Emancipation buffed in BtS?

[blitzkrieg1980]

It's not just an argument against "it's not a life-simulator", it's more so a fact that many players seem to be losing flavor for the game in a big way because of a feature that is sort of forced on them. Like I said, I like having to deal with the penalty or switch to Emanc, but I really think an option at the custom game screen would clear up the woes of these players who are turned off by an issue that is easy to adjust.

 

[winddbourne]

Actually I have no "problem" dealing with emancipation, it's the principle of it, both in game design and realism.

Realism first. . . To this day there are large countries that don't run emancipation, Soviet/Czarist russia didn't, China didn't, Korea doesn't, much of the middle east won't. Parts of india still run Caste System even though it's illegal there, parts of brazil still run slavery and that's illegal too.

Game Play . . . those cottages I put down in 50 AD are more than maxed out by now and forcing every other civilization to switch to a lame duck government type doesn't help me at all when I'm suffering the same disadvantage. Plus, most important, it's simply not fun.

Realistic Game Balance: Get rid of the unhappiness and make emancipation something people WANT to use. Perhaps a happiness BONUS so my cities can grow larger or something. So realistically the whole world doesn't convert to emancipation, and some prosperous countries actually may WANT it.

Ps - it's not whining to comment on something that has been poorly implimented. If firaxis doesn't hear the arguments against this design decision they HAVE to simply assume we all love it. I can play with emancipation the way it is, but I'd prefer to have a civic that is more realistic and fun to play with.

Of course realism wise it also depends on what you consider emancipation to be. People under a caste system or serfdom are technically emancipated, citizens of the roman republic were emancipated and had slaves, so did citizens of the south. I consider emancipation UNIVERSAL for game purposes and that it precludes state control of citizens or business, and includes "Human Rights". Even in a more limited degree if your NOT running slavery you are technically running some form of emancipation.

And if the happiness penalty for UNIVERSAL EMANCIPATION only effected those actually running slavery I probably wouldn't object so much.

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

Realism first. . . To this day there are large countries that don't run emancipation, Soviet/Czarist russia didn't, China didn't, Korea doesn't, much of the middle east won't. Parts of india still run Caste System even though it's illegal there, parts of brazil still run slavery and that's illegal too.

Well, the way I see it, communist russia fell apart because of their lack of Emancipation (vs. slavery? caste system? serfdom? not sure what labor force you consider the USSR...certainly not tribalism), china isn't a slave/caste/or serf based economy AFAIK, brazil has a big problem with law and order in their major cities, and what civic would you say the middle east uses? Serfdom maybe?

Perhaps a better solution would be a diplomatic hit with civs that decide to implement emancipation instead of major penalties within your own cities. The effect could cumulate over the course of X turns (based on game speed) and if you decide to implement emancipation when asked by other nations, the diplo penalties go away and an extra bonus is given for "freeing your people". That's very realistic. If a nation in our modern world has a slavery based economy, don't the nations of the UN (clearly emancipation is required to join the U.N. in the real world) frown upon these nations highly?

 

[winddbourne]

Blitz, you have a good point in that the civics we currently have available are pretty much all ancient versions. I'm not sure what those countries actually would be considered to run. The people aren't "free" but they aren't exactly serfs or slaves exactly either.

When you have to live and work where the government says for only basic cost of living (such as in soviet russia) I'd guess you'd be considered as slave of the state. Czarist russia was certainly running serfdom for most of it's history, and I'm not sure what the middle east is running either. But in most of the world different classes (men or women, blacks or whites, etc . . . ) have different levels of freedom and in a lot of the world "human rights" are either unrecognized or violated. So I can't really consider them emancipated in the same respect as England, the United States, or most of Europe.

Perhaps emancipation needs to be broken into a number of "modern" civics. But you'd need to find a sociologist to do the work on that. Plus you might run into some of the same problems you find with using real religions, including hitler, or terrorism. These government types are currently in active use and might get offended at how they were included.

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

Very true. But complicated for civ4 considering there won't be any more expansions. I think the easiest way to fix Emancipation to appease the masses would be like this:

1. Civs with emancipation harbor poorer diplomatic relations with those who do not have eman.
2. This will be cumulative which increases another (-1) each x turns (determined by game speed)
3. Cities will still experience from not having emancipation, but it will max out at 3 (maybe 4?)
4. If you adopt emancipation, the diplo hits (and in cities) goes away immediately
5. If you adopt emancipation because a civ who has already adopted asks you to, you get (+1) diplo relations with emancipated civs for "freeing your people"

what do you guys think?

 

[Thyrwyn]

Realism first. . . To this day there are large countries that don't run emancipation, Soviet/Czarist russia didn't, China didn't, Korea doesn't, much of the middle east won't. Parts of india still run Caste System even though it's illegal there, parts of brazil still run slavery and that's illegal too.

Yep - and each and every one of those is a thriving, productive economy . You have more than proven our point:

• Soviet Russia had no economy to speak of. Its GNP and effective production were far below international norms per capita

• China? Same thing. Since introducing some market reforms thay have managed to make much more of their populace economically and materially productive. People who aren't oppressed are pretty productive. Beijing is huge and is economically and materially outpaced by many US cities.

Every single example you present, (with the exception of the middle east), are staggeringly poor, inefficient economies. The wealth in the Middle East is exclusively tied to the virtual monopoly on the resource of the age: Oil

Game Play . . . those cottages I put down in 50 AD are more than maxed out by now and forcing every other civilization to switch to a lame duck government type doesn't help me at all when I'm suffering the same disadvantage. Plus, most important, it's simply not fun.

What about those cottages you put down 50 years ago? Look at New York City and Los Angeles: true babies in civ terms; yet they have grown to be economic meccas of the modern age. Look at Tokyo: been around forever and was globally insignificant until after World War II and the post-war economic reforms.

 

[Rex rgis of Ter]

Yep - and each and every one of those is a thriving, productive economy . You have more than proven our point:

• Soviet Russia had no economy to speak of. Its GNP and effective production were far below international norms per capita

• China? Same thing. Since introducing some market reforms thay have managed to make much more of their populace economically and materially productive. People who aren't oppressed are pretty productive. Beijing is huge and is economically and materially outpaced by many US cities.

Every single example you present, (with the exception of the middle east), are staggeringly poor, inefficient economies. The wealth in the Middle East is exclusively tied to the virtual monopoly on the resource of the age: Oil What about those cottages you put down 50 years ago? Look at New York City and Los Angeles: true babies in civ terms; yet they have grown to be economic meccas of the modern age. Look at Tokyo: been around forever and was globally insignificant until after World War II and the post-war economic reforms.

I agree. Free people are happier and thus more productive. In the few years after the Vietenam war there was a famine. Workers lost the will to work. They could not keep their food. They gave up causing mass starvation.

 

[Common Sensei]

Possibilities:

Replace the anger penalty for other civs with a happiness bonus of x + 1 where x is the number of rivals who have not yet adopted it (If there are 7 civs and you are the only one running it, you get +8 ).

Double the range of effect of Palace, Forbidden Palace and Versailles in regards to reducing costs. (Preserving the Union, etc).

Keep the bonus growth for cottages.

Add some favorable random events that only happen when running Emancipation.

 

[OTAKUjbski]

I think we all need to STFU and learn how to deal with in our cities instead of complaining about Firaxis fixing their previously weak attempt at 'encouraging' Emancipation.

Ways into Happiness -- by Cabert.

And as 'useless' as it may be, the Forest Preserve is yet another way to increase .

There are so many resources and buildings that you should never have a problem with -- especially in the late game.


-- my 2

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

We are discussing possible improvements for realism to the emancipation civic. I know perfectly well how to STFU and deal with in my cities. I feel, however, that diplomatic penalties are more realistic especially in the modern age. War is a major factor in in late game with all the units involved and some of us enjoy being able to buy up mass amounts of units using US therefore bypassing Police State. Those add up big time so sometimes all those resources and buildings and even culture slider won't stop the

 

[OTAKUjbski]

We are discussing possible improvements for realism to the emancipation civic. I know perfectly well how to STFU and deal with in my cities. I feel, however, that diplomatic penalties are more realistic especially in the modern age. War is a major factor in in late game with all the units involved and some of us enjoy being able to buy up mass amounts of units using US therefore bypassing Police State. Those add up big time so sometimes all those resources and buildings and even culture slider won't stop the

From the looks of it, only 1/3 of the people in this post are trying to improve it. The other two thirds are either whining or trying to put down the whiners.

I think improving it means making its penalties even stiffer by adding your suggested diplomatic penalites as well as exclusion from the United Nations for not running it.

The penalty seems realistic to me, because even IRL, people have gotten upset and revolted over being in slavery or restricted by religious and political castes.

I tend to agree with the carrot vs. stick view of Emancipation, though, because it really is a weak civic with no real basis for choosing it unless in the process of making the SE-to-CE switch or to prevent from piling up.

IMHO, though, the isn't difficult to deal with and shouldn't be reduced unless other penalties are compounded.

That being said, from WW has no place in a discussion over Emancipation. "War is hell" ... any compounded penalties due to WW have no bearing on whether Emancipation is broke or not.

 

[FrancisMarion]

Emancipation is the only civic that serves more as a punishment rather than reward from a pure game design perspective that doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

I imagine if all civics involved punishment, I wouldn't be bothered by Emancipation at all, but at this point it sticks out like a sore thumb.

 

[Bandobras Took]

I don't believe that Emancipation forces others into it. However, if I had to make a suggestion, I would suggest that they take away the unhappiness for non-participating Civs and simply add a significant boost to GPP of those Civs that do choose Emancipation. Emancipation allows for more talent to shine through instead being killed by a whip, forced to farm, or stuck in a certain job whether they want it or not (Slavery, Serfdom, and Caste System).

On another note, add an unhappiness penalty for Slavery for each successive era in which it is in use.

 

[winddbourne]

I also prefer a positive bonus to a negative. A happiness bonus and better relations with those who do run emancipation "+1 you freed your people" seems a lot better to me than a happiness penalty and "-1 your people suffer under your cruel regime".

To me it's like the initial idea of "dark ages" which was eventually included as "golden ages" instead. The overall effect is still there, if everyone has emancipation everyone is happier and like each other better. If nobody runs it you have no issue at all. But the punishment aspect is gone.

 

[Dennis_Moore]

Emasculation is the tech that enables the "Royal Harem" national wonder.

 

[Aurelius321]

I understand that the game is not a mirror of reality... Compromises must be made so that the overall picture will be as continuous with reality as we can and still have a good game. One of the reasons we like playing this game is due to it's attention to detail and close image of the world around us.

With that in mind... I've seen some of the positive effects of emancipation that have been suggested... And they all just don't seem to gel as well as reducing unhappiness. The thing about adding happiness to your Civ for running Emancipation isn't quite right. People can go thru a day and have 10 good things happen to them and 1 bad... Two days later the only thing about that day that will be remembered is the 1 bad thing. We tend to let negative things stay with us while positive things come and go. Look at your boss at work. When you do something bad he's right on your behind, however he does not praise you for every good thing you do. With slavery we are unhappy when it is here and merely content when it is gone, but we are not 'happy' in the sense that the game defines. When was the last time we had a party for us not being slaves? This whole threads response to the negative stimulus of emancipation is a perfect example of how the one civic that gives you unhappiness is causing so much trouble. There are plenty of other civics that can help you overcome the faces that Emancipation creates.

Just my two cents

 

[magicalsushi]

I'm not in favour of changing it. You know it's coming; it's hardly a great surprise. I *like* having to make tough choices - for me, that's why the game's fun. I often spend a while thinking about when to research Scientific Method (knowing that I'll lose all my monastic science output), or switch to Emancipation and miss out on Slavery or CS. I'm glad that the stakes are high in those instances; it makes the game interesting.

However, for those who can't tolerate the fact that the game has rules stopping them from doing absolutely anything they want, here's one suggestion: perhaps there should be a happiness bonus for the other modern civics that only works if you are also running Emancipation? +1 (or 2?) happy faces for each of the other four bottom-row civics, but only if you're also running Emancipation. I don't think there are any other examples of *direct* synergies between civics, and there's probably a good reason for that, but it's an idea.

I'm not keen on the proposals of extra positive features of Emancipation (including my own, but I thought I'd post it for discussion). Extra happiness doesn't seem like a big deal to me in the late game - extra unhappiness is much more significant, especially when it scales with city size like emancipation anger currently does. As for diplomatic penalties, I really can't stand those - they're meaningless in multiplayer and they cause asymmetry in single player games, because the human won't impose diplomatic penalties on the AI even if the AI aren't using Emancipation. I suspect this is why we have the current implementation - Firaxis presumably wanted a penalty that would genuinely affect the human and AI equally.

 

[Martinus]

You guys must be doing something wrong - if you are running Caste System, it means you are running specialist economy, which means you can adjust culture slider for happiness. I never had a problem with Emancipation so far (I play usually on Monarch).

 

[FrancisMarion]

It's not dealing with the Unhappiness that is an issue. There are plenty of ways to do that. The issue is that Emancipation is a punishment civic the ONLY punishment civic which doesn't fit in the context of the rest of the game.

 

[OTAKUjbski]

It's not dealing with the Unhappiness that is an issue. There are plenty of ways to do that. The issue is that Emancipation is a punishment civic the ONLY punishment civic which doesn't fit in the context of the rest of the game.

Just a quick thought before I go to lunch, because this post continues to interest me ...

A couple responses have referred to Emancipation using phrases like "only civic" and "doesn't fit". That argument seems unfounded to me, because Civ 4 is far from a homogenous game ... not everything has to be the same or "fit" (nor does it now in many aspects).

There are other civics which have unique aspects when compared against the other civics:

• Police State is the only civic affecting War Weariness.
  
• Organized Religion is the only civic allowing cities to build units (Missionary) without regard to its requirements (Monastery).
  
• Serfdom is the only civic that is made entirely worthless by both a Wonder (The Hagia Sophia) and a technology (Steam Power).

And there are also other civics with a corresponding punishment:

• Pacifism increases unit maintenance.
  
• Mercantilism eliminates foreign Trade Routes and foreign Corporate effects in your cities.
  
• State Property nullifies all Corporate effects in your cities.
  
• Environmentalism increases Corporate Maintenance.

So the way I see it, the only valid argument really left against Emancipation is that it's weak. IRL, nations really did go into turmoil over Emancipation when the world began abolishing slavery and castes; and what's more, it escalated as more and more of the world accepted Emancipation.

If anything, the penalty should be removed from Emancipation and instead added to Tribalism, Slavery, Serfdom and Caste System as " penalty when other civs are Emancipated". I bet if Firaxis had done that in the first place, this thread wouldn't even exist.