Ideas on New Governments

[Smoking mirror]

Actualy it was the invention of socialism that helped bring about fascism, as many traditionl liberal nations rushed towards totalitarianism to save them from the "Red Rabble", if anything Das capital should allow an anarchy free switch to despotism or fascism.

Actualy I agree that anarchy quashing wonders would be a good idea. Perhaps they need not be wonders at all, but social engineering projects..

Civic/social engineering projects
How about a new categoy of city improvement, these would be built just like a building or small/great wonder, but when complete would result in a set temporary social event.

Example; Economic asessment.
cost 200 shields.
result; allows a preview of what your ecconomy would be (corruption and waste in each city) under a different government.

Social reorganisation;
cost 400 shields.
Allows a anarchy free (or one turn) transition to another government type. Represents a carefully planned change of government through peacfull means, with lots of propaganda to ease the transition.

Capitalisation;
cost 80 shields.
Shields are only converted to capital once all 80 shields have been gathered.

Army recritment drive;
cost 500 shields.
drafts one conscript unit in every city without causing unhappyness. Even effects cities too small for conscription normaly, representing a last ditch call to arms in defence of the city.

Theres lots of other projects you could have, and lots of odd rules that could be represented with this function.

 

[ComradeDavo]

Actualy it was the invention of socialism that helped bring about fascism, as many traditionl liberal nations rushed towards totalitarianism to save them from the "Red Rabble", if anything Das capital should allow an anarchy free switch to despotism or fascism.

Actualy I agree that anarchy quashing wonders would be a good idea. Perhaps they need not be wonders at all, but social engineering projects..

Civic/social engineering projects
How about a new categoy of city improvement, these would be built just like a building or small/great wonder, but when complete would result in a set temporary social event.

Example; Economic asessment.
cost 200 shields.
result; allows a preview of what your ecconomy would be (corruption and waste in each city) under a different government.

Social reorganisation;
cost 400 shields.
Allows a anarchy free (or one turn) transition to another government type. Represents a carefully planned change of government through peacfull means, with lots of propaganda to ease the transition.

Capitalisation;
cost 80 shields.
Shields are only converted to capital once all 80 shields have been gathered.

Army recritment drive;
cost 500 shields.
drafts one conscript unit in every city without causing unhappyness. Even effects cities too small for conscription normaly, representing a last ditch call to arms in defence of the city.

Theres lots of other projects you could have, and lots of odd rules that could be represented with this function.

I like that idea

Especially the army recruitment drive!

It would be very good to see 'temporary' improvments like this, would make the game more dynamic

 

[Smoking mirror]

Also it would give you something to do with your capital or high production cities once you've built all the available Improvements and have a good size army. If you cant bulid any wonders then you are just left with capitalization, and its realy anoying seeing all that uncorrupted production being bypassed soboringly (especialy before you've researched economics when the income from capitalization is pitiful).

Other temporay improvements could be;

Military parade
Cost 300 shields
Huge temporary rise in war wariness handling capability. Good as a propoganda exercise before a war of agression, would also add fun to the espionage part of the game; If a nearby civ was building a "Military Parade" in thier capital it would be a good bet that they were just about to become agressive. Perhaps it could also add a temporary boost to your civs military reputation (based on number and strength of military units and judged by your military advisor), making everyone more respectfull. A military parade could then be used as a bluff to ward off an impending war.

Cultural Festival
Cost 500 shields
A bit like either the Nuremburg rallies or other 20th century "historical festivals" which atempted to link the new national order with previous cultural ideas. Would give a ten point increase of culture in every city on the continent.

Scientific exibition
Cost 1000
Like the great exibition in London or the futurama expo in america. Could give a temporary boost to science generation in all cities Or a single large boost of beakers directly.

 

[Jaca]

judgement, point (1) and (2), exactly my thoughts. Point (3): very interesting.
In short: I am with you!

Regards,
Jaca

 

[CivEconomist]

I would like to see a more recent capitalist government than demo, thats way back in middles ages something better would be nice in the industrial or modern

 

[rhialto]

Have a look at the Rise and Rule mod for C3C. It has a lot of very good government types.

 

[DBear]

Or this could be better handled by using the social engineering system from Alpha Centauri. Under governments you would have Chieftain (default) with choices of Monarchy, Representative, or Totalitarian. Under economics you would have Individual as default, with choices of Barter, Capitalist, or Communist. Under religion you would have animism (default), with Polytheism, Monotheism, Agnosticism as choices.

That's all I can think of for now.

 

[rhialto]

dbear, under that model, every modern industrial country in Europe, North America and teh Far East would have exactly the same government, but we all know there are differences. Come to think of it, except for the religion aspect, Ancient Athens would also be the same government.

This is why SMAC style won't work for any historical model.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Thats nonsense Rhialto! Each civs individual circumstances and play style would dictate the nature of both the government AND Social engineering settings. For instance, a player who is embarking on a domination victory will probably tend more towards fascist and communist government types. Within these government types, though, the player would probably also adjust his militarism and nationalism settings, in order to keep war weariness down and assimilation rates up! A more isolated, building player, OTOH, going for a cultural and/or moral victory might tend towards democratic or republican governments, but would probably have high libertarian and sufferage levels, in order to keep happiness and culture levels as high as possible! Of course, a completely isolated player, even one going for a moral victory, might set a high nationalism just to keep other civs 'at bay' as it were!
The reality is that the government models in civ3 do give us a great starting point for modelling the different government types. However, to get the full range of choices actually available in real life, these 'baseline' governments should be combined with some kind of Social Engineering system! Also, if you read some of my other posts, the extent to which you can vary your SE settings would depend greatly on the extent to which you have progressed down the 'socialogical/ethical' pathway of the tech tree! Meaning that your Classical Greek democracy will still be VERY different from your modern democracy, as the former's understanding of emancipation, womens right and sufferage were very different from those of the latter!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[rhialto]

Well, you've just explained how the smac system gives more options for maximising your government to your play style. you haven't explained how it works better for modelling actual governments.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Simple Rhialto,

In real life, whole government changes are in fact VERY RARE-yet in civ1,2 and 3 they happen very frequently!! However, minor social changes WITHIN a particular type of government occur almost all the time, and yet this is not very well accounted for in the civ series to date. Social Engineering allows you to change your playing options without neccessarily going through the very nasty upheavals involved in changing government types! Of course, your government choices will restrict the extent to which you can alter your social engineering settings, in which case government change will become neccessary-assuming your own people haven't brought it about themselves!!
Lastly, the current government models do not accurately reflect the variety in Real World 'same government' types. For example, Indonesia, France, Germany, Brazil and USA are ALL republics, yet they are ALL very different kinds of republics (and, of course, the original French and US republics are a far cry from their modern day counterparts)! Similarly, Britain, Australia and Canada are all Democracies but, again, they are all quite different in certain 'incremental' ways! Social engineering would allow you to better model the 'incremental' differences which exist between governments which 'appear' the same at the macro level!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Elgalad]

Have a look at the Rise and Rule mod for C3C. It has a lot of very good government types.

Oh, this just figures. I spent MONTHS and months (heck, since Conquests came out) checking Bernskov's site every other day for the RAR patch and finally gave up about the beginning of September!

Well, downloading it now. But if it's like the DYP expansion for PTW, then yes the Governments they added all make a lot of sense. I like the various Monarchies especially. I wish there were one or two more in the modern era though, maybe a modern version of a junta or military rule that wasn't as limited as the old despotism or as all powerful as fascism. Something like a Banana Republic/Castro government.

-Elgalad

 

[rhialto]

Simple Rhialto,

In real life, whole government changes are in fact VERY RARE-yet in civ1,2 and 3 they happen very frequently!!

Most people claim to change government 2-3 times at most in a typical epic game, and I haven't found myself increasing that with teh R&R mod which has about a dozen government types. That's about one government change every 2 millenia. Hardly what I'd call very frequent.

However, minor social changes WITHIN a particular type of government occur almost all the time, and yet this is not very well accounted for in the civ series to date. Social Engineering allows you to change your playing options without neccessarily going through the very nasty upheavals involved in changing government types!

Now this is ENTIRELY an implementation issue. SMAC had no change penalty beyond a token money cost, the opposite extreme of the civ series. Because of this, everyone thinks that social engineering means you CAN'T have a major revolution period as a consequence, and conversely civ123 style means you MUST have one. Ain't so. Civ 2 had a much less debilitating anarchy period, and even if you ignored a certain cheat (count the game yar, divide by 4), there was a wonder to remove that period entirely.

Of course, your government choices will restrict the extent to which you can alter your social engineering settings, in which case government change will become neccessary-assuming your own people haven't brought it about themselves!!
Lastly, the current government models do not accurately reflect the variety in Real World 'same government' types.

Agreed. But I think the government types can be extended to account for this. At the risk of over-praising the R&R mod, it has (in the modern age),

Constitutional Monarchy
Social Democracy
Federal Republic

Plus Democracy and Republic as distinct early era open government types, plus a few new governments for the less freedom-loving players among us.

For example, Indonesia, France, Germany, Brazil and USA are ALL republics, yet they are ALL very different kinds of republics (and, of course, the original French and US republics are a far cry from their modern day counterparts)! Similarly, Britain, Australia and Canada are all Democracies but, again, they are all quite different in certain 'incremental' ways! Social engineering would allow you to better model the 'incremental' differences which exist between governments which 'appear' the same at the macro level!

I think a broader list of government types, along with a defined list of governments that can 'transition' to each other (a kind of easy-going revolution) would work far better.

 

[Mr. Blonde]

The SMAC system was more sensible to me than the current civ system. What would need a workover is the transition cost for changing. What about this: when you change the slider rule with for instance government(despotism/absoultism/representative/oligarchy) you would still have anarchy but less 2-3 turns. (I mean during/after WW1 with russia/germany/austria abandoning monarchy you had only 2-3 years of unrest, actually there was hardly a thing you could call anarchy, the switch to Fascism in the late 20´ and early 30´was without unrest at all)
A transition in economy (basic/guilds/mercantilism/capitalism/communism/ecology) would cost money,
a transition between religions (Druids/Polytheism/Monotheism/Atheism) would cause unrest/pop loss. I also suggest like in SMAC a slider called paradigma with basic/wealth/power/knowledge the transition costs are maybe production loss for 2-3 turns. You could with such a system forbid certain transitions based on your civilisation or on your civtraits. (Religious-no atheism, or commercial- no communism). All chioces have boni AND mali and, of course need to be balanced well in order to prevent an "always best" choice.
The choices would come as in SMAC with the related tech (knowledge with invention, guilds with monarchy, wealth with currency, atheism with scientific methods, mercantilism with maybe education -invented in early 18th century)
To discuss: communism a gov type or an economy type? (Imo eco, most comm governments fall into oligarchy or despotism)

Edit: an economic win would also make sense- we need to encourage different playstyles and win options

Another possibility was as proposed earlier in this threat a system with Governments and subsystems, where the change to a subsystem would only cost money and the transition to another government would cause anarchy.

The main point is: we need more choices which make sense (current situation: republic is always preferred, communism when going for domination in late industrial area, monarchy for AW, practically unused: Fascism and Democracy) and due to more switches a shorter anarchy period. (Always laughed when the computer switches to Demo in late MA, you attack him, he falls back to Monarchy, you make peace, again democracy and when he researches it switches to Fascism). The trades need also a big workover, imo.

 

[rhialto]

ok, can you propose a SE model that can reflect the differences between the various modern democratic governments? That's something I have yet to see from anyone.

 

[Mr. Blonde]

I would make it in my system that way: democratic is a representative government, differences which would make sense would be in economy (capitalism vs. socialistic), religion (monotheistic vs. atheistic) and, if implemented in paradigma (wealth, power and knowledge). The US would be capitalistic, monotheistic with power as paradigma, sweden ecologic (or with a better term socialistic), maybe atheistic (people without confession increase rapidly in europe) with knowledge as paradigma. GB capitalistic, atheistic and wealth as paradigma. Austria socialistic (changing to capitalistic at the moment), monotheistic (soon also atheistic) with knowledge.

Republics would be representative governments with other ecologic systems and religions as they are to my understanding pre democratic systems, at least in civ. A representative government with polytheism and maybe slightly enhanced ecologic system (don´t have a word for it, maybe could come with currency) and power as paradigma would be republican rome, absoultistic would be emperialistic rome since caesar. Attic greece maybe with knowledge as paradigma.

Fascism would be absoultistic, atheistic, power as paradigma and to my understanding with communistic economy since nearly the whole economy worked for the state to provide goods for the war.
I hope the system makes sense, maybe someone can comment on it or has ideas for tweaking it into something which satisfies the community.

 

[dh_epic]

Yeah, I think Mr Blonde has the fundamentals there. I mean, I could take my own personal stab at it.

One is your economic model. (Highly regulated or highly free)
Another is your security model. (Highly regulated or highly free)
Another is your moral model. (Highly regulated or highly free)
And your political model (Highly authoritative or highly representative)
Maybe even quality of life (Highly subsidized or completely free)

Each dimension would need to have advantages one way or another. A lot of gameplay balancing needed. But you could have two democracies -- one that has health care, another that doesn't... one that lets the corporations rome free, and one who holds them accountable. (Just to give examples, not that you'd actually see little corporations or hospitals.)

Regardless of what the dimensions are (god knows we could argue until we're all blue in the face), I'm sure the developers would be able to come up with something. And inventions in the tech tree would open up new ideas (e.g.: you discover capitalism and suddenly have the option to give greater economic freedom to your nation)

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Also, there is very strong evidence to suggest that this whole argument might be moot, as all the facts seem to point towards the much touted 'Civics' as referring to Social Engineering-especially given what we know of the dictionary definition of the word 'civics'!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Teabeard]

Socialism: No support for standing armies or conscripts (although conscription would be allowed). Similar benefits (tile bonus, etc) to Democracy above. WW would occur whenever ground and air combat units were stationed outside of the civilization and whenever naval units were in foreign territory (out in the ocean is ok). Air units would be allowed to be on carriers, but would cause WW if they fly into another civ’s airspace. These restrictions would include units in allied civ territory. Corruption would not exist at all. Certain buildings would not require maintenance (library, temple, etc.)

Excuse me, but no corruption under socialism?! Socialism is one of the most corrupt systems imaginable because everything is run by politicians. No maintenance either?!

 

[dh_epic]

If Civics refers to that, then it's a pretty good sign. Still, could mean a lot of other things.