(2-30a) Counterproposal: Integrate Tourism process as an Order Ideology

[pineappledan]

Counterproposal to this proposal:

(2-30) Proposal: Integrate more processes from Bare Necessities mod

Bare Necessities mod link: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/bare-necessities.645157/ Add more flavor to city processes by integrate these three processes to VP: As for balance context: :c5faith: Prayer unlocks in Philosophy :tourism: Propaganda unlocks in Radio :c5goldenage: Prosperity...

forums.civfanatics.com

Problem: Order's CV tenets are lame.
- There is no Tier 3 cultural victory in Order
- Order has 2 CV tenets and they are both Tier 2:

• Cultural Revolution: +34% Tourism to the other Order Civilizations. Spies steal technologies at double the normal rate. +5 from Great Works.
• Dictatorship of the Proletariat: +50% Tourism to civilizations with less Happiness.+1 happiness from Factories.

Cultural Revolution's bonus to Great Works is identical a Freedom T1 Tenet: Creative Expression. The 34% Tourism towards other Order players is basically useless, but it's not doing any harm either. Players that share your ideology are unlikely to be the last cultural holdout, so it won't win you a game.
Dictatorship of the Proletariat is extremely powerful, basically because it's only 1 of 2 meaningful CV bonuses in the entire tree, other than a flat GW booster. A 50% tourism modifier is huge; basically carrying the full potential of Order's CV play

Order's Great Leap Forward is squatting on the slot that a Tier 3 CV tenet would use. It's also a lame tenet. It is a full T3 slot and GLF consists entirely of 2 free techs. No permanent bonuses. It's potentially quite powerful, since techs in the super-late game are expensive, but it's not special and it doesn't affect your playstyle. A Rationalism policy also gives a free tech, but it also gives a 2nd bonus. I think we can do better.

Proposal:
New Order T3 CV policy: Socialist Realism
Unlocks the Propaganda Process (convert 15% of Production into Tourism). +25% Tourism to the other Order Civilizations. +4 Production from Great Works

Great Leap Forward moved down to T2:
Gain 1 Free Technology. Spies steal technologies at double the normal rate. +1 for every 3 non-specialist Citizens.

Dictatorship of the Proletariat renamed to Cultural Revolution and nerfed:
+25% Tourism to civilizations with less Happiness.+1 happiness from Factories.

Party Leadership renamed to Dictatorship of the Proletariat (no balance change, it's just a bad name)

Spoiler Justifications :

• Cultural victory is the strongest, fastest, and safest victory type, based on user feedback and AI test games. We have been looking for ways to nerf it relative to other victory types
• Order is the strongest tree right now, according to user feedback.
  • Autocracy got hit with a major nerf to its CV 2 versions ago, when we removed the GW and tile modifiers off Airports (Air Supremacy T3 tenet)
• Order is already the safest CV tree.
  • It has numerous bonuses to allow it to work as an autarky, allowing it to ignore or cushion itself against world congress. It has a lot of in-built economic flexibility as well
  • While Freedom's CV bonuses are all either indirect from its general specialist focus, and Autocracy has several policies that translate war bonuses into cultural victory
• Order has no T3 cultural tenet. It should have one.
  • Both of its CV tenets are T2, meaning it reaches its peak potency as early as 5 policies, earlier than other ideologies. This makes Order's CV very unorthodox from a timing and structure perspective
  • The two T2 CV tenets are packing enough power that Order is viable for a CV without a T3 tenet, which is it's own problem
  • All ideology trees except for order have a full array of 3 T3 tenets that each point squarely at one of the ideology's intended victory paths. Order is the only one that is missing a full set, and it feels poorer for it.
• The T2 CV tenets that Order has are too strong and too boring.
  • They are basically a large GW modifier and a large empire % tourism modifier. Neither of them asks you to do anything you weren't doing already.
  • Compare to Autocracy, which has numerous flashy abilities that translate war winning into cultural dominance (eg. Futurism and Cult of Personality)
  • Of the 3 ideologies, Order's CV is the most passive. Autocracy has its war fighting bonuses, and at least Freedom is oriented more around historic events, and has to control enough of the diplomatic game to stay competitive, because they are vulnerable to sanctions, etc. Order's CV bonuses amount to big numbers and pressing 'Next Turn'.
  • Cultural revolution is just Freedom's Cultural Expression T1 tenet, but 2.5x stronger. It should do something else.
  • Dictatorship of the Proletariat has a 50% culture modifier while most of the other % modifiers in the game are 10%. There is only 1 other 50% tourism modifier in the game, but it's a T3 tenet and it's much harder to use.
  • In contrast, a Tourism process gives Order a choice, and a task to do. You have to choose to work a process instead of doing something else
  • A Tourism process combines with all of the other production bonuses in the Order tree to make the ideology cohere as a CV ideology, in the same way that Freedom's general specialist bonuses resolve into a CV victory
• Great Leap Forward isn't focused enough, or interesting enough to merit its spot as a T3 tenet.
  • Unlocking a new process has the "Wow factor" that would make it much more deserving of being a capstone ideology tenet
  • Unlocking the Tourism Process at T3 would give Order a full complement of 3 T3 tenets, each focused on 1 of its intended victory paths.
• Great Leap Forward ought to be changed anyways.
  • If GLF is going to be moved down to T2 that should come with a nerf.
  • GLF has no basis in history. I have proposed additional bonuses for it that add a catchup mechanic and science for non-specialists, which are both more historically aligned with what the GLF was intended to do*
  • GLF doesn't transform a game mechanic or unlock an entirely new one like most other T3 tenets do. It's just a large, conventional tech bonus
  • I hazard to even call it a proper tenet, because it's the only example of a policy or tenet out of >100 policies in the game that has no permanent bonus that you can build off of. Its entire power is a 1-time bonus and then it's inert; a dead slot. This violates the basic idea of what a policy/tenet is supposed to do.

 

[Stalker0]

So this is mostly just pure nerf. You tossed the +5 to Great Works it seems like (which is actually the main reason cultural revolution is good). You lose an entire free tech on the ideology that is best geared for SV (and because its sooner the amount of free science you gain is actually lower). You lose the massive +25% tourism from dicatorship. Yes I gain propaganda, but I actually have to work to use it, whereas the +5 from great works was just churning previously (especially when you consider all the late game multipliers on Great work tourism). A 15% conversion to tourism I don't feel is going to equal that...and I'm giving up a lot more for the privilege.

This is....just bad to be honest. I have never understood your dislike of Great Leap Forward, it is absolutely amazing. Just this last game I used it to shoot ahead and pick up tanks way sooner than my opponent, giving me a fun military advantage. timing your science to give you the best leap forward is part of the strategy and fun. This notion that its "boring" is just completely out of whack imo.

 

[Stalker0]

I can respect the desire to differentiate Order from Freedom more, and if the change was just a simple "swap the +5 to GW with the propaganda process"....I could maybe see that, as it provides a very distinctive "order like" way to get tourism. But I think this proposal just goes way too far.

 

[pineappledan]

So this is mostly just pure nerf.

Yup. CV is the strongest victory and order is the strongest tree right now. Patriotic War / T34 need to be nerfed too, but that’s a separate proposal.

Cultural Revolution is 2.5x stronger than stronger than its Freedom equivalent. DotP in particular is functionally a T3 tenet at T2 slot. The closest comparison to DotP is Autocracy’s Cult of Personality, which if maxxed will give a 50% global tourism modifier with all civs*. That’s the only other modifier that big in the game, But consider that is a T3 policy and you have to maintain a 100 war score in perpetuity with Autocracy to get that bonus, while all Order has to do is be happy. Autocracy leverages war wins to win CV via CoP and Futurism, but all you have to do with Order is sit there and you get 50% tourism while other tourism modifiers from policies are 10%.

*the 2nd +50% modifier on CoP, towards major civs in a joint war with you functionally doesn't exist. If a civ is in a joint war with the culture leader in the end game that means they are your vassal; This isn't contributing to a Culture victory.

You lose an entire free tech on the ideology that is best geared for SV (and because its sooner the amount of free science you gain is actually lower).

You can pick a T2 tenet whenever you want, this doesn’t affect timing if you don’t want it to. On the contrary, it makes timing your free tech easier.

Yes I gain propaganda, but I actually have to work to use it, whereas the +5 from great works was just churning previously (especially when you consider all the late game multipliers on Great work tourism).

Yes, it needs to be said that +5 tourism on GWs isn’t just +5, because it is affected by modifiers from hotel/stadium/Olympic village/CN Tower. So it’s more like +8-12 per GW. This is also added BEFORE other empire tourism modifiers like religion, trade routes, etc. Very strong.

A 15% conversion to tourism I don't feel is going to equal that...and I'm giving up a lot more for the privilege

Bear in mind that power plants add +10% to all processes, increasing the conversion to 25%. just like the GW boost there is a big way to augment the power with infrastructure.

This is something I want to discuss, because the % conversion can be tweaked to whatever we want to make it feel worth it. In late game you probably have a capital with >400 per turn and several cities between 100-300 per turn. Working this propaganda process at 15% conversion would be >60 per turn in your capital. Comparable to the current cultural revolution boosting 8 GWs (assuming just hotel/stadiums).

There is an opportunity cost with the propaganda process, but order is often looking for more things to build or do. With iron curtain, each ITR you run can add another 80-120 on top, so there is a lot of synergy with Order’s ability to leverage massive industrial capacity. But right now, all of order’s cultural policies are extremely passive. They offer no choice or task for you to do except raw number boosts on core, existing CV components and pressing “next turn”.

I have never understood your dislike of Great Leap Forward, it is absolutely amazing. Just this last game I used it to shoot ahead and pick up tanks way sooner than my opponent, giving me a fun military advantage.

Simple. It’s strong, but it gives no permanent bonus and adds no twist. It’s also completely ahistorical in its current form, so the bonuses have to stand entirely on their own merits; they aren’t portraying history, so it has to do something good.

Were you not going to get tanks if you didn’t have GLF? Were you not going to get techs and try to out tech your opponent’s military already? Did GLF do anything for you in that respect other than just make it automatic? 1 up-front bonus I have no qualms with, but that’s all that GLF is, and that sucks. Policies and tenets are supposed to give strong boosts, and other T3 tenets unlock entire abilities or radically transform existing ones that give you a new tool to win. GLF not only doesn’t do that; after picking it up it doesn’t do ANYTHING.

 

[Stalker0]

Yup. CV is the strongest victory and order is the strongest tree right now.

If you had led with this as your rationalization, then the conversation would have gone differently. You made it appear that you wanted to shake up Order, not nerf it. If you want to nerf the tree for CV than yes this is certainly one way to do it.

However, I can't get behind nerfing Order on both the CV AND SV front, I do not think that is necessary or desired.

 

[Stalker0]

Were you not going to get tanks if you didn’t have GLF?

So do you believe that UUs that come out earlier have no benefit for coming out sooner in the tech tree? That ability is just a "waste"?

Speed is EVERYTHING in civ, getting things faster than my opponents and leveraging that for victory. No one gives a crap that you completed the tech tree if someone won a CV 50 turns earlier, timing is everything.

Sure I would have gotten tanks like 20 turns later....in 20 turns I can take over an entire continent in the late game. Being able to have certain techs so much faster than your opponent is a massive advantage.

 

[pineappledan]

You keep talking like I said GLF is weak. GLF isn't weak, it just sucks. It's the only policy/tenet in the entire game that doesn't give a single permanent bonus. That maybe makes it a "mould breaker", but in the suckiest way imaginable.

I will keep repeating that over and over until you stop trying to defend it solely on the basis of its power. Just explaining what the tenet does isn’t a defence.

 

[pineappledan]

Amended proposal:

Great Leap Forward moved down to T2:​

Gain 1 Free Technology. Spies steal technologies at double the normal rate. +1 for every 3 non-specialist Citizens.​

​

Oh wow, a permanent bonus! This actually gets close to a historical justification of the GLF, if it had worked. The idea was to mobilize the peasantry to rapid industrialization, the famous making pig iron in their backyards. This is an existing ability from Fealty (serfdom)

 

[Stalker0]

It's the only policy/tenet in the entire game that doesn't give a single permanent bonus. That maybe makes it a "mould breaker", but in the suckiest way imaginable.

I'm sorry, but you can't say something "sucks" when it gives an amazing bonus that just happens to be unique to every other mechanic. And why does everything need to provide some permanent bonus to be considered good? Next thing you'll tell me is that Great Writer bulbs suck because its a "one and done bonus". Or concert tours, yep once the tour ends man those musicians suck.

You commonly argue for things to be distinct and different from each other....well you have one right here that works great....yet you want to weaken it. Just doesn't make sense to me.

 

[pineappledan]

And why does everything need to provide some permanent bonus to be considered good?

It's not about being good, it's about being a policy or tenet. GLF doesn't even adhere to the game concept of what it's supposed to be. See below.

Next thing you'll tell me is that Great Writer bulbs suck because its a "one and done bonus". Or concert tours, yep once the tour ends man those musicians suck.

straw man. Bulbs are bulbs and policies are policies. And all of the >100 policies give some kind of lasting, permanent bonus except GLF. You haven’t given a justification for why GLF should violate a basic convention beyond “you like it”.

You commonly argue for things to be distinct and different from each other....well you have one right here that works great....yet you want to weaken it. Just doesn't make sense to me.

So first off, I want to move it to a T2 slot. That should involve weakening it. I want Order to have a T3 policy that augments a CV because that Conforms to some basic conventions around what T3 tenets do in the other 8 cases of T3 ideology tenets.

You misapprehend my point of view on how policies, beliefs, etc. design should work. Recall that I criticized your proposal to the Inspired Works reformation belief because you wanted to remove a delayed tech unlock on that belief, which is something that (almost) all other reformation beliefs have. You also recall that I have an axe to grind about Crusader Spirit because it is the only reformation with no tech/era delayed ability, and is at full power as soon as it is unlocked. Likewise policies give permanent, empire-wide bonuses. That's what they do. That's why they exist. And I'm not disposed to breaking that most basic rule for GLF, especially if all it is going to do is give the same bonus that an earlier rationalism policy gives while THAT policy conforms by giving a 2nd permanent bonus.

So you’re right, I shouldn’t say that GLF is a sucky policy. That’s being charitable. That’s like saying a camel is just a bumpy horse. It’s a basic category error. GLF doesn’t fulfill the basic criteria to even be considered a policy; it’s either waiting to be turned into one or it’s squatting on a slot where a real policy could go instead.

 

[Stalker0]

straw man. Bulbs are bulbs and policies are policies. And all of the >100 policies give some kind of lasting, permanent bonus except GLF. You haven’t given a justification for why GLF should violate a basic convention beyond “you like it”.

Because when you get into the late game, permanent bonuses innately become weaker, and if you beef them up to be competitive, they can become OP. Meanwhile a single strong bonus is an excellent mechanic to provide a real difference in the late game without having to pile on tons of yields to show effect. Its a mechanical tool, just like anything else we use to provide balance.

There is no magic requirements document that says a tenant must do X and a building must do Y. The only requirement is that the thing is useful. GLF is useful, it and academy of sciences is what solidifies Order as a strong science civ. You haven't provided any justification as to why we should nerf Order's science just to fit some "box" that doesn't exist, other than "I don't like it"

 

[pineappledan]

You haven't provided any justification as to why we should nerf Order's science just to fit some "box" that doesn't exist, other than "I don't like it"

Naw, I have. You just stopped reading and are denying it.

You want to turn policies and other game concepts into Calvinball then make your proposals. My proposals have consistency, and adhere to basic game concepts.

 

[Stalker0]

You want to turn policies and other game concepts into Calvinball then make your proposals.

Proposals should improve the game, not just shift into the mold you wish it to be. I am not turning anything into anything here, you are the one saying that the current game is "broken" in some way that needs to be fixed.

As I said, I could see the justification for swapping the +5 to gw with a process, that is more ordery, and does fix a "similarity" to Freedom, aka real justification. Your justification for GLF change is weak, its pure preference.

Alright, I think we have said our pieces on the matter, lets see what the voters think.

 

[InkAxis]

Having an instant bonus is totally fine. Even on a policy. Especially late game it's good, "lasting" bonuses don't matter that much because the game is almost over anyway, so they need to be strong.

Maybe one thing is that GLF should be moved to T2 so that it can be taken more flexibly, because you can only choose a T3 policy like twice in a game, if that. If it was T2 it could be more flexible what/when you use your boost. But of course then it would have to be nerfed, I'm not sure how.

But honestly that should be a separate proposal. I think the tourism process is a good idea, I supported it when it was first proposed a long time ago. Maybe make it another counterproposal that just adds the process.

 

[pineappledan]

But honestly that should be a separate proposal. I think the tourism process is a good idea, I supported it when it was first proposed a long time ago. Maybe make it another counterproposal that just adds the process.

It would still have to occupy space somewhere. You could put it on Cultural Revolution, but it's a large enough bonus that it's more suitable as a T3.

To recap in brief, here are my arguments:

• Cultural victory is the strongest, fastest, and safest victory type, based on user feedback and AI test games. We have been looking for ways to nerf it relative to other victory types
• Order is the strongest tree right now, according to user feedback.
  • Autocracy got hit with a major nerf to its CV 2 versions ago, when we removed the GW and tile modifiers off Airports (Air Supremacy T3 tenet)
• Order is already the safest CV tree.
  • It has numerous bonuses to allow it to work as an autarky, allowing it to ignore or cushion itself against world congress. It has a lot of in-built economic flexibility as well
  • While Freedom's CV bonuses are all either indirect from its general specialist focus, and Autocracy has several policies that translate war bonuses into cultural victory
• Order has no T3 cultural tenet. It should have one.
  • Both of its CV tenets are T2, meaning it reaches its peak potency as early as 5 policies, earlier than other ideologies. This makes Order's CV very unorthodox from a timing and structure perspective
  • The two T2 CV tenets are packing enough power that Order is viable for a CV without a T3 tenet, which is it's own problem
  • All ideology trees except for order have a full array of 3 T3 tenets that each point squarely at one of the ideology's intended victory paths. Order is the only one that is missing a full set, and it feels poorer for it.
• The T2 CV tenets that Order has are too strong and too boring.
  • They are basically a large GW modifier and a large empire % tourism modifier. Neither of them asks you to do anything you weren't doing already.
  • Compare to Autocracy, which has numerous flashy abilities that translate war winning into cultural dominance (eg. Futurism and Cult of Personality)
  • Of the 3 ideologies, Order's CV is the most passive. Autocracy has its war fighting bonuses, and at least Freedom is oriented more around historic events, and has to control enough of the diplomatic game to stay competitive, because they are vulnerable to sanctions, etc. Order's CV bonuses amount to big numbers and pressing 'Next Turn'.
  • Cultural revolution is just Freedom's Cultural Expression T1 tenet, but 2.5x stronger. It should do something else.
  • Dictatorship of the Proletariat has a 50% culture modifier while most of the other % modifiers in the game are 10%. There is only 1 other 50% tourism modifier in the game, but it's a T3 tenet and it's much harder to use.
  • In contrast, a Tourism process gives Order a choice, and a task to do. You have to choose to work a process instead of doing something else
  • A Tourism process combines with all of the other production bonuses in the Order tree to make the ideology cohere as a CV ideology, in the same way that Freedom's general specialist bonuses resolve into a CV victory
• Great Leap Forward isn't focused enough, or interesting enough to merit its spot as a T3 tenet.
  • Unlocking a new process has the "Wow factor" that would make it much more deserving of being a capstone ideology tenet
  • Unlocking the Tourism Process at T3 would give Order a full complement of 3 T3 tenets, each focused on 1 of its intended victory paths.
• Great Leap Forward ought to be changed anyways.
  • If GLF is going to be moved down to T2 that should come with a nerf.
  • GLF has no basis in history. I have proposed additional bonuses for it that add a catchup mechanic and science for non-specialists, which are both more historically aligned with what the GLF was intended to do*
  • GLF doesn't transform a game mechanic or unlock an entirely new one like most other T3 tenets do. It's just a large, conventional tech bonus
  • I hazard to even call it a proper tenet, because it's the only example of a policy or tenet out of >100 policies in the game that has no permanent bonus that you can build off of. Its entire power is a 1-time bonus and then it's inert; a dead slot. This violates the basic idea of what a policy/tenet is supposed to do.

* note that I say intended. The real Great Leap Forward was a disaster. It did not contribute to China's modernization and the disastrous set of policies it generated triggered a famine that killed >50 million people. The best we can do to adhere to history for the GLF is try to gamify what they were Trying to do.

 

[pineappledan]

However, I can't get behind nerfing Order on both the CV AND SV front, I do not think that is necessary or desired

SV order just got a GARGANTUAN buff with the new engineer bulb, so I don’t even agree with you here. Order was already the stronger SV tree compared to Freedom before that change.

The proposal is to add some per turn and reduce the free techs from 2 to 1. In other words GLF would lose less than 1 tech, which usually goes for 6-8 turns. How many turns faster are these new GEngineers on a spaceship part, and you already get at least 1 free. Order’s SV is already faster, if not for the tech re-scaling

Having an instant bonus is totally fine. Even on a policy. Especially late game it's good, "lasting" bonuses don't matter that much because the game is almost over anyway, so they need to be strong

And yet somehow the other 100+ policie/, including the other 8 T3 tenets found a way to have lasting bonuses. Why settle?

 

[Stalker0]

Hopefully my last word, I do want to counter some of the specific arguments made here.

Order is the strongest tree right now, according to user feedback.
--I blame myself partly for this, as I tend to be vocal and also was on the "Order is OP" wagon for a time. But I've been playing a lot more freedom and autocracy lately and frankly...they are really good in their own respects. I don't think Order is really over the top.

• Order is already the safest CV tree.

--Order's big bonus requires you to stay happier than your opponent, that is not passive. You have to maintain luxs, seek out happiness sources, consider stopping growth. Freedom's CV is "build broadcast towers". Order's passivity towards CV is not unique, only autocracy actively "works" for its CV in any real way. CV is generally passive VC to begin with.

• Order has no T3 cultural tenet. It should have one.

Autocracy has no T2 CV tenent. Freedom has 3 CV tenants' to Order/Autocracy's 2. Not everything has to be symmetrical.

...Freedom is oriented more around historic events, and has to control enough of the diplomatic game to stay competitive, because they are vulnerable to sanctions, etc. Order's CV bonuses amount to big numbers and pressing 'Next Turn'.

Order's CV is just as vulnerable to sanctions as Freedom's is, they both get their tourism in the same way, both are vulnerable to Travel Ban, etc. In some ways its more vulnerable, because without the lux trade of sanctions, staying happier than your opponent to get the big tourism bonus is significantly more difficult. Again, CV is a passive VC, pressing "next turn" is the norm whether your playing freedom or order.

And yet somehow the other 100+ policie/, including the other 8 T3 tenets found a way to have lasting bonuses. Why settle?

Your right, maybe we should switch a few of them to more instant bonuses

 

[pineappledan]

Amended OP with the big justification blurb spoilered
Also, added +4 production to GWs to Socialist Realism. T3s all have some sort of more broad bonus, even if it's a rather small one. +4 per GW means that if a city has the +10% process boost from a power plant, it can convert that extra 4 into 1 with the propaganda process

And before someone asks, yes, I consider this a material difference from the current +5

Order's big bonus requires you to stay happier than your opponent, that is not passive.

It's a lot more passive than maintaining 100 War Score against an opponent in perpetuity.
Also, the proposal doesn't remove this mechanic, it just reduces its power. I have no problem with its existence, I just have a problem with it being a whopping 50%

Order's passivity towards CV is not unique, only autocracy actively "works" for its CV in any real way. CV is generally passive VC to begin with.

But that's not much of a defense to keep it as passive instead of adding a more active CV method.

re: the passivity of Freedom:

• This becomes a bit more "fine" if Order and Autocracy can serve as counter-strategies? Having 2 super-passive CV trees is pretty lame.
• Freedom being the passive, boring tree in many respects is pretty fine to me:
  • Liberalism is the oldest of the 3 ideologies, and it was the last man standing while the other 2 were either a response/reaction to liberalism / capitalism
  • As a result, Liberalism's cultural victory is kinda accurately portrayed by just... jogging in place. Having just a big % tourism modifier on an ideology called "Media Culture" on a historical basis has my begrudging respect.
  • Meanwhile, Socialism, Communism, and Fascism, in that order, are the new kids on the block and have to do more to prove themselves as the superior way to arrange societies. Having Order's CV be a little more active -- and Autocracy's being very active -- makes sense in that context.

 

[nekokon]

Just saying but a lot of ppl like me play civ as a board game with some historical elements. We only care about how different each choices can be gameplay-wise and don't dive deep enough in philosophy to care if some ideologies are supposed to be precisely this or that. If the changes are only there to have better resemblance of real world politic but don't improve gameplay or balance it's better staying the same.

 

[pineappledan]

Just saying but a lot of ppl like me play civ as a board game with some historical elements. We only care about how different each choices can be gameplay-wise and don't dive deep enough in philosophy to care if some ideologies are supposed to be precisely this or that. If the changes are only there to have better resemblance of real world politic but don't improve gameplay or balance it's better staying the same.

My comments re: Freedom were an argument in support of it staying the same.