(Idea) Open Borders Changes

Idea is simple:

Open Borders recipients
* Growth +5% (maximum of 20)
* Crime Threshold increased 5% (maximum of 20)
* Tourism received increase
* Foreign missionaries do not suffer attrition
* Increase bargaining value

Open Borders senders
* Growth -5% (maximum of 20)
* Crime Threshold decreased 5% (maximum of 20)
* Tourism sent increase
* Your missionaries do no suffer attrition
* Decrease bargaining value

The idea being to reflect what we've been seeing in history for the last 100 years or so of lax immigration policies and the effects of free movement across borders.

It can be argued, especially most recently, that one way immigration into a country comes with an increase in crime and obviously an increase in population, as observed in Western countries.

In the reverse, if you open borders up in another country you could effectively dump your criminals to the other country instead of jailing them, losing some of your population to emigration. This is what happens in the "third world" although they have not particularly improved their own crime situations due to a number of other reasons.

The point being that one-way border agreements can be even more potent and reflect history and current events. It would take a fairly big number of these types of one-way agreements to reach the biggest effect and it comes with a catch.

The changes to the value of these agreements should make it so you want 1-to-1, but for opening up someone else's or your borders to be valued higher than current levels, because if you have more people over time and higher crime it's going to potentially create serious problems, while sending people to another country comes with considerably less problems and more benefits.

Curious what you guys think

 

Your reasoning sounds flawed to me.
If you want to make your Civ "great again" then you should open up your borders regardless. Immigrants tend to be amongst the most dynamic citizens in a country. Maybe give a bonus to gold and science in addition to the growth?

Also your premise that immigrants are more likely to be criminal is wrong.
Take California for example, 35% of the State's population are foreign born yet only account for 17% of the prison population.
A 2008 report by PPI also showed that the incarceration rate across the US for foreign born criminals was 297/100,000 vs 813/100,000 for native born Americans.

The same holds true in the UK.

Also, I don't know how you say there is an observation of increased crime in Western countries when the crime rate across most of the western world has dropped dramatically over recent decades, across most crime categories, although perception of crime has increased significantly which helps demagogues give that impression. Despite illegal immigration (ok a crime) having tripled in the US from 1990-2013 to 11.3m people, violent crime somehow fell by 48% according to the FBI in the same period.

I'd vote no. to these changes.

 

Code:

Open Borders recipients
* Growth +5% (maximum of 20)
* Crime Threshold increased 5% (maximum of 20)
* Tourism received increase
* Foreign missionaries do not suffer attrition
* Increase bargaining value

Open Borders senders
* Growth -5% (maximum of 20)
* Crime Threshold decreased 5% (maximum of 20)
* Tourism sent increase
* Your missionaries do no suffer attrition
* Decrease bargaining value

Surprisingly doable.

 

I'm all for making Open Borders a more interesting deal, but I have zero interesting in politicizing the mod this way.

 

Check this out:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_crime

Also, it's worth pointing out that it isn't necessarily the actuality of committing crimes, but the suspicion that is created by mingling of native and foreign cultures. If a foreigner commits a crime, usually the native population cares much more about that than if a native did. This can lead to an over-emphasis on policing foreign groups and lead to a crime wave of natives, who have capitalized on the over-emphasis.

Not every immigrant is the same either. Some people, whether by culture, religion, etc. are more hostile or defiant of laws than others. It's not much of a surprise that people who immigrate to a country currently bombing their former country might be more hostile.

Furthermore, the increase in crime is only part of the package - the dynamic element you refer to with the fresh blood carries over to being able to add more specialists to your cities due to the growth rate. I wholly recognize the positive impact of immigration policy.

Also, the impact of either one is actually canceled out if there is full open borders between the two civilizations in question.

 

It's no more politicizing than claiming monarchy (Tradition) produces better culture than a republic (Progress), or that state sponsored culture (Aesthetics) is required to be the greatest, or that Big Ben is more of a representative of the Industrial Revolution than Slater Mill, etc.

The whole idea is to come up with suggestions more than to push an agenda. That's how I and others perceive immigration historically and presently, but people can make their own contributions.

 

Except that concept you're trying to have open borders represent is a massively hot-button issue right now in both the US and Europe, the change you're suggesting at least looks on the surface level like it comes out of the alt-right, and none of those examples you listed affix the word "criminals" to some non-criminal group. Other than that, yes, they're exactly identical.

Religious divisions and ideological pressure already represent this kind of unhappiness just fine. This isn't MAGA: The Mod.

 

What if "crime" got replaced by boredom? Culture clash!

 

Looking for the upvote button and then realise this is not Reddit.

 

Vox Populi is on Reddit, too!

I'm Skyblue_Aardvark over there, because... I mean, aardvarks, man. They're great.

 

I'm subbed to the channel, but it feels pretty quiet compared to the NQ channel and this forum. Check regularly though.

 

Yeah. Civ Fanatics is the best place to talk about VP. I was hoping the subreddit would be a place we could ****post about our games, but it's mostly been a bug-reporting / questions forum for people who don't want to make Civ Fanatics account.

 

r/civ mods refused/ignored my request to sidebar the subreddit for me. My guess? Fanboyism for the hilariously trivial NQ Mod. No offense to NQ users, but there are zero major fixes in that DLL.

G

 

I think it's meant to be just a Multipalyer mod , no?

 

That isn't true, I worked on NQMod as well (you'll see me in the thanks). No need to insult other projects.

But the /r/civ mods should definitely sidebar the subreddit. Will see if I know any of them.

 

I've surveyed the NQ Mod and, aside from your work, there's really not much to it at all (for the record, I don't consider your work to be an original aspect of the NQ mod, as you made your work available elsewhere. Mea culpa if I'm mistaken).

G

 

That may be, but the number of mentions of the CP/Vox Populi followed by some variation on "NQ Mod or GFTO" is pretty darn high. 'First to the party' syndrome, it seems.

G

 

It's Reddit, what can you really expect?

 

Just for the record.
Perhaps you should change the Name of the site from CPP to VP?

Might get more views.

 

My sole point of preference from a purely player perspective is that NQMod makes the game better, while VP *also* makes the game more interesting. Hence, VP makes the game more fun