Which government?

[TheMarshmallowBear]

So, I've been thinking... what government do policy tree represent? Because let' sbe honest, most of them do represnt something.

Order - Communism
Freedom - Democracy/Republic?
Autocracy - Fascism.

Tradition - Oligracy/Monarchy?
Honor - I can't help but feel that it represnts "Empire/Imperialism"

 

[prince_caspian]

"Those were the days playing Civ 3..." *sigh*

Can't seem to find a representative of rationalism and patronage though. Commerce on the other hand is Venetian Republic. Doge?

 

[janboruta]

Some policy names themselves suggest the type of government, while other policies in the same tree represent various aspects of that government. So, my usual understanding is:

Tradition - Monarchy / Hereditary Rule
Liberty - Oligarchial Republic, as in Roman, Carthaginian Republics and, to some extent, Greek city states with voting systems.
Honor - Dictatorship / Tyranny
Piety - Theocracy
Patronage - an auxilliary tree to represent the patronage over arts and sciences. It was a part of nearly any type of government historically
Commerce - Merchant Republic (the Hanse, Venice, Genoa, Novgorod)
Rationalism - Technocracy / Enlightened Monarchy / Secular Republic (also an auxilliary tree, it fits many other types of government)
Freedom - Presidential Republic / Democracy
Autocracy - Military Dictatorship / Fascism / Nazism
Order - Communism

 

[That nerdy kid]

autocracy also represents absolute monarchies.

 

[joncnunn]

Order also represents Socalism; it only becomes Communism if you continue that path one more step.

The odd thing on Piety is that it also has "Free Religion" as a sub policy (in addition to Theology). So apparently you become a Theology but later abolish it in favor of Free Religion.

 

[Saxony]

Tradition + Freedom = Constitutial monarchy?

 

[janboruta]

Order also represents Socalism; it only becomes Communism if you continue that path one more step.

Yes indeed, I forgot to write it down earlier.

The odd thing on Piety is that it also has "Free Religion" as a sub policy (in addition to Theology). So apparently you become a Theology but later abolish it in favor of Free Religion.

I presume all the social policies, unlocked in an order, try to simulate each government's or idea's "evolution" throughout the ages. Free religion was kinda inevitable in western societies after the 16th and 17th century European religious bloodshed, which found its way first in the UK, then in the US and France after the revolutions, though free religion policy was also present (to some extent) in Poland-Lithuania since Reformation. If you are role-playing the game (and not going for cultural victory), you can omit a policy in favour of picking one from another tree. But sometimes they are too beneficial not to pick.

Tradition + Freedom = Constitutial monarchy?

Good point, I never thought about it earlier. Makes sense.

 

[tofofnts]

Edit:nevermind saw similar post after posting

 

[Bergerperson]

It would suck if you went into freedom, then had to have some sort of vote in your empire before you declared war on another. Let’s hope that isn’t implemented in Gods and Kings.

 

[BuilderFTW]

freedom is an illusion that we are taught to buy into from very young age. We are free to elect out of 2 corporates(parties) and then they rule as Elected Dictators .

Not quite, there is something called the constitution... according to civ5 social policies, they could be monarchists, but not facists, or communist/socialists

 

[Louis XXIV]

Order - Socialism/Communism
Autocracy - Fascism
Freedom - Democracy

Those three are clear cut and intentional.

Piety, Commerce, and Rationalism don't really seem intended to represent a government so much as a system. Piety might be the closest (with Theocracy), but it really is much broader than that (Free Religion is a policy, after all).

Tradition is clearly a rule of a select group or of the one. Liberty is more focused on collective or egalitarian rule. But I don't think the two are exclusive. The Roman Republic, for example, combined the two to a bit. So do Constitutional monarchies. If I had to, I'd use the Machiavelli Principality/Republic divide but I don't think that's a very full description.

 

[Bergerperson]

To be honest, it doesn’t really matter what area you go into, whether it’s democracy, socialism or fascism, in game, you’re always going to be a totalitarian dictator. You decide what’s being built, where the cities are built, where people are stationed and what is built on what tile.

 

[historix69]

Some policy names themselves suggest the type of government, while other policies in the same tree represent various aspects of that government. So, my usual understanding is:

Tradition - Monarchy / Hereditary Rule
Liberty - Oligarchial Republic, as in Roman, Carthaginian Republics and, to some extent, Greek city states with voting systems.
Honor - Dictatorship / Tyranny
Piety - Theocracy
Patronage - an auxilliary tree to represent the patronage over arts and sciences. It was a part of nearly any type of government historically
Commerce - Merchant Republic (the Hanse, Venice, Genoa, Novgorod)
Rationalism - Technocracy / Enlightened Monarchy / Secular Republic (also an auxilliary tree, it fits many other types of government)
Freedom - Presidential Republic / Democracy
Autocracy - Military Dictatorship / Fascism / Nazism
Order - Communism

Half of the social policies are not government types but just represent society focus / specialisation. (Military, Culture, Diplomacy, Economy, Science)

Honor = society with focus on military traditions (like ancient Sparta or medevial Japan)
Piety = religious society with focus on culture (like ancient egypt, medevial europe)
Patronage = society which focuses on high diplomacy to find allies to form a league (like ancient Peleponnesian League, Delian League)
Commerce = society with sea-based commercial focus (like British Empire)
Rationalism = (atheistic, enlightened) society with focus on science (e.g. western nations after Enlightenment / Aufklärung / Scientific Revolution)

 

[headcase]

It would suck if you went into freedom, then had to have some sort of vote in your empire before you declared war on another. Let’s hope that isn’t implemented in Gods and Kings.

It would be interesting but would require a lot of work to get it just right, so hopefully it won't be in G+K as they haven't bragged about it.

It would start with each civ's people having a relationship value with the people of every other civ (independent on what leaders think of each other).

If you want to war with civs that are hogging land, etc, that would be easier because your citizens would hate them for the same reason. If your citizens like the other civ (they returned workers, etc), then you'd need to use propaganda to lessen their favour, which would take some time, as well as some gold and\or espionage.

Or, if you don't like doing all of that, you could rip down the "nice" SP branches and start on new ones where you don't care what your citizens think (but still lose some happiness, potentially); then there would be no limitations to war. The "nice" branches would be powerful to compensate.