Autocracy, freedom, & order

[El Caballerion]

any reason why Autocracy, freedom, & order are called such and not Fascism, democracy, and communism respectively? It would help add to immersion as those three types of government have been the predominant governments/enemies of the past century.

It would be cool to have a 4th ideology known as ABSOLUTE MONARCHY (like that of Swaziland and Bhutan) with benefits for religion, traditional buildings (and obsolete units) and isolation. Maybe even better benefits for the palace?

 

[Nuukov]

TBH I prefer them being called Order, Freedom and Autocracy. IMO it allows for greater freedom of imagination for the player RP-wise, and isn't politically sterotypical, if you understand what I mean.
e.g. North Korea calls itself communist, but is infact a dictatorship (e.g. an autocracy).

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

TBH I prefer them being called Order, Freedom and Autocracy. IMO it allows for greater freedom of imagination for the player RP-wise, and isn't politically sterotypical, if you understand what I mean.
e.g. North Korea calls itself communist, but is infact a dictatorship (e.g. an autocracy).

First of all sorry to go historical at this but wasn't Stalin also a dictator, Fidel Castro too?

 

[El Caballerion]

What does TBH mean? lol

 

[otaman1]

First of all sorry to go historical at this but wasn't Stalin also a dictator, Fidel Castro too?

Yes. So was Tokugawa (Civ IV), Mao Zedong (Civ IV), Simon Bolivar, and Adolf Hitler

 

[kaspergm]

What does TBH mean? lol

TBH = To Be Honest


I think it's a good think, they don't call them that name. I, and I'm pretty sure many others, would have a problem with adopting Fascism because it has such a negative association to events from real life. I know it's just a game, but it's nice to have it taken apart from certain associations.

 

[AriochIV]

Autocracy, Order and Freedom are more general terms, whereas Fascism, Communism and Democracy are much more specific. Using the more general terms for the Ideologies allows them, among other things, to use the names Fascism, Communism and Democracy for actual Tenets (as they do right now for Policies).

 

[NuOmicronMu]

First of all sorry to go historical at this but wasn't Stalin also a dictator, Fidel Castro too?

All communist revolutions have failed to create the free, stateless, moneyless societies that they set out to, and pretty much gone the opposite way. But that's beside the point.

I like having Order, Freedom and Autocracy named as they are, even if they aren't always totally exclusive, as the names of the policy trees aren't really that specific elsewhere. It doesn't really matter too much anyway. They're just words.

And TBH means "To be honest".

 

[El Caballerion]

Does their inclusion mean that like-minded CIVS will like each other based on their common ideology? OR is it more specific per ideological choices (i.e. CIV A adopts 5 of the same resolutions as CIV B, making them like each other more)?

 

[El Caballerion]

In any case, any thoughts on a 4th ideology driven by ABSOLUTE MONARCHY with emphasis on religious bonuses and perhaps palace upgrades?

 

[pedrobarbosa]

No.

Order has Nationalism. So, you cant say that order is communism.
Communism/socialism is inside order, but order is not communism/socialism.

 

[pedrobarbosa]

For me every policy tree could be a ideology. Historically more precise and better.
Mercantilism, Absolutism, Patronage. You could choose your ideology of any century, not only of the XX.

 

[Calouste]

In any case, any thoughts on a 4th ideology driven by ABSOLUTE MONARCHY with emphasis on religious bonuses and perhaps palace upgrades?

No major power has been an absolute monarchy since WWI (probably even before that, but I don't know the exact details of how the Russian and Ottoman empires worked in the late 19th century). Bhutan, Swaziland and even Saudi-Arabia and North Korea don't count as major powers. This phenomenon is exactly what the ideologies model.

 

[andrewlt]

I think this works well enough as it is. It's already hard enough to choose policies that are real world failures just because they provide unrealistic bonuses in the game. It will be harder if you make them specific like directly calling it fascism.

 

[Tsar NicholasII]

No major power has been an absolute monarchy since WWI (probably even before that, but I don't know the exact details of how the Russian and Ottoman empires worked in the late 19th century). Bhutan, Swaziland and even Saudi-Arabia and North Korea don't count as major powers. This phenomenon is exactly what the ideologies model.

Russia was an Absolute Monarchy but they called it the Autocracy. It was run similarly to Fascist governments but wasn't quite as restrictive. The problem that I see with Absolute Monarchy being its own tree is that it can't really have ANY Happiness bonuses once you get into the Industrial era.

 

[Red Milk]

All communist revolutions have failed to create the free, stateless, moneyless societies that they set out to, and pretty much gone the opposite way. But that's beside the point.

That is because they were taking the Marxist-Leninist approach of using a class-savvy vanguard party to establish a revolutionary socialist state that represents the dictatorship of the proletariot.

Only after a very slow transitionary period would the 'pure' stateless communism emerge.

 

[Louis XXIV]

While Democracy and Communism arguably could take those names, the thing that is Autocracy took varying names and never had a completely unified philosophy. I'm fine with making them all more vague, though.

 

[JFD]

any reason why Autocracy, freedom, & order are called such and not Fascism, democracy, and communism respectively? It would help add to immersion as those three types of government have been the predominant governments/enemies of the past century.

It would be cool to have a 4th ideology known as ABSOLUTE MONARCHY (like that of Swaziland and Bhutan) with benefits for religion, traditional buildings (and obsolete units) and isolation. Maybe even better benefits for the palace?

Bhutan is not an absolute Monarchy. Maybe you were thinking of Brunei? In any case, I think Autocracy encompasses Absolute Monarchy. The defining characteristic of both is the sovereign exercising power above the law.

 

[Leugi]

The posts here prove the whole reason why the game can't use the words Capitalism, Communism and Fascism...

First, because you can't ever have a Communist Washington, some people could burn the game. But a Washington with policies of Order, yeah, doesn't sound too bad.

Second, the word Communism is sometimes associated with either evil or failure, hence making it an odd choice in gaming terms...

Third, their very inclussion would generate needless political discussions, when it comes to a simple game (like the very discussions here)

 

[AriochIV]

The posts here prove the whole reason why the game can't use the words Capitalism, Communism and Fascism...

But it already does. Communism and Fascism are policies in the Order and Autocracy trees. I haven't noticed any bonfires or riots yet.