Bring back the Senate, PLUS

[collin_stp]

I think the senate would work well, but without as much power. In Ancient Roman times, didn't Ceasar simply overule the Senate when he didn't like what they said, eventually disbanding it? Maybe the Senate would negotiate a peace treaty when a WW like counter hit a certain point, but you don't have to accept it. If you decide not to accept it, the civ take a major WW hit, or you lose some other benefits of a representative government, eventually turning your gov into some totalitarian gov if you keep overruling them. The penalties would not completely end at the end of the war, but some of them should linger for a certain amount of time. After unpopular wars are ended, the peoples' anger often still raged (but to a lesser degree).

 

[wlievens]

A Senate like in Galactic Civilizations would be more interesting....

 

[SewerStarFish]

Civilization starts with "The people have invested in you....."
The Senate was and would be a startling return of a negative game feature. Its original purpose was to dissuade you from an overpowering form of gov't, democracy.
has tools to make other forms more palatable than in II. And the war weariness is more pronounced for unjust wars by Dem/Rep.

If any form of the senate is brought back it can not have its "veto" power over a player's choice for the civ. It was so unfun that I would be jaded to it's resurrection.

 

[Yuri2356]

As an avid fan of Civ2, I have to say the canate should come back but with much reduced power. The idea of having civ characteristics effect the senates opinion is a pretty good one, but there there would need to be other factors effecting them.

1) I could see a system where the senate can manipulated by the player through a system of bribes/kickbacks/other evil deeds, but with a chance that the people would find out and protest.
2) If the enire concept of the gouvernment was made more complex, you could have a puppet cabinet that make the people think you're a democracy/republic, when in fact you could be a communist. Again, if the people learned the truth they would rebel. In return you could recive some of the bonuses of a free country, to a lesser extent.
3) You could be allowed to mix church and state by giving the option to change the religion of your civ as you reserch different philosiphys. Your senate would favor peace with members of the same faith, and quick to war with less compatible religeons.
(couldn't you just see you doplomacy advisor screaming "DEATH TO THE INFIDELS!"? )

Those are my ideas for now, feel free to coment or criticise.

 

[Sark6354201]

A senate would be alright, just as long as the designers don't go off and snort some crack and bring back the Civ2 senate.

Given the probability of this, I think we are safe.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

I think that, if you were to bring back a senate, it would HAVE to act far more 'intelligently' than the Civ2 version. Namely its response to your dealings with other civs should be based on reasonably predictable cultural and civ-character based principles-principles that can be modified according to foreign civs government types and past behaviour! Also, you should be able to ignore your senates wishes, but only at the cost of increased war weariness and the risk of the senate going behind your back and/or your nation collapsing into civil war/revolt!
If these safeguards were introduced, then I for one would be VERY happy to see a senate in the game!!

Oh and, as I might have mentioned before, I think that you should be able to select which government types have a senate through the editor!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[ManOfMiracles]

I'm totally with Aussie_Lurker on this. It should be tweakable and certainly should take civ traits into account.

 

[sir_schwick]

Personally, I hated the Senate. You are the state, how else do you get elected every turn?

If it had to come back, here is how, mostly inspired by collin_stp :
Your senate will occasionally ask for stuff based on what your people need/hate(war mostly). If you refuse, you get a liberty penalty. LPs take away some of your bonuses and eventually make you a Police State of some kind. LPs will wear off for a while and be taken off if you do comply with the people's command. Senate demands could include a tax break, luxury increase.
Actually thinking about this is making me think of an entire new concept for incorporating the needs of the people, for all governments/economic systems. I'll start a new thread and give the link here.

 

[jabancho]

Personally, I hated the Senate. You are the state, how else do you get elected every turn?

If it had to come back, here is how, mostly inspired by collin_stp :
Your senate will occasionally ask for stuff based on what your people need/hate(war mostly). If you refuse, you get a liberty penalty. LPs take away some of your bonuses and eventually make you a Police State of some kind. LPs will wear off for a while and be taken off if you do comply with the people's command. Senate demands could include a tax break, luxury increase.
Actually thinking about this is making me think of an entire new concept for incorporating the needs of the people, for all governments/economic systems. I'll start a new thread and give the link here.

I like this idea. The senate could have certain power, yet not enough to forbid you from your state decisions (such as wars). Perhaps it could be also a nice small wonder building, available with the republic and once built it will reduce corruption (ironic.. ) in all your cities....

 

[Dr. Broom]

I think that, if you were to bring back a senate, it would HAVE to act far more 'intelligently' than the Civ2 version. Namely its response to your dealings with other civs should be based on reasonably predictable cultural and civ-character based principles-principles that can be modified according to foreign civs government types and past behaviour! Also, you should be able to ignore your senates wishes, but only at the cost of increased war weariness and the risk of the senate going behind your back and/or your nation collapsing into civil war/revolt!
If these safeguards were introduced, then I for one would be VERY happy to see a senate in the game!!

Oh and, as I might have mentioned before, I think that you should be able to select which government types have a senate through the editor!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

I was thinking something along these lines but I think civil war and revolt is a bit extreme, at least for just ignoring the senate a few times. For the possibility of civil war or revolt you should have to do it several times and your historic relations and culture groups should come into the equasion too. If you are Germany for example and your closest neighbors are France and the Mongols and you have had a lot of trade, good relations and peace with France but go to war with them over something then the senate pops in and says time for peace or whatever and wants to compromise and you ignore the senate your citizens would get very angry and maybe revolt if you do this a few times. On the other hand the Mongols you warred on and off with while you were a despotism you and the Mongols have both cheated each other frequently and are in different culture groups. You now get into a big war with them and after a while(if at all) the senate says enough war time for peace. You ignore them but this time your people hate the Mongols and hardly even care that you ingored the senate. Also if you are fighting a defensive war, you did not start the war then your people and senate should be more lenient than if you start the war. Maybe it would even be possible to make them very lenient if you attack the other nation because of something like constant border violation although i really hope they fix that little problem, that the AI treats your borders like a highway.

 

[bob rulz]

Well, the first thing they need to do is not make democracies immune to propaganda. I absolutely hate that! Maybe make them more resistant to propaganda, but not completely immune, like it would balance out Communism's propaganda bonus and Democracy's propaganda resistance. That wouldn't make them too overpowered. But even before that they need to make espionage misisons less expensive. Also, if the public finds out that you have been engaging in extensive espionage missions under a republic or democracy your people become unhappy.

Also, I wouldn't mind a senate, but it's power would need to be severely restricted. First, the Senate only vetoes war if you are the aggressor. eg a spy is caught, you frequently violate the border of a neghboring country, you just openly attack them, etc. Also, I think they should get rid of the enemy not complying immediately after war is declared COMPLETELY. I have always hated that. Unless they really don't want to talk to you. Make it still possible but just not always like that.

Also, I like the idea of liberty points. I think this would balance the game out greatly and would help curb an overly aggressive civilization, although if you really don't like it you should have an option to turn it off. I will have to think about this though, because it would have to implemented in specific ways.

 

[sir_schwick]

Why shoudl democracies be more resistant to propoganda? I think history has proved the opposite. The reason no city in the US has defected over is that the US has a very dominant place in the world, so why would you leave the table of the big dog. Germany was at least a Republic or a Democracy in 1933 when it elected Chancellor Hitler. Anyone seen "Triumph of the Willing"?

Thank you for supporting the other ideas. There is a good thread on a new espionage system that encourage programs that require developemenet of espionage, not just missions.

Also, i think it is important that even non-representative civs make demands of their leaders. THis would be a good way to introduce a genocide or ethnic cleansing model, since no rationale leader would encourage these policies(unless they were truly sadistic).

 

[michael4000]

Worth mentioning, maybe, that the Senate can't ~really~ veto your actions in CIV II. All you have to do to stay on the attack is declare a revolution and let the tanks roll.

 

[searcheagle]

I am opposed to a Civ II senate. In that, the senate blocked any offensive move without reason. If you built the UN, you had a random 50% percent chance of "peace keeping" operations.

Senate actions have to be done with reason and with repect to national interest or desires (Hey, they nuked us. MAKE THEM PAY!)

 

[Colonel]

I like the idea of the senate but dont like how they could block wars, if a president wants to goto war we will go ----not to be political but look at iraq--------- If somehow reworked the senate system it might work

 

[sealman]

A Senate like in Galactic Civilizations would be more interesting....

For those of us who have never played (or heard) of Galactic Civilizations, could you please elaborate.

I do not like the idea of the Senate of sometimes preventing you to declare war. I have never played Civ II but I hated the feature in Civ I.

 

[Yuri2356]

Also, i think it is important that even non-representative civs make demands of their leaders. THis would be a good way to introduce a genocide or ethnic cleansing model, since no rationale leader would encourage these policies(unless they were truly sadistic).

I had an idea with regards to allowing genocide/cleansing ans a darker part of civ, using it as a way remove forign citicens from newly captured cities. There would be a HUGE unhappyness penalty if it was used of members of the same culture group, but not nearly as much if it were used on ressitors, which your people would hate. (Enemies of the state)

It could only work in non-representative governments (or just be more effective) and would realy hurt your reputation with other civs.

As for the cenate, they should have their own attitude toward you, like another country, and the more they like you, the less likley they are to over-rule you on things like war. Attitude could be influenced by your actions as a leader, things like executions (see above) would have negative effects, while tax breaks and more luxuries would be positive.

 

[sealman]

I like the idea of the senate but dont like how they could block wars, if a president wants to goto war we will go ----not to be political but look at iraq--------- If somehow reworked the senate system it might work

Not to be a nitpick but the President of the United States does not have the authority to to formally declare war on another nation. He has to request it through a joint session of congress and Congress must issue the declaration. The last time that the US formally declared war on another nation was June 1942 and that was declared against Romania, Hungary and Bulgaria. The president does have the authrority to commit US troops without the approval of Congress but needs approval if the deployment is more than xx number of days. I think it is 90 but not 100% sure.

The US has engaged in many extended military engagements since then, Vietnam and the Gulf Wars for examples but no formal declarations were ever made.

That said, your point is well taken.

 

[MSTK]

No
__________________
Yes, I said NO!

 

[Nlochman]

If the senate is brought back it should have a bigger roll in the operation of you government. Like dojoboy said there could be elections during which you gain our loose favor in the senate. You should be able to endorse, ignore, or outlaw political and social movements that happen within your country. For example if you are England and a large part of your population is aposed to a certian trade agreement or another nations actions, You could choose to endores, ignore, or outlaw that point of view. Your choice could make you gain or loose favor in the next senate election, and even effect your diplomatic relationships.
I would also like to see perhaps great leaders become political aponents/allies. You could choose to arrest/assasinate your policical aponents, or if they share your political views they could help you influance the population into agreeing with you and in effect control the senate.
Domestic politics is somthing that has been largly ingored in past versions but in Civ4 I think the new civics option was an attempt at this.