Civ3 Game of Republic?

[Chieftess]

I had some ideas of this way back at the start of the demogame. (Maybe it was just before its' time). Anyway, the idea of the game is a Repbublic (geared more towards provinces/city-states). This would be perfect when MP comes along. Each civ would be its' own province, and a cluster of provinces would be its' own nation. Naturally, power is shifted more towards the mayors and governors (who will act as the senate. ).

PTW will allow up to 32 civs (I'm not sure if this means at the same time). If it does allow 32 civs, it gives us a flexible amount of provinces and civs. (11 civs, and you can still have 21 provinces). This would allow for more realistic and interactive play, such as provinces breaking away from each other. (like having factions without really having factions - just more civs).

Basically, the mayor controls his city (obviously), and follows orders from the provincial leader (i.e., the provincial leader might want 10 knights to guard the northern part of the province). The provincial player can step in and override a mayor (martial law).

The provincial player would be the DP of that "civ". A group of provinces can unite and elect a leader (emporer). They are not the DP, but can order provinces to build certain units, or research a particular tech.


Just a thought. Any ideas?

 

[Chieftess]

Think of the demogame provinces (and the civil war role play). You could have Istar, Normandy, and New Cormyr as the 'Homeland provinces', and Ameri, Asphinxia, Kashmir etc. as the UEP.

I think wonders will still only affect one civ, not a 'team' (which would have been nice), which could create super-provinces. You could have a science province (collosus, Copernicus, Newton's, SETI), and a military province (Sun Tzu, Leo's Workshop, "Great" Wall).

There still is the problem of everyone getting on at the same time. (we'll probably have to see how the first few PTW games go...)

 

[Octavian X]

When I think 'republic,' the form of government that comes to mind is a common one found around the world. The US is a great example of a republic, more speficially a federal republic.

In a Game of The Republic, my thought would be that the citizens elect representitives to make their laws, having no direct say of their own in the legislative process.

 

[Chieftess]

I always thought the US was a Democracy...
- bad history textbook! bad! -

 

[Falcon02]

Democracy is now used as a generic term for True Democracies (The people rule) and Republics (elected officials rule) alike. It's a bad broadening of the term since Democracy can mean either the specific government type or the non-specific (non-dictatorial, people have some say in government) type. That's why the Pledge of Allegience is "I pledge allegience to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands...."

Anyway... your idea is interesting, and does have merit. However, It would better be defined as a "confederacy" losely tied together group of provinces our small countries with a weak central government and stronger local or State governments. This was one of the reasons the South Broke off from the Union in 1861. They were afraid of the Central government telling them what to do, specifically that Lincoln would abolish slavery (which truely wasn't his original objective, just limit the expansion thereof). Regardless the South broke off and gave most of the power to the states, which provided most of the loyalty to the state, which really hampered Jefferson Davis' attempts to fight the war, in all aspects.. militarily and economically, since every state had it's own currency.

Okay Enough of the History Lesson...
I like your idea, but there should be some centralized Government set up... not just Alliances and MPP's. Also there'd need to be some way to make sure the provinces are next to each other. Otherwise (using the Demogame map) Istar could be located at our starting location, Kashmir where the Zulus where, and Normandy where the Iroqouis were. We'd get a huge spread of provinces.

However, this would also put the AI at a great disadvantage. They wouldn't have the "Provincial Capitals" to reduce corruption like we would, with several small civs we'd have the greatest advantage... maybe even on Diety.

 

[Octavian X]

And having seperate civs opens up several possibilites. For one, it would be possible for a civil war to take place, not like the rpg we had recently.

 

[Stuck_as_a_Mac]

Originally posted by Chieftess
I always thought the US was a Democracy...
- bad history textbook! bad! -

Yup.
the us is the nation that says one thing and means the other.
dont get me started here. for my age, i care too much about the gov.

 

[Stuck_as_a_Mac]

also, good idea.

DONT GET ME STARTED....

you think my lack of 1.29 rants are bad, just wait

 

[eyrei]

Interesting idea, CT. It would give the humans a serious advantage over the AI, but this could be countered somewhat by playing on Deity, as was already stated.

 

[Stuck_as_a_Mac]

just askin-
how would we do province capitols 2 fight corruption?

 

[disorganizer]

do we have something else than a republic in here? if you look carefully, we vote representants and they decide for us (how many decissions are taken in forum and how many without?).

maybe a republic with a public-balloting system (like in swiss). but no real democracy.

 

[BCLG100]

i think this is a good idea i would like to play

 

[Chieftess]

I guess a Game of Confederacy would be the better term. When I was making this, I had Greecian city-states in mind. Plus, with PTW, you could have all civs be human players. I don't know if you could restart yourself in the game... though, that would open up an interesting concept - fleeing your homelands due to invaders - or weaker 'civs' banding together (which happened a lot in ancient history).

This type of game could be heavily modded. That way, you'd be able to have a cluster of city-states, and even reduced research to make the game more interesting. (more ancient wars for the ancient warmongers).

 

[Ehecatl Atzin]

hmmm...as a history student, I have to put my spoon into the soup
There is no real democracy in the world, there has neven been one. Democracy implies a direct intervention by the people on issues that relate to the people, this includes everything from energy reforms to what country gets aid. A representive republic is as near as we, as humans, have gotten to democracy. A republic is a band of city states, much like modern nations are composed, where a local government is followed by a state government and this by a federal one.
That out of the way, sounds like a good idea!

Ehecatl Atzin

 

[Falcon02]

Originally posted by Ehecatl Atzin
hmmm...as a history student, I have to put my spoon into the soup
There is no real democracy in the world, there has neven been one. Democracy implies a direct intervention by the people on issues that relate to the people, this includes everything from energy reforms to what country gets aid. A representive republic is as near as we, as humans, have gotten to democracy. A republic is a band of city states, much like modern nations are composed, where a local government is followed by a state government and this by a federal one.
That out of the way, sounds like a good idea!

Ehecatl Atzin

And Athens wasn't a true democracy? Granted the definition of "citizen" was limited to male indiginous people who weren't slaves, but THAT's as close to democracy as we've ever gotten. Each citizen DID vote in the Government, and this was concidered each citizen's duty to attend whenever possible. Remember the "Nation of Greece" didn't exist back then... it was basically a region of related peoples with many "City-States" which were essentially countries to themselves. Remember while the Athenians had a Democracy, the Spartans had an Authoritarian government of Eldars and Warriors.

 

[Chieftess]

And each city had kings that ruled them. I think Rome acted in a similar fashion.

 

[GenMarshall]

Originally posted by Cheftess
I always thought the US was a Democracy...
- bad history textbook! bad! -

Same here. I have asked my Socal Studies teacher about "Are we a Democracy or a Republic?". Most of the time the answer is Democracy. Encyclopedias said the US's Government is a Federal Republic. Strange that both sources cannot aggree on one thing .
The idea of a Civ3 game of Republic sounds good . Maybe the Titles could be:

Democracyresident, Vice President
Republic: Chansellor, Vice Chancellor?

 

[Stuck_as_a_Mac]

okay. lets all agree the us is a republic and bush is a moron.
did i say that last one out loud?
And chancelor is a better name then prez. it fits w/ the whole germany theme.

Also, does anyone think TF would get mad @ me if i uploaded "Springtime for Hitler"?- Zipper is around 3mb

 

[Falcon02]

I agree with the US is a Federal Republic part... not on the "Bush is a Moron" part. But that's a matter of opinion.

I agree Chancellor is a better title with the German theme though.

BTW: when we got our first President (George Washington, if you didn't know) they didn't know what to call him. Varying from the rediculous to titles of royalty. I THINK it was Jefferson who first suggested President, and while it was never official the name caught on.

 

[Ehecatl Atzin]

Originally posted by Falcon02


And Athens wasn't a true democracy? ....

Athens wasn't a true democracy precisely beacuse slaves and women didn't get to vote. Democracy implies a direct intervention by the people being governed, this includes slaves. It was still a republic beacuse it was divided into city states, much like your present system of government: you have California with it's own constitution, Texas, Oklahoma, etc. their local constitution can't go against the federal one, there's the republic part, they are still being governed by a federal power. Democracy is when the entire body of people being goverend by that power (citizen or not) gets to cast a vote on every issue, not just in elections. I know not one country that gives it citizens the right to vote on every single issue. That's the dificult part of a democracy, and it's most frail part too.

@Civgeneral -- It's a federal republic (Mexico also) beacuse it's a republic of states governed by a central, federal power. They are called democracies beacuse of direct representation. The key word here is representation. Citizens don't get to vote on everything, they are represented by a group of men known as Congress and Senate that, suposedly, care after their interests. The president doesn't represent the people, he is there to execute the will of the people, hence the term Executive power.

Ehecatl Atzin