Civics in Planetfall

[Gerikes]

Yes. It's what I thought. But then I don't see what's the advantage of social engineering. You're just tying different civics effects together in one parameter, calling it a SE factor. But doesn't that just reduce your flexibility in making interesting civics?

I agree.

Civics and SE are exactly the same, IMO, with the difference being that Civics have more SE categories. SMAC may have a "Wealth" category, but you can think of Civ4 Civics as having a category for each of the kinds of bonuses that the Wealth category may provide (such as TradeRoutes, CommerceYieldModifiers, etc.) Thus, where SE in SMAC allows you to make change to wealth, Civics in Civ4 allow you to change multiple things about wealth.

Note that when I say "You", I mean the developer. As the user, you are still stuck with the same choices. The only way to alleviate this is to have those categories be completely chooseable. For example, have the SE categories all start at 0 (with some changes for each faction) and give the user 5 points to spread around. However, this to me seems like no fun whatsoever, as there's no real theme to it. There's no reason to try to get one tech over another due to the Civic it grants you, but it forces you to try to get the tech that gives you an additional point to your SE choices.

 

[Rubin]

The advantages of Social Engineering are mainly the level of abstraction and the reduced set of parameters that affect balance and gameplay.

The effects of "Social Engineering" and "Civics" should be the same.

I think "Social Engineering" parameters are more difficult to balance initially; but with increasing complexity "Social Engineering" probably becomes a stronger model than "Civics".

"Social Engineering" is probably harder to implement too because of the reduced set of parameters.

Maniac, there should basically be no reduction in flexibility using either system. I guess you can view it as two different ways of handling the same thing.

If using "Social Engineering" reduces our flexibility in making interesting civics then we should not be using "Social Engineering".

 

[Gerikes]

Well, now that we got theory out of the way...

For those of you who have played both SMAC and Civ4, which way did you like better?

Honestly, I preferred Social Engineering. To me, it was just easier to understand. I've never really cared much for Civics more than knowing that if I do them right I can get a certain bonus. It's a nice feature, but typically I'm the type where I figure out what the right combination of Civics is for my strategy (get all the ones that help tech, or get all the ones that boost XP), and then just use that and never look back (hey, I never said I was any GOOD at these games).

Thus, SE made sense to me. I could pick and choose my choices, and look instantly and see that my choices helped me with military, but gave me a hit to my markets. Fine.

I think that Civics offer a wider variety of changes that can be made, but the fact of the matter is when it comes to keeping it simple, the SE screen did that for me. Truthfully, I think in the Civics or SE or some hybrid or completely other idea, I'd just as soon go with what you guys agree with. But I have to admit that I found SE a better choice for my style of play.

Other thoughts?

 

[Rubin]

I'd like to try a "Social Engineering" approach. So, count me in on that, Gerikes.

 

[woodelf]

I'm fine with either since I've played so much CivIV, but I think SE is more balanceable and worth a shot here. I think a hybrid with focus on SE and using the civics screen and options will be super. I volunteer to help Rubin.

 

[snipperrabbit!!]

bump following the Woodelf's call.

 

[snipperrabbit!!]

Well, If no one want to put down a system for civics, I will do it first.

POLITICS

1/ Frontier
UPKEEP : None

• 
  + 1 happy in Capitol

2/ Aristocratic (Land owners who owns the power)
UPKEEP : Low

3/ Fundamentalist
UPKEEP : Average

4/ Authoritarian (ex police state)
UPKEEP : Low

5/ Representative (Indirect Suffrage mostly)
UPKEEP : Average

6/ Democratic (Direct Suffrage mostly)
UPKEEP : High

7/ Technocratic (Bureaucratic-like civic)
UPKEEP : High


ECONOMICS

1/ Ad Hoc (ex Simple)
UPKEEP : None

• 
  + 1 credit per turn in treasury

2/ Autarcy (mercantilist-like civic)
UPKEEP : Low

3/ Green
UPKEEP : High

4/ Planned
UPKEEP : Average

5/ Free Market
UPKEEP : Low

6/ Regulated (New Deal-like civic)
UPKEEP : Average

7/ Globalized (present day-like civic)
UPKEEP : High

SOCIAL VALUES

1/ Survival
UPKEEP : None

• 
  +1 nutrient in Base tiles

2/ Expansion ("Cultural" civic)
UPKEEP : Low

3/ Power
UPKEEP : Average

4/ Welfare (Health+Happiness civic)
UPKEEP : High

5/ Knowledge
UPKEEP : High

6/ Wealth
UPKEEP : Average

7/ Empathy (Planet+transcendence civic)
UPKEEP : Low


MILITARY DOCTRINE

1/ Conscription (well-known system)
UPKEEP : Low

• 
  + ? units support (cf. vanila vassalage civic)

• 
  Can draft

2/ Warchiefs (privately owned militia, synergy with aristocratic)
UPKEEP : Low

3/ Continental (Land superiority, defensive)
UPKEEP : Average

4/ Oceanic (Naval supremacy)
UPKEEP : Average

5/ Air and Space (Advanced blitzkrieg)
UPKEEP : High

6/ Mecanoid (Battle droids)
UPKEEP : None

7/ Clone army (Troopers)
UPKEEP : High

The Fifth Column (not a joke) will reflect the SE output with the 10(11) categories and informatively the Unique Faction Power SE output (because integrated).

 

[woodelf]

I have my 3 month old notes at work, but didn't find the time to look at them. I'm still trying to find values in the Civ4 civics XML that will work in the SMAC world.

 

[snipperrabbit!!]

I think it's time to put something in and have the SE code. I can't imagine this mod without social engineering. I 'll fill in the post above.

 

[woodelf]

I think it's time to put something in and have the SE code. I can't imagine this mod without social engineering. I 'll fill in the post above.

Gerikes wanted us to figure out something in civics first before tackling a conversion to SE.

 

[snipperrabbit!!]

That was what I intended to do, letting the last column untouched for the moment. I just forgot to write later after SE code.

 

[GeoModder]

The military setup doesn't appeal to me, snipper. The rest is smacish enough for my tastes. But 7 options/column is overload to my brain.
How about keeping the futuristic options that smac gave to players? It could replace the military column.

 

[snipperrabbit!!]

future society meaning collides too much with values. A gattaca model is, for exemple, a police state with wealth value and a lot of techs in it. The system I propose deals with State(politics),enterprises (economy), society (social values) and how to project power (mil. doctrine) which is IMO a big goal for ideologic factionalism. 7 is a respectable number in the civilization franchise and it is not overload for my brain. Let me come up with an unique effect for each of the 28 civics and we will decide which one to drop. Maybe a 4x6 system is preferable and I can drop Welfare, Warchiefs, Regulated and Representative but not atm.

 

[Maniac]

For reference's sake, SMAniaC civics. Not that I'm suggesting we use those.

POLITICS

1) LIBERTIES
Democracy: +1 TALENT, -2 POLICE, -1 SUPPORT
<->
Police State: +1 SUPPORT, +2 POLICE, -3 RESEARCH

2) STATE STRUCTURE
Unitary: +2 PROBE, +1 SUPPORT
<->
Federal: +2 EFFIC

=>
Unitary Democracy: +1 TALENT, +2 PROBE, -2 POLICE
Federal Democracy: +1 TALENT, +2 EFFIC, -2 POLICE, -1 SUPPORT
Unitary Police State: +2 SUPPORT, +2 POLICE, +2 PROBE, -3 RESEARCH
Federal Police State: +2 POLICE, +2 EFFIC, +1 SUPPORT, -3 RESEARCH

ECONOMICS:
Subsistence: /
Private / Free Trade: +3 ECONOMY, +1 RESEARCH, -1 TALENT, -2 INDUSTRY, -1 SUPPORT
Planned: +2 GROWTH, +1 INDUSTRY, -2 EFFIC
Private / Protectionist: +2 ECONOMY, -1 TALENT, -1 INDUSTRY, -1 SUPPORT

RULING ELITE:
Technocrat: +2 RESEARCH, +1 EFFIC, -2 PROBE
Junta: +2 SUPPORT, +2 MORALE, -1 INDUSTRY
Empath: +2 TALENT, +2 PLANET, -2 GROWTH
Plutocrat: +1 ECONOMY, +1 INDUSTRY, -2 MORALE

SOCIETY:
Frontier: -1 PLANET
Cybernetic: +2 RESEARCH, +1 INDUSTRY, -3 POLICE
Green: +2 PLANET, +2 EFFIC, -1 INDUSTRY
Anthropocentric: +2 GROWTH, +1 MORALE, -3 PLANET

***

Btw, some issues I had with the original SMAC civics:

Isn't a fundamentalist state also more or less per definition authoritarian, meaning this as a third politics choice didn't make much sense?
And can't a Green economy be either planned or free market, meaning this as a third economics choice didn't make much sense?

 

[snipperrabbit!!]

This was just on previous page. Not a big deal because I reread them twice recently and what we want atm is non se effects that can be translated later.
I don't think federal/unitary make more sense than green or fundamentalist. We need something for Deirdre, we need something fo Miriam, we need something for eventually additional factions ... etc ...

I don't see why you discard Fundamentalist in regard to Authoritarian :
- Authoritarianism force people to follow using tools like political police, intelligence, ...
- Fundamentalism is held by the people who is fanaticized for a religious/ideologic belief.

I don't see why you discard Green in regard to Planned or Free Market :
- Free Market is the capitalist civic and appears to benefit most to entreprises
- Planned is the socialist civic and appears to benefit most to nomenklatura
- Green is the ecologist civic and appears to attempt the two previous but tend to minimize its impact on environment.

 

[Maniac]

I don't think federal/unitary make more sense than green or fundamentalist.

Why?

I don't see why you discard Fundamentalist in regard to Authoritarian :
- Authoritarianism force people to follow using tools like political police, intelligence, ...
- Fundamentalism is held by the people who is fanaticized for a religious/ideologic belief.

I think my main issue is more or less that the Politics column usually mixes up in an inconsistent matter several concepts/axises which have nothing to do with each other, or are not mutually exclusive. Eg one concept here is the method by which politicals goals are reached. Another is what those goals are. Eg a Police State and Fundamentalism indeed differ in the method by which the goal is reached. But the goal is the same: tightly control people's behaviour. For a Politics column to make sense for me, each civic in it should be analyzable by the same subconcepts, have different positions on the same axis.

 

[snipperrabbit!!]

Now the question is :

"Is a linear differentiation fun to be played ? What is the price strategically to such a self-limitation ?"

 

[Anon Zytose]

Some 30 hours ago, I came with a crazy idea of a Civics/Social Engineering Category. Specifically what controls (if any) might be played on reproduction. The days of selective breeding might not have much of a choice on what happens to society. But after the days of Bio-Engineering or other such advances, people will surely take note on how they might want this to affect the populations of 100 years later. So my ideas are as follows.

Answer 1: Natural Progression. People mate with whomever. Much like exists in both today's society, plus immediately after Planetfall.

Answer 2: Directed Evolution. Merely the best in society are allowed to reproduce. The progeny that are chosen may be slightly based on adopted Values. Stronger offspring with Power, Smarter offspring with Knowledge, happier offspring with Happiness, more productive offspring with Wealth, Healthier offspring with Survival. If no state value is chosen (assuming that's possible), maybe this could provide a culture boost instead.

Answer 3: Designer Offsprings. Through genetics (and other cool stuff later), parents choose the best traits for their progeny possible. Could lead anywhere from Gattaca to Empathically Gifted to Posthuman robot children. This choice might emphasize bonuses of certain Economic Choices.

Answer 4: Population Preservation. This may be for a society that embraces means of vast life extension while also keeping actual reproduction at a minimum. Health increases for sure. The economy thrives because more people are working. Happiness also increases for populations that are given the opportunity to live as long as they want. There might be some negative effect here, like much increased war weariness.

If this idea works, then cool. ^^ If it leads to something else that works, probably still cool. :3 If this doesn't work and doesn't lead to anything worthwhile, then oh, well, I tried.

One other thing to note here is the idea of civic choices that have effects that depend on other civic choices. Like what if Planned Economics had its industry bonus be directed toward buildings with Democratic active and units with Police State active? But still roughly even for the other choices... Something like that could be looked into.

I don't know whether I would've been better off posting this here or in the thread titled Social Engineering.