Monarchy politics - asking for suggestions

I would like to see some sort of an incentive so that more people will choose the leaderism option. :)

Collectivism protection is already to high, I really can't believe anyone suggesting the need for something stronger. In the hero I have that is collective I do not attack. but it is taking forever to get experience there, that is my own fault since I really hate monsters.

As far as an idea for Monarchy I am drawing a blank. I guess it is because I already feel like the Queen of my kingdom. Or as I prefer to think of it I am Empress of my empire. The idea of not being able to attack if I did want to seems like I should just go play a farm game. I myself really wonder when you will concentrate on making some of the other little things work like perks or achievements so the game seems more complete.

 I think part of my dissatisfaction with achievements is the fact that you did not wipe them this time and since I already have most of the ones that do work it seems I really have no goals this stage.

I have many more thoughts on this stage but this is not the place for it.

I think collectivism defense is high enough as it is and would not want to give up my ability to attack for extra defense.  I like the system as it is.  As for monarchy, I am still pondering, but am leaning toward a middle ground between collectivism and leaderism for defense/attack power. 

I am a peaceful player, I don't attack other players and don't like much the war aspect of the game. But since you are not going to change the possibility to attack and conquer other players, I wouldn't sacrifice the possibility to attack myself for a little more defense - I would sacrifice it for total defense but this is not the case.

As for Monarchy it cannot be much different from the two aspects of country development  - welfare or conquest - that are already implemented in Collectivism and Leaderism. No idea what disparate development of a country is possible. The only thing I can think about is the possibility to make a second choice (regardless of the initial one) and  strengthen somewhat the abilities that the player already has or acquire some new ones typical for the other kind of policy. What I mean is if a player has chosen Collectivism, in Monarchy he/she can either choose to strengthen some features of Collectivism or try to compensate a little some drawbacks of his/her choice and acquire some new abilities typical for Leaderism.

I play collectivism mostly, trying one leaderism also,  I would like to be able to attack if I want even if I don't do it often.  That's my vote. 
 

Maybe a dedicated thread for voting would be best, as its not obvious from the title of the thread.
I am collectivism, I do not like the war aspect but I will attack if I really have to, but would rather not.  So I am in favour of Bers suggestion.  If you want to avoid war players and you end but you end up next to one, or at least one that plays aggressively - then delete the hero.
I much prefer to stay in my domain  and watch invading armies being wiped out by my towers.

but there is abondoned countries too i suggest if a country abondoned for a while anarchy like policy should take over so we can destroy or take one cell and small countries collectivism for these country is massive disadvantage in games for upcoming policies we can give better economic advantages such like +%25 bonus resource -%50 building cost and time also research bonus and unit speeds also collectivism traits but for disadvantage %50 tribute tax for buy sell resource or send resource to other countries for example for sending another country 2000 wood we must spend 3000 wood reinforcing another countries should be forbidden also %20 culture penalty (Im sure for leaderism players domain size important i think domain size of collectivism big disadvantage for leaderism player because of resource freedom of collectivism players) collectivism penalties, also for changing policy there should be worse penalties such as resource points in -'s (for example normally resarchin something before changing is 2 days when we changed it will become 7 days) also %75 resource penalty auto dissmissed soldiers auto descrution of military buildings ... for other policy attack bonus culture bonus training bonus army bonus ... for diadvantage slow everything ( it would be more like online browser games) ALSO!!! Special Unit For Policies for example Some kind of super soldier(almost too hard to kill but expensive and takes too moch time and consumes a lot of food like Building:7 day cost 8000 of all kind of resource food consume: 50 for leaderism like player for collectivism like player Super Scout (moves fast for every explored tile gains research points also can be used as spy) sorry for long post and bad english

I would also like to see something between collectivism and leaderism. Perhaps only 150% strength defense, but a stronger 75% strength attack.

I think that if you want to squeeze something in between collectivism and leaderism then those two also need to be re-designed... As it is, many people who want to play against others (but are also interested in other aspects of the game) still choose collectivism - the 30% less attack is a relatively small price to pay and is outweighted by 50% safe resources and 300% defense. If the numbers given in this thread are true (98% coll) than maybe these 2 politics are not working as (I think) they were meant to. If collectivism was meant to be for casual, less involved players it should have a stronger penalty for attacking - at least 50%. On the other hand there should be more incentives for leaderism to encourage people to choose that one - for example, less resources/time needed for training units and unit upgrades. If these two are sort of pushed more to the extremes, than a third politics could fit in the middle - for example a slight defense bonus (150%) and a slight attack penalty (15%) but no safe resources. This could suit people who are not mostly interested in fighting others, but if they get bored with / stuck in other parts of the game they could easily engage in wars.

Maybe not for monarchy but a further politic: a sort of reverse-communality: 30% more damage on other towns but your towns has 30% less defense. Sounds like a politic for someone who wants a lot of adrenaline, or count a lot on his friends to defend his towns.