Civics in FfH2

[78monti]

I really like the idea of discussing civics. Iam more then certain the developers of this mod will consider improvements and whatever changes they will implement ill be more then happy with that
My biggest problems with the civic system in FFH is that, we all start with 3 totally useless civics and everyone tries to get rid of the despotism, the tribalism and the Decentralization. Sooner the better. Lets just think about flavour wise. Hippus, Clan, Doviello, Illan, Malakim, Sheaim whould really look more tasteful by considering using Despotism or Tribalism for a longer period of time if not forever. I really have no idea what could we do with Decentralization, but I try.
Despotism: (the reckless warlord)
- Low Upkeep
- No Maintainance cost for cities
- Cities cannot advance beyond level3 (or 5), except capital
- +25% Maintainance Cost for Cities beyond level3 (or 5)
- -50% War
Tribalism: (you dont need to restart the game in Jungle)
- No from terrain types
- Cannot use Road
- Units +1
Decentralization: (the beginning and usually the end of an empire)
- Warrior can use Bronze, Iron, Mithril
- Build units 20% faster
- Cannot build Farm, Cottage, Mine, Quary
- No from Cottage

 

[Imuratep]

This is a good point. But then, what to put "the State" against?

Good point. Perhaps State (strong controlled economy) - Merchants (liberal economy)?

 

[Breunor]

I think this is an unavoidable problem with Civilization in general, not just FfH2. Aztec tanks purchased in my Universal Suffrage Aztec government? Theocracy America with state religion Taoism? (Taoist Theocracy at all?)

And like you say, Infernal Republic that values Liberty?

I think we just have to forget it and leave that all up to the game.

I guess this is where we disagree. I like Civics as being a part of the game, an important part even, but I don't think Civic choices should be so defining that they overwhelm the charactersitcs of the Civ. In regualr Civ and BtS, pertty much everything goes as you say.


However, one of the reasons I like FfH so much, more than regular Civ, is that the defining characteristics of the Civ do come across. I wouldn't want civics to be so powerful that the underlying identity, brought out so well in FfH, to be forgotten.

Best wishes,

Breunor

 

[Elfhawk]

I don't know if these ideas are possible, but that 'Special Sauce'/Membership category really got my creativity flowing.

Special Sauce: Foreign Relations

Empyrean special civic: Enlightened Harmony - Provides membership in Overcouncil, +1 per , +5% with Elder Council, and +1 diplomacy bonus for 'you are trustworthy' or something like that.
(may need a drawback or something)

Council of Esus special civic: Capital Influence - Provides membership in Undercouncil, +1 per , the option to 'buy' votes of the Undercouncil, price depending on how many members would vote against it, the ability to bribe units (is this in the game somewhere? It's in vanilla BtS, right?). Maybe something more that earns money rather than just letting you spend it.

Then, to balance the section out a bit:
Xenophobia - Cancels all current agreements and disables trade. +1 for foreign units within borders (invisible or hidden nationality). Diplomacy penalty –1 for ‘you’re impossible to work with’ or ‘you think you’re better than us’. Removes all foreign culture and prevents your cities from flipping. Cities gain +50% defense. Walls add +2 culture. (I kind of love the flavor of this, but am not sure if the benefits outweigh the penalties at all.)

And maybe Tolerant, as I've read discussions about moving it away from an Elohim trait. Might work as a civic, and I had the idea of adding 'forced neutral alignment', and 'inability to declare war' as possible balancers.

Crusade would stay, as suggested, under this civic category.

Anyway, these are just brainstorms.

 

[Lone Wolf]

(is this in the game somewhere? It's in vanilla BtS, right?).

Wrong. You're thinking of Civ2.

I like the general idea of the Empyrean and especially Esus special civics.

 

[Honor]

I think this is an unavoidable problem with Civilization in general, not just FfH2. Aztec tanks purchased in my Universal Suffrage Aztec government? Theocracy America with state religion Taoism? (Taoist Theocracy at all?)

And like you say, Infernal Republic that values Liberty?

I think we just have to forget it and leave that all up to the game.

Instead of using the alignment change mechanism, you could always implement a reward or penalty system for civs that choose to adopt civics that are in tune with or against their current alignment respectively.

 

[Valkrionn]

Justice - High upkeep. Requires Order state . +1 per . Causes in civilizations without Justice. Moves alignment up one step (Neutral -> Good).

This would be incredibly powerful for Order Calabim... A hammer for every AND ?

I really like the idea of discussing civics. Iam more then certain the developers of this mod will consider improvements and whatever changes they will implement ill be more then happy with that
My biggest problems with the civic system in FFH is that, we all start with 3 totally useless civics and everyone tries to get rid of the despotism, the tribalism and the Decentralization. Sooner the better. Lets just think about flavour wise. Hippus, Clan, Doviello, Illan, Malakim, Sheaim whould really look more tasteful by considering using Despotism or Tribalism for a longer period of time if not forever. I really have no idea what could we do with Decentralization, but I try.
Despotism: (the reckless warlord)
- Low Upkeep
- No Maintainance cost for cities
- Cities cannot advance beyond level3 (or 5), except capital
- +25% Maintainance Cost for Cities beyond level3 (or 5)
- -50% War :angry:
Tribalism: (you dont need to restart the game in Jungle)
- No from terrain types
- Cannot use Road
- Units +1
Decentralization: (the beginning and usually the end of an empire)
- Warrior can use Bronze, Iron, Mithril
- Build units 20% faster
- Cannot build Farm, Cottage, Mine, Quary
- No from Cottage

I don't know if these ideas are possible, but that 'Special Sauce'/Membership category really got my creativity flowing.

Special Sauce: Foreign Relations

Empyrean special civic: Enlightened Harmony - Provides membership in Overcouncil, +1 per , +5% with Elder Council, and +1 diplomacy bonus for 'you are trustworthy' or something like that.
(may need a drawback or something)

Council of Esus special civic: Capital Influence - Provides membership in Undercouncil, +1 per , the option to 'buy' votes of the Undercouncil, price depending on how many members would vote against it, the ability to bribe units (is this in the game somewhere? It's in vanilla BtS, right?). Maybe something more that earns money rather than just letting you spend it.

Then, to balance the section out a bit:
Xenophobia - Cancels all current agreements and disables trade. +1 for foreign units within borders (invisible or hidden nationality). Diplomacy penalty –1 for ‘you’re impossible to work with’ or ‘you think you’re better than us’. Removes all foreign culture and prevents your cities from flipping. Cities gain +50% defense. Walls add +2 culture. (I kind of love the flavor of this, but am not sure if the benefits outweigh the penalties at all.)

And maybe Tolerant, as I've read discussions about moving it away from an Elohim trait. Might work as a civic, and I had the idea of adding 'forced neutral alignment', and 'inability to declare war' as possible balancers.

Crusade would stay, as suggested, under this civic category.

Anyway, these are just brainstorms.

I love it all.

 

[apotheoser]

I guess this is where we disagree. I like Civics as being a part of the game, an important part even, but I don't think Civic choices should be so defining that they overwhelm the charactersitcs of the Civ. In regualr Civ and BtS, pertty much everything goes as you say.


However, one of the reasons I like FfH so much, more than regular Civ, is that the defining characteristics of the Civ do come across. I wouldn't want civics to be so powerful that the underlying identity, brought out so well in FfH, to be forgotten.

Best wishes,

Breunor

But the situations I described are already possible in FfH2. You do get Hyborem Republic+Liberty all the time. I think I even built the Mercurial Gate as Hyborem once.

Right now, there is really very limited tying of the story to the game mechanics. And I think very stringent rules is actually a bad way to do it. Instead, you should shape the civilization's traits, bonuses, and penalties so that players want to play the civilization in a story-appropriate way. Telling the player he just can't do something seems inferior to encouraging the player to do the appropriate thing.

For example, I think Khazad is done really well. You have a strong incentive to stockpile large amounts of gold in a few powerful Dwarf Fortresses (heh, my other favorite game), which means Runes of Kilmorph is very valuable as a religion for you.

 

[apotheoser]

Instead of using the alignment change mechanism, you could always implement a reward or penalty system for civs that choose to adopt civics that are in tune or against their current alignment respectively.

Yeah, this is an eternal question about alignment: are people innately good/evil, and thus act accordingly? Or is alignment just a description of how people already act?

 

[apotheoser]

I don't know if these ideas are possible, but that 'Special Sauce'/Membership category really got my creativity flowing.

Special Sauce: Foreign Relations

Empyrean special civic: Enlightened Harmony - Provides membership in Overcouncil, +1 per , +5% with Elder Council, and +1 diplomacy bonus for 'you are trustworthy' or something like that.
(may need a drawback or something)

Council of Esus special civic: Capital Influence - Provides membership in Undercouncil, +1 per , the option to 'buy' votes of the Undercouncil, price depending on how many members would vote against it, the ability to bribe units (is this in the game somewhere? It's in vanilla BtS, right?). Maybe something more that earns money rather than just letting you spend it.

Then, to balance the section out a bit:
Xenophobia - Cancels all current agreements and disables trade. +1 for foreign units within borders (invisible or hidden nationality). Diplomacy penalty –1 for ‘you’re impossible to work with’ or ‘you think you’re better than us’. Removes all foreign culture and prevents your cities from flipping. Cities gain +50% defense. Walls add +2 culture. (I kind of love the flavor of this, but am not sure if the benefits outweigh the penalties at all.)

And maybe Tolerant, as I've read discussions about moving it away from an Elohim trait. Might work as a civic, and I had the idea of adding 'forced neutral alignment', and 'inability to declare war' as possible balancers.

Crusade would stay, as suggested, under this civic category.

Anyway, these are just brainstorms.

Actually, "Foreign Relations" might be the perfect name for the category.

"Xenophobia" that you describe reminds me a lot of the "Lost Lands" civic in Fall Further, which is basically for this lizard race that lived in remote swamps that survived the Ice Age. They traded with themselves only and had no outside contact. The "Lost Lands" civic also cuts off all foreign trade, but it is specific to that civilization (the Cuali or Maztl, I can't remember which).

"Crusade" fits nicely in a "Foreign Relations" category, as would various Council options.

 

[apotheoser]

Good point. Perhaps State (strong controlled economy) - Merchants (liberal economy)?

Oh, that works out nicely.

 

[TheJopa]

And like you say, Infernal Republic that values Liberty?

I think we just have to forget it and leave that all up to the game.

Why not?

Think of liberty as an uncontrolled hedonism, moral decay, loss of all traditional cultural values, anarchy and revelry, uncontrolled orgies..

 

[KillerClowns]

Why not?

Think of liberty as an uncontrolled hedonism, moral decay, loss of all traditional cultural values, anarchy and revelry, uncontrolled orgies..

IIRC, it used to be Perpentach's favorite civic... I haven't checked lately, but I think it got changed to Slavery. Quite an inversion there. I still think it should be Liberty, myself.

 

[Nor'easter]

Esus in Legal was tricky. I sort of think of the CoE as a shadowy extra-legal group, like an organized criminal syndicate. A Legal civic for them would be almost like some kind of para-military, internal security force that carries out laws and executes dissidents. It's got very cool potential, actually.

You could call it the Shadow Proclamation.

 

[JonathanStrange]

I see how the Civics came to be so ... bland, redundant, and often pointless: one simply redefines a concept, for example, the Slavery civic in such a way that it just doesn't have the commonly accepted meaning with any attached good/evil value at all - which is ironic for a fantasy game that seems to emphasize such things. Why even bother with the concepts of good and evil anyway. Everything's relative. The epic battle between good and evil becomes "matter of opinion" and "who's to say?."

 

[RabbitDynamite]

I see how the Civics came to be so ... bland, redundant, and often pointless: one simply redefines a concept, for example, the Slavery civic in such a way that it just doesn't have the commonly accepted meaning with any attached good/evil value at all - which is ironic for a fantasy game that seems to emphasize such things. Why even bother with the concepts of good and evil anyway. Everything's relative. The epic battle between good and evil becomes "matter of opinion" and "who's to say?."

The alternative, surely is to make it so that each civ can only pick the civics that "fit", given the designers understanding of the civic and the civ. And just to make sure the player doesn't do anything too silly or independent, do away with the civic system entirely and tie all the mechanics to the civ. Thus the lore can remain pristine and untainted by all those intrusive players. Hey,its a reductive argument, but considering you named one of the very few civics with a alignment restriction in a mod which is rare enough in having an inherently storybookish alignment system, I'd say you're being a bit harsh yerself sir

The thing here is surely not to get bogged down in semantics, surely? Ignore the "commonly accepted meaning" of the names, concentrate on what the gameplay mechanics imply about the civ, and if that can't be squared with what the civ stands for , make the civic unnatractive to the civ. If the name doesn't fit, change it. So is a society of demons based around "liberty" coherent? Well, a hellish gamut of crazy orgies could be "liberal" in a very Marquis de Sade sense of the word yes. But hang on, liberty boosts culture. Culture represents influence and attractiveness. People are not going to want to join a society of demons because it looks fun. Ergo, the infernals should have some limit on being able to "flip" tiles or cities outside of the BFC. There is nothing wrong with an evil civ allowing people to do what they want and looking attractive to outsiders, but it doesn't fit the infernals.

Personally, I don't think this a "problem" at all Civ IV, as history strongly suggests that societies can hang on to opposed cultural values without noticing a contradiction for very long periods of time, but in a fantasy mod its problematic.

Personally, one thing that bothers me is a civ like the Calabim taking the Order. The auto-good alignment suggests that all Order is inherently virtuous and everyone wears white hats, but the social order civic seems to imply that they're merely ruthless in crushing "evil". Vampires feeding on human cattle can be squared with the latter, but not the former. So which is it?

 

[apotheoser]

The thing here is surely not to get bogged down in semantics, surely? Ignore the "commonly accepted meaning" of the names, concentrate on what the gameplay mechanics imply about the civ, and if that can't be squared with what the civ stands for , make the civic unnatractive to the civ. If the name doesn't fit, change it. So is a society of demons based around "liberty" coherent? Well, a hellish gamut of crazy orgies could be "liberal" in a very Marquis de Sade sense of the word yes. But hang on, liberty boosts culture. Culture represents influence and attractiveness. People are not going to want to join a society of demons because it looks fun. Ergo, the infernals should have some limit on being able to "flip" tiles or cities outside of the BFC. There is nothing wrong with an evil civ allowing people to do what they want and looking attractive to outsiders, but it doesn't fit the infernals.

Personally, I don't think this a "problem" at all Civ IV, as history strongly suggests that societies can hang on to opposed cultural values without noticing a contradiction for very long periods of time, but in a fantasy mod its problematic.

Personally, one thing that bothers me is a civ like the Calabim taking the Order. The auto-good alignment suggests that all Order is inherently virtuous and everyone wears white hats, but the social order civic seems to imply that they're merely ruthless in crushing "evil". Vampires feeding on human cattle can be squared with the latter, but not the former. So which is it?

Which is it? It's neither, it's an unresolvable contradiction. Someone can make a "Rhye's and Fall"-type modmod for FfH2 if they want to play the story out properly.

In a free-form FfH2, you just have to throw most (not all) of your preconceptions out the window. There's no getting around it unless you want to play pre-set scenarios.

In my current game (on Earth map), I'm Svarfaltar and I founded Runes of Kilmorph and was neutral for most of the game, and colonized most of South America myself. After meeting all the civilizations in Eurasia/Africa I converted to Order. Balseraph is in North America; he founded Ashen Veil. I just finished reducing him to a single city so he would capitulate to me; I razed the Ashen Veil holy city and am systematically wiping out the Ashen Viel in North America. Next step: send an Acolyte to Balseraph's only city and make him convert to Order.

Unfortunately Hyborem popped up in the Middle East, next to the Cuali (yeah, this is FF). The Cuali just beat the tar out of the Ljosfalar and Ljo is now Cuali's vassal (Cuali is an evil race of lizardy people). But just now Ljo summoned Basium somewhere in central Asia. Hyborem declared war on Basium, and by extension Ljo. And since Ljo is a vassal of Cuali, the Cuali as well.

The Bannor have been stuck on the pacific coast of Asia for awhile now and aren't getting anywhere. The Calabim in North Africa founded Order, but just lost a war to Natane (another FF civ) and the Malakim are now Natane's vassal.

How does any of this fit in to the FfH universe? It really doesn't. It's all just completely made up, so let's not get bogged down in how the actual story played out.

 

[UNIT 666]

Something to keep in mind in regards to civilization in general (at least this is my take of it) is: all games are "what ifs?" What if the Bannor became the beacon of evil, founding the Ashen Veil and bringing the Infernals into Erebus? What if Auric was lead to ascension, and subsequently defeated by a Hippus mercenary force? What if Rantine unleashed a Lich hiding deep inside a barrow within Clan lands? ...and so on.

Basically, all civ games are open books where almost anything can happen.

Games set-up for specific occurrences are, of course, scenarios.


In regards to good and evil: FFH is not set in our world; it is not a world made up of ten thousand shades of gray with no black or white in it -- it, instead, is comprised mainly of black and white with shades of gray in the minority. It is a fantasy world where the struggle between the forces of good and the forces of evil decides when Armageddon will occur, with the neutral forces dancing around in the middle of the conflict.

In the end times, however, everyone will have chosen a side.


Civics, with how I see it, should be made so that all forms of governing present in FFH lore can be represented by using them in different combinations, whilst simultaneously allowing for many different in-game set-ups; i.e. a large, sprawling kingdom; small, divided lands (like a bunch of islands), a smallish, centralized kingdom that is constantly at war, etc. I can't speak to balance or how they should be made because I'm not an expert at civ or FFH.

In fact, I won my first match of FFH a few weeks ago.

 

[Lone Wolf]

Personally, one thing that bothers me is a civ like the Calabim taking the Order. The auto-good alignment suggests that all Order is inherently virtuous and everyone wears white hats, but the social order civic seems to imply that they're merely ruthless in crushing "evil". Vampires feeding on human cattle can be squared with the latter, but not the former. So which is it?

"Good" in that mod is correlated, but not always dependent on, personal ethics. Of all the "Good" religions, Order fits the Calabim the best.

it, instead, is comprised mainly of black and white with shades of gray in the minority.

The auto-good alignment suggests that all Order is inherently virtuous and everyone wears white hats,

Not really, many "Good" guys have quite gray ethics, see Basium. The behaviour of most "evil" leaders is pretty morally "black", through. Even then, we have people like Mahala, who are pretty progressive for the society they are in, through.

Mind you, I do think that civs adopt the aligment-changing religions too easily. Leads to enviromentalist utopia with the Ljos in the game and to absense of all evil with the Khazad in the game.

Personally, I use more strong religious weights Leaderheadinfos.xml (here it is) and a file which nearly disables the autonatic spread of FoL and RoK: here

The first file should go in Sid Meier's Civilization 4\Beyond the Sword\Mods\Fall from Heaven 2\Assets\XML\Civilizations, second one should go to Sid Meier's Civilization 4\Beyond the Sword\Mods\Fall from Heaven 2\Assets\XML\Gameinfo.

Patches overwite these files, but they can be replaced again without any bad effects.

 

[Giga-Gigan]

I've always thought that The Council of Esus and The Empyrean were missing something, and now I what it is. They don't have unique civics! (Well OO doesn't but slavery used to be theirs...)
Special Esus and Empyrean only membership civics sound like a good idea. It would help fill out the space in the membership section, and would help incentive to run the religions with their respective councils.