Ideas for a Broader Civic System

[Aussie_Lurker]

Hi again guys. Thanks for all the positive comments, it really inspires confidence for when I actually tackle this particular endeavour.
Anyway, the planning continues apace. I have added additional material for both Organisation and Rights, as well as making minor corrections to government and ideology. That means that I am now exactly halfway through the planning. As always, please check it out and tell me if there is anything you want changed or explained. Another point is that some of the 'effects' I have explained in SMAC speak, and these will of course need to be 'translated' into civ4 form.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Right guys this is it, I have finished filling in all the blanks for what all the various civics settings I have suggested will actually do. It is as rough as guts, and will probably require serious balancing after the game is in our hot little hands-but I am sure I will be able to count on you guys for help in that !
In some cases, if some of the choices seem a little 'overpowered', then it because I probably envisage them having at least a medium to high upkeep cost, to make them most useful for smaller nations (like Democracy and, to a lesser extent, Republic).
Anyway, hope you enjoy going over my little 'Magnum Opus' (or is that 'Magnificent Octopus'?) and, as I have said previously, please don't hesitate to throw up alternative suggestions for me to consider !

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Hiya again guys.
Well, I have made a few minor tweaks to the Civic Options, to try and 'balance them out' a bit more.
I also thought I would explain a few key points:

Where there is a flat bonus or penalty to hammers and/or gold, this usually reflects the impacts of crime/corruption. So a penalty means this civic option tends to encourage greater corruption and crime, wheras a bonus means that the option actually discourages it.
By the same token, a bonus or penalty to happiness means that you are changing the number of people who actively feel happy about their quality of life etc etc. A Bonus or Penalty to Unhappiness, on the other hand, means that you are changing the number of people who feel genuinely UNHAPPY about how life is treating them. Hopefully, the game will allow us to more finely tune the Happy/Unhappy ratio so that it can directly effect the Gold, Hammers, Science, Culture and Health the city generates-to reflect the rising tide of crime and corruption-and thus allow me to link the ideas from both paragraphs.
This brings me around to civil servants and police (technically the same thing, I guess). Civil Servants represent the ability of the state to facilitate greater growth-in both economic and population terms-through the implementation of laws, the healing of the sick, or the monitoring and collection of revenues.
Police represent both the light and dark side of 'law enforcement'. On the one hand, they try and prevent crime and corruption, or regain property that has been stolen/misappropriated. Additionally, they can arrest malcontents before they can cause enough trouble to send a city into total disarray (i.e., they reduce the number of 'unhappy' citizens).
Again, if it is possible to mod a relationship between Happy/Unhappy to the output of a city, then I might just roll Civil Servants and Police into a single specialist type-whose ultimate goal is simply to reduce the number of effectively unhappy people in a city.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Robi D]

Very interesting and well thought out. Its difficult to make exact comments because i dont know how the civic systems going to play out in the game, but this is a good starting point and definately something that can be expanded on/ refined easily once we know how the current system will work. All in all great work aussie.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Thanks for the support there, Robi D. I confess that at least some of the 'positive' elements of the civic system I have put forward are based on elements of the Civic screen which we have already seen (such things as bonus specialists, extra rewards from specialisation and happiness bonuses), its whether we can incorporate the counterbalancing stuff (like added unhappiness and the ability to add new categories of specialists) which I am most uncertain of. Anyway, I guess we will see when the game is released, as you said-but at least we have a blueprint from which to work !

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[megabrainz]

Having said elsewhere that I'm not commenting on this, just a quick question: Why do you feel that you need the same number of options for every category? It seems a bit forced. E.g. "Environmental" just doesn't seem to belong in the legal category. It might belong in ideology, conceivably - or even economy (it would be a sort of regulated economy).

Also, I think it would be worth considering having some civics that aren't chosen from a set of 5 (or in your case, 7). Instead, you either adopt it or you don't, but your other civics are unaffected. Environmentalism might be a good example. Adopt it and health is increased, don't adopt it and you get a production bonus.

I'll stop now before I spend all day here.

 

[apatheist]

Those are both excellent points.

 

[Holistic]

Since environmentalist legislation usually has the government trying to change the behaviour of its citizens through law, renaming the "Environmental" legal category to "Social Engineering" would both fit and justify moving it a bit earlier in the tech tree? Might be a nice nod to what civics were called in SMAC as well.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

I don't know why, Megabrainz, except perhaps that I have a great love of symmetry . As I said, though, all comments and suggestions are welcome. You are probably right that having legal as both an economic and a legal civic is simply uneccessary duplication-perhaps it can be removed or replaced, what do YOU guys suggest?

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Trajan13]

I saw this and thought it was too awesome to allow to slip to the recesses of the second page.

Mr. Lurker, it seems you have an awesome idea going here. I have a few constructive criticisms/questions though.

1. What exactly is 'Bureaucratic' meant to be in the Economic catagory? It seems almost a placeholder to make the catagory have 7 options. Perhaps it could be replaced with a term more specific, or a new catagory between Barter and Mercantile - something that reflects the use of currency and the existence of trade, but is not Mercantilist yet not a modern Laisse Faire free market.

2. Under Legal, what's the difference between 'Magesterial' and 'Judicial'? And why is there an 'Environmental' catagory? Personally I'd change the catagory to go
Tribal(same)
Decree(same)
Theocratic(new - laws based on religion)
Vassalage(same)
Civil Law(new - Greco/Roman and European style of trial/court system, used by much of world, where legislation not precedent is the primary source of law)
Common Law(new - US, British and Commonwealth style of trial/court system, used by rest of world, where previous cases are the primary source of law, with legislation as guidelines)
Totalitarianism(renamed Total Law Enforcement).

3. Under 'Organization,' what do you mean by 'Devolved'?

4. For 'Ideology'... This entire catagory strikes me as strange actually. IMHO it should be something like
Survival
Order
Spirituality
Liberty
Equality
Power
Wealth
if you are going for an overarching Ideology column. I see it as basically saying what the society's dominant concern is, and thus I'd say it should be broader than 'Feudalist' or 'Fascist'.
For example, Saddam Hussein's Iraq might be seen as an 'Order' nation, whereas the United States would be 'Liberty.' It's not THAT different from yours, but again IMHO it's both more focused and more clearly differentiated from the other civics choices.

Anyways those are a few of my thoughts, but overall it's an awesome idea and would make internal national politics awesome. I'm no modder, but if I can help at all just ask.

 

[Skirmisher]

What about the Family unit!

Matriarchial +1 food +1 happiness
Clannish +1 food +2 free military support
Extended +1 food +1 trade
Paternal +1 trade +1 free military support
Nuclear +2 trade
Singular -1 food +3 trade

 

[MRM]

Hi Aussi ,

I would give some religous civics rewards or penalties on science - for example for militant -2/city, orginazied -1/city , free religon +1/city , atheism +2/city. ( Think about inqusition and Galileo for example )

And IMO Paganism is not a Civic, because that are just other religons.( which I would add someday if possible )

In generall i like your new civic system

 

[Skirmisher]

BTW under rights you have the first entry as "none". I don't think that is correct. I believe that in many tribal communities people had the right of revenge, or bloodfeud, if no compensation to a family for a wrong against one of its members is given. The Troyan war and the Icelandic sagas are examples.

ps. What does "probe" mean?

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Well, in SMAC you had Probe teams-and different Social Engineering choices had a varying impacts on probe team success-either for you or against you. My idea is that more totalitarian/strict societies are better able to flush out spies within their midst-but at a cost to ordinary rights and liberties-hope that makes sense.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Skirmisher]

I see. Do have some insider knowledge on how the spy system will work in CIV4?

I hope that spies will have varying effectiveness, like you suggest.

 

[MRM]

Well, in SMAC you had Probe teams-and different Social Engineering choices had a varying impacts on probe team success-either for you or against you. My idea is that more totalitarian/strict societies are better able to flush out spies within their midst-but at a cost to ordinary rights and liberties-hope that makes sense.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

Make some sence but I think with adding science rewards or penalties it would make even more sence. In a strict religous state you can maybe still have free speece, but research at university that contradict the "holy book" ( no matter what book ) is not supported ( at best ) or even forbidden. ( just imagine a usa where the religous right get even more power ) - maybe an overall reduction or reward or pennalty ( 5% and 10 % ) would be better.

Other modification might be that you could get more happy people at atheism with TV and colloseum ( or theater ) , but less or none happy people our of temples and cathedrals. Other way around for strict religous civics, a cathedral makes more people happy when you have a strict religous civic. . That would have the consequence that strict religous civic is better in the medivian are, and atheism makes more sence in the modern era.

Don't get me wrong - I don't want to replace your idea with the spy, it is just an additional suggestion

 

[jamesjkirk]

I've been very interested on the topic of civics, thanks for putting together this list, Aussie. Overall it's very good, and it's good to get thinking about this early. I probably have a lot to say on this, so I'll just break it down by the Civics choices listed.

Religion
I think this one is pretty good as it stands regarding the choices, good balance, and balanced throughout history, etc. My only comment is that I think there should maybe be some more positive sides to Atheism, so human & AI players don't rush to sell off all religious improvements. Maybe an economic benefit and not lose culture, as, for example, the Soviet Union convert many of it's churches to museums or other sorts of buildings. I hear of Mosques getting converted to vodka factories too.

Economy
I think the choices here are too skewed toward the late game. There needs to be something pre-Mercantilist I think (as this only developed in the 1500s or so, really). So maybe the prior tech (Cash Economy or something far more elegant) could have the Specialist bonus and Mercantilism could get an extra gold or hammer or both?

There should be a later choice that would reflect protectionist/nationalist economics of the 19th & 20 centuries, called Statism. It could have production and maybe happiness bonuses, but reduce gold or specialists or increase maintenence.

Additionally, I don't see the difference between Bureaucratic and Welfarist. Maybe they could be combined into one called Social Market or Corporatism, that would come later in the game. I see it as sort of modern Continental Europe's tendency toward social consensus and providing capitalism and social benefits. Health and happiness would be increased at the cost of production and gold. But maybe add one more specialist too.

And I agree w/ the elimination of Environmentalism

So the choices would be:
Barter
Cash Economy
Mercantilism
Free Market
Statism
State Property
Social Market/Corporatism

Labor
I also this this is pretty good, just confused over what exactly Individual is supposed to represent.

Legal
Something about this, that also needs to be addressed in Organization and Rights, is basically just how the authority of the state is organized, if power is arbitary or limited. Before I elaborate, I think I also need to hear how Magisterial and Judicial differ.

Rights
Like w/ Economy, these choices are very skewed toward the late game. I'm also not clear how different Civil, Equal and Universal rights would be. I know they're different, but they're close. I'm also not sure Constitutional belongs here and not under Legal? Not to get too into political theory, but maybe this should be the category to get into such things as Positive and Negative Freedom - ie, a state which is laissez-faire, versus an interventionist one. The categories are coming right to me now, but if it sounds good I could get some concrete ideas down later.

Governments
Basically fine as it stands also. I'm not totally convinced of the need to separate republic and democracy, because it seems redundant given the other civics options. Although at the risk of doing the same thing, maybe Dictatorship could be broken into Authoritarianism and Totalitarianism?

Organization
Also very well developed. Maybe it could use another older one, but I see how there's not room for that. I'm also confused as to why Devolved and Federal increase maintenence. Intuitively, I'd think they'd decrease it. I'm just curious what the argument for it is.

Devolved means decentralized, BTW, although I don't know if Aussie means like a confederation, or somewhere between Centralized and Federal systems, like the devolved system in Britain.

Ideology
I was also confused by this category, and think it could be duplicative or contridictory with the other choices. But I think the ones listed by Trajan are good, though they may suffer the same problem.

And that's it for now. I can respond later with some more definite civics choices as well as positives and negatives for them.

 

[Khaim]

Is it possible to make the civics choices change over time? For instance, could Despotism become Dictatorship once the prerequisite tech is discovered, Paganism evolve into Atheism (though Secularism might perhaps be a better name?) and Plutocracy into Aristocracy.

Second post, and no one responded to it.

I think the idea of evolving civics choices is really interesting. It would open up a lot of design space without actually increasing the number of options at any one time. After all, late game there tends to be one or two "best" choices, because they're strictly better (or nearly so) than previous choices. Civ IV looks like it does a good job combating this, but I still think there's room for improvement.

Basically, new civics choices have to be better, otherwise you wouldn't be excited to get to them, and no one would bother with them. So the early civics will be ignored later. If instead certain techs upgrade them, by increasing bonuses, adding related bonuses, or downgrading penalties, then it lets you switch back to the basic or early civics if you like their style better.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

I don't think newer civics choices have to be better in every way than older ones-merely different. Then you simply choose the one which is best for you at that particular time. So, if you are involved in a long-running war, and dissent is getting too much to handle, then you can choose to either change government type (from democracy to dictatorship), or Rights or Legal (Civil/Judicial to Total Enforcement or Decree). If, however, you want a scientifically and Culturally productive society, then you will aim for a monarchy or democracy. Upkeep costs are another means of balancing out any modern civics which are genuinely 'better' than their earlier bretheran.

Oh, as for Individualised labour. This is where every worker is required to operate without the cover of a union or other forms of collectivism. Each worker must negotiate pay and conditions independant of their fellow workmates-leads to a cut-throat and competitive workplace-which is good for profits, but not always good for the health and wellbeing of the workers.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Oh also, Ideology serves both a gameplay function AND a descriptive function-so allowing a player to see at a glance who is a fascist republic and who is a theocratic dictatorship etc etc. With all of the gameplay effects of civics, though, I have tried to avoid ANY overall duplication (so, though a legal civic might have the same happiness effect as a government civic, the former might have an effect on maintainance, wheras the latter might effect culture.) Hope that makes sense.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.