Civic Mini Mod / Suggestions for RoM
- Thread starter Lawrie
- Start date
E_Pluribus_Unum
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2008
- Messages
- 176
Nice... 
It would be great, if the RoM contain this.
It would be great, if the RoM contain this.
E_Pluribus_Unum
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2008
- Messages
- 176
Do not forget Education.
- Community - The parents/community educate.
- generan knowlege, no comprehersive view, no specialization
- not orgaized
- educates all
- Wise man - The wise mans educates.
- general knowlege, comprehersive view, no specialization
- not organized
- educates minor
- Professions - Pros educates their jobs
- general knowlege, no comprehersive view, specialization
- not organized
- educates minor
- Private schools - Teachers and pros educates the talent and the rich ones
- general knowlege, comprehersive view, specialization
- not organized
- educates minor
- Compulsory education - Teachers and pros educates childrens, supported by state
- general knowlege, comprehersive view, specialization
- organized
- educates all
- Corporate - Teachers and pros educates, supported by corporates
- general knowlege, no comprehersive view, extra specialization
- organized
- educates majority
- Brain stimulation - Subconscious education)
- general knowlege, comprehersive view, specialization
- organized
- educates all
- Braint inplantatum - Instant access to knopwlege bases
- general knowlege, no comprehersive view, specializations
- organized
- "educates" all (no direct knowlege, but instant access to it through inplantant)
- Brain manipulation - Instant learning by maipulationg the brain
- general knowlege, comprehersive view, specializations
- organized
- "educates" all
- Genetic learning - Basicly the genetics of the human race is altered completly, the descendants inherits all the knowlege of their ancestors.
- general knowlege, comprehersive view, specializations
- organized
- "educates" all
I have ideas for the bonuses, but until now no one have suggested it, so...
Big Heb
Warlord
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2008
- Messages
- 266
We took Healthcare and Education and combined it into Welfare. Most of your proposed civics fit directly in the Welfare civic column.Do not forget Education.
I give them names, but english isn't my native language, so if you thing that the names are not qite proper, the just post a reply.
- Community - The parents/community educate.
- generan knowlege, no comprehersive view, no specialization
- not orgaized
- educates all
- Wise man - The wise mans educates.
- general knowlege, comprehersive view, no specialization
- not organized
- educates minor
- Professions - Pros educates their jobs
- general knowlege, no comprehersive view, specialization
- not organized
- educates minor
- Private schools - Teachers and pros educates the talent and the rich ones
- general knowlege, comprehersive view, specialization
- not organized
- educates minor
- Compulsory education - Teachers and pros educates childrens, supported by state
- general knowlege, comprehersive view, specialization
- organized
- educates all
- Corporate - Teachers and pros educates, supported by corporates
- general knowlege, no comprehersive view, extra specialization
- organized
- educates majority
- Brain stimulation - Subconscious education)
- general knowlege, comprehersive view, specialization
- organized
- educates all
- Braint inplantatum - Instant access to knopwlege bases
- general knowlege, no comprehersive view, specializations
- organized
- "educates" all (no direct knowlege, but instant access to it through inplantant)
- Brain manipulation - Instant learning by maipulationg the brain
- general knowlege, comprehersive view, specializations
- organized
- "educates" all
- Genetic learning - Basicly the genetics of the human race is altered completly, the descendants inherits all the knowlege of their ancestors.
- general knowlege, comprehersive view, specializations
- organized
- "educates" all
I have ideas for the bonuses, but until now no one have suggested it, so...
Community = Charity
Wisemen = Church (monks) or Private (rhetors)
Professions = Private
Private Schools = Private
Compulsory Education = Subsidized or Socialized (depending on other welfare)
Brain ***** = One possible future civic. Very circumstantial.
Yep Pluribus_Unum cheers for posting details and contributing to the thread!
Yep Education is a funny one because really there is no unique civic/ideology that represents a theory of education imo. They all result from policies from other ideologies.
Governments heavy on ideology insert that in schools, religious theocracies will insert spiritualism/religion into education etc. There is no great disparity however in the structure of education, from schools for kids, adults, and universities etc.
So we wanted to avoid specifying the peculiarities of government policy to education when they are already alluded to by a players choice of other civics.
Yo Big Heb good to see you - and yep we're now focussing on the future civic tree - im gonna post some tomorrow. We've got the others about nailed I reckon!
Yep Education is a funny one because really there is no unique civic/ideology that represents a theory of education imo. They all result from policies from other ideologies.
Governments heavy on ideology insert that in schools, religious theocracies will insert spiritualism/religion into education etc. There is no great disparity however in the structure of education, from schools for kids, adults, and universities etc.
So we wanted to avoid specifying the peculiarities of government policy to education when they are already alluded to by a players choice of other civics.
Yo Big Heb good to see you - and yep we're now focussing on the future civic tree - im gonna post some tomorrow. We've got the others about nailed I reckon!
Just dropping here to say that no progress at all at incorporating these to next version yet. This is due to real life things - my apartment's bathroom is under renovation for couple weeks (actually all apartments' bathrooms are being "fixed" in that building which takes couple months) so I'm staying at my relatives and thus can't really do any modding now for while (except thinking process).
Hey Zapp thats okay mate - there not done yet either though, this is just a talking shop really, when we get this finalised we want to kinda present it to you for discussion etc! We're still working at the mo on the idea for what the future civics would be 
Big Heb
Warlord
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2008
- Messages
- 266
As Lawrie said, it's no problem at all. We still have the future civics, and some more review of the other civic effects would be good to give you a perfect general idea as to what the specific effects should be.
Speaking of future civics, do you have any ideas Lawrie?
To bring up my old ideas, I stand by Open Source Government ("wikipedia-style" internet-based direct democracy, GOVERNMENT), Scientific Religion (scientifically proven religion or atheism, RELIGION), Digital Economy (technology of converting atoms to digital bits creates virtual online marketplace as center of economy, ECONOMY), and Noocracy (scientists, teachers and intellectuals have political power; Plato's "philosopher king" idea, POWER).
Anarcho-Capitalism is iffy because it results in a complete market economy and no government at all, which would rule out many civics that need government to function (Planned economy, Socialized welfare, most Power civics, ETC.)
Perhaps a government where there is no central government but corporations control different cities? It could simulate the "cyberpunk" future idea seen in a lot of science fiction. That would essentially be what anarcho-capitalism would lead to in the absence of a law code, so it could be good.
Big Heb
Ah my partner in arms hehe. Let's discuss your ideas first Heb (and your a great guy for making these, ill put some too.)
The future civics are extremely difficult to propose, and their far easier to shoot down than create! Especially of course if we are proposing genuine future civics that are plausible.
Heb if i seem overtly critical bare in mind, as i say its easier to challenge ideas than create them!
Open Source Government
The idea of a digital democracy, is essentially either a point made about the practical process of election (ie using the internet/high tech gear) but that assumes a kind of Proportional Representation style of democracy. Does it class with the govt choice of civic, and if not then is it simply a more technologically advanced version of the players govt civic. So its a bit iffy I think!
Digital Economy
Now this is interesting, as the digital economy (as opposed to just calling it digital currency) can have an interesting and far reaching implication. As a theory of economics it can be based entirely on certain economic forms (outwith gold standards/ stock markets etc) For this I think we should speak to a specialist on economy and futurism.) The concept however, is for a form of economy that is 'through technology' transcendent from other trade forms.
The difficulty is to ensure that this does not become a more 'advanced' level of currency AND that it can rest comfortably (and subjectively) with the more modern choices of economic civics.
So this is great i think, a great future choice for trade/ civs, but one that we are going to have to put our heads together for the description!
Noocracy
Now I kind of pooh pooh'd this suggestion when you originally made it Heb, but reconsidering that now. What is interesting is that in effect it is a kind of oligarchy really. That perception put me off, (as something essentially ancient and circumstantial.) However this is not necessarily the case if we can find a decent amount of theory and credibility to back it up.
Essentially we are finding that within the drive towards globalisation, corporatism and scientific progress that power is going more to the hands of the few as it were. Now Noocracy suggests this power would reside within the intellectual elites, andthat can be fairly abstract as to include general perceptions for what that 'genius' may be - be it the most enlightened candidates that should win in democratic forms, to their specific selection by ruling fascist parties etc.
So as an abstract ideal it should be open to interpretation for other players government choices.
As an interesting side note, we are finding in Russia and China today, that governments are becoming generally 'popular...' or at lest populist through nationalism etc, and that its democractic forms in Russia are becoming redundent in the face of rampant consumerism.
In that sense Autocratic Capitalism seems to be on the ascendency - is that another form of noocracy (certainly not as envisioned by Plato) but as an interpretation (one of many) for players that choice civics appropriate to it.
Okay so that might be a bit confusing lol, but i like this one too, albeit its going to need a hell of a description too!)
//
So at the moment, Digital Economy looks great, and Noocracy looks promising albeit we're gonna have to work a bit on both.
Essentially we are looking at broad concepts, in terms of gameplay, we should look at a future civic that helps to cap off an idea - and expression of a civs late achievement. A civic for trade, military, happiness, etc.
Okay im going to get my thinking cap on and post back!
Ah my partner in arms hehe. Let's discuss your ideas first Heb (and your a great guy for making these, ill put some too.)
The future civics are extremely difficult to propose, and their far easier to shoot down than create! Especially of course if we are proposing genuine future civics that are plausible.
Heb if i seem overtly critical bare in mind, as i say its easier to challenge ideas than create them!
Open Source Government
The idea of a digital democracy, is essentially either a point made about the practical process of election (ie using the internet/high tech gear) but that assumes a kind of Proportional Representation style of democracy. Does it class with the govt choice of civic, and if not then is it simply a more technologically advanced version of the players govt civic. So its a bit iffy I think!
Digital Economy
Now this is interesting, as the digital economy (as opposed to just calling it digital currency) can have an interesting and far reaching implication. As a theory of economics it can be based entirely on certain economic forms (outwith gold standards/ stock markets etc) For this I think we should speak to a specialist on economy and futurism.) The concept however, is for a form of economy that is 'through technology' transcendent from other trade forms.
The difficulty is to ensure that this does not become a more 'advanced' level of currency AND that it can rest comfortably (and subjectively) with the more modern choices of economic civics.
So this is great i think, a great future choice for trade/ civs, but one that we are going to have to put our heads together for the description!
Noocracy
Now I kind of pooh pooh'd this suggestion when you originally made it Heb, but reconsidering that now. What is interesting is that in effect it is a kind of oligarchy really. That perception put me off, (as something essentially ancient and circumstantial.) However this is not necessarily the case if we can find a decent amount of theory and credibility to back it up.
Essentially we are finding that within the drive towards globalisation, corporatism and scientific progress that power is going more to the hands of the few as it were. Now Noocracy suggests this power would reside within the intellectual elites, andthat can be fairly abstract as to include general perceptions for what that 'genius' may be - be it the most enlightened candidates that should win in democratic forms, to their specific selection by ruling fascist parties etc.
So as an abstract ideal it should be open to interpretation for other players government choices.
As an interesting side note, we are finding in Russia and China today, that governments are becoming generally 'popular...' or at lest populist through nationalism etc, and that its democractic forms in Russia are becoming redundent in the face of rampant consumerism.
In that sense Autocratic Capitalism seems to be on the ascendency - is that another form of noocracy (certainly not as envisioned by Plato) but as an interpretation (one of many) for players that choice civics appropriate to it.
Okay so that might be a bit confusing lol, but i like this one too, albeit its going to need a hell of a description too!)
//
So at the moment, Digital Economy looks great, and Noocracy looks promising albeit we're gonna have to work a bit on both.
Essentially we are looking at broad concepts, in terms of gameplay, we should look at a future civic that helps to cap off an idea - and expression of a civs late achievement. A civic for trade, military, happiness, etc.
Okay im going to get my thinking cap on and post back!
The Future
Perhaps we should broaden our discussion for the future a little - i would love to hear everyones opinions of this! In a way, our future civics are taking plausible outcomes for the future of this Earth... in creating deep and meaningful ideological civic ideas that can work and compliment (the vast majority) of the civic lists we have developed thus far - at least those of the 'modern period 1800s+)
Naturally there will be an element of the hypothetical in our ideas, but they certainly should be inspired by the reality of our world, and not the fiction of one's favourite sci-fi movie!
Let's start our discussion with a brief analysis of current future projections (and I BEG ALL OF YOU) this discussion is a basis for devising the future civics, not for arguing about national pride, and egotistical rubbish!
Future of Democracy
The fundamental theory of Democracy has evolved a little in its ideology, mostly in its implication. The extension of freedoms lower social classes and or of differing races, religions etc. The 'reliability' of democracy in practice has evolved a little bit recently (or devolved depending on pov) with the inclusion of electronic electoral devices etc, with the future promise of the web.
The stability of democracy of course depends on transparancy, social desire, honest political representation and so on.
Competing interests have oft challenged democracy and lead to its defeat (as a form of government) by various competing interests.
Religious fanaticism (Iran, 79')
Instability (Weimer Republic, many more...)
Consumerism?
Indeed, is consumerism and individual self interest for prosperity and good living destroying an interest in politics? Obama in the USA would suggest that is not necessarily true, but what then of rising autocratic movements in Russia, (that enjoy relatively speaking popular support) despite their curbs in democracy. Likewise in China, heavily Capitalist (and more nationalist at times than communist!) yet that nation is not awash in revolution presently. On the contrary, financial freedoms have alleviated many political desires among the folks.
Is it possible to find an even more enlightened version of democracy that can transcend the forms we've seen come and go.
The greatest prospect of futuristic forms of democracy may well come less from the United States (and its classic republicanism) but from the quasi democratic institutions set up within the European Union.
Those of us in Europe are familiar with the gradual powers ceded to commissioners there and the european parliament. In 50 years time, it is hard to imagine its government not dominating over national parliaments of member states. Its also hard to imagine it being a model that is not extremely modern and future focussed, - it will hardly utilise a standard form of democracy such as the electoral college of the USA.
That example, is worthy of consideration, as the EU 'democracy' of the future (For europe wide citizenry) will be the biggest and most modern interpretation of the 'democratic ideal' (hypoethically speaking of course, for naturally the EU could disentegrate before then or be anything but democratic)
It will also be a form of democracy invented in the midst of a period of time where the nation state itself (as a romantic concept of the 19th century) is crumbling. Globalisation and international agencies are taking increasing precedance over individual national governments.)
So future democracies may have basis on ideologies akin to social liberalism, over national interests/ borders.
- As such, a civic regarding futuristic democracy must also concern itself with compatablitiy with governments that are not in themselves 'democratic' under common conception. For example, Fascist...
So in that sense, we are talking about an abstract form of government, with futuristic electoral forms (that are not necessarily democratic) that are transcendent from the 'nation' state.
*breathes deep* Quite a mouthful eh! So lets look at some hypothetical examples.
2050, The EU abolishes as a political instrument, the 'institution' known as the nation state. Instead its new democracy is based around the agreement of certain rights (in accordance with its ideology, in the EU of present that would be liberal - socialist). The EU is not a nation, but a political body, its democracy is not of national citizens, but of members of this political organisation itself.
Note: In a sense it is not hard to imagine that a radical USSR might have done something akin to this, though of course it did not.
Let's stretch plausibility a little with an example for the USA...
2100, USA is dominated by apolitical corporations whose interests in economic - and its associated social - economic policies have become such that archaic institutions such as congress and the senate, are dominated completely by committees and sub committees created to represent the specified interests of true power. Increased secularism, multi-culturalism has left any notions of nationalism a romantic past dream... as such nations like Canada... Mexico etc, find themselves absorbed within trade organisations that find themselves with enormous political influence. Corporatism...
Both those situations indicate a defeat of the concept of the nation state, and nationalism. They do not indicate democracy overcoming or becoming the ultimate winner even in present modern and well developed democracies. (using these hypothetical and completely arguable examples!)
In that case maybe 'Democracy' is the wrong word to use here. As a Government civic, we can have one that represents a transcendance from the concept of the nation state - which preserves the ideological choices a player has made in the govt civic and subjectively shows the sphere of power - form the politic civic.
It's bonuses are another matter. But in terms of concept and imagination, it heralds a huge event which we struggle to percieve - that the country we call home, becomes a bedtime story replaced by corporate agencies, international organisations.
Note
That is not to suggest this is the most advanced form of political understanding ones civ should have in the game. It is a choice from a column of future civics (so a player can only pick this or another future civic.) It just represents one form of plausible and interesting futuristic extreme, that can really define a players civ in the future age!
Conclusion
Therefore perhaps as opposed to Open Source Government we can called this Ideological Ascent - National Transcendance (ok not that word!) you get the idea. Something that works with players choices, but is radical and futuristic!
Perhaps we should broaden our discussion for the future a little - i would love to hear everyones opinions of this! In a way, our future civics are taking plausible outcomes for the future of this Earth... in creating deep and meaningful ideological civic ideas that can work and compliment (the vast majority) of the civic lists we have developed thus far - at least those of the 'modern period 1800s+)
Naturally there will be an element of the hypothetical in our ideas, but they certainly should be inspired by the reality of our world, and not the fiction of one's favourite sci-fi movie!
Let's start our discussion with a brief analysis of current future projections (and I BEG ALL OF YOU) this discussion is a basis for devising the future civics, not for arguing about national pride, and egotistical rubbish!
Future of Democracy
The fundamental theory of Democracy has evolved a little in its ideology, mostly in its implication. The extension of freedoms lower social classes and or of differing races, religions etc. The 'reliability' of democracy in practice has evolved a little bit recently (or devolved depending on pov) with the inclusion of electronic electoral devices etc, with the future promise of the web.
The stability of democracy of course depends on transparancy, social desire, honest political representation and so on.
Competing interests have oft challenged democracy and lead to its defeat (as a form of government) by various competing interests.
Religious fanaticism (Iran, 79')
Instability (Weimer Republic, many more...)
Consumerism?
Indeed, is consumerism and individual self interest for prosperity and good living destroying an interest in politics? Obama in the USA would suggest that is not necessarily true, but what then of rising autocratic movements in Russia, (that enjoy relatively speaking popular support) despite their curbs in democracy. Likewise in China, heavily Capitalist (and more nationalist at times than communist!) yet that nation is not awash in revolution presently. On the contrary, financial freedoms have alleviated many political desires among the folks.
Is it possible to find an even more enlightened version of democracy that can transcend the forms we've seen come and go.
The greatest prospect of futuristic forms of democracy may well come less from the United States (and its classic republicanism) but from the quasi democratic institutions set up within the European Union.
Those of us in Europe are familiar with the gradual powers ceded to commissioners there and the european parliament. In 50 years time, it is hard to imagine its government not dominating over national parliaments of member states. Its also hard to imagine it being a model that is not extremely modern and future focussed, - it will hardly utilise a standard form of democracy such as the electoral college of the USA.
That example, is worthy of consideration, as the EU 'democracy' of the future (For europe wide citizenry) will be the biggest and most modern interpretation of the 'democratic ideal' (hypoethically speaking of course, for naturally the EU could disentegrate before then or be anything but democratic)
It will also be a form of democracy invented in the midst of a period of time where the nation state itself (as a romantic concept of the 19th century) is crumbling. Globalisation and international agencies are taking increasing precedance over individual national governments.)
So future democracies may have basis on ideologies akin to social liberalism, over national interests/ borders.
- As such, a civic regarding futuristic democracy must also concern itself with compatablitiy with governments that are not in themselves 'democratic' under common conception. For example, Fascist...
So in that sense, we are talking about an abstract form of government, with futuristic electoral forms (that are not necessarily democratic) that are transcendent from the 'nation' state.
*breathes deep* Quite a mouthful eh! So lets look at some hypothetical examples.
2050, The EU abolishes as a political instrument, the 'institution' known as the nation state. Instead its new democracy is based around the agreement of certain rights (in accordance with its ideology, in the EU of present that would be liberal - socialist). The EU is not a nation, but a political body, its democracy is not of national citizens, but of members of this political organisation itself.
Note: In a sense it is not hard to imagine that a radical USSR might have done something akin to this, though of course it did not.
Let's stretch plausibility a little with an example for the USA...
2100, USA is dominated by apolitical corporations whose interests in economic - and its associated social - economic policies have become such that archaic institutions such as congress and the senate, are dominated completely by committees and sub committees created to represent the specified interests of true power. Increased secularism, multi-culturalism has left any notions of nationalism a romantic past dream... as such nations like Canada... Mexico etc, find themselves absorbed within trade organisations that find themselves with enormous political influence. Corporatism...
Both those situations indicate a defeat of the concept of the nation state, and nationalism. They do not indicate democracy overcoming or becoming the ultimate winner even in present modern and well developed democracies. (using these hypothetical and completely arguable examples!)
In that case maybe 'Democracy' is the wrong word to use here. As a Government civic, we can have one that represents a transcendance from the concept of the nation state - which preserves the ideological choices a player has made in the govt civic and subjectively shows the sphere of power - form the politic civic.
It's bonuses are another matter. But in terms of concept and imagination, it heralds a huge event which we struggle to percieve - that the country we call home, becomes a bedtime story replaced by corporate agencies, international organisations.
Note
That is not to suggest this is the most advanced form of political understanding ones civ should have in the game. It is a choice from a column of future civics (so a player can only pick this or another future civic.) It just represents one form of plausible and interesting futuristic extreme, that can really define a players civ in the future age!
Conclusion
Therefore perhaps as opposed to Open Source Government we can called this Ideological Ascent - National Transcendance (ok not that word!) you get the idea. Something that works with players choices, but is radical and futuristic!
Okay I'll continue this er epic discourse -
So we're now looking at a future govt style column civic - for the future civic tree that can work as a compliment for most modern ideologies the player may have chosen.
If a player has picked communist or democratic it should 'fit' and yet be amazingly credible and futuristic.
I discussed before the idea of digital democracy, (and Heb as Open Source Government) but I expanded that idea (due to difficulty of implementing a fancier tech version of democracy incompatable with players choosing non democratic govt civics) to something more abstract.
Which is 'more influence by the people' which since it is not being expressed (or perhaps can't be) by more futuristic forms of democracy or government per say is so, by a ground changing event.
That is the 'death of the nation state' concept, that i discuss in the post before this one.
There are two principle concepts to the 'successor' to the nation state, which is the concept of 'transnationalism' which more or less describes the experience of the ended nation state (and belonging to its organisation based succcessor) and cosmopolitansim which more or less advocates the humans of the world belonging to a single moral community - standing in contrast to ideas and romantic ideals of nationality, patriotism and so on.
Now this is where it gets interesting.
If a player chooses this civic, it represents the overriding influence of there peoples 'ideals' and 'ideologies' over the concept of national belonging, and nation state concepts and institutions. (They remain just as they would, but are now subserviant to the grandious borderless imaginings.)
Yet this is subjective for any players civ.
Its most apparent incarnation is through ideas such as worldwide revolution espoused in Marxism etc.
In Democracy it is better represented by the ideals of cosmopolitanism,
In Fascism?
What might be great for this, is that this future civic could while providing generic bonuses/penalties, could also allow perhaps for some wonder, civic specific for a nations ideology? Who knows.
Big Heb
So I think we can take Open Source Government and take it in this more abstract area to make it compatable with other civic choices players may have made, but at the same time is pretty far out but credible. In a way this is what i want the future civics to represent - credible, and fascinating alternatives that we ourselves possibly face.
So what about names for this? Based on the basic theories...
'TransNationalism','Cosmopolitanism',
Or our versions (since they are a bit long!)
'Post-national','Transnational'?
Note
Lets get this one sorted first, then we can move onto Hebs Digital economy future civic idea.
So we're now looking at a future govt style column civic - for the future civic tree that can work as a compliment for most modern ideologies the player may have chosen.
If a player has picked communist or democratic it should 'fit' and yet be amazingly credible and futuristic.
I discussed before the idea of digital democracy, (and Heb as Open Source Government) but I expanded that idea (due to difficulty of implementing a fancier tech version of democracy incompatable with players choosing non democratic govt civics) to something more abstract.
Which is 'more influence by the people' which since it is not being expressed (or perhaps can't be) by more futuristic forms of democracy or government per say is so, by a ground changing event.
That is the 'death of the nation state' concept, that i discuss in the post before this one.
There are two principle concepts to the 'successor' to the nation state, which is the concept of 'transnationalism' which more or less describes the experience of the ended nation state (and belonging to its organisation based succcessor) and cosmopolitansim which more or less advocates the humans of the world belonging to a single moral community - standing in contrast to ideas and romantic ideals of nationality, patriotism and so on.
Now this is where it gets interesting.
If a player chooses this civic, it represents the overriding influence of there peoples 'ideals' and 'ideologies' over the concept of national belonging, and nation state concepts and institutions. (They remain just as they would, but are now subserviant to the grandious borderless imaginings.)
Yet this is subjective for any players civ.
Its most apparent incarnation is through ideas such as worldwide revolution espoused in Marxism etc.
In Democracy it is better represented by the ideals of cosmopolitanism,
In Fascism?
What might be great for this, is that this future civic could while providing generic bonuses/penalties, could also allow perhaps for some wonder, civic specific for a nations ideology? Who knows.
Big Heb
So I think we can take Open Source Government and take it in this more abstract area to make it compatable with other civic choices players may have made, but at the same time is pretty far out but credible. In a way this is what i want the future civics to represent - credible, and fascinating alternatives that we ourselves possibly face.
So what about names for this? Based on the basic theories...
'TransNationalism','Cosmopolitanism',
Or our versions (since they are a bit long!)
'Post-national','Transnational'?
Note
Lets get this one sorted first, then we can move onto Hebs Digital economy future civic idea.
Big Heb
Warlord
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2008
- Messages
- 266
Lawrie, I think you bring up a good point with the EU. Ever since the end of WWI, the world's political stage has been dominated by treaty organizations such the League of Nations, the United Nations, NATO, Warsaw Pact, EU, NAFTA, ETC. Open source governance will probably only surface as a utopian system of government for a small amount of tech savvy people. I am going to suspect the United States will not be dominated by corporations in the future, but eventually a North American Union between Canada and Mexico could surface. All of these treaties and alliances have risen due to economic globalism and defense concerns, two components that will only strengthen as future technology is discovered and the world is more interconnected through improved communication.
I think an idea is a government type that is a union or federation. It would make having Permanent Alliances and Vassals more profitable, and it could make the United Nations play a bigger role in gameplay and in your favor. The general effects should be debated, but I think the idea of "world government" or just simply "regional union" is a possible future of government unlike any of the other choices.
For Power, I stand by Noocracy. Just to stand by Plato's claims that it is the government of the future, and because technological innovation could indeed lead to the intellectuals, scientists, professors, ETC. getting political power in the future.
Society is open for ideas. If there are any sociologists here who can see a new movement from modern events, feel free to input.
For Economy, again I stand by Digital Economy. What is interesting is that a technology converting atoms to bits would allow for copying and thus duplication of atoms, thus duplications of products. I doubt organic goods could be duplicated, however, and there will still remain a scarce market for services. However, with duplication and downloading of resources possible, essentially you remove scarcity from the equation for inorganic goods and undermine the core foundation of economics as a social science. So the effects should be completely unlike any other Economic civic.
For Religion, scientific research could prove religion to be true or false. Effects for this would be difficult to make, but I do not now of any other ideas except perhaps a machine cult, which is very circumstantial.
For Welfare, any ideas?
So if I am not mistaken, there will be one Future civic per other category all in one category and you can pick one future civic to use at a time. Therefore, the effects of each future civic should be considerably good since you only get one at a time.
I think an idea is a government type that is a union or federation. It would make having Permanent Alliances and Vassals more profitable, and it could make the United Nations play a bigger role in gameplay and in your favor. The general effects should be debated, but I think the idea of "world government" or just simply "regional union" is a possible future of government unlike any of the other choices.
For Power, I stand by Noocracy. Just to stand by Plato's claims that it is the government of the future, and because technological innovation could indeed lead to the intellectuals, scientists, professors, ETC. getting political power in the future.
Society is open for ideas. If there are any sociologists here who can see a new movement from modern events, feel free to input.
For Economy, again I stand by Digital Economy. What is interesting is that a technology converting atoms to bits would allow for copying and thus duplication of atoms, thus duplications of products. I doubt organic goods could be duplicated, however, and there will still remain a scarce market for services. However, with duplication and downloading of resources possible, essentially you remove scarcity from the equation for inorganic goods and undermine the core foundation of economics as a social science. So the effects should be completely unlike any other Economic civic.
For Religion, scientific research could prove religion to be true or false. Effects for this would be difficult to make, but I do not now of any other ideas except perhaps a machine cult, which is very circumstantial.
For Welfare, any ideas?
So if I am not mistaken, there will be one Future civic per other category all in one category and you can pick one future civic to use at a time. Therefore, the effects of each future civic should be considerably good since you only get one at a time.
Hey Heb - yep there will be just one future civic a player can choose however - we have to make them so abstract and 'relative' that they can be both bold but also work within the govt civic choices a player has made.
So for example, if we had a future civic, er lets give it a randon name hehe, ok 'enlightened pacifism' then, that would be bizarre for players who have chosen nationalist republics, or fascist states and are waging war etc.
So annnyway, yep I think we can propose for sure so far, something like
Post National (-as I describe, end of 'nation state' ie. akin to globalisation)
Digital Economy (Pretty much as you describe heb)
Right so we've got two for sure so far! We'll get back to these to clarify final names, descriptions etc.
Noocracy
Well basically every future civic has to work at least in some interprative abstract way with likely modern player choices, ie, democracies of varying kinds, communist, fascist, authoratarian / theocratic states etc.
So of course we have Plato's theory of government, but is its application too unique to work with the other civics. If it was lead by intellectuals and scientists for example, - then its very relative to the players civ. A theocratic state with noocracy or fascist etc are examples of combos that Plato could have hardly have envisioned in his theory.
I think also that Noocracy is perhaps too circumstantial to work, and is not really a theory that comes of the tip of our tongue when we consider the future world.
So for example, if we had a future civic, er lets give it a randon name hehe, ok 'enlightened pacifism' then, that would be bizarre for players who have chosen nationalist republics, or fascist states and are waging war etc.
So annnyway, yep I think we can propose for sure so far, something like
Post National (-as I describe, end of 'nation state' ie. akin to globalisation)
Digital Economy (Pretty much as you describe heb)
Right so we've got two for sure so far! We'll get back to these to clarify final names, descriptions etc.
Noocracy
Well basically every future civic has to work at least in some interprative abstract way with likely modern player choices, ie, democracies of varying kinds, communist, fascist, authoratarian / theocratic states etc.
So of course we have Plato's theory of government, but is its application too unique to work with the other civics. If it was lead by intellectuals and scientists for example, - then its very relative to the players civ. A theocratic state with noocracy or fascist etc are examples of combos that Plato could have hardly have envisioned in his theory.
I think also that Noocracy is perhaps too circumstantial to work, and is not really a theory that comes of the tip of our tongue when we consider the future world.
Big Heb
Warlord
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2008
- Messages
- 266
Hey Lawrie, it looks like we are making some good progress.
This post is all ideas for names for future civics, and we can add and subtract names off the list when needed. Names grouped together are different names for the same thing.
Government
Open Source Government (laws edited by anyone, voted by a significant majority)
Direct Democracy
Transnationalist (global government or government that extends beyond your civilization and extends to vassal states and alliance states)
Supranationalist
Confederate
Postnationalist
Power
Noocracy (intellectuals, engineers, scientists, ETC. have political power)
Technocracy
Mobocracy (those who satisfy the needs and wants of the most people possible have political power, or could mean mob rule)
Ochlocracy
Mob Rule
Society
Utilitarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism)
Collectivist
Globalist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalization)
Postmodern/Postmodernist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism)
Environmentalist
Scientistic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism)
Economy
Post-Scarcity Economy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_scarcity)
(More general term for my idea of a Digital Economy)
Ecological Economy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_economics)
Thermoeconomy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermoeconomics)
Bioeconomy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioeconomics)
Neo-Austrian
(I can hope...)
Religion
Scientific Religion (religion/atheism has been proven to be true/false)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_gene
Welfare
Not sure
Hi everyone. I'm new to this thread and desperately trying to do some catch-up reading to see the new ideas. So if I repeat something or misunderstand, I apologize in advance.
Much of the discussion that I've read has seemed to focus on political aspects of the game. However, one of the major attractors of Civ IV (at least, for me), has been the inclusion of relgion. And perhaps this is an area I can be of assistance.
In the world today, studies in the field of religion are moving towards defining them by their worldview. For those of you to whom this term might be new, a worldview is simply 'how one views the world.' Catchy, eh? Different religions are classified into seven very basic worldviews (listed here in no particular order):
1) atheism
2) pantheism
3) panentheism (no, that's not a typo)
4) deism
5) finite godism
6) polytheism
7) monotheism
And in some cases, you can also break down the category into subcategories. For example, Polytheism is the worship of many gods/goddesses. Henotheism (a subcategory of polytheism) is the belief in many gods/goddesses, but the worship of only one god/goddess) while Tritheism (a subcategory of polytheism) is the belief and worship of three gods/goddesses as a pantheon. Or for example, Monotheism would encompass Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Both Judaism and Islam represent Unitarian Monotheism (meaning only one god) while Christianity represents Trinitarian Monotheism (meaning three persons in one god).
Thus, you can have different types of religions with the same type of worldview, but still have radically committed factions that don't mingle. Again, both Judaism and Islam share Unitarian Monotheism, yet they are fiercely in conflict with one another.
So what does that do for gameplay in Civ IV? Well, it could mean a major restructuring of how religion functions in the game. And for gameplay purposes, it might work well to tie it in with the Power aspect being discussed in conjunction with the Political side. For example, a prophet could have the support of the people, the support of a ruling class (like a priest caste system), a rebel fanatic preaching doom and gloom in the rural countryside, or have a small following and be labeled a "cult leader" . . . all depending on "power."
And just because two nations have the same religion does not mean they share the same "theology." For example, the United States was founded by settlers calling themselves "Pilgrims" (those who could no longer accept the teachings of the Crown-governed Anglican "Church of England" -- who separated themselves). Those who tried to change the Church of England from within called themselves "Puritans". So, in England, during the 1600s you had Anglicans, Separatists (Pilgrims), and Puritans but all of whom rejected Roman Catholic Spain (not just on a geopolitical scale, but mostly on theology). Yet, all these groups were "Christian."
So, these historical and theological facts got me to thinking about application in Civ IV. Is there a way to do a "Revolution" Mod only on the religious side? Perhaps a "Revival" Mod? When a people's religious needs are not being met (the possibility for a "Spiritual Awakening" or "Revival" could take place or mass conversions or apocyliptic hysteria or a wave of spiritual renewal to generate half costs on social reforms or prayer movements that increase happiness for a number of turns, or overthow of the "goddless president" to make their new "prophet" the ruler.
So generally, those are my three ideas: 1) how to make it so that different types of religions can be in the game (worldviews) but each with their own unique "flavor", 2) tie in religion with power, and 3) spiritual events that are generated from and affect gameplay.
Granted these ideas will take some "fleshing out" but that's the kernel anyway. So what do you all think?
Much of the discussion that I've read has seemed to focus on political aspects of the game. However, one of the major attractors of Civ IV (at least, for me), has been the inclusion of relgion. And perhaps this is an area I can be of assistance.
In the world today, studies in the field of religion are moving towards defining them by their worldview. For those of you to whom this term might be new, a worldview is simply 'how one views the world.' Catchy, eh? Different religions are classified into seven very basic worldviews (listed here in no particular order):
1) atheism
2) pantheism
3) panentheism (no, that's not a typo)
4) deism
5) finite godism
6) polytheism
7) monotheism
And in some cases, you can also break down the category into subcategories. For example, Polytheism is the worship of many gods/goddesses. Henotheism (a subcategory of polytheism) is the belief in many gods/goddesses, but the worship of only one god/goddess) while Tritheism (a subcategory of polytheism) is the belief and worship of three gods/goddesses as a pantheon. Or for example, Monotheism would encompass Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Both Judaism and Islam represent Unitarian Monotheism (meaning only one god) while Christianity represents Trinitarian Monotheism (meaning three persons in one god).
Thus, you can have different types of religions with the same type of worldview, but still have radically committed factions that don't mingle. Again, both Judaism and Islam share Unitarian Monotheism, yet they are fiercely in conflict with one another.
So what does that do for gameplay in Civ IV? Well, it could mean a major restructuring of how religion functions in the game. And for gameplay purposes, it might work well to tie it in with the Power aspect being discussed in conjunction with the Political side. For example, a prophet could have the support of the people, the support of a ruling class (like a priest caste system), a rebel fanatic preaching doom and gloom in the rural countryside, or have a small following and be labeled a "cult leader" . . . all depending on "power."
And just because two nations have the same religion does not mean they share the same "theology." For example, the United States was founded by settlers calling themselves "Pilgrims" (those who could no longer accept the teachings of the Crown-governed Anglican "Church of England" -- who separated themselves). Those who tried to change the Church of England from within called themselves "Puritans". So, in England, during the 1600s you had Anglicans, Separatists (Pilgrims), and Puritans but all of whom rejected Roman Catholic Spain (not just on a geopolitical scale, but mostly on theology). Yet, all these groups were "Christian."
So, these historical and theological facts got me to thinking about application in Civ IV. Is there a way to do a "Revolution" Mod only on the religious side? Perhaps a "Revival" Mod? When a people's religious needs are not being met (the possibility for a "Spiritual Awakening" or "Revival" could take place or mass conversions or apocyliptic hysteria or a wave of spiritual renewal to generate half costs on social reforms or prayer movements that increase happiness for a number of turns, or overthow of the "goddless president" to make their new "prophet" the ruler.
So generally, those are my three ideas: 1) how to make it so that different types of religions can be in the game (worldviews) but each with their own unique "flavor", 2) tie in religion with power, and 3) spiritual events that are generated from and affect gameplay.
Granted these ideas will take some "fleshing out" but that's the kernel anyway. So what do you all think?
Oh, on a side note, one idea I would like to see implimented in the next RoM 2.4 (hopefully), is the abiltiy to customize before the game starts. For example, say I want to play with 34 different Civs and their respective leaders, but I want to play "me" and lead nation X to victory. I would like to see an option in the leaders listed to play "self". After the game parameters are established and you launch it, it gives a pop up window for you to put in name, leaderhead selection, nation to lead, and your two leader traits . . . and then it continues with starting the game.
Currently in RoM 2.3, you can select to play any leader with any civ. That's nice, but it scrambles all the rest of the civs, too. So, that's why I was asking about customization for "self" (and that way the other civs keep their respective leaders).
Currently in RoM 2.3, you can select to play any leader with any civ. That's nice, but it scrambles all the rest of the civs, too. So, that's why I was asking about customization for "self" (and that way the other civs keep their respective leaders).
Hyronymus
Troop leader
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2003
- Messages
- 1,872
Isn't it easier to make your own civ and add it to RoM as a modular civ?
Easier? Not for what I'm talking about.
You can design your own civ and add it, yes, but that means you have to play that one civ all the time. What I was talking about is more flexible. Lets say I want to play Romans one day, Celts the next day, or even Egyptians on the third day. If I create my own civ, it will have just the custom units I give it ALL the time. No changes. If I play another civ, if I make it change leaders, then ALL the leaders change. Its an ALL or NOTHING proposition.
What I'm asking about is a "change self only" mode. Thus, if I want to play one of those other civs, unique units intact, yet change up leadership traits (and thus, the WAY I play that civ), I could. Doing it that way, those special units and buildings stay with each civ, but I can change out leadership traits as I desire to play them while keeping all the other civs as they are (same leaders, same traits, same unique units, etc.).
Basically, I'd like to customize "self" (human players only) while keeping the rest of the world intact.
You can design your own civ and add it, yes, but that means you have to play that one civ all the time. What I was talking about is more flexible. Lets say I want to play Romans one day, Celts the next day, or even Egyptians on the third day. If I create my own civ, it will have just the custom units I give it ALL the time. No changes. If I play another civ, if I make it change leaders, then ALL the leaders change. Its an ALL or NOTHING proposition.
What I'm asking about is a "change self only" mode. Thus, if I want to play one of those other civs, unique units intact, yet change up leadership traits (and thus, the WAY I play that civ), I could. Doing it that way, those special units and buildings stay with each civ, but I can change out leadership traits as I desire to play them while keeping all the other civs as they are (same leaders, same traits, same unique units, etc.).
Basically, I'd like to customize "self" (human players only) while keeping the rest of the world intact.
Hi Zappara,
I just caught your post a few weeks back about how you didn't want to make any major changes to religion at this time, but rather that you wanted to focus on your new project of a new tech tree.
With that in mind, I was wondering just how far RoM could go with new tech? What I'm thinking of is rather ambitious: RoM + Planetfall mod (as far as the tech tree goes). Planetfall is a mod based on Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri where players terraform a new planet (so its a sci-fi Civ game). The tech tree in Alpha Centauri was pretty cool, too. So, I was wondering if it would be possible (feasible, practical) to create a huge tech tree that spanned the dawn of civilization all the way up and past "futurology" (includng futuristic civics, development of Psi units, bio/chem warfare, genetic enhancement of one's populace, and even to the point where players could 'terraform' tiles - level mountains, raise/lower sea level, and so forth in late game play)?
I'm hoping that with Plantfall as a mod already having been developed, much of the work would have already been done. But not being a programming, I'm not sure what all would still remain to be finished to make its appealing parts work with RoM. It may be just too much work. I don't know. But I'll toss out that idea as a possibility for greater RoM enhancement.
I just caught your post a few weeks back about how you didn't want to make any major changes to religion at this time, but rather that you wanted to focus on your new project of a new tech tree.
With that in mind, I was wondering just how far RoM could go with new tech? What I'm thinking of is rather ambitious: RoM + Planetfall mod (as far as the tech tree goes). Planetfall is a mod based on Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri where players terraform a new planet (so its a sci-fi Civ game). The tech tree in Alpha Centauri was pretty cool, too. So, I was wondering if it would be possible (feasible, practical) to create a huge tech tree that spanned the dawn of civilization all the way up and past "futurology" (includng futuristic civics, development of Psi units, bio/chem warfare, genetic enhancement of one's populace, and even to the point where players could 'terraform' tiles - level mountains, raise/lower sea level, and so forth in late game play)?
I'm hoping that with Plantfall as a mod already having been developed, much of the work would have already been done. But not being a programming, I'm not sure what all would still remain to be finished to make its appealing parts work with RoM. It may be just too much work. I don't know. But I'll toss out that idea as a possibility for greater RoM enhancement.
Well, the more I read, the more I seem to see the same ideas I was having already being suggested. 
I've found lots of sci-fi ideas that were posted already, so, my congrats to those folks. Lots of good stuff in there (I really liked the Deuterium production idea).
Okay, so with new techs being proposed and new a new civics system being designed, is there a way to enhance the "economy" of Civ IV? Something like a 3-tier system: Resources -> Materials -> Goods. For example, to go from Cotton -> Textiles -> Ship Sails (or whatever). Each could be traded to a nation, but increases in value the further up you go. Raw resources are cheap, but materials get more profit than resources and goods get more profit than materials.
Just a thought . . .
I've found lots of sci-fi ideas that were posted already, so, my congrats to those folks. Lots of good stuff in there (I really liked the Deuterium production idea).
Okay, so with new techs being proposed and new a new civics system being designed, is there a way to enhance the "economy" of Civ IV? Something like a 3-tier system: Resources -> Materials -> Goods. For example, to go from Cotton -> Textiles -> Ship Sails (or whatever). Each could be traded to a nation, but increases in value the further up you go. Raw resources are cheap, but materials get more profit than resources and goods get more profit than materials.
Just a thought . . .
Similar threads
