>this thread is out of control!
>so to add to the madness, here's my interpretation of what
>fascism should be in the game. (no consideration given to
>balance I'm afraid)
And then will be my own opinion on your interpretation
>and I will stick with what can actually be altered in the rules.
>prereq: nationalism
>-this is basis of fascism, everybody interpreted the new idea of
>popular rule differently, this is the least liberal interpretation.
Agree. The most known fascisms relied heavily on the supposed superiority of their nation (and race) to justify a right to rule over others.
>free units: 10 per metro,
>-to reflect the increased conscription.
Acceptable.
Fascism is directed toward control, police and army. It's build for it. So ok.
>worker rate: 3
>-democracy's rate because fascism worked people to death
>basically, and their heavy use of rail
Here I don't agree. It's true that a lot of people under fascism worked harder due to propaganda, forced labor, and police, but there were also big resistances with sabotages, spying and the like due to rebellious people, hard pressed by the inhuman vision of the society. Moreover, the constant police control kill initiative, creativity and the like. So I would stick with the worker rate of 2.
>assimilation chance: 4
>-democracy's rate because cities are tightly controlled by police
>and propaganda
Well, time to end the joke. Assimilation in fascism ? What a joke ! Fascism is all about national glory and racial superiority. The very idea of assimilation would frighten even more the fascists than the people being assimilated ; whose people who would not be eager to be assimilated by such a government that consider them as inferiors.
Look at history : Germany did not assimilate anyone but the Sudetes. Even the Dutch and Alsacians, who were considered as Germans by Hitler and had a common culture with Germany resisted assimilation.
Japan invaded China and Korea, and slaughtered civilian, never even wanting to hear about considering PEOPLE as part of their empire.
Assimilation chance : 0 or 1. But I think 0 is more representative.
>military police limit: 5
>- 1+ communism's rate to reflect the military police's enormous
>effect on the minds of the populace.
The police in fascism was frightening. Everyone feared the dreaded Gestapo. So it would be acceptable to have a 5 police limit.
Though, more people resisted to the tyranny. So I would say, stay with the same police limit as communism.
>draft limit: 3 or maybe 4
>-fascist germany relied very heavily on conscription to battle
>numerically superior enemies, and at the end of the war,
>germany and the other countries it conscripted from were
>enormously drained of men, but so was russia which is why I
>tend towards 3, communism's rate.
The armies of Nazi Germany and Japan in WW2 recruited almost anyone they could, especially in the battle in Berlin, where women, teenagers and 60 years men fought.
So it's very logical. Agree.
>hurrying production: forced labor
>-as I said, fascists tended to basically enslave people
Agree too. Germany killed thousands Russians with forced labor. Most of the death camp were aimed to "kill through labor".
Hurrying production by forced labor is nearly a sine qua non for fascism.
>war weariness: none
>-I really thought about changing this to low, its a myth that
>germany/italy never tired of the war. they tired of it pretty
>quickly, but since no one was allowed to dissent, I put it at
>none.
If a government is able to be constantly in war, it's the fascism. Nearly designed for. Putting war weariness is definitely a no-no.
>diplomats: elite
>-this is to reflect germany's fantastic pre-war military buildup
>that was wildly illegal according to the no-military treaties
>germany signed after WWI.
Disagree. Germany could do this because the Europe was living with the dread memory of the WW1, and public opinions wanted the peace whatever the cost. In fact, diplomats in fascism are nothing big enough to talk about. A fascism is toward either ignoring the rest of the world and concentrate onto internal stability (Argentina, Spain under Franco, Greece under "the colonels") and thus, does not have much use of diplomatic ways, either is agressive towards the foreigners and don't use a lot diplomacy (Argentina about the UK isles i.e. , Japan, Italy). So the diplomat should be weaker if any change should be made.
Diplomat : either normal or, if possible, weakened.
>spies: regular
>-german spies were pretty good at concealing their war crimes,
>and propaganda in the US, and finding internal enemies, but
>they severely lost the code war, so I won't make them veteran.
Germans did not discovered anything about the radars during the Battle of England, they did not succeed in jamming the US atomic research, while at the same time a number of covert missions of Allied were successfully driven in Germany. Italy has never anything close to a performant secret service during the WW2. Japanese handled it better, but they could not find the secret codes of USA, while USA could at least partially decode theirs.
All in all, never any fascim has impressive spies.
So Spies : normal, and if possible weakened.
>immune to: investigate city, propaganda (i don't know if you can
>pick 2)
>-they did keep their death camps secret, and they were highly
>effective with their own propaganda
Immune to propaganda is acceptable. The politic police would not allow anyone to make any propaganda except the official one. Thus, investigate city don't seem to me very realistic.
So I would say that fascism should be resistant/immune to propaganda, but that's all.
>standard trade bonus: on
>-like it or not, fascism when not at war was extremely profitable.
>above threads act like germany wasn't fascist before WWII, but >they were.
Fascism is, like it was previously said, in acquaintance with free market. Thus it should gain the trade bonus.
BUT, many of the ressources of a fascism government is headed toward police and the army to sustain the high control it requires.
So I would say that one nullify the other, and that the benefit from trade bonus is showed in the extra unit support, and the ability to do more police and more draft.
>Ruler titles: duce, fuhrer, I forget the spanish one
>-reply to above: Japan was not a fascist state.
Furher. The spanish one was "caudillo" (the capitan of the chief, if I'm correct).
The Japan WAS a fascist state. It perhaps had the Emperor, but only at a symbolic figure (except at the very end of the war when the Emperor forced its military staff to make peace), and the power was in the hands of generals. The government was praising the racial superiority of Japaneses, was aiming a huge conquest war to realize the dream of the Dai Nippon (great Japan, from Korea to Australia) and showed all the features of fascism. Japan in WW2 was, in fact, fascist.
>I'd put corruption at nuisance, but I'm not sure what corruption
>really represents, other than a stupid hack fix for a flawed
>engine.
Corruption represent the quantity of goods, money and work that is wasted/embezzled (right word ?). The reasons can be that the local men in charge keep a part for themselves, or that the city is a remote, backward one, or that there is a tradition to bribe the official (particularly for despotic government, as in ancient China), etc...
Fascism has a part of 'cult of the leader'. The power is absolute in the hand of the dirigeant, and subsequently (spelling ?) the power of someone in fascism is nearly all the time absolute toward his inferiors. Just see as how Goering, Goebbels and the like could kill thousand people just if they wanted, with a single phone call.
So what happen is that a large part of the wealth is easily theft by city governors and the like, so the corruption should be fairly high (remember how Goering could pillage all the art from occupied territory, just to be able to show them in his house).
Corruption : AT LEAST the level of republic.
>I think this is an imbalanced modification to the game, because
>this would be the best government. However this is due to
>game flaws, but I would put fascism on par with democracy and
>communism, at least for short periods of time. We've never
>really seen a fascist government go on for a long period of time.
Franco hold Spain for more than 30 years. Greece was ruled by Colonels for nearly as long. Argentina and Brazil suffered the same fate. The fact is, fascism is good for war, but the rest of the country is stagnant, because of the lack of freedom and because most of the nation's energy is directed toward repression.
>my information comes mainly from an excellent couple of books
>called the rise and fall of the third reich, I highly recommend it.
>as to whether fascism is inherently evil, I'd say yes, but only
>because I believe in freedom. I would say that
>monarchy/despotism/communism are all evil too. However that
>is me speaking as a citizen, if I could, I would be a fascist
>leader, because I think that would be the most fun.
Well, that is not part of the game, if we start about it, we will end in a philosophical reasoning about Good and Bad, and it's "only" a Civ3 forum here
