What should the Civ VII political system be like?

[Arcaian]

I do not have all the solutions the various factions could. Ask for various policies and grant support to the sovereign. Or to the form of government of course there are miles of factors to change things citizenship, the form of government, the economy, politics, the state, war or peace, the people the electoral system, things that change over the centuries, can not only be politics card

No-one is asking for all the possible solutions - it is just that your suggestions are completely separate from anything approaching the game we're ostensibly discussing, and you seem unwilling to provide any suggestion for how these could possibly be translated into game mechanics that fit into the 4x genre. If it's of fundamental importance that the game accurately model the economic, political, and dynastic elements of society that impacted the Holy Roman Empire after the death of Charlemagne (though I think it's contentious as to whether one should include the Carolingian empire in the Holy Roman Empire) in Civilization 7, could you provide a direction in which these game mechanics should work? If we make mechanics very specific to the Carolingian Empire, not only would we need an incredible amount of mechanics to represent all periods of history across ~6,000 years in all corners of the world, but we'd dictate that the game has to progress exactly how history did, which is obviously not of interest to people playing a game like Civ. So we need somewhat general mechanics that can apply to similar situations - what sort of mechanics may they be?

EDIT: Almost immediately after posting that I realised that it likely comes off as quite confrontational, which wasn't the intent. I think there is a lot of interesting space for game mechanics designed to reflect the role played by internal politics in Civ, which has traditionally been thoroughly neglected in the series - and is the area that you seem most interested in engaging with discussion of the Civ mechanics. I do think it is an area that is tricky to design mechanics for, however, as it is easy to both get historically deterministic, which undermines the purpose of the series as a video game first and foremost, and for the mechanics to balloon in complexity without providing sufficiently interesting gameplay to justify it. I think this is especially true of the Civ series, which has traditionally been focused on relatively simple gameplay mechanics and the relatively simplistic representations of history generated, and it would be unfair to fans of the series to change that at this point. Games like Victoria 3 exist for those of us who are enjoy a great level of detail in the economic and political realities of the history being depicted

 

[luca 83]

I probably what should not be in the 7 policies with bonuses : middle-class system + soldiers Number , production Total , that determined , the example of the Carolingian empire and that there are so many possibilities in a series of choices , political , cultural , wars that makes it impossible to make the game preordained , surely serves an excellent

 

[luca 83]

A lack of lineriality is that the probalities of an event are infinite or of a cause the assassination of Julius caesar for example, or the death of Alexander the Great, so being a non-linear and not preordained game I do not think that there are problems of monotonous linearity

 

[dagriggstar]

As fascinating as the question is, I'm not sure how to represent it in a choice of civics or policies

My thinking started with an idea that "architectural style" as a civic choice. You would probably get something like
adobe - Desert tiles (including flood plains) yield +1 production (misspelt in initial post woops)
brick - Buildings cost 10% less production
timber - Chopping woods gives double production
stone - Wonder production increased by 15%
nomad - tiles without adjacent buildings/improvements yield +1 food, +1 production

But then I started questioning if that's technology or culture.

 

[luca 83]

My thinking started with an idea that "architectural style" as a civic choice. You would probably get something like
adobe - Desert tiles (including flood plains) yield +1 production (misspelt in initial post woops)
brick - Buildings cost 10% less production
timber - Chopping woods gives double production
stone - Wonder production increased by 15%
nomad - tiles without adjacent buildings/improvements yield +1 food, +1 production

But then I started questioning if that's technology or culture.

An internal system of consensus or rebellion and fundamental to the new game dynamics related to alls new technology of the improved ai, bonuses / malus for political, social, economic no longer work as they used to , the internal dynamics should be dynamic and change over time

 

[luca 83]

The most important thing is in my opinion the sense of nonlinearity of the game that makes a game not predictable, and gives the sense of the passing of time of the centuries ... The problem remains that the player and the same person for millennia how to solve the question ? Then we can talk about government

An internal system of consensus or rebellion and fundamental to the new game dynamics related to alls new technology of the improved ai, bonuses / malus for political, social, economic no longer work as they used to , the internal dynamics should be dynamic and change over time

An internal system of consensus or rebellion and fundamental to the new game dynamics related to alls new technology of the improved ai, bonuses / malus for political, social, economic no longer work as they used to , the internal dynamics should be dynamic and change over time

An internal system of consensus or rebellion and fundamental to the new game dynamics related to alls new technology of the improved ai, bonuses / malus for political, social, economic no longer work as they used to , the internal dynamics should be dynamic and change over time

 

[vorlon_mi]

Another perspective -- from one of my favorite games, though it is not very popular here nor in the Steam usage data: Beyond Earth, especially with the Rising Tide expansion.

For those not familiar with it, here are a few salient points.

• The game uses many of the Civ5 concepts, including a hex grid, 1UPT, and a global mechanic that affects yields and growth. In BERT, the "health" metric replaces the "happiness" metric of Civ5
• More importantly -- for me, anyway -- are the interactions with affinity and virtues (more on those below) that allow the player to eXpand and research one's way out of a negative health situation. Building an empire is encouraged!
• BERT virtues bear many similarities to Civ5 social policies, which @Krajzen mentioned, that he wished they would return. Like social policies, they are permanent once adopted, but adopting a virtue from one of the four trees does not preclude adopting virtues from the other trees. They are complementary, allowing the player to choose which bonuses to add to their faction in this game. I've not noticed a distinct political aspect to adopting certain virtues compared with those adopted by the AI.
• BERT also features affinities, which weakly resemble ideologies. Choosing to increase your affinity score in one does not preclude increasing in another. A balanced approach can make sense in certain cases. Each of the affinities has a related victory condition; to win an affinity victory, the player does need to specialize and build a specific victory wonder. From a political system, other players/AI may object to your choice of victory wonder and declare war to stop you. Usually, the objectors have a different primary affinity.
• Each leader (yes, they are also immortal leaders) may choose personality traits that affect the growth of the empire. One trait is unique to the leader (somewhat analogous to Civ6 leader unique ability), but 3 may be chosen in separate categories. The AI players will like or dislike a player based on how they conform to these abilities. These may be viewed on the diplomacy screen, with mouseovers.

Overall, I want to make two points.

1. The interactions between researching techs, growing one's affinities, adopting virtues, and the possible diplomatic agreements is very strong in BERT. The systems work well together, in my opinion. The AI successfully builds its empire towards the affinity victory conditions consistently and successfully.
2. All of our discussions above about government types, how governments could work, are not applicable in BERT. It has no changes in government system, no evolution in how the government runs. The leader is the leader, period. In that sense, BERT is nearly irrelevant to a forum asking, "what should the Civ7 political system be like?"

Why no government changes? Perhaps because the time period is much shorter than Civ games. Perhaps because it is set in the future, where all the factions are running some sort of future government. Perhaps it was planned for a second expansion that never happened.

I for one really enjoy the way that the systems interact. The developers also re-invented the diplomatic aspect in some interesting (and sometimes frustrating) ways.

 

[luca 83]

Another perspective -- from one of my favorite games, though it is not very popular here nor in the Steam usage data: Beyond Earth, especially with the Rising Tide expansion.

For those not familiar with it, here are a few salient points.

• The game uses many of the Civ5 concepts, including a hex grid, 1UPT, and a global mechanic that affects yields and growth. In BERT, the "health" metric replaces the "happiness" metric of Civ5
• More importantly -- for me, anyway -- are the interactions with affinity and virtues (more on those below) that allow the player to eXpand and research one's way out of a negative health situation. Building an empire is encouraged!
• BERT virtues bear many similarities to Civ5 social policies, which @Krajzen mentioned, that he wished they would return. Like social policies, they are permanent once adopted, but adopting a virtue from one of the four trees does not preclude adopting virtues from the other trees. They are complementary, allowing the player to choose which bonuses to add to their faction in this game. I've not noticed a distinct political aspect to adopting certain virtues compared with those adopted by the AI.
• BERT also features affinities, which weakly resemble ideologies. Choosing to increase your affinity score in one does not preclude increasing in another. A balanced approach can make sense in certain cases. Each of the affinities has a related victory condition; to win an affinity victory, the player does need to specialize and build a specific victory wonder. From a political system, other players/AI may object to your choice of victory wonder and declare war to stop you. Usually, the objectors have a different primary affinity.
• Each leader (yes, they are also immortal leaders) may choose personality traits that affect the growth of the empire. One trait is unique to the leader (somewhat analogous to Civ6 leader unique ability), but 3 may be chosen in separate categories. The AI players will like or dislike a player based on how they conform to these abilities. These may be viewed on the diplomacy screen, with mouseovers.

Overall, I want to make two points.

1. The interactions between researching techs, growing one's affinities, adopting virtues, and the possible diplomatic agreements is very strong in BERT. The systems work well together, in my opinion. The AI successfully builds its empire towards the affinity victory conditions consistently and successfully.
2. All of our discussions above about government types, how governments could work, are not applicable in BERT. It has no changes in government system, no evolution in how the government runs. The leader is the leader, period. In that sense, BERT is nearly irrelevant to a forum asking, "what should the Civ7 political system be like?"

Why no government changes? Perhaps because the time period is much shorter than Civ games. Perhaps because it is set in the future, where all the factions are running some sort of future government. Perhaps it was planned for a second expansion that never happened.

I for one really enjoy the way that the systems interact. The developers also re-invented the diplomatic aspect in some interesting (and sometimes frustrating) ways.

Interest. And the needs of the individual classes should change over time because historically the classes do not always want the same things, even products, and technologies should influence, the factors of change, so within the classes there should be , form parties, factions, on an ideological basis, based on political philosophy, liberalism, absolutism, communism, fascism, etc

 

[luca 83]

Another perspective -- from one of my favorite games, though it is not very popular here nor in the Steam usage data: Beyond Earth, especially with the Rising Tide expansion.

For those not familiar with it, here are a few salient points.

• The game uses many of the Civ5 concepts, including a hex grid, 1UPT, and a global mechanic that affects yields and growth. In BERT, the "health" metric replaces the "happiness" metric of Civ5
• More importantly -- for me, anyway -- are the interactions with affinity and virtues (more on those below) that allow the player to eXpand and research one's way out of a negative health situation. Building an empire is encouraged!
• BERT virtues bear many similarities to Civ5 social policies, which @Krajzen mentioned, that he wished they would return. Like social policies, they are permanent once adopted, but adopting a virtue from one of the four trees does not preclude adopting virtues from the other trees. They are complementary, allowing the player to choose which bonuses to add to their faction in this game. I've not noticed a distinct political aspect to adopting certain virtues compared with those adopted by the AI.
• BERT also features affinities, which weakly resemble ideologies. Choosing to increase your affinity score in one does not preclude increasing in another. A balanced approach can make sense in certain cases. Each of the affinities has a related victory condition; to win an affinity victory, the player does need to specialize and build a specific victory wonder. From a political system, other players/AI may object to your choice of victory wonder and declare war to stop you. Usually, the objectors have a different primary affinity.
• Each leader (yes, they are also immortal leaders) may choose personality traits that affect the growth of the empire. One trait is unique to the leader (somewhat analogous to Civ6 leader unique ability), but 3 may be chosen in separate categories. The AI players will like or dislike a player based on how they conform to these abilities. These may be viewed on the diplomacy screen, with mouseovers.

Overall, I want to make two points.

1. The interactions between researching techs, growing one's affinities, adopting virtues, and the possible diplomatic agreements is very strong in BERT. The systems work well together, in my opinion. The AI successfully builds its empire towards the affinity victory conditions consistently and successfully.
2. All of our discussions above about government types, how governments could work, are not applicable in BERT. It has no changes in government system, no evolution in how the government runs. The leader is the leader, period. In that sense, BERT is nearly irrelevant to a forum asking, "what should the Civ7 political system be like?"

Why no government changes? Perhaps because the time period is much shorter than Civ games. Perhaps because it is set in the future, where all the factions are running some sort of future government. Perhaps it was planned for a second expansion that never happened.

I for one really enjoy the way that the systems interact. The developers also re-invented the diplomatic aspect in some interesting (and sometimes frustrating) ways.

A revolution also defines an era the age of the French Revolution , romanticism and revolution of the peoples 1821 - 1848 liberalism and colonial expansion , the Russian Revolution the change of government and fundamental! Also to define an era such as the Industrial Revolution which is connected to the age of liberalism and colonial economic expansion , and the self-determination of peoples

 

[vorlon_mi]

The most important thing is in my opinion the sense of nonlinearity of the game that makes a game not predictable, and gives the sense of the passing of time of the centuries ... The problem remains that the player and the same person for millennia how to solve the question ? Then we can talk about government

Which civ games have you played? Did you find the same level of linearity in each? Which one did the best to work towards nonlinearity?

Same Person Problem: You have written about this frequently, so you must care about it a lot.

Consider a gamer playing a 4X game, like Civ6 or any of the games in the franchise. Let's call her Maria.
Maria starts up a session of the game and chooses to play as Julius Caesar. The game begins in 4000 BCE, like Civ games.
After 100 turns or so of this game, the game says that the date is now 1000 BCE. Maria gets up from her computer, pours a drink and gets a snack.

Inside the game, the "person" or "leader" who started the game would have died. The person / figurehead who is the current "leader" would be the 20 times great-grandchild of the original leader. But the person playing the game is still Maria.
She is still making the decisions, choosing what techs to research, deciding if her civ needs to declare war, exploring and exploiting the terrain on the map in her game.

So I ask you: does it really make a difference whether the leader of Rome is named Julius, or Augustus, or Cincinnatus? Or if the game simply uses numbers... Caesar the 1st, Caesar the 10th, Caesar the 25th? Does it make a difference in the game?

I would submit to you that since the player of the game remains Maria, it does NOT make a difference whether the name of the leader changes or not. The label for the human player can stay Julius Caesar; the label could change with numbers; the name could change to a series of different names. Maria may choose to save her game progress, turn off her computer, and resume it later. The name of the leader just. Doesn't. Matter. Examples from real history are not relevant.

 

[luca 83]

Which civ games have you played? Did you find the same level of linearity in each? Which one did the best to work towards nonlinearity?

Same Person Problem: You have written about this frequently, so you must care about it a lot.

Consider a gamer playing a 4X game, like Civ6 or any of the games in the franchise. Let's call her Maria.
Maria starts up a session of the game and chooses to play as Julius Caesar. The game begins in 4000 BCE, like Civ games.
After 100 turns or so of this game, the game says that the date is now 1000 BCE. Maria gets up from her computer, pours a drink and gets a snack.

Inside the game, the "person" or "leader" who started the game would have died. The person / figurehead who is the current "leader" would be the 20 times great-grandchild of the original leader. But the person playing the game is still Maria.
She is still making the decisions, choosing what techs to research, deciding if her civ needs to declare war, exploring and exploiting the terrain on the map in her game.

So I ask you: does it really make a difference whether the leader of Rome is named Julius, or Augustus, or Cincinnatus? Or if the game simply uses numbers... Caesar the 1st, Caesar the 10th, Caesar the 25th? Does it make a difference in the game?

I would submit to you that since the player of the game remains Maria, it does NOT make a difference whether the name of the leader changes or not. The label for the human player can stay Julius Caesar; the label could change with numbers; the name could change to a series of different names. Maria may choose to save her game progress, turn off her computer, and resume it later. The name of the leader just. Doesn't. Matter. Examples from real history are not relevant.

And just that the problem a man of the era of Augustus and different from that of Charlemagne politically and culturally , civilizations are made of ascended and fallen laws Gibbons. A Victorian man would not believe what England is today with an Indian prime minister of origin there must be difference between the various governments the ages, and the single will of the player is a problem of continuity between the player and historical eras. For me history is more important than will

Inviato dal mio telefono Huawei

 

[vorlon_mi]

A simple question, @luca 83 . Which Civ games have you played?
Please answer the question without giving any examples from history or historical figures.

 

[luca 83]

A simple question, @luca 83 . Which Civ games have you played?
Please answer the question without giving any examples from history or historical figures.

From one to five

 

[vorlon_mi]

Thank you very much. Of those, which was your favorite? Which one did you play the most?

 

[luca 83]

Thank you very much. Of those, which was your favorite? Which one did you play the most?

certainly the first, the most played one in the IV, I appreciate the subculture of ethnic minorities in the cities, the cultural, exponential growth of the borders even if in my opinion they should be fixed with a political agreement, the policies in the IV are insufficient and poorly cared for, the V the troops outside from the walls and the lack of stacking was a serious development mistake like buying troops with. gold and buildings are controversial, then I find excellent ideas in the call to power: first, every ideology has its advantages and disadvantages, a certain amount of production, gold, science, ideas such as technocracy, ecotopia, genetic manipulation, intriguing ideas, then you could choose how much food to distribute for each individual city, and how much daily work per individual city, and the concept of religion for the first time. and the diffusion of the belief

 

[vorlon_mi]

Thank you again! For my part, I delayed buying Civ VI until I had a new computer which could support it. Why have you not played Civ VI? Is it the lack of stacking, or something else?

 

[luca 83]

Thank you again! For my part, I delayed buying Civ VI until I had a new computer which could support it. Why have you not played Civ VI? Is it the lack of stacking, or something else?

In truth I think that civizazzion has become too commercial civ Revolution on mobile, mah the cartoon graphics, wanting to please all people instead of creating new game dynamics and improve. The ai . Add civilization and civilization and create graphical improvements in the animation is not a progress, not in 2024

 

[vorlon_mi]

An interesting view; thanks for sharing. I am excited that Civ VI is now available on tablets (both Apple iOS and Android) as well as the game consoles. I'm glad that more people have access to this franchise, not just Windows and Macs.

 

[reddishrecue]

An interesting view; thanks for sharing. I am excited that Civ VI is now available on tablets (both Apple iOS and Android) as well as the game consoles. I'm glad that more people have access to this franchise, not just Windows and Macs.

There's also the smaller civilization revolution 2 for android which I play sometimes since its so simple but it works and takes turns.

 

[luca 83]

An interesting view; thanks for sharing. I am excited that Civ VI is now available on tablets (both Apple iOS and Android) as well as the game consoles. I'm glad that more people have access to this franchise, not just Windows and Macs.

game that becomes more advanced with time with the best ai (I hope) and absurd to propose it in mobiles , on tablets only to sell it to a wider audience . Just as it is absurd to put leaders depending on the origin of the players to support their nationality