Fixed governments' return?

i do like the civic concept introduced into civ4. it is indeed more flexible than fixed governments in previous civs. however as of right now any combination of civics is possible. that's too much freedom for players!

so i propose: fixed governments return as metacivics(governments). the "government" civic type shoud be dropped or named to "something else". some civics should receive different names and different meanings (what does "Environmentalism" do as a economy civic type?). each government [type] allows a subset of civics. any allowed combination can be chosen.

i see at least 2 ways of how it can be implemented.
1)
the chosen government [type] will greatly impact your nation. chosen civics' combo will have an impact on your nation, but much less than the government [type].
2)
the chosen government [type] will have no impact on your nation. however the civic combination chosen will greatly impact your nation.

a first glance list of governments [types]:
Anarchy, Autocracy, Theocracy, Democracy, Plutocracy, Aristocracy.

Anarchy:
power belong to no one.
Autocracy:
power belongs to one [person] (Fascism, Absolute Monarchy).
Theocracy:
power belongs to the clergy ([Islamic] Fundamentalism).
Democracy:
power belongs to the people (keep in mind that "people" is NOT everyone).
Plutocracy:
power belongs to the rich.
Aristocracy:
power belongs to a group of "chosen".

so for example an Autocracy cannot have "Free Speech", Democracy cannot have "State Property", etc.

the idea is rather crude and definitely needs polishing. so tell me what you think.

No, I like it the way it is. Allowing for a government of Police State, Free Speech, Caste System, Environmentalism and Pacifism raises an interesting spectre. It is nice to play with these seemingly random combinations. However, I guess it does divert from realism a bit. Perhaps just keep it as it is, but add penalties for using incompatible civs? For instance, given my example, Free Speech could create unhappiness when used in conjunction with Police State, and Police State would have a higher running cost because of Pacifism. Et cetera.

Hail said:

so i propose: fixed governments return as metacivics(governments). the "government" civic type shoud be dropped or named to "something else". some civics should receive different names and different meanings (what does "Environmentalism" do as a economy civic type?). each government [type] allows a subset of civics. any allowed combination can be chosen.

Click to expand...

I think it's not quite one thing nor the other; I don't like civics as a mechanic, but I'd rather have them dropped and just go back to fixed governments entirely.

I like the civics, myself.

Maybe there should be a type of option that allows you to just pick a government, and it would create that within the Civics, allowing people to keep originality if they wanted, or maybe try to branch off from a government.

I dislike Civics because some of the most interresting ones are in the same branch, so can't be choosen in the same time. I particularly think about overpowered Heredetary Rules, that can't be choosen in the same time as Police State that allows conscripts, which should be a defaut civic for all the game.

In another topic, I suggested governments that shape the economy of the game. One would allow to build infinite number of cities but with corruption, like in Civ1, Civ2 and Civ3, another would allow to play like in Civ4, with huge maintenance costs.

I also like how civics are currently. Out of the 25 civics, perhaps change the type and how it affects the civ overall.

Maybe there could be a choice before starting the games if you want fixed governments, or Civics?

I think that Civics are a step in the right direction, but they don't offer enough freedom.

I propose that each Civic type be represented by a slider, ranging from the most liberal setting to the most powerful. So you would have a Government slider (Anarchy to Autocracy), a Religion slider (from Free Religion to Theocracy), an Economic slider (Free Market to Mercantilism), an Environmental slider (None to Environmentalism), a Military slider (Pacifism to Police State), a Freedoms slider (Free Speech to Nationhood), etc.

When starting out, all the sliders are locked in place, but by researching techs, the sliders can be moved further away from their starting positions.

Too much freedom is not good. There must be some control or governments will get out of hand. Checks & balances must be in place too ensure an efficient and responsible government is in place.

Perhaps split the civics to an executive branch and a legislative branch. Majority of countries around the world have these two systems in place forming the government as a whole.

exhile said:

Too much freedom is not good. There must be some control or governments will get out of hand. Checks & balances must be in place too ensure an efficient and responsible government is in place.

Perhaps split the civics to an executive branch and a legislative branch. Majority of countries around the world have these two systems in place forming the government as a whole.

Click to expand...

Well Religion must also be there, since until very recently in human history, governments and religions were inseperably intertwined.

Ramesses said:

Well Religion must also be there, since until very recently in human history, governments and religions were inseperably intertwined.

Click to expand...

Religion is already a separate feature in Civ4 if you haven't noticed.

exhile said:

Religion is already a separate feature in Civ4 if you haven't noticed.

Click to expand...

I did notice. I was telling him that religion needs to stay a part of the Governments/Civics system.

Camikaze said:

No, I like it the way it is. Allowing for a government of Police State, Free Speech, Caste System, Environmentalism and Pacifism raises an interesting spectre. It is nice to play with these seemingly random combinations. However, I guess it does divert from realism a bit. Perhaps just keep it as it is, but add penalties for using incompatible civs? For instance, given my example, Free Speech could create unhappiness when used in conjunction with Police State, and Police State would have a higher running cost because of Pacifism. Et cetera.

Click to expand...

any system can be improved [indefinitely]. however it may not be worthwile. the problem is not that some combinations seem random, but that some combinations are illogical.

rysmiel said:

I think it's not quite one thing nor the other; I don't like civics as a mechanic, but I'd rather have them dropped and just go back to fixed governments entirely.

Click to expand...

we both know that it ain't happening. civics will stay, but i think they need a minor overhaul. one of them is what i propose in the 1 post.

Shackel said:

Maybe there could be a choice before starting the games if you want fixed governments, or Civics?

Click to expand...

that would be hell for the ai programmer, since these concepts affect almost everything in the game. such "metaconcepts" should not be toggleable.

Ramesses said:

I did notice. I was telling him that religion needs to stay a part of the Governments/Civics system.

Click to expand...

and it will. thank you for reminding.

Hail said:

any system can be improved [indefinitely]. however it may not be worthwile. the problem is not that some combinations seem random, but that some combinations are illogical.

Click to expand...

Which is why you would be heavily penalised for using them. Theoretically, you can have any combination of government you desire, but some civics will impede you in combination with others. For instance, Police State does not automatically preclude Free Speech, it's just that any successful Police State will need to control communication in order to function effectively. Which is why you should be penalised for using such civics in combination, but should not be prohibited from using them in tandem.

Camikaze said:

No, I like it the way it is. Allowing for a government of Police State, Free Speech, Caste System, Environmentalism and Pacifism raises an interesting spectre. It is nice to play with these seemingly random combinations. However, I guess it does divert from realism a bit. Perhaps just keep it as it is, but add penalties for using incompatible civs? For instance, given my example, Free Speech could create unhappiness when used in conjunction with Police State, and Police State would have a higher running cost because of Pacifism. Et cetera.

Click to expand...