Labor:
Tribalism
No Upkeep, 1 :yuck:, -1:hammers: per city, new units +1 XP.
Emancipation
Low Upkeep, faster cottage to town progress.
Collective
High Upkeep, Farms -1:food:, +1:hammers:, can sacrifice population to hurry production.
Organized
Medium Upkeep, Workers Build improvements 25% faster, faster cottage to town progress, +1:commerce: from town.
Professional
High Upkeep, +5%:hammers:, +1 Free Specialist-per-city.
Basic Income Guarantee / Negative Income Tax (should have a shorter name...)
-10% :hammers:, +50% :culture:, +3 :) in each city, high upkeep

Economics:
Deregulated
No Upkeep, +1:yuck:, +3:commerce:, +1 Trade Route Per City, +50% Corporate Maintanence Cost.
Communist
Medium Upkeep, No Corporations, +10% Production, Pay to Hurry Production
Corporatist
Medium Upkeep, +1 Trade Route Per City, Unlimited Specialists, -50% Corporate Maintanence Cost, +1:) from Corporate branch.
Military Industrial
High Upkeep, -10% :hammers:, -5:commerce:, +50% Military Unit Production, 20 Free Units. (This could be what is used for North Korea.)
Grass-roots
High Upkeep, No Foreign Corporations, +:) Per Forest, Jungle Preserve, +50% Corporate Upkeep, +1:hammers: From Windmills, +25% :gp: Birth.
Knowledge Economy
Medium Upkeep, +1 :hammers: for every 4 :science: in the cities

Some notes on definition, from top to bottom (not including Knowledge Economy)

Deregulated is considered to be the default civic for developing nations. As its name implies, there are no regulations, but also not too much economic production in the private sector. It can be a profitable civic unless your cities get bought up by foreign investment; at that point you can switch.
Communist refers to the Sino-Soviet state-socialist model, not theoretical Anarchistic Marxism. This is a good civic for dragging a backwater agrarian civilization into industrialism by the balls, although it isn't good for making money in the long run.
Corporatist is based on the modern economics of most Asian Industrial powers like China and Japan. The state here does not own production as in a communist state; rather, it encourages private enterprise as long as it's in a way that benefits the state, attracting investment and channelling funds into infrastructure.
Military-Industrial economies are those where all of a country's infrastructure is utilized primarily for the production of military units. Car factories only make tanks, planes, etc, civilian consumption of tin, gas, and even food, may be rationed, and ultimately, most money spent in the country doesn't end-up there.
Grass-roots economies are defined as being a combination of environmentalism, and an attempt to recreate the classical model of private enterprise. The government does not own production; rather, it proactively safeguards the rights of its citizens to own businesses, and gives them preferential treatment over multinational investment.

Government:
Caesardom
Medium Upkeep, +25%:commerce:, +25%:hammers:, +25%:culture: in capital city, Workers +25% Faster
Totalitarian
High Upkeep, No spread of non-state ideaology, -25%:culture: in all cities, +25% Military Unit production, +3:) from Broadcast tower
Congressional
High Upkeep, -50% Corporate Maintanence, +50%:commerce: in capital city
Parliamentary
Medium Upkeep, +25%:gp: Birth, +1:science: per-specialist,
Technocracy
High Upkeep, +100%:gp: Birth, +3:) from University
Direct Democracy
Medium Upkeep, No turn of anarchy, +50% :commerce: in capital, +3:) in every city, +1:mad: per broadcasting tower, +1 gold support per military unit

Religion/Society:
Ochlacracy
Is a society uninfluenced by the government, usually forming mobs and gangs within the nation. Low Upkeep.
Plutocracy
Is run by the rich and those whom aren’t rich are workers or do little jobs. Low Upkeep, +20% :gold: in all cities, +1 :mad: in capital if losing gold.
Theocracy
A citizenry run by priests who claim to hold the divine rule. Medium Upkeep, can build "missionaries" without monastery, cities with state :religion: construct building and units 15% faster
Conformity
Is when the government is constantly trying to influence the people to believe what they believe through any way; propaganda, secret police, lies and empty promises. High Upkeep, +10% research in all cities, -30% war :mad:, -25% :gp: birth rate
Free Religion
You can do whatever you want as long as you’re not disobeying any laws. Low Upkeep, +1 :) per religion in a city, no state religion, 100% :gp: birth rate.

Or alternatively, using the Ideologies as Culture Groups (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=6845024) idea:

Segregation
High Upkeep, +1 :hammers: per non state culture group (nscg), +1 :mad: per nscg
Sense of Mission or Messianism
High Upkeep, +50% :culture: in all cities with state culture group, Can build "missionaries" without monastery (or equivalent building), +1 :mad: per nscg
Leitkultur*
Low Upkeep, Cities with state culture group construct buildings 25% faster, +1 free specialist per city, +1 :mad: per nscg
Ethnic Nationalism
No upkeep, +2 xp points in cities with state culture group, can do "ethnic cleansing", +2 :mad: per nscg
Pacifism
No upkeep, +100% :gp: birth rate in cities with state culture group, +1 gold support cost per military unit
Multiculturalism
High upkeep, No state culture group, +1 :) per culture group in a city, +10% :science: in all cities


* Leitkultur (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leitkultur) is a German term, controversically discussed in the last few years. There is no English word for it and all English sources use the German word so I left it untranslated. It basically means a monocultural vision of a society with ideas of cultural superiority of the own culture. Nevertheless there is certain superficial tolerance toward foreign cultures but their assimilation is compulsory. This would be the civic that applies to most western nation states as long as they aren't Messianistic and aggressively trying to spread western culture around the world.
I think your shortend Definition of "Leitkultur" gives a wrong impression.
Although I am impressed that you know this.
If you're not interested in it, just skip and delete it.
But if you're interested in the opinion from a German read on...

It is not about "the own cultural superiority"! NOT AT ALL!!! Its more about finding a NEW Culture. One that everyone in a country can accept and that is a guide for immigrants, so that integration becomes easier. It's always spoken from a "neue Leitkultur" - new Orientation Culture, almost never alone, because a "Leitkultur" does not exist. Discussion is about if we need one. Because there are so many Cultures in our modern society, some fear that the people will not be able to understand each other anymore, It's due to the fact that in modern societies you often have cultural groups, not understanding each other and thus hate can arise (see the burning suburbs of Paris two years ago).
Of Course the western European / German Culture is the Basis of that. But not because of a Feeling of superiority. Unlike France, where they are proud of their Culture and History, we Germans have Problems with both (because of a stupid looking dumbass in a brown uniform). So that's why we are looking for a new German way to identify us. In the 80's there was a big influence of American Culture, which not everyone liked, e.g. on TV there were almost no German productions any more, except the news, so the Idea of a new "Leitkultur" is also a try to emancipate us from the US.

Hope you found that interesting.

Ciao,
Marcus

Post reserved

Post reserved #2

What's the difference between parliamentary and congressional?

What's the difference between parliamentary and congressional?

Congressional I am guessing is like the US with the President as head of state whereas Parlimentary is like the UK and the commonwealth where the Queen is the head of state technially however the Head of Government always acts as the head of state if that makes any sense :crazyeye:

To be honest, the terms are more or less synonymous. Can you suggest a better name for one of them?

For congressional, substitute Presidential.

Political scientists distinguish between systems like the US where the president is the head of day-to-day government and not beholden to the legislature, and systems where parliament/congress/the legislative body are supreme and, if there's a president and not a monarchy, they're symbolic and easily dismissed (like Germany or Ireland).

Caesardom
Medium Upkeep, +25%, +25%, +25% in capital city, Workers +25% Faster
Maybe change this to dictatoral,or junta,or force of arms

I regrettably cannot do everything the other peoples' proposed civics call for. I can only work with attributes that already exist. We either need a more-experienced programmer to pick-up where I left off, or a reevalutation of some of these civic ideas.

Which parts are you talking about?

Here is a list of things I do not know how to do:
*Happy in each city, although I have been using largest city happiness to get around that.
*Production for Every four research.
*Unhappiness in capital if losing gold.
*Production per-non-state ideaology.

Try to use existing civic features (that's what I always do). For example you can use heredictary rule, change the name and you can also easily increase the happiness for every military unit.

Being an economist, I'm unsure about the last two economics civics. I also think the 'communist' civic should be renamed 'centrally planned' to make it sound a little more neutral (this would also incorporate ideas like the real-life technocracy theory).

Your 'grass roots' civic seems a little arbitrary. I think a social-democratic-environmentalist civic would be more realistic. I'm not sure where you're going with the 'knowledge economy' either.

That Military Indusdrial used for North Korea, Aren't they communistts then?

That Military Indusdrial used for North Korea, Aren't they communistts then?

Military-Industrial economy doesn't specify who owns the means of production, so I'm only using North Korea as an example. I would consider North Korea when it industrialized under Kim Il Sung to be a Communist system (as defined in the civics here), but with Kim Jong Il's survivalist politics, the military has become the primary focus of the economy. So NK should start with the tech prerequisite for the Military-Industrial complex, but everyone can research it.

Now for an announcement. Given that I cannot do the production-per-research thing, I have instead coded "Knowledge Economy" to grant 2 commerce of each type per-specialist, at least tentatively.

I will now proceed to think of legal civics. I'm holding off on religious civics for the present, because religion hasn't really been finalized.

When (for example) the US is adopting totaliarian (equal to police state?) then i twould become a revolution and so on, but won't the people like start some kind of national resistance movement or am i watching too many movies?

Considering that I live in the US, I sure hope they would!

So having population rebel against bad treatment might not be a bad idea. You could acomplish that with a rebellion event, similar to the ones that occur with the Slavery Civic.

Another good idea might be to have immigration from unhappy cities or even countries, to others, resulting in sudden decline and growth.

sounds good but i don't know what happens if you use slavery cause iv'e never used it X). Anyway if immigration, the nationatility should change a little then.

What's the difference between parliamentary and congressional?

Congressional could be changed to Republican. No, not as as in the American political party, but as in just a government based around representation. Or, Representative Democracy. It's still is a little ambiguous, but maybe it works.

To clear up the matter of republican not being a political party why don't you say Republic instead?

For revolutions could you set up base civics for each country/leader. Then if that country/leader goes to that civic then later goes to another one the people have a chance of revolting every turn that the civic is not that 'base' one. Increasing of course with each turn to a certain maximum amount.

New poster to this area, and in general new despite my age as I haven't found much to post about plus being off for a large span of time.

I touched on this in the Europe Thread. However, it also deserves (IMO) a mention here.

Globalization Civics: This category determines a nation's relationship economically to nations around it.

Limited-Entry: Any Civilization following this Civic would have a standard trade route system.
Open Market: Any Civilization following this Civic has one extra trade route in all cities.
European Union: Any Civilization following this Civic has two extra trade routes in each city, limited to cities within Civilizations following this Civic*
MERCOSUR: See above
NAFTA: See above
ASEAN: See above
African Union (?): See above

*The UK and European Union would begin with this civic. Thus, each city would have 2 extra trade routes, but the trade routes would only go to cities within the European Union and UK.

How will you determine what a leader's title is in correspondence to each government civic?

For example, in Civ4, the Representation civic gives the title of Prime Minister to the leader. "We love the Prime Minister Day"....

I found it a tad annoying in some scenarios as the U.K, when I had to change civic to survive, and I started getting "We Love the President Day". The U.K probably will never ever become a republic, so it just kinda puts me off.

I'm not sure where that's controlled, but I'm sure a nifty coder could change it so that the UK always has a PM unless event X happens or something.

I think that leaders shall not hav only 1 favorite Civic but all of the categories, and if we can make the thing about leaders change sometimes (as dscribed by amogos in leader thread) then they're fav civics change, but most likely when the leader in democratic Civs change it's most likely to still be the same democracy civic choice as it had before. If the civic change to the one that is equal to police state there is a high chance of a national rebellion in the country.

Replace Free Religion with Human Rights. Which are we going for, by the way? Religion or Society?

I want some changes to the game:

Under Labor:

Forced Labor

Extreme Slavery

Prisoner Labor

Under Economic:

Growing Economy
(when economy is doing starting to expand- defaults to it)

Depression
(when economy is starting to do badly- defaults to it)

Thriving Economy
(when economy is doing great-defaults to it)

Government Economy
(when government has control over businesses)

Under Religious:
Atheist

Polytheism

Worship a god

Ecclesiastical

Theocracy

In the Religion section:

Baha'i - Founded by Mirza Husayn-Ali (known as Baha'u'llah) in Iran in 1852, Baha'i faith emphasizes monotheism and believes in one eternal transcendent God. Its guiding focus is to encourage the unity of all peoples on the earth so that justice and peace may be achieved on earth. Baha'i revelation contends the prophets of major world religions reflect some truth or element of the divine, believes all were manifestations of God given to specific communities in specific times, and that Baha'u'llah is an additional prophet meant to call all humankind. Bahais are an open community, located worldwide, with the greatest concentration of believers in South Asia.

Theravada Buddhism: The oldest Buddhist school, Theravada is practiced mostly in Sri Lanka, Cambodia, Laos, Burma, and Thailand, with minority representation elsewhere in Asia and the West. Theravadans follow the Pali Canon of Buddha's teachings, and believe that one may escape the cycle of rebirth, worldly attachment, and suffering for oneself; this process may take one or several lifetimes.

Mahayana Buddhism, including subsets Zen and Tibetan Buddhism: Forms of Mahayana Buddhism are common in East Asia and Tibet, and parts of the West. Mahayanas have additional scriptures beyond the Pali Canon and believe the Buddha is eternal and still teaching. Unlike Theravada Buddhism, Mahayana schools maintain the Buddha-nature is present in all beings and all will ultimately achieve enlightenment.

Mormonism (including the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints): Originating in 1830 in the United States under Joseph Smith, Mormonism is not characterized as a form of Protestant Christianity because it claims additional revealed Christian scriptures after the Hebrew Bible and New Testament. The Book of Mormon maintains there was an appearance of Jesus in the New World following the Christian account of his resurrection, and that the Americas are uniquely blessed continents. Mormonism believes earlier Christian traditions, such as the Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant reform faiths, are apostasies and that Joseph Smith's revelation of the Book of Mormon is a restoration of true Christianity. Mormons have a hierarchical religious leadership structure, and actively proselytize their faith; they are located primarily in the Americas and in a number of other Western countries.

Orthodox Christianity: The oldest established eastern form of Christianity, the Holy Orthodox Church, has a ceremonial head in the Bishop of Constantinople (Istanbul), also known as a Patriarch, but its various regional forms (e.g., Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Serbian Orthodox, Ukrainian Orthodox) are autocephalous (independent of Constantinople's authority, and have their own Patriarchs). Orthodox churches are highly nationalist and ethnic. The Orthodox Christian faith shares many theological tenets with the Roman Catholic Church, but diverges on some key premises and does not recognize the governing authority of the Pope.

Protestant Christianity: Protestant Christianity originated in the 16th century as an attempt to reform Roman Catholicism's practices, dogma, and theology. It encompasses several forms or denominations which are extremely varied in structure, beliefs, relationship to state, clergy, and governance. Many protestant theologies emphasize the primary role of scripture in their faith, advocating individual interpretation of Christian texts without the mediation of a final religious authority such as the Roman Pope. The oldest Protestant Christianities include Lutheranism, Calvinism (Presbyterians), and Anglican Christianity (Episcopalians), which have established liturgies, governing structure, and formal clergy. Other variants on Protestant Christianity, including Pentecostal movements and independent churches, may lack one or more of these elements, and their leadership and beliefs are individualized and dynamic.

Sunni Islam accounts for over 75% of the world's Muslim population. It recognizes the Abu Bakr as the first caliph after Muhammad. Sunni has four schools of Islamic doctrine and law - Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, and Hanbali - which uniquely interpret the Hadith, or recorded oral traditions of Muhammad. A Sunni Muslim may elect to follow any one of these schools, as all are considered equally valid.

Shia Islam represents 10-20% of Muslims worldwide, and its distinguishing feature is its reverence for Ali as an infallible, divinely inspired leader, and as the first Imam of the Muslim community after Muhammad. A majority of Shia are known as "Twelvers," because they believe that the 11 familial successor imams after Muhammad culminate in a 12th Imam (al-Mahdi) who is hidden in the world and will reappear at its end to redeem the righteous.
Variants

Ismaili faith: A sect of Shia Islam, its adherents are also known as "Seveners," because they believe that the rightful seventh Imam in Islamic leadership was Isma'il, the elder son of Imam Jafar al-Sadiq. Ismaili tradition awaits the return of the seventh Imam as the Mahdi, or Islamic messianic figure. Ismailis are located in various parts of the world, particularly South Asia and the Levant.
Alawi faith: Another Shia sect of Islam, the name reflects followers' devotion to the religious authority of Ali. Alawites are a closed, secretive religious group who assert they are Shia Muslims, although outside scholars speculate their beliefs may have a syncretic mix with other faiths originating in the Middle East. Alawis live mostly in Syria, Lebanon, and Turkey.

Druze faith: A highly secretive tradition and a closed community that derives from the Ismaili sect of Islam; its core beliefs are thought to emphasize a combination of Gnostic principles believing that the Fatimid caliph, al-Hakin, is the one who embodies the key aspects of goodness of the universe, which are, the intellect, the word, the soul, the preceder, and the follower. The Druze have a key presence in Syria, Lebanon, and Israel.

Jainism - Originating in India, Jain spiritual philosophy believes in an eternal human soul, the eternal universe, and a principle of "the own nature of things." It emphasizes compassion for all living things, seeks liberation of the human soul from reincarnation through enlightenment, and values personal responsibility due to the belief in the immediate consequences of one's behavior. Jain philosophy teaches non-violence and prescribes vegetarianism for monks and laity alike; its adherents are a highly influential religious minority in Indian society.

Shintoism - A native animist tradition of Japan, Shinto practice is based upon the premise that every being and object has its own spirit or kami. Shinto practitioners worship several particular kamis, including the kamis of nature, and families often have shrines to their ancestors' kamis. Shintoism has no fixed tradition of prayers or prescribed dogma, but is characterized by individual ritual. Respect for the kamis in nature is a key Shinto value. Prior to the end of World War II, Shinto was the state religion of Japan, and bolstered the cult of the Japanese emperor.

Sikhism - Founded by the Guru Nanak (born 1469), Sikhism believes in a non-anthropomorphic, supreme, eternal, creator God; centering one's devotion to God is seen as a means of escaping the cycle of rebirth. Sikhs follow the teachings of Nanak and nine subsequent gurus. Their scripture, the Guru Granth Sahib - also known as the Adi Granth - is considered the living Guru, or final authority of Sikh faith and theology. Sikhism emphasizes equality of humankind and disavows caste, class, or gender discrimination.

Zoroastrianism - Originating from the teachings of Zoroaster in about the 9th or 10th century B.C., Zoroastrianism may be the oldest continuing creedal religion. Its key beliefs center on a transcendent creator God, Ahura Mazda, and the concept of free will. The key ethical tenets of Zoroastrianism expressed in its scripture, the Avesta, are based on a dualistic worldview where one may prevent chaos if one chooses to serve God and exercises good thoughts, good words, and good deeds. Zoroastrianism is generally a closed religion and members are almost always born to Zoroastrian parents. Prior to the spread of Islam, Zoroastrianism dominated greater Iran. Today, though a minority, Zoroastrians remain primarily in Iran, India, and Pakistan.

From Cia World Factbook:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/docs/notesanddefs.html#2122

Really, Jell, that's too much for one mod, and it's hardly relevent to the scope of this one. Collective Labor is similar to Forced and Prison Labor in a way, and the Deregulated Civic is related to growing economies, but for much of the rest of the civics, like Slavery, they are more things that fit in the context of history, whereas this mod focuses on the modern era, necessitating changes.

The modern world almost-unanimously frowns on such things as slavery and genocide, so countries that still possess such vices will be added to the Barbarian state, a necessary move because there aren't any barabarians left in the world in the traditional sense. Possibly we could add Depression, and make the Deregulated and Corporatist Civics trigger events where you need to police the market or risk sliding into it, but I personally do not know how to add that.

As with your civic suggestions, likewise with religion. Again, true religions aren't a big enough part of world affairs anymore to be very influential in such things as starting wars, especially not the ones you proposed adding, most of which aren't even professed to by the majority of any country's population, making them hardly influential in world affairs. It has long-since been decided to replace religion with ideaologies. I don't know about relevent civics.

I'm not sure where that's controlled, but I'm sure a nifty coder could change it so that the UK always has a PM unless event X happens or something.

The default cause is the "We love the king" tag in the Government Civics. I do not know how to change it to anther source, however.

Really, Jell, that's too much for one mod, and it's hardly relevent to the scope of this one. Collective Labor is similar to Forced and Prison Labor in a way, and the Deregulated Civic is related to growing economies, but for much of the rest of the civics, like Slavery, they are more things that fit in the context of history, whereas this mod focuses on the modern era, necessitating changes.

The modern world almost-unanimously frowns on such things as slavery and genocide, so countries that still possess such vices will be added to the Barbarian state, a necessary move because there aren't any barabarians left in the world in the traditional sense. Possibly we could add Depression, and make the Deregulated and Corporatist Civics trigger events where you need to police the market or risk sliding into it, but I personally do not know how to add that.

As with your civic suggestions, likewise with religion. Again, true religions aren't a big enough part of world affairs anymore to be very influential in such things as starting wars, especially not the ones you proposed adding, most of which aren't even professed to by the majority of any country's population, making them hardly influential in world affairs. It has long-since been decided to replace religion with ideaologies. I don't know about relevent civics.



The default cause is the "We love the king" tag in the Government Civics. I do not know how to change it to anther source, however.

I agree with your ideas. Thank you for your considerations.

You can see my other mod.
-Ideas to put into Civilization 4: Beyond the Sword
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=293738
This mod tells more specifics of civics and religions.

Sorry. I double posted

Here I am again!

Okay, the remaining Civic category (unless we add more) is religion. I was thinking of replacing it with Media, because that is more relevent to the modern situation of state ideologies. If I did do media Civics, some things might change in the others.

I meanwhile have already made one change--I have changed the differences in corporate upkeep back to 25%, as they were in the main game. I am also planning to give more Civics the option of hurrying production by paying money. Stay tuned for more on the religion category.

Edit: I also have some "Legal" Civics in progress. So far they are Darwinism (the default; avoid if possible), Confederacy (reduced maintenance from distance and greater worker speed and cottage-to-town progress, but less money and culture), and Isolationism (Experience to military units in cities with state ideology, no non-state ideology spread, less culture, happy from military units). What else do you think I should add?

internationalism +1 forein relations?

would be good for EU Countries

this was my idea for civics, for what it's worth:


Government
Parliamentary democracy
Presidential republic
Military junta
Religious theocracy
Anarachism

Economic System
Free Market
State Capitalism
21st Century Socialism
Communism
Kleptocracy

Media
Corporate
State run
Independent
State censored

Tax System
Capital Gains only
Progressive Tax
Flat Tax
Regressive tax
Tax free


Population Control
Totalitarian
Police State
Constitutional
Libertarian

Well, the Parliamentary and presidential republic are there, under slightly different names, in my plans. Totalitarian government essentially corresponds to the Theocracy civic, because religion has largely been replaced by ideology, and all totalitarian countries develop some state ideology, even if it's only accidentally. There are no government civics purely representative of Force-of-Arms or Anarchy, though, because those are reserved for failed states.

Economically, I also think my ideas correspond to yours for the most-part. Media, as I said, is a good idea. Taxes and population control are a bit too fringy for my tastes.

Great list!!!

One little question: what exactly do you mean with "21st Century Socialism"?? Do you mean socialism like Venezuela does practice it or a social market economy like Germany's????????

greets

Great list!!!

One little question: what exactly do you mean with "21st Century Socialism"?? Do you mean socialism like Venezuela does practice it or a social market economy like Germany's????????

greets


Like Venezuela. I figured that state capitalism would be the Germany style system. That isn't the list though, I just posted it to help give Bahmo ideas. I think he's pretty much got it figured out.

@Skell Jell- what's "Extreme Slavery"?

@Bahmo- I think that, since its the "modern" world, Media should replace religion in the civics category. Most countries run free religion nowadays anyway (and unless their favorite civic is religious, the AI usually switches to Free Religion when available).

MEDIA CIVICS-
-Deregulation
-Free Speech
-Controlled Media
-State Monopoly
-?

This mod is looking good, I would play it.

I've been reading this thread and I'd just like to mention I had a crack at civics a while back:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=230313

Comment is welcome

@Skell Jell- what's "Extreme Slavery"?

@Bahmo- I think that, since its the "modern" world, Media should replace religion in the civics category. Most countries run free religion nowadays anyway (and unless their favorite civic is religious, the AI usually switches to Free Religion when available).

MEDIA CIVICS-
-Deregulation
-Free Speech
-Controlled Media
-State Monopoly
-?

This mod is looking good, I would play it.

You might want to clarify the differences between "Deregulation" and "Free Speech," and between "Controlled Media" and "State Monopoly," as they sound like essentially the same things.

My ideas are that we could have Civics corresponding to media that is up for grabs by corporations, protectionist media that is utilized by the state to promote the individual artists, and media used for state propaganda. Of course there'd be others, as well. The first reduces corportate maintanence (that, as you've seen, is my usual way to facilitate situations in which corporations give payoffs to politicians), the second increases culture, and the third could increase happiness/decrease the crime rate/decrease war-weariness. The other two (or three) are up in the air at this point. Of course, all civics are up in the air until I get my regular computer back.

Skell Jell- what's "Extreme Slavery"?


It is slavery at its worst level...

It is slavery at its worst level...

No, extreme slavery is owning human beings as property whilst abseiling down a glacier.

No, extreme slavery is owning human beings as property whilst abseiling down a glacier.

LOL

he s right though, extreme slavery. slavery is bad enough and no country has it as a way to run its entire country. the closes i can come up with is indentured labour in the UAE and that, although awful, is not slavery.

I have taken Sheep's idea for the fourth Legal Civic! :goodjob: However, I do not know how to boost international relations, so instead, it adds trade routes and culture.

I still need two more ideas; any help?

Bahmo, can you post the 4 Legal Civics you already have so we can think of two more?

Here you go.

Darwinism: No upkeep, -20% :gp: Birthrate, +1 experience points to units trained.
Confederacy: Low upkeep, -50% maintenace costs from distance to palace, workers 25% faster, -20% military unit production, 50% faster cottage to town progression, cities +10% :hammers: , -10% :gold: , -50% :culture:
Isolationism: High upkeep, +1 :) for military unit, no foreign corporations, no spread of nonstate ideology, -20% culture.
Internationalism: Medium Upkeep, +1 :traderoute:, +20% :culture:

Whew. :yuck: It's...done.

Okay, so a few things up front. As I've said before, a major criticism I have of this mod so far is that, compared to the core game, all of the Technologies are, well, just that. All are just futuristic technological developments; none of them relate to political or cultural changes, so in many cases the old gameplay element of doing research to implement new civics does not work. Another problem is that I did not have any graphical representation of the tech tree on hand; hence, when I did have to look for techs to make requirements for civics, it was difficult to tell whether some techs would be early or late. Finally, many techs had scientific jargon titles that I didn't understand, further complicating things.

I worked around it as best I could, binding certain Civics that require technology to various techs, and elsewhere, in the case of controversial civics like government and media, I used Niknaks's idea of increasing revolution length. I'd like to know whether that makes AIs at all more reluctant to implement these civics; if not, I need to know how to do that, and how to make certain civics more desireable in general.

Despite the gripes, the file is done, and should work in the game once the related technology and leader files are added as well. I will upload what I have; meanwhile, I'll continue to work on the cosmetic art and text parts of it.

Ok, look forward to seeing them. You can always add new techs if you need them.

Previously, I was told the tech tree was finalized, and so all the other developers would still need to agree.

Just tell me what tech(s) you want added, and I'll add them. :-)

I thought the idea was to have all civic options available to everyone at the beginning of the game, with long revolutions. And no, or very few, futuristic civics.

Only the "Utopian" Civics are what I'd consider futuristic, and even they aren't monopolistically-overpowering. As to others, though, some of them aren't overwhelmingly-futuristic, but do require techs to be researched, while those that are free but controversial have lengthened revolution time. If we're moving towards a more research-based mode of political development, I'd suggest reinstating a lot of the political and economic technologies like democracy, communism, corporation, fascism, and liberalism, and starting certain Civs with certain techs.

But those technologies have already been discovered, right? We can't have communism or any others mentioned above as techs any country still has to research. Also I didn't know we were "moving towards a more research-based mode of political development", in fact I'm not totally sure what you mean by that, you will have to fill me in. Anyway I am greatly looking forward to seeing what you have come up with. :-)

What do you mean by controversial civics? Authoritarian/Totalitarian ones I guess?

But those technologies have already been discovered, right? We can't have communism or any others mentioned above as techs any country still has to research.

I'm really not sure if China has discovered democracy, or the Middle East has discovered liberalism. That is only a half-joke. The people in those countries simply do not seem to understand how to participate as citizens in a freer country; when abrupt experiments were tried, society broke down. Research of such things could correlate in real life to a country's students gradually becoming familiar to the ideas in school. It admittedly doesn't correlate to the real world situation perfectly, but the intent is to remember exactly which game you're modding. When you look for a solution to problems in realism, like China suddenly becoming a democracy, at least the most obvious is the one that already exists in the game, that of prolonging the change by requiring research. The solution Niknaks offered still isn't bad either, though, although in that case you'd be well-advised to take out the "No anarchy" part of the "Spiritual" trait, and put in something different.

Also I didn't know we were "moving towards a more research-based mode of political development", in fact I'm not totally sure what you mean by that, you will have to fill me in. Anyway I am greatly looking forward to seeing what you have come up with. :-)

Remember, I said "if," right? I'm not actually under the impression we're heading in that direction.

What do you mean by controversial civics? Authoritarian/Totalitarian ones I guess?

You're in the ballpark, but it also works in reverse, meaning that an authoritarian country will have to go through a lot of anarchy if it wants to become a democracy, similar to post-Saddam Iraq or China during the warlord era and Cultural Revolution.

regarding totalitarian to anarchy to democracy. The former soviet republics in central, eastern and baltic europe all made the transition peacefully. Just playing devils advocate

Bahmo- just merging your civics into our mod now. Looks good, but you only sent me the civicinfos.xml file. Did you not define the tags in a text file?

Crap; no I didn't. If you mean something just like what it is in the Civiliopedia, I think the civics will still funtion without them. As to the "description" tags, I think you could just write out the word in the space provided, as opposed to the capitalized "TEXT_KEY" tags you'd need if you wanted to release the mod in different languages. If you do need the text files, though, I can start working if you tell me where to look.

We are using TXT tags for everything. I'm not sure if there are advantages other than being able to add other languages and consistency, but when I got started on this NikNaks suggested doing them all that way, so we have been.

You can just create a new text file, call it: World2009_Civics_CIV4GameText.xml

Copy the header and tags from any other text file to start it.

As you mentioned, you can leave civilopedia entries for now. It would be nice to have the descriptions defined though. I want to get your civics added and have set aside time to do that, but I wouldn't have time to get to this for quite a while.

Also, could you please check out this thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=301906&page=2), I have a couple other questions for you.

And finally, could you please explain the idea behind the Darwinism legal tech for me please?


thanks dude

regarding totalitarian to anarchy to democracy. The former soviet republics in central, eastern and baltic europe all made the transition peacefully. Just playing devils advocate

My understanding of many of the former Soviet Socialist Republics and satellite countries is that after the change they became rundown dumps with ethno-religious terrorists spewing from the woodwork and winning elections. Liberalized government/economy here needs to make a distinction between countries that show they can maintain domestic order when adopting them, and those that can't.

Ahh see, your thinking of the Former Soviet Republics of Central Asian Republics, Kazakstan, Uzbekistan & the states of the Caucasus region, aswell as possibly Romania. Mind you some of this still havent made it into democracy!

Im thinking of Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Hungary, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia & Ukraine (?) who all made the transition peacefully to Democracy

Some interesting information. My political science teacher last semester once served as a political advisor to Hungary, back when they were asking how to transition to democratic government after the fall of communism. He had an uphill battle to fight, because of different priorities; the Hungarians thought a democratic government would be better because Soviet tyranny didn't allow them to kill gypsies. It took my teacher a long time to explain that a healthy democracy does not allow that, either, and the Hungarian official seemed disenchanted with democracy after that.

Post-communist Poland seems to have been retheocratized by the Vatican more than anything else, and I hear skinheads are common there because Germany doesn't tolerate neo-Nazies within its own borders. (The irony of there being more Nazis in Poland now is almost funny, but not quite.)

I think the regime of Slobodan Milosevik speaks for itself as maybe the best reminder of why they call that area the "powder keg of Europe," and it was sickening just how many of his supporters held a teary vigil in his memory when he died.

However, while clearly I have much less sympathy for many former communist-bloc states, since we're on the subject of relative peace and democracy, I would like to remind you that the "extended anarchy when transitioning to other governments" idea was not mine. We needed some way to preserve realism by making sure countries like Saudi Arabia didn't change overnight, but I supported reinserting political and economic technologies to be researched instead, so some civs wouldn't start with them, but once they discovered them, countries could switch at will with only a few turns lost.

So under that system, the situation with the Soviet collapse could be that the former SSRs were vassals who had discovered democracy a long time ago, but who were forbidden by their master country, the Soviet Union, from becoming democracies. Once things change a bit, like a leader coming to power in Russia who doesn't mind them liberalizing, or Russia's economy collapsing so that it's no longer strong enough to retain other states as its vassals, those states could finally change.

However, we didn't use that system. Perhaps part of the reason is that there aren't really any large empires bordering on collapse at this moment, as there were in the cold war, or perhaps the reasoning of the technology coding staff (and this is the rational they gave me) is that they feel making a country research political technologies would take time away from their scientific progress, something overwhelmingly favored by that side of the staff. (I point out that ten turns of anarchy will also freeze the country's research, so we'll need to wait to play the game to see whose idea was truly more practical.)

Drat. The version of WinRAR installed on this laptop I'm once again forced to use seems to hate me; it won't let me compress the file. So how about this: I embed the XML here for description texts. You can just make your own copy file from that. Other editing will continue.
<!-- Civic Names -->
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_CAESARDOM</Tag>
<English>Caesardom</English>
<French>
<Text>Caesardom</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Caesardom</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Caesardom</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Caesardom</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_TOTALITARIAN</Tag>
<English>Totalitarian</English>
<French>
<Text>Totalitarian</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Totalitarian</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Totalitarian</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Totalitarian</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_PRESIDENTIAL</Tag>
<English>Presidential</English>
<French>
<Text>Presidential</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Presidential</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Presidential</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Presidential</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_PARLIAMENTARY</Tag>
<English>Parliarmentary</English>
<French>
<Text>Parliarmentary</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Parliarmentary</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Parliarmentary</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Parliarmentary</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_PARLIAMENTARY</Tag>
<English>Parliarmentary</English>
<French>
<Text>Parliarmentary</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Parliarmentary</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Parliarmentary</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Parliarmentary</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_TECHNOCRACY</Tag>
<English>Technocracy</English>
<French>
<Text>Technocracy</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Technocracy</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Technocracy</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Technocracy</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_DIRECT_DEMOCRACY</Tag>
<English>Direct Democracy</English>
<French>
<Text>Direct Democracy</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Direct Democracy</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Direct Democracy</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Direct Democracy</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_DARWINISM</Tag>
<English>Darwinism</English>
<French>
<Text>Darwinism</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Darwinism</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Darwinism</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Darwinism</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_CONFEDERACY</Tag>
<English>Confederacy</English>
<French>
<Text>Confederacy</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Confederacy</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Confederacy</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Confederacy</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_ISOLATIONISM</Tag>
<English>Isolationism</English>
<French>
<Text>Isolationism</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Isolationism</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Isolationism</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Isolationism</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_INTERNATIONALISM</Tag>
<English>Internationalism</English>
<French>
<Text>Internationalism</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Internationalism</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Internationalism</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Internationalism</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_MARTIAL_LAW</Tag>
<English>Martial Law</English>
<French>
<Text>Martial Law</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Martial Law</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Martial Law</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Martial Law</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_MANDATORY_JUSTICE</Tag>
<English>Mandatory Justice</English>
<French>
<Text>Mandatory Justice</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Mandatory Justice</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Mandatory Justice</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Mandatory Justice</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_TRIBALISM</Tag>
<English>Tribalism</English>
<French>
<Text>Tribalism</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Tribalism</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Tribalism</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Tribalism</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_EMANCIPATION</Tag>
<English>Emancipation</English>
<French>
<Text>Emancipation</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Emancipation</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Emancipation</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Emancipation</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_COLLECTIVE</Tag>
<English>Collective</English>
<French>
<Text>Collective</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Collective</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Collective</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Collective</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_ORGANIZED</Tag>
<English>Organized</English>
<French>
<Text>Organized</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Organized</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Organized</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Organized</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_PROFESSIONAL</Tag>
<English>Professional</English>
<French>
<Text>Professional</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Professional</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Professional</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Professional</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_GUARANTEED_INCOME</Tag>
<English>Guaranteed Income</English>
<French>
<Text>Guaranteed Income</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Guaranteed Income</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Guaranteed Income</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Guaranteed Income</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_DEREGULATED</Tag>
<English>Deregulated</English>
<French>
<Text>Deregulated</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Deregulated</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Deregulated</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Deregulated</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_COMMUNIST</Tag>
<English>Communist</English>
<French>
<Text>Communist</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Communist</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Communist</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Communist</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_CORPORATIST</Tag>
<English>Corporatist</English>
<French>
<Text>Corporatist</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Corporatist</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Corporatist</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Corporatist</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_MILITARY_INDUSTRIAL</Tag>
<English>Military-Industrial</English>
<French>
<Text>Military-Industrial</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Military-Industrial</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Military-Industrial</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Military-Industrial</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_GRASSROOTS</Tag>
<English>Grassroots</English>
<French>
<Text>Grassroots</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Grassroots</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Grassroots</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Grassroots</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_KNOWLEDGE_ECONOMY</Tag>
<English>Knowledge Economy</English>
<French>
<Text>Knowledge Economy</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Knowledge Economy</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Knowledge Economy</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Knowledge Economy</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_CORPORATE</Tag>
<English>Corporate</English>
<French>
<Text>Corporate</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German>
<Text>Corporate</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>Corporate</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>Corporate</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_STATE_CENSORED</Tag>
<English>State-Censored</English>
<French>
<Text>State-Censored</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German><Text>State-Censored</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>State-Censored</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>State-Censored</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_STATE_RUN</Tag>
<English>State-Run</English>
<French>
<Text>State-Run</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German><Text>State-Run</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>State-Run</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>State-Run</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_STATE_SPONSORED_INDEPENDENCE</Tag>
<English>State-Sponsored Independence</English>
<French>
<Text>State-Sponsored Independence</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</French>
<German><Text>State-Sponsored Independence</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</German>
<Italian>
<Text>State-Sponsored Independence</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Italian>
<Spanish>
<Text>State-Sponsored Independence</Text>
<Gender>Male</Gender>
<Plural>0</Plural>
</Spanish>
</TEXT>

Wow, that looks like a mess in translation. You may want to neaten it up when you make the file. Still, it should work.

Now, the moment everyone has been waiting for! The updated list of Civics and effects!

Government Civics:
Caesardom: Requires 15 turns of revolution, Medium Upkeep, +25% Worker Speed, +25% :hammers:, :gold:, and :culture: in capital.
Totalitarian: Requires 20 turns of revolution, High Upkeep, -25% :gp: birth, +25% Military Production, -25% War Weariness, -25% :culture:, No nonstate ideology spread.
Presidential: Requires 10 turns of revolution, High Upkeep, -25% Corporation Maintanence Costs, +50% :gold: in Capital.
Parliamentary: Requires 10 turns of revolution, Medium Upkeep, +25% :gp: birth, +1 :science: per specialist.
Technocracy: Requires 15 turns of Revolution, Composites Tech, High Upkeep, +100% :gp: Birth, +1 :) for University.
Direct Democracy: No wait for Revolution but requires Quantum Computers tech, Medium Upkeep, +1:) in three largest cities, +50% :culture: in capital, 1:( from Broadcast Tower.

Here's to me; that was painful. I hate having to do this with a crummy laptop that has no real mouse.

Legal Civics:
Darwinism: No Upkeep, -20%:gp: birth, +1 Free Experience Point.
Confederacy: Low Upkeep, -50% maintenance costs from distance from palace, +25% Worker Speed, +50% cottage to town speed, -20% Military Unit Production, +10%:hammers:, -10% :gold:, -50% :culture:.
Isolationism: Requires Modern Military Tech, High Upkeep, +1:) per military unit, No foreign corporation spread, no foreign ideology spread, cities with state ideology grant 2 free experience points, -20%:culture:.
Internationalism: Requires Satellites tech, Medium Upkeep, +1:traderoute:, +20%:culture:.
Martial Law: Requires UAVs tech, High Upkeep, +25% Military unit production, -25% War weariness, -25% :culture:, +25% :espionage:, Jails give 1:(, +2:health:, Can draft 3 units per turn.
Mandatory Justice: Requires New Vaccines Tech, High Upkeep, +25% Corporation maintenance costs, +1 :) in 3 largest cities, +20%:culture:, +1:), +1:health: from Courthouse.

Labor Civics:
Tribalism: No Upkeep, 1 :yuck:, +1 Free Experience point, -10%:hammers:.
Emancipation: Low Upkeep, Faster Cottage to town progress.
Collective: High Upkeep, Can Sacrifice population to hurry production, Farms and Fishing boats give -1:food: but +2:hammers:.
Organized: Medium Upkeep, Workers build improvements +25% faster, Faster cottage-to-town progression, +1:gold: from town.
Professional: Requires Modern Computers tech, High Upkeep, 2 Free specialists per city, +5%:hammers:, can spend gold to hurry production.
Guaranteed Income: Requires Fusion tech, High Upkeep, 1:) in 3 largest cities, -10%:hammers:, +50%:culture:.

Economy Civics:
Deregulated: No Upkeep, +25% Corporation Maintenance costs, 1:yuck:, +3:commerce:.
Communist: Medium Upkeep, No corporations, +10%:hammers:, can spend gold to hurry production.
Corporatist: Requires Fiberoptics technology, High Upkeep, -25% Corporation Maintenance costs, +1:traderoute:, can spend gold to hurry production, can assign unlimited artist, scientist, and merchant specialists, +1:) from corporate branch.
Military-Industrial: Requires Missile Delivery technology, High Upkeep, +50% Military production, 20 free units, -10%:hammers:, -5%:gold:.
Grassroots: Requires Hybrid technology, High Upkeep, +25%:gp: birth, +25% Corporate Maintenance costs, +1:gold: from forest and jungle preserves, +1:hammers: from windmill, 2:health: from public transportation.
Knowledge Economy: Requires Nanotechnology tech, High Upkeep, +2:gold:, :culture:, and:hammers: from each specialist.

Media (Religion) Civics:
Corporate: No Upkeep, -25% Corporation Maintenance costs, +1:commerce:.
State-Censored: Medium Upkeep, Requires ten turns of Revolution, -10% War weariness, +10%:espionage.
State-Run: High Upkeep, Requires 20 turns of Revolution, no spread of non-state ideology, 1 :) from state ideology but 1 :( for each non-state ideology, -20% War weariness, -20% :culture: but + 20% :espionage:, +1:) from broadcast tower.
State-Sponsored Independence: Requires Advanced Satellites Technology and 10 turns of Revolution, High Upkeep, +20% :culture:, +2 :) from broadcast tower.

It's done! Hoorayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy...Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzz :sleep:

I'm not familiar with the term "Mandatory Justice". Can someone explain what this means?

Great work, Bahmo! Thanks! :)

One thing, though: Shouldn't need the democratic government civs the longer revolution time compared to the totalitarian? After all a newly installed democracy is taking much longer to properly work than a newly installed dictatorship...

I actually believe that fluctuates depending upon the nature of a country's populace. A country used to simple "might-makes-right" struggle is probably going to be more accepting of a dictator simply because then at least the power will be centralized, unisymmetrical, and relatively predictable. Meanwhile, a country that has lived under a dictatorship, but still become peaceful, prosperous, and modernized under it, is more likely to be able to run a successful democracy when it decides to implement one.

I'm not familiar with the term "Mandatory Justice". Can someone explain what this means?

I simply chose a very basic name to describe a new idea. So Mandatory Justice is one of the "utopian" civics, and though not clearly defined, entails governments making laws not for their own sake, but for the sake of their people. So to explain it further, in the current state of things, most of the governments of the world have, to a point, made a habit of granting equal rights to their citizens. Under Mandatory Justice, the idea would be taken a step further when a government not only agrees not to violate the rights it grants its citizens; it also acts to prohibit any sub-governmental bodies from violating said rights. This naturally cannot be insured in a dictatorship, which is why it coincides somewhat with other utopian civics, like Direct Democracy.

nice one Bahmo, really good work!

Thank you, unfortunately, due to a discussion about media I had on the Civ List thread, I realized I needed to rework some of this. Shoudldn't take too long, though.

Edit: I thus submit this, yet again. Note that there still aren't many matching buttons.

I don't know if you'd like to change something once again but while thinking about which civs should start with which civics I found something missing.

How about changing the media civic "regulated" (which is rather redundant in my eyes) to "monopoly"? By this I mean a system in which media is nominally free but is almost completely under control of one corporation. This would apply to a number of states like Brazil for example.

OK, here's my first suggestion for starting civics. First Asia, Oceania and the Americas:

Saudi Arabia

Government: Totalitarian
Labor: Organized
Legal: Darwinism
Economy: Corporate
Media: State-Censored


Israel

Government: Parliamentary
Labor: Organized
Legal: Internationalism
Economy: Military-Industrial
Media: State-Censored


Palestine

Government: Parliamentary
Labor: Tribalism
Legal: Darwinism
Economy: Deregulated
Media: State-Censored


Syria

Government: Caesardom
Labor: Tribalism
Legal: Martial Law
Economy: Deregulated
Media: State-Run


Iran

Government: Totalitarian
Labor: Organized
Legal: Martial Law
Economy: Communist
Media: State-Censored


Pakistan

Government: Presidential
Labor: Tribalism
Legal: Darwinism
Economy: Deregulated
Media: Regulated


Bangladesh

Government: Parliamentary
Labor: Emancipation
Legal: Darwinism
Economy: Corporatist
Media: State-Censored


India

Government: Parliamentary
Labor: Organized
Legal: Confederacy
Economy: Corporatist
Media: State-Censored


Kazakhstan

Government: Caesardom
Labor: Organized
Legal: Darwinism
Economy: Corporatist
Media: State-Run


Mongolia

Government: Parliamentary
Labor: Tribalism
Legal: Internationalism
Economy: Deregulated
Media: Regulated


China

Government: Technocracy
Labor: Collective
Legal: Martial Law
Economy: Corporatist
Media: State-Censored


Taiwan

Government: Presidential
Labor: Professional
Legal: Internationalism
Economy: Deregulated
Media: Corporate


North Korea

Government: Totalitarian
Labor: Collective
Legal: Isolationism
Economy: Military-Industrial
Media: State-Run


South Korea

Government: Presidential
Labor: Professional
Legal: Internationalism
Economy: Corporatist
Media: State-Censored


Japan

Government: Parliamentary
Labor: Professional
Legal: Internationalism
Economy: Corporatist
Media: Corporate


Myanmar

Government: Caesardom
Labor: Tribalism
Legal: Darwinism
Economy: Deregulated
Media: State-Run


Thailand

Government: Presidential
Labor: Organized
Legal: Darwinism
Economy: Corporatist
Media: Corporate


Vietnam

Government: Totalitarian
Labor: Collective
Legal: Darwinism
Economy: Communist
Media: State-Run


Philippines

Government: Presidential
Labor: Organized
Legal: Darwinism
Economy: Deregulated
Media: Corporate


Indonesia

Government: Presidential
Labor: Organized
Legal: Confederacy
Economy: Deregulated
Media: Corporate


Australia

Government: Parliamentary
Labor: Professional
Legal: Confederacy
Economy: Corporatist
Media: Corporate


New Zealand

Government: Parliamentary
Labor: Professional
Legal: Internationalism
Economy: Corporatist
Media: Corporate


Canada

Government: Parliamentary
Labor: Professional
Legal: Confederacy
Economy: Corporatist
Media: Corporate


United States

Government: Presidential
Labor: Professional
Legal: Confederacy
Economy: Corporatist
Media: Corporate


Mexico

Government: Presidential
Labor: Tribalism
Legal: Darwinism
Economy: Deregulated
Media: Unruly


Colombia

Government: Presidential
Labor: Professional
Legal: Darwinism
Economy: Deregulated
Media: Unruly


Bolivarian Americas

Government: Presidential
Labor: Collective
Legal: Confederacy
Economy: Corporatist
Media: Corporate


Peru

Government: Presidential
Labor: Professional
Legal: Confederacy
Economy: Deregulated
Media: Corporate


Brazil

Government: Presidential
Labor: Professional
Legal: Confederacy
Economy: Corporatist
Media: Corporate


Argentina

Government: Presidential
Labor: Organized
Legal: Confederacy
Economy: Deregulated
Media: Corporate


Chile

Government: Presidential
Labor: Professional
Legal: Internationalism
Economy: Corporatist
Media: Corporate

I don't know if you'd like to change something once again but while thinking about which civs should start with which civics I found something missing.

How about changing the media civic "regulated" (which is rather redundant in my eyes) to "monopoly"? By this I mean a system in which media is nominally free but is almost completely under control of one corporation. This would apply to a number of states like Brazil for example.



"Regulated" means by the state (though not for authoritarian reasons), not by certain corporations. "Corporate" is the civic for that.

I know that it means something different than monopoly. That's why I suggest to change it.
As far as I understand it "corporate" just means that the media is run by corporations not by the state and that the state is not regulating, censoring or restricting anything. Basically free media.
But we have no civic for what became increasingly common in free media societies around the world in the last 10 years or so: The concentration of media power in the hands of a single corporation while the state does not interfere. This is something decisevly different than the plurality of hundreds of news and media corporations that we had in the 20th century. In states like Brazil or Australia one corporation can significantly influence public opinion due to its control of 70-90% of the media.

You're correct, but a civic is not the way to do that. Governments don't command single corporations to control media (unless the corporations are run by the KGB), so it wouldn't make sense. Also, we already have one media corporation, so that is a better simulation factor for media monopolies.

Edit: I also don't understand why Mexico should have the "Professional" labor civic. From what I've heard of Mexico, labor conditions are pretty poor, with minimum wage not even enforced in some rural areas. I'd go as far to say they should start at tribalism; maybe even Darwinism as a legal civic, too.

You're correct, but a civic is not the way to do that. Governments don't command single corporations to control media (unless the corporations are run by the KGB), so it wouldn't make sense. Also, we already have one media corporation, so that is a better simulation factor for media monopolies.

That's not coherent. You're arguing that we can't have a civic that in reality cannot be "commanded" by a government. But it's the same with "unruly". The government does not command criminals or anybody else to gain influence on the media by violence or any other means. The government does not order criminals to kill journalists (well...it does happen but that's not what's meant with "unruly"). The government only provides the general framework in which journalists cannot be save from being threatened.
Same with "monopoly": Here the government provides a framework that does not prevent concentration of the media market in the hands of one corporation. Some states have effective antitrust legislation to do so and some don't.

Edit: I also don't understand why Mexico should have the "Professional" labor civic. From what I've heard of Mexico, labor conditions are pretty poor, with minimum wage not even enforced in some rural areas. I'd go as far to say they should start at tribalism; maybe even Darwinism as a legal civic, too.

Sounds reasonable. I'll edit it.

That's not coherent. You're arguing that we can't have a civic that in reality cannot be "commanded" by a government. But it's the same with "unruly". The government does not command criminals or anybody else to gain influence on the media by violence or any other means. The government does not order criminals to kill journalists (well...it does happen but that's not what's meant with "unruly"). The government only provides the general framework in which journalists cannot be save from being threatened.
Same with "monopoly": Here the government provides a framework that does not prevent concentration of the media market in the hands of one corporation. Some states have effective antitrust legislation to do so and some don't.


Be that as it may, Six is the maximum number of civics the dev team has agreed upon, at least for now, and I have already added two. The Unruly civic is a totally uncontrolled one, Corporate is largely uncontrolled; basically up for grabs. Regulated is more controlled. Perhaps what should be done is to set up an event that occurs with the Corporate civic implemented, where a certain corporation tries to buy out your nation's media. You have two choices from there: Either let it buy it (You switch to Unruly) or you step in with legislation (You switch to Regulated). Other options might also be used, like bribing them to leave you alone if you can afford it.

The idea with buyout-events is fine!

I just updated the civ/civic-list with Asia and Oceania.

The main disagreement I have is on government:

Saudi Arabia is probably one of the more extreme dictatorships, and it has already been suggested that it use Totalitarian.

Iran actually is technically a Republic, even with female sufferage, albeit one with an inelectable Revolutionary Council as one part of the government, so it makes more sense to give it the Presidential civic and switch media to State-run. Also, is it a state-run economy? If so, I wasn't aware.

China is not a Totalitarian dictatorship anymore; their current government has not granted much additional sufferage, but it has adopted a new constitution that provides for separation of powers, and ensures that single men cannot build a cult of personality. They will not have something Chiang's New Life Movement or Mao's Cultural Revolution again. When conceiving civics for this game, I saw fit to split tyrannical governments between Civic categories, so I added Technocracy with China specifically in mind. At the same time, the restructured government hasn't meant overall improvement in human rights, so switch China's government to Technocracy, but also switch labor away from Organized (Collective isn't an exact designation for China's labor anymore, but it's probably still the one that fits best), and switch legal to Martial Law. China's current economic growth may be unequal, but Darwinism is the realm of borderline failed-states, and in police states (which is what Martial Law implies), it's not very appropriate.

I don't think Vietnam is Totalitarian anymore either, nor is it strictly Communist, but it does seem to be more backwards than China, so maybe change it Caesardom and Corportatist.

North Korea is, of course, still a Totalitarian state, and definitely collective. I'm not sure they'll have the tech I programmed required for Military-Industrial at the start, however, so if need be, just default them back to Communist in the Economy category.

Finally, while we're on the subject of Communist states, what happened to Cuba? Is it part of Bolivarian America now?

Other than these issues, good job! :goodjob:

OK, that's something to discuss about: What do the government civics mean? My take on some of them seems to be a little different than yours. Here's how I interpret the government civs:

Caesardom: An authoritatian dictatorship. This means a dictatorshop where the dictator is in absolute power and demands subjugation from his people. But he doesn't care what people do in their private non-political life, e.g. what music they here, what habits they have.

Totalitarian: A totalitarian dictatorship. Here the dictator demands total subjugation from his people in every aspect of their life. Their habits must be consistent with his ideology.

Presidential: A democratic civ. Presidential democracy. No disagreement on this I think.

Parliamentary: A democratic civ. Parliamentary democracy. No disagreement either.

Technocracy: I don't necessarily think that this must be a non-democratic form of government. In my use of this word this means that the government (elected or non-elected) consists not of polititians but of technocrats, i.e. experts. I'd given this government civic to the EU as the only one in the world.

I'd like to have a discussion on the interpretation of government civics with you guys. I know, Bahmo, that you chose the civics and had exactly in mind what you meant them to be but people who play our mod should know exactly what every civic is about. And if they (like me) think some of the civic names to be something different then they'll be confused.

So with these things in mind that's what I think about your suggestions:

Saudi Arabia: I agree. At first I wasn't sure how much the Saudi government interfers with the private lifestyle of their people but the more I think about it the better Totalitarian fits. I'll change it.

China: You're right about them no longer being Totalitarian. However, China still is a party dictatorship. And I'm not sure, either. Caesardom is misleading since it is focused on one person (maybe it makes sense to change it into "Authoritarian"?) and Technocracy is misleading since it can be taken for a democratic system, too. But if everyone else agrees that Technocracy is no form of democracy, I'll change it into Thechnocracy.
Switch to Collective and Martial Law seems good to me.

Vietnam: Wikipedia says "adherence to ideological orthodoxy has become less important than economic development as a national priority." So it might still be Totalitarian, or already be Caesardom. Maybe someone who lives closer can answer that question... what do you think, Genghis Kai?
Same with Communist... Wikipedia: "While the country has shifted toward a more market-oriented economy, the Vietnamese government still continues to hold a tight rein over major sectors of the economy, such as the banking system, state-owned enterprises, and areas of foreign trade."
Still Communist or already Corporatist? Genghis? :)

North Korea. I agree. But I'll leave Military-Industrial as long as we don't know the starting techs.

Cuba. Yes, it's part of the Bolivarians. But Venezuela definately is the most powerful country in that coalition so I was geared to that when I chose the civics.

Here is the gist of what the civics mean, as I planned them.

Both Caesardom and Totalitarian imply dictatorships, and the idea I had for distinguishing the two really came from the Second Revolution mod. There, one civic was called "Personalistic" and the other was called "Totalitarian;" I borrowed the basic idea but renamed the first one in order to be more clear about what it meant, and how it differed from a totalitarian state.

The notion of dictatorship is, as always, a sticky one to convey in Civilization IV, because the player is technically always a lifelong (indeed, immortal) dictator during the game, regardless of civics. The real validity with government civics is as a way to simulate what the effects of different governments would be, as though the leader was less than absolute and enduring. However, some things do differ based upon more than just what sort of power a leader has.

The Economist Democracy Index lists both Israel and Palestine as "flawed democracies," not because there's anything wrong with their actual government structure (except that perhaps Israel should have a written constitution, but the UK does not have a written constitution either, and does alright), but probably because of the glaring religious bias in both, which colors judgement. Mexico likewise has a constitution modeled after the US, but functions less because of poor labor conditions, economic mismanagement, and similar flaws.

The core game already has tyrannical institutions represented across every category; you'd still think a country with Universal Sufferage was fairly tyrannical if it also had Slavery implemented, for example. Rather than change this theme of multiple brands of oppression, I simply wanted to modernize it, which solicited the changes. "Hereditary Rule" does not work in the modern world, where few absolute monarchies are left, nor does it really make sense in a game where leaders are immortal. "Representation" isn't valid as a milder alternative to "Universal Sufferage," because the latter has been reached in all major democracies. Hence, both democracy and dictatorship are split into two types. A "Caesar" is basically a demagogue; he rules as a dictator, but only because the people want him to. That doesn't rule out all authoritarian measures, but it at least balances the "whip-to-carrot" ratio a little more. A totalitarian may or may not have to resort to brutal measures more than a "Caesar," but has more interest in brainwashing the country to see eye-to-eye with him.

The easiest way to understand what the difference is between "authoritarian" and "totalitarian" governments, is to consider the first to be a government intolerant of certain behaviors, whereas the second is one that mandates certain behaviors. So in other words, in an authoritarian system, any behavior is probably fine so long as it doesn't threaten the government. In a totalitarian one, the government feels threatened if you don't put the dictator's portrait or something like a swastika everywhere.

Totalitarianism is therefore much less flexible, but authoritarianism in fact does not necessarily imply dictatorship. It's still possible for a democratic country to become intolerant of those who dissent from what the majority of the people decides upon. Singapore (Is it in the mod?) can be considered an authoritarian democracy. Caesardom as I interpreted it does imply dictatorship, but less as a means to keeping the people in line than as a means to streamlining the bureaucratic processes that would plague a democracy; hence the effect I gave it.

Which brings us, finally, to Technocracy, and to China. Technocracy is in my interpretation much like Plato's Republic. It isn't necessarily undemocratic, as an arguement of its advocates against democracy would likely argue that a democracy just boils down to people being misled by and electing the enlightened elite, so an enlightened elite that is good ought to be constitutionally mandated from the start. However, in the case of China, a technocracy has emerged out of two causes: One, as a secular replacement for the traditional Confucian civil service examination system, and two, due to the intentions of a communist government that understands the benefit of strong leadership to a country, but also understands the dangers of what can happen when loyalty to the leadership becomes seen as more important than usefulness to the country.

You had mentioned that the European Union was the only "country" you planned on giving the technocracy civic, and that you hadn't thought about China. They actually are not that different from one another. The European Union is a coalition of different nations; China is a multiethnic, multireligious and multicultural empire-gone-nationstate, which is part of why its leaders have always felt the need to exert firm control to keep it together. The EU may consist of democracies (to varying degrees; I still dislike the political scene in much of Eastern Europe), but its leadership isn't really all that democratic. China, in a similar fashion, has democratic elections on the local level, as well as some autonomous regions like Hong Kong, but not popular elections of the national government.

At the same time, it is a myth that China has made no political reforms. Their adoption of many market reforms alone proves that they've renounced the old Cultural Revolution motto that "It's better to red than expert," and points to the arguement for them being a technocracy, but beyond that, there is the fact that under the new constitution, their chief executives are still not popularly elected, but they also are not unchecked in power, and do not serve for life. For that matter, they also certainly don't have their portrait plastered everywhere. Your arguement that China is still a one party dictatorship really doesn't point towards using either Totalitarian or Caesardom civics for them, because those represent one man dictatorships, and furthermore, China is a one-party dictatorship only because that's how, in fact, checks and balances manifest themselves in China. To get power in China usually requires joining the Communist Party, but now the Communist Party is admitting a great deal of types who aren't particularly "communistic." Hence, there is no longer perfect unity just because only one party can legally exist in China, because that party's ranks have swelled to contain many rival factions; in China, they call them "cliques."

So yes, China's government fits best with the Technocracy civic. The view of their government as undemocratic has less to do with its actual structure (fairly similar to Western republics now) than it does with its relation to the people (still forceful and detached), so this situation is better replicated with State-Censored media, Collective labor, and Martial Law.

I didn't follow the discussion closely enough and my knowledge on the topic seems to have no where near you guys do (i didn't even heard of the term Technocracy before :p) so I wouldn't make much opinion on the topic.

But by reading the last few posts, I think I mostly would agree with what Bahmo have said, in particular, China.

Thanks for that exhaustive explanation, Bahmo. It cleared some things up for me. It turns out that we're having quite the same opinion about all that. Thanks in particularly for your words on distinguishing totalitarian and authoritarian. I meant the same but you found the right words. :)

Now I see that you're right about China being Technocratic. As it turns out the members of the State Council (or the secretaries) indeed are rather experts than reds. One can check that here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Council_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China) . We agree on Technocracy being not necessarily democratic OR undemocratic so we can have both the EU and China have that civ. I'm totally fine with that.

I'll edit the changes in the list.

Regarding civics i generally agree with you. I'm ok with a technocratic EU, although I want to point out, that there is actually a quiet big difference between China and the EU on this issue and I would like to explain why.

First and foremost the Chinese State Council has powers and importance, the European Commission or Parliament can only dream of. It is quiet powerful in economic questions, but decisions regarding the member states social-systems, welfare-system a big deal of judicial guidelines and laws in general they can only "propose" something, which the national governments can completely ignore if they want to. Furthermore it is also important to note, that the members of the EU all have strong represantive and in free elections elected parliaments and governments, who can anytime decide to leave the EU, if they really want to. Certainly that would have a great impact on the rest of the Union, but that doesn't diminish in any way the possibility to leave the EU if desired. That's another very big difference to China, because any secession-movement there would be (and is in Tibet) punished very, very sternly. Regarding other political fields and policies the EU works together it is important to see, that a very big part of those decisions aren't made by the "technocratic" (but note: also from the national governments selected) European Commission, but by the elected polticians and government themselves, who discuss and debate and bargain till they find a compromise. And that's in my opinion, what democracy is all about!!!

But I completely agree with you, that the construction of the Union itself isn't very democratic (although definitely more than China!) and I really hope that will better in the future. I would like to have a more common debating and active "European Public" and more transeuropean TV-channels and newspapers and maybe also some sort of directly elected "president" of the EU and, very important, the Commission replaced by a sort of european government (with the same powers naturally) elected by the European Parliament. But that has nothing to do with this mod, I'm only dreaming a little bit :)...........

Apart from that I think it's really great what you guys are doing here and I'm looking forward to playing this cool mod!

Ah...one thing I forgot. I don't agree on Iran. If we agree on totalitarian being not necessarily a dictatorship then this is the civic for Iran. It is indeed technically a Republic but it has a totalitarian system of, in your words, mandating certain behaviour from its people. The government and the Revolutionary Council use the Iranian Revolutionary Guards to watch people's behaviour in public (and sometimes even in private) and sanction it if it does not match the ideology.

I chose the Communist civic because Wikipedia states that "Iran's economy is a mixture of central planning, state ownership of oil and other large enterprises, village agriculture, and small-scale private trading and service ventures." I wasn't really aware of that, too.

Concerning media it is not entirely state run in Iran. There is private media but it undergoes strict censorship (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_in_Iran). That's why I chose State-Censored instead of State-Run.

One more thing I forgot to add about Asia: How is Taiwan "isolationist?" They want to assert their status as a sovereign nation, yes, but that doesn't imply isolationism, and while they do not have much diplomatic sway, that's not because they don't want to; it's because China requires that Taiwan be ignored diplomatically by anybody who wants to open diplomacy with them. At the same time, though, that's strictly on the political side of things; in terms of trade, Taiwan still has major ties to many world nations, and in fact, China may be their biggest trading partner now.

I know. I have to admit that I was pretty helpless about Taiwan's legal civic. I assumed that my choice of isolationist would puzzle some people. Here is what I thought:
Darwinism isn't right because, as you said, it's the realm of borderline failed states.
Confederacy doesn't work because Taiwan is no Confederacy or Federation or something similar.
Internationalism doesn't really work in my eyes since Taiwan only has diplomatic relations to 23 states like Nauru, Swaziland and Panama.
Martial Law...As far as I know Taiwan is under no Martial Law.
Mandatory Justice doesn't work since the tech is not yet discovered.

In my eyes Isolationism worked best because of the reasons that made Internationalism impossible. Of course it's not deliberately chosen but it is the status quo caused by China.

But I'll be glad to hear a counter-proposal.

OK I lied. I will make comments :p But I will keep my comments only on those topics related to greater China to not making myself sound stupid :)

I wonder what will the cause be for Taiwan being Internationalism in the game. I suspect it doesn't have much relation with diplomatic relationship in reality, would it? Can we just make Taiwan to have no open border with most of the countries to represent that instead?

The current government of Taiwan is definitely following an Internationalism regime. Arguably, it is why the current president Ma Ying-jeou got elected (the term "flexible diplomacy" was invented and overwhelmingly propagandized in his presidential campaign). If civic represents the chosen form of government, NOT the current status of the state, then Taiwan should be Internationalism. In comparison, the old government before May 2008 would be correct to use isolationism.

OK, I'll change Taiwan to Internationalism.

I have a question, is a corporatist economy also regulated? Personally, I really liked the civic set up of Rise of Mankind mod. I can see, though, how the civic set up for 2009+ would be different than a civic set up from beggining of civilization+. However, I disagree with grass roots as a choice. There are simply no civilizations in the world that completly block out corporations and only have small buisnesses. Instead, I think corporatist should be the civic that pertains to civilizations with much less regulation.

I think that grass roots should be replaced with Welfare State, to represent the more European model of Capitalism. Its defining characteristics would be added happieness, less food produced (to represent the declining populations of Europe), higher commerce and science but less hammers.

Sure there is no current grassroots economy in the world. But I'll switch to it first thing I play the mod, that's for sure. :)

I think you have a somewhat important hole in your civics- you lack any option for the sort of free market/mixed economies that the US, UK, Canada, etc. run right now.

Corporatist, by the bonuses given, comes fairly close, except the description jarrs somewhat.

Well....I don't really see a difference there. The free market/mixed economies you describe are de facto corporatist economies.

If so, I think you ought to amend the description- becuase there's quite a lot of difference between the economic system of China, and that of the UK or US.

Resulting more from the fact that the former is an emerging market and the latter are highly industrialized countries than from highly different economic systems. Of course the different political systems play their role, too, but that's for another civic category. The bottom line is that those three economic systems are rather deregulated free market economies. That's making the corporations the strongest players and thus they are - in my view - fairly described by "corporatist".

If they're degregulated market economies, why not just call it free market, or market economy, or liberal, or sumsuch? Corporatist, though it has a distinct meaning, sounds rather like the facsist versions, where all corperations are subservient to the state's will

If they're degregulated market economies, why not just call it free market, or market economy, or liberal, or sumsuch? Corporatist, though it has a distinct meaning, sounds rather like the facsist versions, where all corperations are subservient to the state's will

Actually, it is reverse of what you said. A corporatist economy is where big businesses dictate policies whether out front or behind the scenes (like here in United States).

Actually, it is reverse of what you said. A corporatist economy is where big businesses dictate policies whether out front or behind the scenes (like here in United States).

I know- or, to use the wikipedia version, it is where industrial decisions are made hrough negotiation between corperations, government and labour unions.

However, I was pointing out that this is easily confused with the fascist version, whereby all economic actors, though nominally independant, are infact controlled by the state, and that for this reason the term 'deregulated free market economies', or sumsuch, is better.

I've been wanting to clarify the meaning of the "Corporatist" civic for some time, and now that people are confused, I'd say it's a good idea. Older uses of the word are, indeed, often in reference to fascist (or at least nationalist) countries' economies. In fact, I was considering an economic Nationalist civic for a while, but decided it was redundant with Communist, Corporatist, Military-Industrial and Grassroots already there.

However, my post-modern definition has more to do with the style of economy used in Japan and China, as well as many other Asian economies. "Norse socialism" may also fit that civic, but I am not sure. China isn't too far removed from fascist regimes, which were authoritarian socialist systems that wanted to channel the economy without outlawing private enterprise, given that it's an authoritarian socialist system that wants to experiment with private enterprise while keeping a strict eye on how much it goes right into Chinese pocketbooks. In Japan, which is no longer so authoritarian, such economy was developed under US occupation, with corporations made to work for the benefit of the people so citizens would be endeared enough not to be easy targets for Soviet Influence.

Under this definition, the US doesn't really fall under the "Corporatist" label, which I believe was given it because so many corporations originate there. Because the latter is the case, the US is not substantially weakened by the Deregulated civic because most of their corporations are bringing in money from branches all over the world. The point of giving the civic to Asian economies is allowing them to profit from corporations that aren't actually from their own countries.

I'm bumping this so other people can see it. My plans for various countries:
USA: Deregulated economy, but Organized labor conditions as a result of long committment to high standards of living. Also, though its economic civic charges 25% more for corporate maintenance, this doesn't hurt that much because many corporations are based there, and hence, bring in money from all over the world. Also, the Presidential and Corporate Media civics balance it out.
European Union: I'm thinking this could be nearly anything other than Communist and Military-Industrial.
Japan: Traditionally a Corporatist economy as a result of being the host to many US corporations after WWII, but now it is beginning many corporations of its own, so it will probably turn into a Knowledge Economy in the course of the game.
China: Still a developing Corporatist system, which means that it selectively deals with foreign investors with the intention of bringing money into the state. Labor conditions are still primitive in many places; hence the Collective civic.
India: Corporatist, but unlike China, with a democratic political system. Labor conditions still poor in many places, but probably should start at Emancipation (which is low-tier in this mod), unlike China.
North Korea: Communist, Totalitarian holdover from a past era. May switch to Military-Industrial economy later.
Latin America: Depending on the country, could be Deregulated, Communist, Corporatist, or Grassroots. It is, after all, a very volatile region.
UAE: Corporatist, and I'm thinking of doing something to make oil more profitable under that civic. A simple gold bonus for wells should do the trick.