In Veeky Forums's opinion what education would be most important for a child monarch...

Except you can
>Defeat the fleet before it arrives
>Defeat the fleet with the ritual
>Beat him in a duel
>Sing to him
>Let your father duel him for you

There's actually many ways to beat every failpoint, it's hanakogames' best game

Decoration.
Decoration saved my ass in that magic duel.

It really is a ton of trial and error though.

it tells you the things you fail so it's only really one trial and error before you know what to do

One trial and error for each of the many sudden death events in the game, unless you lucked out and just happened to have the necessary skill to survive.

Excellent taste

>first playthrough I went full military might and let the failures get to be and put more points in persuasion and shit.
>die to poison cause i forgot how to medicine
I was so fucking close too

How to rule with an iron fist.

Divination, Dogs or Foreign Intelligence should also save you from the poison. It might be the only dogs check in the game.

Rush Magic, it's OP and you can get the crystal by week 5

Like always, Wichura knows best.

And honestly, the concept of "general education" exists for a reason. You want to cram as much as possible general knowledge into your monarch in his/her youth, so then they can easily specialise without being 100% one-trick pony.

...

>that failed ending where you and another teen girl get raped by a tentacle monster and die in a forest

My only complaint of that game is the shortness of it.

>All of it.
FPBP.

That game was an autism simulator, but what really made me hate it is the trial-and-error nature. A lot of work went into setting up all the different triggers and such, and the setting felt like it had very great depth, but it never felt like much of it was on display at once.

Also someone actually bought ads for it on Veeky Forums.

>it's hanakogames' best game
A Little Lily Princess wants a word.

Obedience

Do away with a monarchy as a democracy(or republic) works better

Alternatively get a god ai.

>democracy works better than monarchy

>forbidden_lore_check.jpg

Rome was way better than the vast majority of ancient empires, America is a great country.

what game

a leader can't excel at everything, but she would need absolute charisma first and foremost. She needs to be the embodiment of the nation's ideals, so that people close to her can remain motivated and loyal.

Before anything else, I must find an offfspring with the right personality and nurture it with fundamentals. Religion, red books, or any other object of worship is a good place to start.

>Rome was way better than the vast majority of ancient empires
Rome was not a democracy at literally any point in time, and it was not at its height while a republic so how is that a argument for democracies?

> America is a great country

Not really any greater than any other superpower of large population, developement and territory in their days. Certainly less so than China or Persia were at their respective heights.

Democracy works, but not really any better than monarchies.

>America
>Democracy
My fucking sides.

But yeah, democracy does work better than monarchy in the absolutic/despotic/feudal flavours. There is also the weird parliamentary monarchy thing, but that's just a regular republic with a royal family instead of president in typical chancellor-flavoured republic.

I did say that a republic was legal.

America has the highest projected GDP and a far smaller population that china.

Persia and ancient china are pretty good all things considered. Especially in comparison.

>, and it was not at its height while a republic so how is that a argument for democracies?

Rome wasnt a republic at it's height this is true, but the republic produced the men and circumstances that carried it that far. The success of the Empire was pure inertia, Rome's best days were already behind it after the death of Caesar.

>How to turn your monarch into a figurehead: The Post

...

>rome
>democracy

kek

Man, I remember that thread. It was great.

This.
Literally the moment Caesar died, it turned into a clusterfuck. And then there was a five minute of greatness under Octavian, who simply consolidated all the power, organised basic outline of things...
... and anything after that was a progressive downgrade of standards, since they've killed the fucking virtues that brought up the Republic to be an empire

>Good times create weak men

This is where that falls apart, really. You can still have strong, good people during the era of prosperity.

Not him, but that's Slave Maker.
There's usually a thread for it and games styled after it on /aco/

Compared with everyone around them, it was THE republic.
By modern standards it was an oligarchy with pretty wide census, but by own times it was a fucking paragon of democratic and republican behaviour, even including all the shit going with plebs.

Not him and I agree you can...
... but that demands remaining focused, rather than indulgent in your own prosperity.

Honestly I would say the doom clock started with Scipio whose cult of personality introduced mob rule and violence to Roman politics. After that all the great men were out for themselves, not Rome. Caesar, for how well intentioned and exceptional he was, was also a tremendous narcissist produced by his times

That's why you pull a South Korea and put everyone in military service so thyey become strong men

Israel and Sweden do this as well

Sweden... Sweden ain't doing so hot

I do wish we had their gun culture though, ie, everyone knows how to use one and respect for firearms is educated into youths along with practical use and maintenance

Nah, the powerplay was ALWAYS there. And it emerged somewhere around Sulla as a real threat to the Republic, but Sulla wasn't greedy. I mean - he was greedy, but he knew how much he can chew and stayed with that. After Sulla all hell went lose in the power vaccum and the Republic was already disfunctional as a political entity, but there were still enough "good men" (this really need quotation marks) to keep things running, as it was all about at least pretending to give a fuck about the state.
After Caesar crossed Rubicon, it really was the game-changer.

And if you honestly need to pin-point what DIRECTLY caused this shit - professional army under Marian reform. Marius made one, seemingly minor mistake, which wasn't even considered big deal in his times. Namely, the land grant for veterans came from Senate to COMMANDER, who then distributed it to his soldiers, rather than from Senate to soldiers DIRECTLY. This way men were fighting for their generals and not the state.
And this is how sometimes a small, seemingly insignificant thing (after all, it was still Senate delegating the land grant) can fuck things up beyond repair.

It's probably not a strict enough regimen to be worth anything.

You have to turn the spoiled brats into steel balled men to improve the country.

You're rich well welcome to the military, here's your gun, give me a mile run.

>You have to turn the spoiled brats into steel balled men to improve the country.
Or you can educated people to not be spoiled brats and maintain order, instead of acting like some Germanic barbarian, you uncultured swine.
This picture never was more fitting

If you want to improve society force all youths of the age 15- 17 to work one year, part time (24 hrs a week), in a service industry job, like fast food or bagging groceries.

Here's what you do.

You get all people 18-20 and put them through the ringer building roads and crap.

You can't make parents teach there kids good, but you can make the kids good.

>Being this fucking dense
Yeah, apparently it's too late to make anything out of you, hillbilly

You might be incredibly prentious but having some people actually have to work for a day in their life would do a country some good

>niggers dont know about mah sorcerer daughteru

This is you right now. An obese armchair military fan unable to make a basic drill run, busy whinning about kids being spoiled those days and wanking around how conscription makes men out of kids.
All conscription does is providing cheap cannon fodder during war and yanking 6-24 months out of your life in time of peace that could be spend on doing something productive, like working, studying, travelling or starting a family. And due to conscription age, said hole in life happens in the worst moment imaginable, so anyone who dodged the draft this or another reason is already ahead of you.
Let's also not forget about student draft, which is probably the most retarded thing period, since it utterly destroys graduates' chances for finding a job, as they got drafted right after uni.

Honest to god question - is it even possible to "win" without turning what is basically a Princess Maker remake into some sort of mahō-shōjo parody? I just don't find the whole magic girl element interesting enough, but I can't seemingly succeed without doing that direction.

18-20 is not the time to start having a family

22 is about that time.

You have them work, and then help them with student bills or something.

>Student bill
Thanks for confirming you come from a 3rd world country. That explains the military hard-on

>not having university be a private industry.

Who has free higher schooling

But it is the time where you are done with mandatory education and the existing economic system expects you start either working or continue your non-mandatory education. Either way - improving the economy or improving your skills for said economy.
Meanwhile conscription means you've wasted a looooot of time on doing nothing. Oh, right, they've learned you how to march and how to operate an assault rifle, which you were only handled during the oath ceremony and fired it once during entire conscription to see if you are best suited as a HMG crewman, grunt or a marksman.

t. former conscript

Took me additional five fucking years to sort things out, because the Ministry of Defense decided to change conscription lenght by 3 months, utterly fucking up my chance to enroll on university for another year and then I was too busy working for rent to enroll again.
All so I know now how to operate a man-portable mortar, which anyone with half hour training and an abacus can do.

>Having education reserved only for the rich
>Destroying the very core of citizenship that comes from education
You were saying?

I never said only the rich could go to school.

In America even poor people have the ability to go to university.

And if you enlist people to help their student costs everyone can go to scho.

Thats some triple A projecting there, user.
10 out of 10, would laugh again.

Yes, they have the ability.
If they pay for it.
Which is something a poor person can't afford.

But hey, they just didn't used their ability, right?

And if you enlist, the military keeps you for 10 years long contract if they've paid for your education, usually basing you in the middle of nowhere. That's literally the new level of wage slavery. And the moment the contract is null and void, you have a whole decade to make up with your own specialisation, meaning your degree is most likely worthless now. Meanwhile, the military no longer gives a shit about you and due to how pensions are organised and accounted, you are not eglible to EVER get a military pension, despite serving for 10 years.
To put that into perspective - imagine you've finished your IT degree in 1998. Next time you have chance to use computer as a civilian it's 2008. Guess those Windows NT skills are going to be super-useful.
Oh, and you are 32-35 now. With zero job experience.

tl:dr Uncle Sam fucks you both ways and then cums on your face if you get your degree through militar.

You realize student loans are a thing, right?

And it's not enlisting in the military, just a work camp/training/student help thing.

Whatever makes them most loyal to me, their humble Grand Vizier.

Is this pasta? It reads like pasta

>Four year universities are the only option for post-secondary education
I fucking love this meme

All of it, essentially. You can get by with just political acumen, charisma, etc, but that means you have to rely on men to fight for you, and those men must be controlled because they, and not you, are the ones with the capability to commit violence.

Not him, but you do realise student loans past 2003 are equal with dealing with a loan shark... right?
And in the aftermath of the financial crisis, getting a student loan nowdays is like making a pact for your soul.

It was cheaper for me to get a degree via student exchange within EU, living abroad and paying fees for having classes in English than staying in the UK and applying for a student loan, which I would be repaying until my mid 40s.

Talk to any millionaire about how to become successful, and they'll go on and on about the importance of "networking." I.E. making sure you know someone who's already rich and can get you a recommendation to someone they know from the golf-course.

This is the main thing that prevents the poor from becoming rich, not education. But in Israel, mandatory military service lessens this. You force the rich kids and the poor kids to be in a unit together, they inevitably become friends, and when their service is done, they ambitious ones can use the connections they made to get internships/employment/investors to becoem successful in life.

I seriously cannot stress enough how important military service is to your success in Israel. I know, like, 15 Israelis who've done well with startups or in high-tech fields, and all of them credit the connections they made in the military to their success.

Student debt in the UK gets written off completely if you don't pay it back fully in like 25 years and you don't pay anything if you earn under average wage?

Comparing Democracy to Monarchy is an exercise in futility, because Democracy and Monarchy are trying to do two different things.

Monarchy is trying to create a perfect ruler - someone who's been raised from birth in the best possible environment to be a leader.

Democracy is not trying to create a perfect ruler. It is trying to never create a terrible ruler - to make sure that there will never be a Caligula or a Draco with 51% of the votes.

Monarchy creates the best ruler, but it also creates the worst. Democracy, however, is constant mediocrity; never a Napoleon, and never a Nero. Democracy or Monarchy being considered superior tends to come down to personal preference: do you love good rulers, or do you hate bad rulers?

Eugenics for a better future.

>better future
Odd way to spell painted world there, user.

>Not just doing political marriages
Looking on traits, especially those "genetical" is akin to cheating and removes almost all the fun that comes from simply running purely political marriages.

The prince needs to be both a fox to avoid the snares and a lion to scare away the wolves.

this guy gets it

Dark magic.

>Representative Republic turn Empire.
>Constitutional Representative Republic riddled with vile socialism.
Neither Rome nor the US are Direct Democracies, and hopefully the one that still exists never will be.

Not him, but in most, if not all countries where conscription is still a "big" deal, everyone rich enough just dodges the draft. So you end up with poor people making friends with other poor people. Great when trying to get a cheap, reliable and friendly plumber, but won't help you beyond that.
Then there is the exchange service, where everyone smart enough (in the savvy, stree-smart way, but also genuine smart and all sort of didn't-make-it-this-year-to-the-uni-need-time-to-try-again types) don't go for direct draft. Instead they volunteer for slightly longer period (usually no more than 2-3 months) to serve their duty as a park ranger or guard in some government buildng and other stuff like that.
So you end up with concription consisitng of poor AND dumb people befriending each other, further keeping them down.

>Democracy or Monarchy being considered superior tends to come down to personal preference: do you love good rulers, or do you hate bad rulers?
There is also the meritocratic part, which is the main selling point of Democracy. Monarchy just assumes that there is One Family and only members can rule, so you end up with a pretty small selection of people. Or no selection.
Democracy meanwhile takes everyone from the census. Everyone can get elected, and at least in theory of modern democracy with active and conscious citizens, the best people are elevated to the post. And even if not the best, then we are back to your mediocre picks. It's always better to have stable mediocre pick-up selection, because once in a while you still can end up with a great guy. And the more guys to pick from, the bigger the chance of that.

Monarchy thus is about hoping for the best, while Democracy is preventing the worst, to reinterprete your point.

>The "Caligula was bad meme"
Go back to your late republic history class/10

>Not him, but in most, if not all countries where conscription is still a "big" deal, everyone rich enough just dodges the draft.
We're not talking about the draft. the draft is dumb, and stop conflating it to mandatory military service.

Mandatory military service is something that occurs even during peacetime, often takes the form of non-combat national service, it isn't just "providing cheap cannon fodder" like the other guy said, and it isn't something you can pay out of. You can't dodge it in Israel, you can't dodge it in South Korea, you can't dodge it in Switzerland, and you couldn't dodge it in Sweden (until mandatory service was repealed in its entirety).

As I understand it, the idea is that meritocracy is unecessary, since the prince is always gonna be the best candidate, having been raised his whole life to be a ruler. Obviously this isn't true, but I'm not a neo-monarchist, so I don't particularly care enough to defend this point.

Don't get your toga in a twist. It was the first name I could think of, and even if that specific example was imperfect, the point still stands.

Totally possible magic is just easy mode.

That's Switzerland.

Why is there so much damn confusion between Switzerland and Sweden? They're two different countries, in different parts of Europe with different histories, languages and cultures and their countries don't even sound the same or even remotely similar.

Also Sweden dropped conscription for ages and are only now bringing it back.

People confuse Czechia and Chechnya all the time.
Or Slovakia and Slovenia.
Or Poland and Indonesia.

The problem is democracy does not really keep mediocrity either. You essentially give the selection process to an oligarchy who is intent on securing their own individual aims instead of that of the nation.

If you have a monarch their interest is, regardless of what skill they have to make it come about, to improve the power and prosperity of their nation. This can be either out of ideals or self-interest, but there is almost no reason for them not to want to do it. Democracy on the other hand tends to elevate people backed by private enterprises who may be international or just self-interested in a very small subset of the nation, and your nation's prosperity is thus at best frequently a byproduct of them winning themselves.

Monarchy also has the plus of training the next rulers from birth and training them to rule well. Democracies may elevate some good people, but frequently they have no experience at all. How many people that we elevate to the presidency actually have existing foreign policy experience, after all? Even if they are competent, they are likely to spend at least a quarter of their presidency trying to learn how things work.

I've never heard of the Czech republic being confused with Chechnya, but the name does sound a bit similar, so I can somewhat understand that.

Slovakia and Slovenia is a lot more understandable because their names are similar and they're both practically next door to each other, and they have similar flags.

People only confuse the Polish and Indonesian flags, not the actual countries.

None of these can apply to Switzerland and Sweden. They don't have similar flags, they're not near each other (comparatively speaking) and their names don't sound the same.

In addition in democracies you can have people gain power who want to radically change the nation at the expense of its own interests and people; the socialist movements of the 20th century for example, where people pushed international solidarity and socialist programmes of industry which had a negative impact on the nations themselves.

You know what's the key difference between Czechia and Chechnya?
One wishes it was part of Russia.
The other wishes it wasn't.

>mfw I had enough scholarships and grants to only need minimal loans to get through college
>26 and I'll be finished paying off my students loans in 2 days

Monarchies endured that long because it encourages stability in form of unbroken dynasties. No matter who you are, No Man Lives Forever. Having a clear line of succession is advantegeous to those who benefit from thr powers that be. A ruler without a successor is in a very vulnerable position. All it takes is an accident or an assassin and the whole building goes down, pretenders and conspirators rise up and the kingdom collapses. The mere rumor that the king is sick can trigger a chain of conspiracies planning your replacement and rumors that brings you dow. Government is not about morality, it is about stability. This is true for any form of government, even elected ones.

Fertility.

>Conscription isn't something you can pay out of
From the top of my head - being a student means you can't get conscripted, but to be a student you need to afford that in the first place.
See a pattern?
And you can dodge in Israel citing religious reasons. Thing is - you REALLY need to be from one of the ultra-orthodox sects and have papers for that. You can also dodge in Switzerland, again citing religious reasons, only this time nobody can check that.

Thing is - that point is extremely naive. It assumes that whatever happens, you just going to groom a perfect heir. Always.
And considering historical examples, almost all great kings were NOT first candidates to the throne and either had to actively fight for it with "first" sibling OR due to reasons ended up elevated from the "3rd son of the king" to "the Great", because both older siblings died early on

Remember there are people who UNIRONICALLY confuse Austria and Australia.

>Meritocracy is not needed in democracy
Are you retarded or just monarchist?
>to improve the power and prosperity of their nation
So a monarchist. Go suck dick then, no point even bothering.

There's only a 2-letter difference, user! /sarcasm

Stated goal. Monarchy has a less than perfect track record in practise, but I wasn't arguing from there.

Practise is all that matters.
Daily reminder the theory for varnas or castes is to establish a perfect, harmonous society where everyone is doing their job perfectly, because that's their life goal and duty. In practice, it's a religiously-sanctioned slavery that disenfranchises 3/4 of society from the get-go and half of the rest is forcefully kept low, all because your sin was being "punishment for past misgivings". Aka it's your own fault you were born into poor family.

So yeah, I'd rather take something with half-decent practical track record than idealistic bullshit that doesn't work at all and more often than not exists solely to stay in power indefinitely.