Citizens influence a change in gov

[timberwolf4545]

I think, depending on your style of play, that your citizens should be able to express to you their desire to change governments. For example:
1. On the city screens, an unhappy citizen's reason for unhapiness could be: "I long to live in a democracy".
2. Your advisor could also show up and tell you: "our people long for democracy."

The kicker is... depending on your style of play, your people could long for differnet things. If you constantly at war, your people will be hankering for Fascism. If curruption is rampant in far-flung cities, they may want communism. If your civ has tons of natural wealth (oil, diamonds, etc) they may want a Monarchy.
See: old forms of gov in modern day -
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=98115

Choosing the wrong form of government after the revolution would cause another revolution within a few turns.

 

[Haradrim]

This may add realism, which I want a lot of, but I am not in favor of this. It may screw you up when setting up a strategy. For example, If there is a lot of corruption in your large Democracy's outskirts, but no corruption in your core cities, a cange to communism would make those core cities less productive.

 

[MSTK]

...No...?

No.

 

[timberwolf4545]

This would be exactly the reason that your people may be asking for a change in government. Reducing corruption would in this case, bring the people's opinion away from communism. I'm thinking that this feature would be more of an indicator of what gov would best suit your civ at a certain time than something that will actually screw you up. In the case of the outlying corruption, you need a communist gov to improve your civ as a whole. I think this would make people play with a lot more thought regarding the consequences of expansion and unproductive outlying cities. On a side note - I definitely think corruption should be a factor in making people unhappy. Citizens would work as hard as folks at the center of the civ, but nothing would ever get done. It would certainly make me hunger for a revolution.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

You see, this is what I have wanted for the LONGEST possible time, Timberwolf! Not just in relation to government changes, but in relation to much of your domestic and foreign policies.
I have explained my model in other threads, but will repeat it here to make it easy!
Your civ is divided up into FACTIONS (think Tropico). Each faction will have its own influence and happiness level. Factions would also have an 'earning power' and you may even be able to set seperate tax rates for them (though that might be too much of a headache!) Anyway, how influential each faction would be would depend on what your civ characteristics are, what you 'Social Engineering' settings are, what government you are in, what improvements and units you build, and how you specialise the population within your cities. Now, each faction will want to advance its own agenda and, the more you ignore that agenda, the less happy that faction becomes. This is especially important with very powerful factions, but even a weak faction might tip the balance, happiness wise, if things are neatly balanced! One thing a faction could do is demand that you change to a different government-either one which gives them more influence, or one which improves their 'lifestyle'. For instance, your workers might want to change to a more democratic government type, not only because their influence is increased, but because corruption is likely to be reduced! Of course, you can ignore your factions demands, but this could lead to a revolt-depending on their happiness, their influence, and your sufferage levels! The other thing that they can do is PREVENT you from changing to a different government but, again, only if they have sufficient influence!
I feel that these changes would be very important part of improving the 'immersiveness' of the game-in that you get a much greater feeling of ruling actual PEOPLE, with wants and needs that might clash with your goals, rather than just a bunch of 'icons' !

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.