Civics Mod: Balance

[RED DIAMOND]

And someone asked me why I did not make my expanded civics(45 total) in mod form

I have seem some excellent discussion in these civics threads, but the central theme is there is no Univesal civic system that everyone agrees on, none. The fact that there are civics choices leads to the understanding that not everyone will agree on what is good/bad/indifferent in any given gameplay situation for each person.

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

btw, it seems to me that slavery giving +1 production for mines would be too powerful for such an early civic. I recommend changing that to quarries only, and upping the commerce from plantations to +2 or +3. otherwise mine spamming may become an issue. and how many cities exactly will the happiness penalty apply to?

Serfdom: I'd never change 1 food with 1 commerce, but maybe that's only me. now if it were +2 commerce it would be useful instead

 

[Brancaleone]

Kinda off topic

When creating a new campaing world for my rpg group i decided that the players will create a few countries (probably those where they would like to start) and the best way to do so was using the civ4 civic system Off course, im not creating a pen and paper strategy game, i just give short descriptions of what that civic would change in the country society, like, "Despotism: "brief description"; increase military presence but decrease social order" or something like, so they know theyll be.. 'repressed' by living on a despotic country.

Right now there are 7 civics lines: Government (9 kinds), Labor (7), Economy (6), Legal (7), Culture (10), War (6) and Religion (6). I didnt created any rpg-like option yet, like 'Mageocracy'... Divination spells would ruin any real like legal system! Im a lawyer, i would love to "detect lies"...

Anyway. I dont think every Civic needs a disvantage. Upkeep is bad already! I like to conquest, but its hard to do so at 40% science! I have to aim for holy cities but then it becomes a war of extermination, me against everyone! Now you placed a higher distance upkeep on most gov civics!

Red Diamond, i would LOVE to put my hands on your civic mod... please?

 

[RED DIAMOND]

Kinda off topic
Red Diamond, i would LOVE to put my hands on your civic mod... please?

Well remember its not a public mod, but you can check out the attached files.

 

[Armandeus]

btw, it seems to me that slavery giving +1 production for mines would be too powerful for such an early civic. I recommend changing that to quarries only, and upping the commerce from plantations to +2 or +3. otherwise mine spamming may become an issue. and how many cities exactly will the happiness penalty apply to?

Serfdom: I'd never change 1 food with 1 commerce, but maybe that's only me. now if it were +2 commerce it would be useful instead

I like your Slavery suggestion, and I may adapt it.

The "happiness in largest cities" bonus/penalty seems to apply to your 6 largest cities (by default) based on what I see in the civics screen in the game.

The problem with adapting your Serfdom suggestion is, the -1 food in exchange for +1 commerce is meant to be a trade off, an advantage/disadvantage setup that the player must consider. The reasoning is that in Serfdom, the lord of the manor takes his big share of the serfs' crops and gets rich off it, to put it simplistically.

You're forgetting that I'm trying to "balance" the civics with good and bad points. Giving +2 commerce would not present a dilemma for the player at all. Remember, you can get faster workers with this civic.

 

[Armandeus]

Well remember its not a public mod, but you can check out the attached files.

Get your own thread, threadjacker!

But seriously, thanks. I might "borrow" some of your ideas, if you don't mind, that is.

 

[Armandeus]

Anyway. I dont think every Civic needs a disvantage. Upkeep is bad already! I like to conquest, but its hard to do so at 40% science! I have to aim for holy cities but then it becomes a war of extermination, me against everyone! Now you placed a higher distance upkeep on most gov civics!

I respect your opinion, but I don't think the upkeep costs really amount to anything game-breaking. As I said, I playtested these changes for a couple of weeks, and I was able to run a sprawled-out empire with over 10 cities. I had to work at it by building courthouses, a forbidden palace, etc., but I think this mod makes those buildings that much more valuable. I wasn't able to run research at 100% all the time during the mid-game, but I had too many cities to begin with, which isn't really a good strategy in CivIV anyway, right?

I think the maintenance costs are managable, the demerits don't outweigh the merits, and having negative aspects to civics is more interesting. That's my opinion, and I made this mod for people who might share that opinion. You are free to ignore this mod, if you choose, of course.

 

[MrCynical]

The problem with adapting your Serfdom suggestion is, the -1 food in exchange for +1 commerce is meant to be a trade off, an advantage/disadvantage setup that the player must consider. The reasoning is that in Serfdom, the lord of the manor takes his big share of the serfs' crops and gets rich off it, to put it simplistically.

But trading off one food for one commerce is never going to be beneficial. Consider a city with two farms. Serfdom costs you two food and rewards you with two commerce. However you'd be better off 'losing' the two food by creating a specialist, which will be worth more than the two commerce. This becomes an even better solution the more farms the city has. The odd city might be better off if it has only one farm and it merely loses the annoying 1 food that oscillates it between growth and starvation, but I can't see that happening for every city in your empire. The default 50% boost to worker speed was never worth much at this stage of the game, with the result that serfdom is one of the most unused civics of the default game. It therefore isn't really much of a bonus to compensate for the lost food. I don't think anyone will use this civic in this current arrangement, so I think the lord of the manor may need to get rather richer off his serfs to make it a viable choice.

 

[Armandeus]

But trading off one food for one commerce is never going to be beneficial.

Good argument. I like good arguments like this, with facts and solid reasoning.

I will change Serfdom to -1 food +2 commerce sometime later today and upload it with a new version number (I'm at work now...).

 

[Robo Magic Man]

It's an interesting mod. I personally thought a lot of your changes were kind of harsh or counterproductive to the civilization that uses them, but they're based on historical fact. However, basing things on history isn't always the best idea. For example, the bad effects of state property are found only in communist governments that failed. However, it always seemed to me that civics were executed well by default, keeping only the errors of the civic and eliminating the errors that leaders who have used that civic in the past have made (I hope that makes sense the way it's worded). And, why doesn't your state property civic have hard currency? Every nation with state property has/had hard currency.

 

[Zanthra]

I would like to point out that the point of free religeon giving +10% research was that there was no state church to in any way influence what people were doing research on, even in the US however such religeous groups get in the way of such things as stem cell research and human cloning yet they have to be backed up by morals that those outside of that specific religeon may believe in. Such things as saying that there should not be any research into spaceflight because god put us on this earth would not work to stop such science today.

Also every government civic you have except for police state has a + to distance modifier for upkeep, and you could easially say that even managing the police throughout the entire country would be a lot of work so it should be increased as well, and at that point you may just as well remove the maintinence increase because all governments then have increases. I think you might want to reconcider the maintenence increase for governments.

Looks good however, I may try it out sometime soon here if I get the time, just trying to provide a bit of constructive criticism.

 

[RED DIAMOND]

Get your own thread, threadjacker!

But seriously, thanks. I might "borrow" some of your ideas, if you don't mind, that is.

Ah, sure, but I will not take credit for everything. Some of the stuff I put in is from ideas from the great people here in the forums.

 

[RED DIAMOND]

I would like to point out that the point of free religeon giving +10% research was that there was no state church to in any way influence what people were doing research on, even in the US however such religeous groups get in the way of such things as stem cell research and human cloning yet they have to be backed up by morals that those outside of that specific religeon may believe in. Such things as saying that there should not be any research into spaceflight because god put us on this earth would not work to stop such science today.

Yes, I agree with ya, except in the time of Da Vinci research into spaceflight or anything else showing the truth of science vs the lies/misunderstanding of controlling religious powers, would get ya killed. The majority of people in their ignorance would have and did support the church based on "moral" issues in that time(ie. the Earth is the center of the universal blah blah blah).

All that to say, in the future all the moralist people and governments influenced by religious extremists and common ignorance will find the issue of human bio-engineering just as silly as people dying for showing the Earth was not flat and was never the center of the universe IMHO.

BTW, there were plenty of those god put us on Earth folks in the 60's, they were just overruled by the "heathen" culture and President

 

[Zanthra]

Exactly, however if the government had an official religeon, and that religeon was against spaceflight, do you think that the government would still have built such extensive spaceflight capabilities? I don't know, but it is something to think about.

 

[Armandeus]

It's an interesting mod. I personally thought a lot of your changes were kind of harsh or counterproductive to the civilization that uses them, but they're based on historical fact. However, basing things on history isn't always the best idea. For example, the bad effects of state property are found only in communist governments that failed.

Thanks for the compliments.

Please tell me which communist government did not fail? Which State Property governments continue to run as (idealistically pure) State Property without any of the negative effects that I have included in my mod?

Communist (State Property) states that embrace capitalism (China, Vietnam, etc.) don't really count as communist states anymore, don't you think? The "Communist Party" may run the country with an iron fist, but are they State Property if they allow Free Market reforms? I've never been to China, but what little I see and read makes it sound like they are very capitalist. Even North Korea has its "free trade zone."

State Property is not Free Market, is it? For example, an extremely simplistic shoehorn of modern-day China into CivIV's civics would perhaps be Free Market with Representation (but with only one party - would that be Despotism instead, or require Police State?). I would not classify it as State Property. Would you?

However, it always seemed to me that civics were executed well by default, keeping only the errors of the civic and eliminating the errors that leaders who have used that civic in the past have made (I hope that makes sense the way it's worded).

That is fine, but as I stated before the whole point of this mod is to represent both the good and the bad, in order to make choosing a civic require weighing advantages vs. disadvantages. This is the focus of my mod. If you want me to remove that, then we are left with all idealistic utopian (and in my opinion, completely fantasy) civics. If that is what you like, then great, but that is not what this mod is about. I tried to include the errors that were generally made by historical leaders who used that civic, if those errors were common, because I view those errors as likely to occur with that civic.

And, why doesn't your state property civic have hard currency? Every nation with state property has/had hard currency.

Wikipedia:
"In some economies, especially planned economies or economies using a soft currency, there are special stores which only accept hard currency. Examples include Intershops in East Germany or Friendship stores in the People's Republic of China in the early 1990's. These stores offer a wider variety of goods, many of which are scarce or imported, than standard stores."

"For example, during the Cold War, the ruble in the Soviet Union was not a hard currency because it could not be easily spent outside the Soviet Union and because the exchange rates were fixed at artificially high levels. After the fall of the Soviet Union in late 1991, the former Soviet Union's ruble was rapidly depreciating, while the purchasing power of the United States dollar was more stable, making it a harder currency than the ruble. A tourist could get 200 rubles for a dollar ($1 USD) in June 1992, and 500 rubles per USD in November. A worker getting paid 2000 rubles a month who planned to buy foreign merchandise would be better off exchanging rubles for dollars at the earlier rate than the later rate. 1000 rubles would buy $5 USD in June, and that $5 USD would be worth 2500 rubles in November."

 

[Armandeus]

Also every government civic you have except for police state has a + to distance modifier for upkeep, and you could easially say that even managing the police throughout the entire country would be a lot of work so it should be increased as well, and at that point you may just as well remove the maintinence increase because all governments then have increases. I think you might want to reconcider the maintenence increase for governments.

OK, interesting point.

What is the difference between Civic Upkeep and City Distance Maintenance Cost?

Obviously Firaxis must think they are different somehow because they separated them. Also, we have Number of City Maintenance cost too, if you look at the XML for civics and eras.

What are the differences?

My opinion is that Civic Upkeep is running expenses for that civic, and City Distance is corruption/inefficiency due to distance from the center of administration (the capital). That definition of City Distance dates back to when we had the concept of "corruption" in earlier versions of Civ.

So the civics I gave City Distance penalties to are ones that I think would create opportunities for corruption/inefficiency the further away you are from the capital.

That is why I didn't give Police State a City Distance penalty, and that is why State Property eliminates the City Distance penalty altogether.

Is that acceptable? (By the way, this is a paraphrase of what you will find in the Civilopedia...)

 

[tartan spartan]

Hi do any of you civics modders know if its possible to add constraints between civics. I.e universal suffrage cannot be chosen with slaverery, or police state cannot use free speach

or even monarchy requires organised religion or theocracy

 

[Armandeus]

Hi do any of you civics modders know if its possible to add constraints between civics. I.e universal suffrage cannot be chosen with slaverery, or police state cannot use free speach

or even monarchy requires organised religion or theocracy

I wish it could be done! At the best we will need Python skills, at worst we will have to wait for the SDK. Maybe somebody else knows more about this than me.

 

[Marshall Thomas]

Armandeus- Thanks for this excellent civics mod. I've enjoyed reading the debate on this thread. Nowhere else in the forums have I found conversation which adresses politics in Civ 4 via the civic settings with such detail or sincere effort to add history and realism. If I may, I'd like propose some ideas and put forth a few suggestions.

One thing which is completely absent from the Civic settings is civic choices which influence diplomacy. For example: The state property civic should be recognised as an alternative to open markets(capitalism). These two civic choices should be in opposition to each other. The nation which chooses state property should have a negative diplomatic number to nations which have open markets and vice-versa. The country which practices state property should have an incentive to spread state property to foriegn nations(export the revolution). Capitalist nations should have reasons to attempt to contain the spread of state property(The best way is to spread free markets). Free market nations should only trade with other free market countries(this provides incentive to spread capitalism around the world). State property nations should generally have positive diplomatic realations with other communist countries.

The 19th and 20th centuries saw diplomatic eligiances influenced by political ideology more than any other force. In previous centuries, eligiances where often determined by religious ideology- which is already well reflected in Civ 4. Other opposing civics could be hereditary rule against representation.

I like the idea of state property reflecting collective farms and the factory being the proposed setting for the "worker's paradise".

I believe Facism needs more work. It needs some benefit during peacetime simply for game balance. Perhaps some production benefit and faster worker speed. Facism should also produce troops with a little experience to reflect the focus on military even during peace and added promotions which could reflect fanaticism(the SS). This would also reflect the typical dictatoral order to fight to the last man- no conditional surrender.

Again- thanks for the mod and thanks to everyone who has contributed their thoughts to this topic. Civic choices should be among the most important features of Civ 4.

 

[Armandeus]

Thanks for the compliments, Marshall Thomas!
As far as I know there are only 2 instances where civics influence diplomacy. One is where you get a bonus point for having that leader's preferred civic. The other one is Emancipation, which causes unhappiness in other civs that don't have it (does that count?).
I'm just guessiing, but it seems what your very good idea requires is Python programming skills. Somewhere there must be a file that gives out those pluses and minuses for having a leader's preferred civic, and so on, when you are in the diplomacy dialog. If someone who knew Python could add bonuses/minuses for what you describe (comparisons between your civics and that leader's) then we could have what you suggest.
It's not possible in the civicsinfo.xml file, however.
I plan to use this balanced civics mod as a base to add one new civic per category, in order to implement a few ideas of mine. Maybe you will like them. I will post the file here soon.