Citizen Viewpoint: Seperating the Departments

[Strider]

Originally posted by ravensfire
Related to some of 40J's points, let's look at the question of WHY some of the changes were made.

A major reason was simple - during DG3, the Culture department was virutally useless. Nobody missed it. The interaction between various departments was also examined, and areas of significant overlap were found (Science and Trade).

Here is the original discussion for these changes, and how we progressed.

Trade has a significant influence on many departments, but none so much as on the Tech. Who would control the trade of, and for tech? By combining them, not only do we have a logically organized department, many conflicts disappear.

Another area of overlap was Culture and IA. By combining them, we again have another logically organized department - one that keeps an eye on the overall non-military health of the nation.

This demand for a seperate Culture department is utter foolishness. If there is such a need for it, why hasn't that need been demonstrated to the current MIA? NOBODY has mentioned this before now? How can you propose to change something that you can't tell if it works or not?

Then there is the [sarcasm]wonderful[/sarcasm] idea to allow the overriding of build queues. Yeah - that's a good idea. Rather than have the leader actually try to demonstrate the need and value of a change, just give the carte blanche on the change. Real democratic there. Uh huh.

Rik makes a very good point though. One of the changes has not worked - moving the purse strings to the Senate. I was one of the major supporters of that idea - and I want it changed. The only change we should be seriously looking at and considering is Oct's proposal for Ministery of Finance and Labor.

-- Ravensfire

Go look at one of Curufinwe's terms as Culture minister, and tell me if you think all he did with the department was useless.

Trade and Research often overlap, but that wasn't a problem over two DG's, actually not even one PI (or CC nowadays), or huge discussion was launched over it. Normally Trade and Research worked fairly close to eachother, to make the best deals for the nation. I see no reason why something that has worked for two DG's will not work for a third one.

 

[Chieftess]

[sarcasm]Oh, and since Military may require that certain units be built in cities with X amount of spt (i.e., a city with 15spt for a sword every 2 turns), why not just merge military and Internal Affairs now just ot have a well rounded city planner that also plans for defense and offense? Foriegn Affairs and Domestic Defense. Oh, and while we're downsizing the government, why don't we do away with the advisors all together (and deputies too!!!), and just have the president make a Domestic, Military, build queue, FA, trade, technology thread (1 each) every term? After all, if we're going THIS slow, there shouldn't be that much to do...[/sarcasm]

 

[Strider]

Originally posted by Chieftess
[sarcasm]Oh, and since Military may require that certain units be built in cities with X amount of spt (i.e., a city with 15spt for a sword every 2 turns), why not just merge military and Internal Affairs now just ot have a well rounded city planner that also plans for defense and offense? Foriegn Affairs and Domestic Defense. Oh, and while we're downsizing the government, why don't we do away with the advisors all together (and deputies too!!!), and just have the president make a Domestic, Military, build queue, FA, trade, technology thread (1 each) every term? After all, if we're going THIS slow, there shouldn't be that much to do...[/sarcasm]

Or we could even possibly make a sign-up thread for who wants to play the save, and let each citizen play one turn in each 10-turn session, then we don't even need the president!!

 

[Chieftess]

Originally posted by Strider


Or we could even possibly make a sign-up thread for who wants to play the save, and let each citizen play one turn in each 1-turn session, then we don't even need the president!!

That was going to be my next suggestion!

 

[Donovan Zoi]

Originally posted by Strider


Or we could even possibly make a sign-up thread for who wants to play the save, and let each citizen play one turn in each 10-turn session, then we don't even need the president!!

That isn't far from reality, if you are successful in your bid to let the entire CoC play the save.

For the record, I am siding with four former Presidents(Boots, Rik, FortyJ and Ravensfire) and the current President(zorven) that this measure serves no purpose but to pad our government with more positions. And I can't help but think that this reactionary measure may have something to do with the fact that citizens are only allowed to run for one position now.

Sadly, this measure is currently winning. What a sham.

 

[Strider]

Back on topic:

We need the culture department, some may say it's useless, and un-needed, but it is far from it. In the hands of a good leader it could be one of the most important departments within this game. It will monitor the cultural strenght of ourselves, and rival civs, showing our cultural power prepared to rivals. Not only that, but this department is VERY important during wars, sense not only will it predict the likelyhood of a city flipping, it is very likely to save several of them from flipping, by alerting the military of this possible threat, for they can plan accordingly.

Currently not a single cultural discussion has taken place within this game, even when we are sitting next to a civ who is almost certain to be a cultural threat. It is clear that this aspect of gameplay will always be abused if it remains where it is.

-------------

Trade and Technology department? We've given two of the most important and demanding aspects of Civ3 to one leader. Sure, it might sound like a good idea (trade and science overlap ALOT), but consider this:

Science is a major aspect of Civ3 gameplay, an AI receiving a technology can crush your offensive, or during the later years just a slight surge in AI research could leave you wondering where all your gold has gone. We need someone who's job is to watch the AI's research, notice spikes, and plan the tech queue accordingly. We do not need someone who is also worried about trading dyes for 23gpt, or improving our maps.

We are putting to much work and power, on to few. Some may call this democratic, sure there elected, but then again... so was hitler. If we seperate these departments, we could expect more precise, more effcient, and better work from atleast three of our leaders.

 

[zorven]

Originally posted by Strider
We need the culture department, some may say it's useless, and un-needed, but it is far from it. In the hands of a good leader it could be one of the most important departments within this game.

In the hands of a good leader, the Interior Ministry can do an amazing job handling all the culture issues of Fanatica.

In the hands of a good leader, the T&T Ministry can easily handle all the responsibilities given to it.

I hope you see my point. Just because you feel the current leaders have not done well, doesn't mean we should restructure the government in the hopes of getting more good leaders for fill more positions.

I say leave the departments as is.

 

[Strider]

Originally posted by zorven


In the hands of a good leader, the Interior Ministry can do an amazing job handling all the culture issues of Fanatica.

In the hands of a good leader, the T&T Ministry can easily handle all the responsibilities given to it.

I hope you see my point. Just because you feel the current leaders have not done well, doesn't mean we should restructure the government in the hopes of getting more good leaders for fill more positions.

I say leave the departments as is.

Wrong, you missed mine.

I do not feel the current leaders have done a crappy job. I feel they have done the best they can, they best any human can do. Like I said, we are asking to much, of to few.

Our leaders earn our respect, for attempting the impossible, and keeping at it. For setting there goals on what is more important, and concentrating on that. We should be the one's ashamed, forcing them to do, what can not be done.

 

[zorven]

Ok, I missed your point. Your point is that these 2 Leaders have too much to do. Have we heard from the current leaders on that point?

 

[Strider]

Originally posted by zorven
Ok, I missed your point. Your point is that these 2 Leaders have too much to do. Have we heard from the current leaders on that point?

Neither have said one way or another.

Also, may I point out that managing these departments now, will not be the same as managing them two terms from now. The job will only get harder and harder to complete.

Also, as I've yet to see any cultural discussion, or any discussion over possibly destroying AI research, or even helping it if it aids us. It must be to much to do.

 

[zorven]

Originally posted by Strider
Also, as I've yet to see any cultural discussion, or any discussion over possibly destroying AI research, or even helping it if it aids us. It must be to much to do.

That is faulty logic. I haven't seen any rabbits recently, so they must be extinct

You haven't seen any discusstion because: 1) the leader feels there are no issues to discuss, 2) the leader doesn't know their responsibilities, or 3) the leader isn't spending enough time on this game. In any case, you have the same pitfalls whether the responsibility is in one Ministry or two.

 

[Strider]

Originally posted by zorven


That is faulty logic. I haven't seen any rabbits recently, so they must be extinct

You haven't seen any discusstion because: 1) the leader feels there are no issues to discuss, 2) the leader doesn't know their responsibilities, or 3) the leader isn't spending enough time on this game. In any case, you have the same pitfalls whether the responsibility is in one Ministry or two.

1) May I once again repeat that we are sitting next to the most culturally powerful civ in the game, and one discussion has yet to be created over the effects of this, and are future plans to weaken or eliminate this threat to our culture? Whoever feels that there are no issue's to discuss, certainly does not play in the higher difficulties.

If department duties overlap, head to the CoC, but during my 12 Terms (yes, one year in the science department), not once did that need to be done. Trade and Science worked together, fairly good.

 

[zorven]

Originally posted by Strider
1) May I once again repeat that we are sitting next to the most culturally powerful civ in the game, and one discussion has yet to be created over the effects of this, and are future plans to weaken or eliminate this threat to our culture? Whoever feels that there are no issue's to discuss, certainly does not play in the higher difficulties.

And having a Culture Minister is going to guarantee these issues are discussed? I have seen plenty of examples of leaders failing to do thier job. It doesn't mean we should split their departments up.

 

[Strider]

Originally posted by zorven


And having a Culture Minister is going to guarantee these issues are discussed? I have seen plenty of examples of leaders failing to do thier job. It doesn't mean we should split their departments up.

On the whole, yes it would. Sure, we might get one lazy leader woh doesn't want to do anything, but that is just like any other department. Atleast if we seperate them, the leader is actually capable of doing everything, and not called lazy for failing to do the impossible, as it is now.

 

[zorven]

I guess the main point of your argument we are going to disagree on. I don't think there is too much to do for the current leaders.

 

[Strider]

Originally posted by zorven
I guess the main point of your argument we are going to disagree on. I don't think there is too much to do for the current leaders.

Why do you think that?

Currently the Trade and Tech Minister needs to:

1) Monitor trades
2) Monitor active deals
3) Monitor a rival civs economic status (increase's/decrease's in income, research, etc.)
4) Create Tech Queue's
5) Plan according to the other departments plans (IE: foreign affairs asked to give a gift of x amount of gold to x civ)
6) Monitor the techs civs don't have, and how long it takes to gain them (or monitor techs we don't have, and how long it takes for us to get it)
7) Make decisions on wether we should trade x resource to civ x and the effect it might have. (IE: trading iron to the persians is prolly not a good idea, espicially in the middle age's)

 

[Strider]

May I also point out even if you do not think they have to much to do, it is still likely to increase the effeciancy of our leaders. Say our Tech and Trade minister has 1 hour and 15 minutes to spend on his duties. He decide's to spend 45 minutes on trade, and 30 minutes on science. Now, certainly we are likely to get much better results from the leader, if he is allowed to spend the entire 1 hour 15 minutes on one thing, correct? Remember that some people do not have all day to sit here and work on some of the thing's that other's do.

 

[zorven]

Originally posted by Strider
May I also point out even if you do not think they have to much to do, it is still likely to increase the effeciancy of our leaders. Say our Tech and Trade minister has 1 hour and 15 minutes to spend on his duties. He decide's to spend 45 minutes on trade, and 30 minutes on science. Now, certainly we are likely to get much better results from the leader, if he is allowed to spend the entire 1 hour 15 minutes on one thing, correct? Remember that some people do not have all day to sit here and work on some of the thing's that other's do.

That is a good point. I am still not sure that culture warrants another department. One thing that was argued about T&T during the rule building phase was that tech was more burdensome in the early game while trade had relatively little to do, and this ratio would gradually reverse itself during the game. Thus, they were a good complement to have in one department. Do you feel this is not the case?

 

[Strider]

Please note everyone, that this is only a "rough draft" version, and the only additional change is likely to be the following:

2.i.4 4. The Cultural Advisor may override the build queue's of a city that is in danger of a cultural flip. The advisor must have proof of this, and only cultural improvements and/or wonders (provided a great leader is used) may be placed in the queue as the next item to be built.

Instead of:

2.i.4: The Culture Advisor may override the build queues of a city in which any of its' 20 tiles falls within the borders of another
civ. Only cultural improvements, and/or wonders (provided a Great Leader is used) may be placed into the queue as the next item to be built.

The offcial poll for adding this amendment to the const. will be started either tonight, or tommorow morning.

 

[Strider]

Originally posted by zorven


That is a good point. I am still not sure that culture warrants another department. One thing that was argued about T&T during the rule building phase was that tech was more burdensome in the early game while trade had relatively little to do, and this ratio would gradually reverse itself during the game. Thus, they were a good complement to have in one department. Do you feel this is not the case?

No, they don't slowly reverse themselves, the majority of the time anyway. Actually, tech is not burdensome at all in the early game, as it takes two turnchats to finish one tech some times. Whereas in the later games 2 techs can be finished in one turnchat.