So governments (talking about the 4 "normal" ones) are odd and I never know which one to choose.
The "benefits" to democracy are the large leader pool you can elect from and the unity you gain from fulfilling mandates. But it is absolutely shit when your level 6 scientist gets elected and now your gimped on research for the next 10 years because who has a second scientist lying around that is as capable as the one leading the R&D for that field.Shadow council is supposed to "fix" the issue of unpredictability (for the price of 1 of 2 or later 3 civics mind you) by allowing you to influence the election for cheap but it will still cost you quite a bit to actually increase the chances by a meaningful amount and even then RNG can screw you over because there are no 100% chances.
Oligarchic seems better in that you can straight up choose someone to be elected and with shadow council it is even reasonably cheap at 50 influence but the problem is that it just randomly chooses 4 of your leaders to be the candidates. This may sound ok on paper but mind you that in a normal early to mid game more than half your candidates will be scientists and envoys who you probably dont want to elect because they are either (in case of the scientists) doing something you´d much rather have them do or are just straight up shit. So there is a good chance you´ll get nobody you want to elect and no guarantee you will be able to reelect your current leader. Now, you can hold emergency elections. For 250 influence… but in all actuality you´ll have to spend more because it makes absolutely no sense to hold emergency elections and then not select the candidate you want. If he/she even shows up. Because there is still no guarantee. So you´ll have to spend 300 (with shadow council) or 450 influence to actually get the leader you want. And there is still the possibility that you wasted all that influence because you got nobody you actually wanted.
Dictatorial is better in that you don´t have to worry about elections nearly as much and depending on the build only 1-2 per game (venerable + necroid + survivor origin for +190 leader lifespan to a minimum of 270 years rule) but the problem is that you only get 4 candidates again and you cant even reelect so you´re stuck with a bad option for around 80 years minimum.
Imperial has the advantage that there is no chance of getting one of your scientists elected but there is no way of influencing what you´re getting at all.Now, I know that the more min-max orienented players will tell me that it is not worth bothering with leaders but I like the idea of having leaders that want to do what I want to do. AKA electing a general or admiral when planning to go to war or electing a science ship scientist when going for a techrush etc.
What would you guys/gals do in my shoes?
Source: Original link
© Post "Government struggle (AKA they´re all shit, what do I pick)" for game Stellaris.
Top 10 Most Anticipated Video Games of 2020
2020 will have something to satisfy classic and modern gamers alike. To be eligible for the list, the game must be confirmed for 2020, or there should be good reason to expect its release in that year. Therefore, upcoming games with a mere announcement and no discernible release date will not be included.
Top 15 NEW Games of 2020 [FIRST HALF]
2020 has a ton to look forward to...in the video gaming world. Here are fifteen games we're looking forward to in the first half of 2020.