Now im new to these forums, and i love the RoM mod! (I just played a game on the gigantic map on snail speed with 20+ civs, and really, my head is ready to implode.)
Anyway for my personal use, im customising the civics to my own (machiavellian tastes) and thought i'd post the results as a suggestion to for the mod, and just for discussion if thats ok?
Warning - this is long but comments appreaciated
Civic Ideas -
Government - from executive, legislative, ideological and you name it - are often times contradictory in their manifestations. In RoM the government options reflect a mix of 'political structures and ideologies' somewhat uncomfortably. Sometimes they are too similar such as majority rule, representation and universal suffrage and others are too generic or circumstantial - such as Police or Corporate State.
With the Corporate State for example, with varied connotations, is usually linked to fascism - (such as mussolini's italy) while others (particularly yanks, link it less as a political/economic philosophy than to a matter of circumstance, ie. a govt dominated by lobbying corporations. This is a little awkward since it is a matter of circumstance and nod 'governmental' ideology.
Likewise the 'Police State' has always had a strange connotation to it in Civ 4 - of course the 'police state' represent generically - fascism, communism without any of the exciting specificity or flavour! Neither does that civic itself accurately represent those ideologies.
Part of the problem really - is that the Government Options (in Civ 4) do not provide the 'political realism' (as a theory) or machiavellian reality of the government. It tries to do to so much with its umbrella representations that governments become generic! RoM has added exciting new civic options however these new columns are built on this murky foundation. I believe that in terms of political science - we can use these new columns to add further definition as to the type of governmental manifestation that has resulted - to show beyond the executive facade where the power really lies. In this case - the civics from economy, religion (or likewise with the renamed civic columns of Welfare and Culture.)
So to give flavour to our Government civics I suggest changing 'Legal' to 'Politic' - as this allows for an additional dimension to be represented in the players choice of government.
Currently the 'Legal' civics combine elements of 'human rights' and governmental forms - but this is currently a little clumsy and again lacks flavour and specificity. In many cases, we can presume the associated human rights (such as free speech etc) with the type of government, politic and 'society' (renamed from Labor).
So,
I have replaced my Government civics with,
Government
Chiefdom
Despotism (The office of Despot or emperor etc.)
Monarchy
Theocracy
Republic
Fascism
Communism
Democracy
Politic
The Legal civics have become,
Aristocracy
Bureaucracy (Advisors/Party dedicated personally/ideologically/exclusively to govt)
Bourgeouise (power lies with the rich, from venetian merchants to bill gates)
Absolute (Louis 15th style Absolutism - or personal control
Feudal (from 12th century barons to 21st century warlords)
Senate (Patrician dominated democracy) usa, rome
Parliament (comprising democracy) britain
President (Stronger executive democracy) usa, french republic
It is important to note - that the Politic category in my mind is now a machiavellian indication of where 'power really lies'. It allows for an interesting range of governmental types - that at first may seem unusual - but I believe makes more sense.
So I know your all going 'come on thats nuts' with some of the combo's your pairing, but I'll give you some examples for sake of plausability of the more extreme government and politic combinations with plausible historical examples.
1 Despotism - Parliament (Oliver Cromwell, Rump Parliament)
2 Theocracy - President (Iran, present day)
3 Democracy - Feudal (Afghanistan, present day)
4 Communist - Bourgeouise (China, present day)
5 Republic - Absolute (Revolutionary France)
The Politic systems adds definition to the government civics, in as I like to see it - a cynical fashion. Now, in calculating the bonuses for these civics - they should be so that a player can choose between them, to help (as they do normally) when their civilisation faces certain situations.
So for example, a democracy under grave threat, may need to instigate politic changes for military bonuses, or a cash strapped 'absolute' monarchy may need to cede politic civics to the 'bourgeouise' to make more pennies.
LABOR
Now this I have renamed to 'Society'. Instead of a list of 'reforms' for the work-place (which I think proved to be a bit consequential) and somewhat un-colourful, I have instead renamed Labor to 'society' gives us a much wider canvas to look at. It also gives us a little more colour in the types of social engineering we can seek to achieve with our civs, and do more to describe the circumstances of our civs populations.
NB. The Labour type civics, I have combined with the health civics, into a new and renamed Welfare category.
So these civics represent the type of society our civs encourage and or enforce.
Tribalism
Serfdom (For most medieval and in effect ancient history)
Classism (Conservatism/status quo, for most modern history)
Oppressed (Big brother)
Liberal
Socialist
I should note - that these types of society all offer bonuses and are not a series of improvement over the other. Classism is as 'modern' as Socialist or Liberal, each conferring different advantages and disadvantages. Oppressed is fairly self explanatory, and is not necessarily unique to fascist, or communist governments. As a means of ensuring controls we have seen many declared democracies use this during wartime.
Economy
I was never much a fan of the economic civics, as again they descibed a mixture of circumstance and theory often overlapping. For example 'Global economy' can easily be a result of any other economic civic (through circumstance)
I think we have an opportunity to reflect real economic norms - and add a little political flavour to it also. I think also that slavery is perhaps one of the most pivitol economic stages in early civilisation and its crude representation (with spent populations) is quite unrealistic. It was a cruel, but purely profitable stage in the development of 'civilisation' (despite its immorality)
So I have,
Barter - its fair to say that losing decentralised is not a loss?
Slavery - a grim and useful economic trait - we did still have it till the 1860s..
Mercantalism -
Laissez Faire - free trade/ austrian school
Planned - State owned economy from communism to absolutism
Keynesian - Interventionalist Economy ( - Mixed Economy, more socialist)
Chicago School - (free trade, institutional, big corporates, central bank)
Corporatism - Imagine instead of governmental 'patronage' giving businesses monopoly (ala mercantalism) that its the reverse. In effect the most modern form of protectionism.
NB. For you economists, the austrian and chicago schools of fair trade - differing mostly with the chicago school regarding some govt control as necessary - i think is best represented by
classifying austrian school within the laissez faire civic despite its 'evolutionary development' since that theory. Again like all civics, none are simple evolutions from one over the other, but each retain value dependent on circumstance.
Religion
Religion i think is a little unused and not as political as it could be. Paganism, shamanism, sacrificial cult and idolatry could all be part and parcel really. Ive never understood 'pacifism' as a religious civic because as a belief, it has no part in state policy over religion. While Free Religion and Secularism is really part and parcel in some regards, secularism can itself be deemed the most 'tolerant' of religious civics without a seperate civic existing for that purpose. This frees up Atheism as a choice, which as an anti-religious civic formed a vital part of many fascist, communist, and other ideologies.
Paganism
Prophets - early religious tech, basically priests, institutional religion
Free Church - eg medieval church
State Church - eg Church of England - Henry VIII !!
Divine Rule - eg Divine Mandate, Leader Cults - great for a despot
Intolerance - eg Scariness...
Secularism
Atheism
As above, Intolerance and the Free church represent religion at its political might. The State Church is religion (under the heel of its political rulers, as does divine rule, and atheism.)
Healthcare
This is a great idea, but it looks very messy in RoM, with its varying degrees of socialised medicine, and awkward sci-fi universal antidote. I have categorised this differently as 'Welfare' and again each civic is not just an improvement over the last, but an ideological choice. Some players may even find reason to never change civics - the point being to make all relatively interesting in their own right. Naturally the compromise of welfare civic choices is the power given to other sectors of the political, business and religious spectrum.
Charity - give us a penny gov...
Church - Big expansion of church influence
Private - Business/ Insurance companies,
Corporate - Corporate monopoly over this huge industry...
Subsidy - Akin to the US health care system
Socialised - Akin to the NHS UK etc
Education
Education is a bit bland - i think its because, one imagines that the number of improvements that can be built presently add a lot of 'detail' over the education component of the game. Again the sci fi civics of virtual learning etc are a bit ichy.
I changed mine to Culture, and see it as an opportunity to present something completely different - which is the transcending cultural goal of the people. Its bonuses are similar to 'education'.
Mines are,
Conservative
Militant
Cultured
Industrious
Materialist
Enlightened
Socialist
Nationalist
This adds a little more flavour to civs too. Again each would have different bonuses, not obsoleting one another.
The bonuses and penalties for civic choices would influence player choices in the types of combinations they choose - but not force them. It is entirely possible and plausible (and quite machiavellain) for contradictory civics to be chosen. Call it Political Realism!
So again, if we look at a seemingly absurd example
Govt Fascist
Politic President
Society Liberal
Economy Chicago School
Religion State Church
Welfare Corporate
Culture Socialist
So in this case, we have a fascist govt, under Presidential authority, practicing free trade with a liberal society. Such civic bonuses could contradict each other, and one can imagine the rev checks that would result from this setup. However perhaps this has resulted because the fascist player is facing imminent revolution and is desperately giving 'Reform' to society in order to maintain military benefits from his govt civics? Pausible in transition? Indeed!
I actually find it quite fun linking real countries to the civic options - most are likely and easy, but putting the most unusual combos and finding nations is amusing and easy!
Anyway those are my thoughts on the civics and i would be delighted if RoM was interested in them. I have not worked on bonuses and to be honest would be better at providing 'ideas' rather than specifics for the game mechanics.
PS - I should add that I would never release any ammendment of this mod without the mod leaders permission! Cheers