Does anyone not like social policys?

Actually, in terms of "realism" I like SPs!

A Civ aquires some cultural achievements over time that determine the true nature of it, and therefore can not be changed easily.

On the other hand you have some cultural achievements, that stand in conflict with the previous ones (eg rationalism vs. religion/piety). So you DO have a "choice".



In terms of gameplay: You have to make a decision early how to play the game / win. I don't think it's bad...

 

Care to elaborate?

I am curious how you see any realism at all in the social policy system, or at least how you see them as ' more realistic' than civics.

Also I do not get how people can say that civ is immersive, since seeing Napoleon not changing pants for 6000 years surely kills all immersion for me. Staying that social policies are more immersive than civics therefore really raises my eyebrows.

 

I don't mind Social Policies. I'd prefer if there was some sort of drawback to combinations of policies, (aside from anarchy). Everything seems too overly positive at the moment for my liking.

What I'd really like to see is a system where your actions throughout the game affect the positive/negative modifiers in regards to Governments/Policies. Say if you declare war on 4-5 Civ's throughout the course of a game you would get a bonus status towards the strength of your melee troops, but each of your troops also caused a small amount of Unhappiness throughout your empire. Some sort of dynamic like this would really cause you to think about your actions - provided that you couldn't game the system with your choices.

To offset this possibility, I'd have the AI's Flavors influence how your actions play out in the court of public opinion in regards to any bonus abilities/ranks you might get. For example, say you're in a game full of peaceful nations - going to war multiple times would cause you to get a much greater Unhappiness hit to your military units than if you're in a game full of warmongers, but the strength bonus you would get would also be that much higher. This way, based on the Civ's in each game, your government abilities/policies would feel much more dynamic - as opposed to just picking and choosing abilities from a WoW skill tree, (I include Civics in this argument as well).

 

My impression is that social policies need to have a linear cost. At the moment,it is largely infeasible to build a large empire because the policies will become so ridiculously overpriced (unless you keep conquered cities as puppet but then you will have a happiness issue).

 

I agree. Another cool aspect of SP's is that is grows over time, and there are paths you can take to bigger advantages at the bottom of a branch.
You really build something up. It's a little like the cottage to village in civ4: gradual improvement, involving some planning ahead and initial investment.

Nice idea.

Great idea.

 

Personally I think that the social policies are awesome. I'm almost always looking forward to getting the next one whether I'm currently being a warmonger or more of a Civ builder.

 

big social policy fan here as well. i'll admit that the system could use a few tweaks (like the idea of a branch completion bonus, order/autocracy need a buff), but it's still one of my favorite parts of the game. i almost never settle more than 3-4 cities as a result.

civics were ok, and a huge step up from the governments of previous Civ games, but I spent every single game working towards the bottom Civic of each path, because they just seemed best in nearly all situations.

 

I had considered the idea of a branch completion bonus being a Civic.

But I think this would tend to discourage experimenting and dabbling in SP.

What may be better are additional civic bonuses made available only if combinations of SP + Tech are unlocked.

5/5 Liberty 3/5 Freedom + Computers Tech gives you 'The Internet'

 

Puppet empires are prone to unhappiness issues and makes national wonders hard to get (which is another stupid feature of Civ 5).

 

I hate the social policy system.

 

This

I honestly like the concept behind Social policies, but the way their applied to the game is awful. I honestly believe that picking social policies shouldn't be absolutely permanent. There should be some sort of revolution function that refunds your points at a cost, whether that cost be spawned rebel units in your land and/or a drastic decline in your economic, cultural, and/or military output a for a few turns

Also more trees should to be made incompatible with one another in order to encourage the need to swap between different trees in different situations.

 

Social policies are the single best thing to happen to Civ compared to prior games. I do feel you on 'missing' IV's system (because that was interesting as well) but in the end, V's policy system opens up a world of intricacies and interesting empire decisions in a way IV simply can't touch.

 

You're basically reiterating what the OP said in other words. I disagree for the reasons stated.

 

I like what they did with liberty/tradition, but I still think social policies need some serious rebalancing. Autocracy/order are kind of weak and commerce seems completely worthless outside of water maps.

A serious buff to order/autocracy would be awesome. I want the chance to create some kind of commu-fascist distopian police state.

 

Another vote for Social Policies. They're my favorite part of the game.

 

I like the *idea* of social policies - reflecting the cultural growth and evolution of your civilization. I'm not too fond of the way they replaced civics entirely, though.

Edit: in more depth, they should have left civics (even if revised) and used Social Policies as a replacement for religion.

 

Definitely civics.

 

The only thing I miss is the feel that you have real diplomatic differences with other countries. I mean, Civ 4 you could have China = communism and America = democracy. That's pretty different, and it had diplomatic effects.


Civ 5:
There are some policy branches that are mutually exclusive like autocracy and liberty/freedom, which is very good!

But, for example, China = Communism, Socialism, Democracy, and Representation......uhhh, what? Gamey.

I don't mind the strategic unlocking of different bonuses and benefits, though. I just wish it felt more like a civilization sim with the politics side.