravers) and thus it was best to create a new form of government for the Cravers. 

The approval penalty coming from non-militarist votes during elections combined with the inherent approval penalties from slave populations (a feature of the Cravers gameplay affinity) meant that the only way for Cravers to maintain any sort of non-rebellious approval rating was to switch to the religious party and maintain the Saints & Sinners law, setting approval at content. This was self-defeating, as the Cravers were supposed to be a Military dictatorship.

While I'm fine with the Cravers possessing a unique government type (and think that there should be more of them, or at least the government system could be more complex), I don't think that a unique government was a necessary feature. Insead, why not change the Slavedrivers gameplay affinity so that slave populations do not get to vote? That would allow for the affinity to access every government instead of sort-of forcing them into one.