1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

C2C - Civics Discussion Thread

Discussion in 'Civ4 - Caveman 2 Cosmos' started by EldrinFal, Aug 17, 2011.

  1. Lawrie

    Lawrie Prince

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    387
    I quoted a treatise saying it does from Woodrow Wilson writing about the earliest forms of government. He states explicity that Kinship was the first, and the initial foundation to civilised government (I include the reference in the post above.) So you'd have to take it up with him (http://archive.org/stream/stateelementshi09wilsgoog#page/n22/mode/2up) Check the chapter, probable origin of government and refute away etc.

    Anarchism is not an uncivilised government type it is a complex and sophisticated modern political ideology. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#First_International_and_the_Paris_Commune
    I did have a read, and it seems to me (no offense to CIVPlayer8) that they were added spuriously on the basis of modest academic discussion with a greater focus for elaborating gameplay choices - likewise with the addition of other columns relating to politics. There was some consensus in these discussions and I'll give CIVPlayer8 his due as he clearly has made great effort BUT... i think it is in many cases a backwards step from what was developed via ROM. I think the type of discussion that led to these civics (over a long period of time) lost a sense of binding purpose and direction. Hence... many cooks coming in from time to time to add a bit here or there.

    Fair enough haha. I do actually like it as a later civic because it can reflect other social aspects too in fact. Such as the rise of the neo-bureaucratic state in the face of inactive political participation or distraction.

    And soooo my friends...

    I'd love to suggest if its approved by you guys, that we explore looking at these civic options any any new ones on the basis of the historical evidence and an evidential sense of political reality and cynicism. Btw if I sound a bit like a pompous d**k in the way I write about all of this (civic discussion stuff) you can call me one hehe I won't mind (but it isn't my intention - just how i generally unintentionally sound hehe)
     
  2. Hydromancerx

    Hydromancerx C2C Modder

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    16,281
    Location:
    California, USA
    I would say that the reason for having Anarchism would be this ...

    Basically having it in the literal sense of no government. Kinship if made would probably fall around Cooperation or Cultural Identity tech. Basically in the very beginning of the tree you are starting with nothing. No leaders or group organization.

    Note that modern Anarchism is not what the tech is about. I could have just as well called it "no leader" or "no ruler" or "no government".
     
  3. Lawrie

    Lawrie Prince

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    387
    1) Okay... first off what you're defining the civic presently named Anarchism not 'anarchy' The two are very different beasts yes?

    2) Then yes you define the word 'anarchy' as derived from the Ancient Greek. There are many words whose real-world meanings cannot be attributed, literally from the ancient languages that inspired them. In other words that's irrelevant.

    In the context with which the word 'Anarchy' was created (in the modern sense) it rather came about in the field of political science (both stemming from the way the Ancient Greeks perceived uncivilised rule or... any civilisation that did not adhere to their form of government) and in turn the enlightenment era philosophers they inspired which utilised the newly formed word to describe collapsed rule/ in effect perceived barbarism imo and sometimes (in other ways entirely! - see Emmanuel Kant!)

    3) So no... it does not describe a setting for pre-history government. Why would it? When obviously civilization only arose because some degree of organisation existed. Such things do not arise from nothing... even if there was no ruler... no leader... there certainly wasn't no kinship. For it is kinship that has been argued in history and in social anthropology to be the source of first government and by definition was argued... to be the very first form of actual governance thus = government.

    And...

    You don't refute my actual reference? Why? Woodrow Wilson was one of the greatest statesman of history? Surely he'd have a clue? Let me quote from his book for you.

    Link - http://history-world.org/govori1.htm

    As such the dictionary definition of Anarchy just doesn't cut it in this context! If it did you could have posted a telegram to Woodrow Wilson telling him to quite while he's ahead cos you've just checked Mirriam's Online dictionary!? :p

    PS - Er Hydro... (if i'm not on your xmas list this year I'll work hard to make it up to you for next year!)
     
  4. Randomness

    Randomness ...

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2008
    Messages:
    557
    Location:
    ...
    Yeah, I more or less agree with you, all I really wanted was Technocracy :p (not the idealized version either, I imagine it more like a revival of Aristocracy with diplomas instead of bloodlines). I agree that the civic system needs work (it always needs work... and I look forward to seeing your proposal. It seems you have some experience in this area, but none the less I wish you good luck.

    P.S. I do not believe that the current civic system is bad or that those involved did poorly. I have yet to see a civic system from RoM or AND or C2C last more than a few version before getting changed. It just seems to be one of those areas which always "needs work".
     
  5. Lawrie

    Lawrie Prince

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    387
    I have a sneaking suspicion you're right there Randomness and I think your interpretation of Technocracy is probably about right.

    Technocracy requires discussion precisely because it's so vague/hypothetical (in actual real world practice) and let's face it... if it was called Neo-Bureacracy I believe we wouldn't give a crap! Instead because it sounds vaguely futuristic and somewhat resembles the word technology, we've instead got it in our minds as oooh... futuristic. Like buying a chrome toaster that glows in the dark. Otherwise it's not so different to the types of 'elder government' political philosophies espoused by Ancient Greece. Maybe that's another discussion but in raising technocracy to the 'equal' of other government types, we should be able to justify it with remarkable effectiveness? Can we? Could we? Linking the wiki saying 'one hypothetical goverment is...' makes it no more elevated than the nigh hundred government types with wiki articles most of them easily dismissed for the purpose of any civ mod. What makes technocracy special?

    It's certainly part of the government civic discussion anyway. I think if we are to maintain it in the government column it should be good reasons, ie. would it be credibly implemented? If so with what exciting bonuses and penalties for being utterly imperfect. That it has a wiki article is not enough imo, pink is also a type of colour but your not likely to wear it to a funeral either... (well maybe mine but...)

    It sholdn't be because of a vague particularly Western idealised vision of 'oh well, we're getting more scientific eh and rational so... its only obviously were gonna get... you know... better.' better what!? hehe

    In criticism I've often only heard technocrats for example of being appointed as the most inoffensive political leaders (really as administrators) by transitional governments/ or military juntas. Rarely have i envisaged such grandeur for the men in grey that they might evolve to become the most heightened form of government possible in the history of civilisation.

    I think this is kinda true more or less because people enjoy modding what's there or folks just like to add their tuppence. This can have the effect of deconstructing superior work or improving it. I
    think if you hold to the basis that it requires more than a word defined 'ism' but some academic level reference/historical evidence etc then it's harder to unravel so frivolously in future. I also think if it can be more clearly explained in the 'pedia (and in the civic descriptions.) expressing its root in the academic it becomes a bit more informative/mature. (I think we could contribute to that if desired.)

    Just to add,
    I'll try and look at the Rule column and Power column next. I think these should be more organically interconnected with the government column instead of specified particular legal terms or states of national security etc. All a bit mishy imo.
     
  6. bill2505

    bill2505 King

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    645
    can you give some capture change to mercenery civic. historically after banditry mercenerys were the second who were too eager to sell slaves
     
  7. Dancing Hoskuld

    Dancing Hoskuld Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Messages:
    23,540
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canberra, Australia
    It already does. If you are running Mercenary then your units are likely to be captured by +20%.
     
  8. Thunderbrd

    Thunderbrd C2C War Dog

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    27,914
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Speaking of Rule AI... and since there's a big push on the Transhuman/Futuristic stuff right now. What would you call a government ruled by an AI?
     
  9. Lawrie

    Lawrie Prince

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    387
    I don't think you could have a human based ideology that establishes itself as subservient to AI command. We took make ourselves subservient to technology and (the primitive AI we have) in our daily lives but we are the ones influencing it.

    So you might not want to look for an ism or a cy for something like this... It's so otherworldly and fictional that it might be more fun to imagine what the AI would call its government since really... humanity would be irrelevant in this matter.

    Give it a cool enigmatic name... something that actually seems kinda disturbing and freaky... like an artificial intelligence programme that went wrong hehe. Its encyclopedia entry could describe it as arising from an incident (bit like Skynet.)

    Command Protocol

    Project Moloch

    Revelation Z41

    Or names like the... er something Incident... the 'Bio Arrest Protocal or Bio Arrest Incident.

    Not great - but some ideas.

    I think something that aims to make it credible and a bit apocalyptic would be more fun/dramatic/exciting than say the more typical imo yawnsome type names like 'Digital Imperium' or Artificial Hegemony and that sorta stuff. (And ism or icy or other human political term selotaped to something vague computer reference.)
     
  10. Azurian

    Azurian The Azurian

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    Messages:
    2,092
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    There are many names, AI government, Government Brain, etc.

    We are going to need new civics for Transhuman/Futuristic but that's in a while once we have foundation buildings up.
     
  11. Lawrie

    Lawrie Prince

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    387
    Sure, i mean unless the futuristic civics are to be utterly camp then that should be a seperate discussion imo, based on credibility and evidence where possible - in outlining the political science of a millennium... beeeeeyooooooonnnnnnd!

    Also Mr. Azure, 'AI Government' is officially the most boring futuristic civic name I have ever heard. So much so... that it should be singled out in the civic tree to utilise 'size 12,' 'Times New Roman' font... as a lesson and constant reminder to all mankind of what a dull civic name it is.

    Children... will speaketh of it on the cobble strewn streets of Rome... birds will chirp about it in the mornings... Old Men, will weep under moonlight... whispering... 'did you hear... someone said a futuristic civic could be called ai government.'

    Oh MrAzure... why... oh why...
     
  12. Yudishtira

    Yudishtira Spiritual/Creative

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2012
    Messages:
    2,772
    Location:
    Brisbane
    How picky is that!!!??? A civic's name is almost as unimportant as how many colours it comes in! :lol: Kindly focus on what civics do.

    Oh, and cut the pedantic sniping at other people's efforts altogether.
     
  13. Lawrie

    Lawrie Prince

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    387
    Awe it was a joke bro!!! Oh and kindly focus on getting me a beer :D
     
  14. Azurian

    Azurian The Azurian

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    Messages:
    2,092
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    Lol many names it can be called. Well I'm personally keeping virtually everything in Transhuman Era in the transhuman thread and Galactic in its own thread. When it's ready to be put in the core, Hydromancerx can put it in its appropriate area.

    Actually there are quite
    A bit of science fiction literature and lore with civics and laws and regulations about so many branches of society I don't even know where to start. There's sci-fi databases and hypothetical civics sites on the Internet. It highly dependent on what the TH era has.
     
  15. Lawrie

    Lawrie Prince

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    387
    I mean when you start to go that far in the future it gets almost impossible to speculate on a traditional basis anyway - so in that sense it's good imo to explore what makes for exciting/fascinating player options etc. I find the future eras exciting (esp. if we can implement the additional game maps etc eventually.) lol and so you know MrAzure I was just teasing!
     
  16. Azurian

    Azurian The Azurian

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    Messages:
    2,092
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    Lol duh I knew you were joking around. I don't take it personal. Well there are many ways to see the future, with many branches, who knows what can happen. I did some TH era civics last year, I don't remember were I posted them here lol
     
  17. bill2505

    bill2505 King

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    645
    i refer to the enemy units
     
  18. ilduce349

    ilduce349 (Financial, Philo)

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2008
    Messages:
    5,490
    Location:
    Canada (Greatest Country Ever!!!!!)
    Some notes on civics in general (based on whichever C2C version I downloaded on July 28th, if civics have been updated since then, I apologize):
    1. In most cases I have placed a focus on realism over balance, the only cases were I placed any focus on balance is in the cases that civics should be almost useless compared to alternatives but are popular and therefore frequently enacted. In some cases were these civics have been known to increase unemployment, I have stayed clear from giving them happiness modifiers.
    2. I have removed any beaker penalty in late game civics. While the argument that some civics would reduce science and innovation, one cannot argue that a more primitive civic would be better for science. The easiest example is Oral Tradition, by default any civic that comes after that should be better for science (one can’t argue that going from Propaganda to Oral would increase tech rate), and by default would have to have the same if not better tech rate.
    3. I’m a conservative with some minor libertarian leanings. I will freely acknowledge that I have a bias towards civics that I would personally support.
    4. I expect to get a lot of criticism for some of my views, but feel free to post any. I am always open to changes.
    5. For the most part I will be avoiding hard numbers in the explanation, while I have already given hard numbers to my civics xml sheet in game; I support slight changes for the purpose of balance. I also admit that my changes will due to commerce, maintenance, beaker and production changes, affect the rate at which technology can develop. Thus my changes have increased tech development during certain eras and decrease them during others. I have not (nor will I) change the costs of techs to reflect these changes, so it may be more appropriate for my numbers to be changed to be more in line with historical production and tech rates.
    6. If I don’t mention an effect that is currently present it means I want to keep it. On the other hand if I mention an effect that’s already present, it means make further changes (eg. Increase Maintenance means further increase the maintenance penalty).
    Government:
    7. Near the end I got bored of writing out long explanations, if you have any questions feel free to ask.
    Government
    Anarchism: I strongly disagree with the name of this civic; I think either tribalism would be a better name for this. The most primitive Homo sapiens were not anarchists; they generally collaborated as a tribe and had a hierarchy of importance among them.
    Chiefdom: Got rid of great general emergence bonus.
    Despotism: I increased the city distance instability penalty and increased the Great General Emergence. I decreased the happycap to -3 (from -1), and balanced this out by letting military units create happiness. If possible I would like having multiple great generals in the field at the same time to reduce stability (the argument being that great generals would challenge the right to rule of the leader, and at times would get popular support, hence reducing stability).
    Monarchy: New units receive XP bonus. Squires and nobles, being trained from a young age in the art of war, would make for better recruits then those in a free society. I also added a great person and great general birth rate bonus for a similar reason (nobles and princes had greater access to education then most free men in republics, and greater education should leader to greater people). I also removed maintenance modifiers, colonial empires were historically monarchies not because a monarchy has a competitive advantage in colonization but because most great empires at the time were monarchies. I’ve slightly buffed Monarchy and made Republics weaker for this reason.
    Republic vs Democracy: How bonuses for Republic and Democracy should be awarded is entirely based on the interpretation of Republic vs Democracy. Given that the Republic tech is enabled far earlier then democracy, my civic changes run under the assumption that Republic merely refers to a more primitive form of democracy:
    Roman Republic, Venice etc. would be considered republics while the United States etc. would be considered Democratic.
    Republics: Republics normally extended the vote only to property owners (and in most cases only property owners in the capital and large cities). It therefore generally means a more centralized political seen. I have therefore given production and commerce bonuses to the capital, while removed the +10% gold in all cities. I also added a trade route per city, not just because republics were historically trade focused, but also because of the realistic trade demand a republic would give, as well as grant.
    Democracy: Democracies typically extended the vote to all (free) citizens, requiring a larger representation and therefore and increased upkeep (high upkeep instead of medium). I gave them beaker and production bonuses in all cities, as political freedoms have historically lead to more innovative populations. I also increased the growth rate of cities (cities now require less to grow).
    Theocracy: Increases culture, especially in the capital.
    Totalitarianism: What is probably my most controversial change is that it now increases, rather than decreases culture. My argument here is essentially that oppressive regimes normally promoted a like-minded culture among their people and were could more effectively assimilate minor cultures. While certain aspects of culture are discouraged other parts are greatly encouraged.
    Technocracy: Technocracy, like Republic is another form of government where I take issue based on the definition. If experts control society, then lawyers and economists should be the ones who govern the country, write laws, etc. I don’t know who considers engineers to be an expert in the field of managing and governing. However technocracy is typically considered to be where, as mentioned in the description scientists and engineers govern society. These two widely accepted definitions have different meanings and therefore would lead to different outcomes. Technocracy, while popular in science fiction as it sounds advanced, is in my opinion useless. I would argue that it would decrease science and production, as scientists would be forced to focus more on managing the economies and politics and therefore less on science. It would be a less effective form of government due to the lack of checks and balances (Smartest person being leader makes him very corruptible, one of the main reasons I see technocracy being inferior to democracy) and most importantly, should have much higher instability as scientists and engineers lack the charisma lawyers and politicians (our current political elite) have, placing less trust between the government and her people. Even despotism would be trusted more because of the leadership, confidence and charisma the despot would have gained through many years of leading troops on the battlefield.
    Obedience: No complaints.
    City States: +6 gold in every city with a population greater than (except capital). Goal of this is to represent lots of ‘mini capitals’ for each of the city states in the region. Lowers espionage and culture
    Magistrates: Increase distance to palace maintenance, decreases Maintenance cost from number of cities.
    Meritocracy: Increases commerce and production, not science. 2 local instability, 2 national instability.
    Bureaucracy: decreases production, not increases.
    Vassalage: No complaints.
    Confederacy: No complaints.
    Federal: Less Maintenance due to distance (that’s kinda the point of a federal system, electing local representatives in government would make lands distant to the capital easier to manage, and therefore require less maintenance), lowers gold of capital, increases commerce in all cities
    Martial Law: More production and less commerce in all cities.
    Grid: Larger instability penalty for adopting civic (represents the time between initial and full implementation), requires more food for a city to grow. Big brother increases suicide rate and decreases opportunities for sex (knowing your being watched makes you more uneasy), thus would slow population growth rate. Greatly increases espionage. +1 free spy per city. Grid also decreases crime.
    Mind Control: No complaints.
    Power
    Strongman: No complaints
    Junta: No complaints
    Sovereignty: No Complaints
    Divine Right: Anyway you can make it give a stability bonus for cities with state religion, and a negative stability bonus for non-state religion in a city?
    Separation of powers: Increased commerce bonus. Less corruption, more certainty leads to an economic bonus.
    Single Party: changed the gold penalty to commerce penalty
    Society:
    Primitive: No complaints
    Tribal: No complaints
    Caste: New units receive 3 Experience. -5% science. Caste is the civic that rejects change of any kind the most. While the birth rate penalty does reflect this, I think a science penalty would fit Caste more.
    Bourgeois: No complaints
    Proletariat: No complaints
    Feudal: No complaints
    Egalitarian: Removed the growth bonus of speed camp, wood gatherer etc. Increased the production penalty.
    Nationalist: Added a subsidy for corporations.
    Marxist: Increased maintenance for number of cities. Removed the food bonus. +1 Happiness per city.
    Corpornation: Removes the free units bonus. -20% Maintenance cost from Number of cities (corporations are good at cutting costs). No espionage bonus.
    Economy:
    Communalism: Less food production (tragedy of the commons). Increased military unit production.
    Barter: Removed the no foreign trade routes penalty. No inflation. Removed the production bonus. Increased the trade route yield penalty.
    Subsistence: No complaints
    Trade: I’d add a stability penalty. In history the biggest obstruction to trade was how much citizens typical distrusted/hated foreigners.
    Guilds: Removed the science bonus. Increased the food and production and culture bonuses. -10% trade route yield.
    Mercentile: Increased income bonus.
    Free markets: (As a libertarian I am probably bias) Espionage and culture penalty, +1 unhappiness, increased trade food, production and commerce yield. Increased production and commerce bonuses in all cities.
    Corporatist: Increased all the +4% bonuses. Increased inflation.
    Planned: Bonus production for slaves (Gulags were pretty effective). Stability and Happiness bonuses. -25% commerce in all cities. Removed the production bonus. (USSR vs USA in productivity. West vs East Germany in productivity).
    Regulated: Health bonus in all cities. Increased city maintenance
    Green: increased city maintenance.
    Military
    Militia: Can draft 2 units per turn
    Banditry: No complaints
    Tribal Warfare: -5% Military Unit Production
    Conscription: No complaints
    Mercenaries: No complaints
    Pacifism: No complaints
    Vassalage: +5 free experience, +5 free units
    Volunteer Army: +2 free experience (as opposed to 7), +10 free units, low upkeep
    Unmanned Warfare: +5% birthrate
    Cloning: No complaint
    Time Drafting: No complaints
    Religion:
    Irreligion, Folklore: No complaints
    Divine Cults, State Church, Free Church: Slight culture bonus
    Intolerant: No complaints
    Secular: Science bonus, decreased the culture bonus
    Atheism: Removed the stability bonus
    Welfare:
    Survival: No complaints
    Charity: Removed the gold penalty
    Church: No complaints
    Public works: No complaints
    Private: Low upkeep, removed the gold penalty
    Subsidized: No complaints
    Corporate: No complaints
    Socialized: Removed the science bonus, +2 health per city
    Paradise: Lowered the science bonus, low upkeep
    Superhuman: High upkeep, +2 free experience, +25% birth rate
    Garbage:
    Anywhere, Burn, Sea, Landfill: No complaints
    Exportation: -10% gold/city
    Importation: Medium upkeep, reduced sickness penalty
    Energy: No complaints
    Off-Planet: No complaints
    Immigration:
    No borders: No complaints
    Open: increased production and science (I think it’s ridiculous that attracting skilled workers would yield bonuses that attracting all immigrants wouldn’t), increased crime, added sickness
    Closed: No complaints
    Skilled: Removed crime bonus, removed trade penalty, medium upkeep
    Secure borders: 5% maintenance from # of cities, high upkeep, health bonus
    Education:
    Ignorance: -5 science/city
    Oral Tradition: removed science bonus
    Written tradition: low upkeep
    Military tradition: +science and culture as opposed to negative
    Religious: +10 science, +5 culture
    Apprenticeship: +5 science, +10 production/city
    Corporate: increased the science bonus, low upkeep
    Compulsory: increased the science bonus
    Propaganda: Removed the science penalty
    E-Education: increased the science bonus
    Time travel: increased the science bonus
    Language: No complaints
    Agriculture:
    No agriculture: No complaints
    Subsistence: No complaints
    Guilds: No complaints
    Corporate: Low upkeep, +40% food in all cities, stability penalty, +2 unhappiness
    Privatized: No upkeep, +20% food in all cities
    Subsidized: (farm subsidies have not, and do not work, ask any economist) Increased stability, +2 happiness, removed the food in cities bonus and food from trade bonus
    State: Increased maintenance from distance to palace, removed the food in cities bonus
    Green: No complaints
    Coinage:
    No currency: No complaints
    Metals: low upkeep,
    Coinage: no complaints
    Banknote: No complaints
    Paper money: No complaints
    Gold standard: Medium upkeep (one of the arguments used by proponents, which I am not one of them, is that it would reduce the need of government, therefore reduce upkeep), -10% foreign trade route (strong currencies hurt, not help trade. Ask yourself why China depreciated their currency, it wasn’t to hurt trade) yield (as opposed to a trade bonus)
    Fiat: +25% trade route yield
    Credit: 25% inflation, +12% commerce instead of gold in all cities
    Digital: removed gold penalty, +15% commerce
    Labour:
    Why isn’t slavery here? I think the way slavery works right now is kinda stupid and entirely Americanized given how many European governments banned slavery even prior to the middle ages. Slavery should be a labour policy, not its own kinda thing?
     
  19. Dancing Hoskuld

    Dancing Hoskuld Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Messages:
    23,540
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canberra, Australia
    Slavery did not fit in the previous civics since it existed under most of them. I am not sure about the new set. (The UK removed the last slavery loop hole in the law in the 1980's. I think you could own a slave but could not buy or sell one.)
     
  20. Lawrie

    Lawrie Prince

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    387
    Wow that's an impressive and epic analysis, curious to read through all this :)
     

Share This Page