Ideological Pressure?

[Big J Money]

Have we seen anything like this yet or does it seem to have been removed?

Although... am I the only person who would miss this aspect of the cultural game?

 

[kaltorak]

I sure hope the system is totally changed. I don't mind the pressure, but tourism does have to give you more bonuses than just that. In civ5, for me tourism was like score victory. I accumulate something that's only beneficial for winning the game. While going for science victory gives you techs, culture gave you policies, conquest gives you everything, diplomacy gives you state bonuses and allies, tourism only gave you pressure, which i dont dislike, but couldnt care less about it. There shouldnt be a resource which only purpose is winning the game.

 

[ZerrorR]

I d like to see city flipping due to cultural pressure...

 

[King Jason]

I don't think it's in the game at the moment. If it returns I imagine it'd be tied to government types through out the age. I will say, that some (or all?) civs seem to take a diplo hit when they have differing government types. Though, I don't yet know if the diplo hit is directly tied to having different governments - or if each civ has a coded "preferred" and then "hated" government type.

Personally, considering there are three government types - I'd prefer the latter. That way you could create a spectrum of Positive-Neutral-Negative Effect. For example you could have a civilization that prefers Democracy and Hates Fascism, but doesn't mind communism - This would influence both their own government choice, and at least slightly augment their relationship with other players.

That said, I have seen negative diplo modifiers for "you have a different government" - so perhaps it's as simple as that.

In terms of pressure, I don't mind the idea of it's return - it'd easily make use of the amenity system. But again, it'll probably end up getting tied to government type. Which could be neat, creating certain governmental blocs across the world like the cold war.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

They don't appear to have it...but they definitely Should.
Since happiness is local now, instead of civs putting pressure on other civs they can put pressure on individual cities. (So if you took a lot of cities from a communist civ, those cities would be more vulnerable to communist pressure from any civ)

 

[kaltorak]

So, if it doesnt appear to be in the game, what does tourism give you?

 

[ZerrorR]

So, if it doesnt appear to be in the game, what does tourism give you?

Not a culture flipped city into your empire...

 

[Mort_Q]

.... what does tourism give you?

Cultural Victory!

 

[Big J Money]

And cultural victory defense!

 

[juanpavo]

That said, I have seen negative diplo modifiers for "you have a different government" - so perhaps it's as simple as that.

Yes, I think that ideological pressure has morphed into this. I prefer having this part of the modifiers instead of having a parallel mechanism that needs to be tested, balanced, etc.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Yes, I think that ideological pressure has morphed into this. I prefer having this part of the modifiers instead of having a parallel mechanism that needs to be tested, balanced, etc.

The problem is that this is gamey AI, the human player has no reason to hate other governments.

The big benefit of ideological pressure was that it gave all players a reason to hate other governments.

 

[bumpyglint]

I sure hope the system is totally changed. I don't mind the pressure, but tourism does have to give you more bonuses than just that. In civ5, for me tourism was like score victory. I accumulate something that's only beneficial for winning the game. While going for science victory gives you techs, culture gave you policies, conquest gives you everything, diplomacy gives you state bonuses and allies, tourism only gave you pressure, which i dont dislike, but couldnt care less about it. There shouldnt be a resource which only purpose is winning the game.

I agree.

The problem is that this is gamey AI, the human player has no reason to hate other governments.

The big benefit of ideological pressure was that it gave all players a reason to hate other governments.

I totally agree.

 

[stealth_nsk]

The problem is that this is gamey AI, the human player has no reason to hate other governments.

The whole Civ6 diplomacy is based around modifiers and is SP-centered. In it's terms that's not a problem.

Also, could someone remind me what advantages the ideological pressure has? To break the diplomacy relations built for many turns with some artificial separation?

 

[joncnunn]

Moderator Action: Moved to Ideas & Suggestions

 

[Amrunril]

The whole Civ6 diplomacy is based around modifiers and is SP-centered. In it's terms that's not a problem.

Also, could someone remind me what advantages the ideological pressure has? To break the diplomacy relations built for many turns with some artificial separation?

I think this is largely a matter of perspective. If you think of civilization primarily as a simulation type game, then having AI opinion modifiers based purely on roleplay isn't a problem. On the other hand, if you think of civilization primarily as a strategy game, then it doesn't make sense to see AI players responding strongly to to factors (like governmental differences) that don't affect them*. If you want ideological tensions to be pat of the game (an excellent idea in my opinion), then from this perspective, it's essential to give different ideologies mechanical reasons to come into conflict. The same is even more true if you want these tensions to be present in multiplayer games.

And it's important to note that, while there may, debatably, be places where simulation and strategy perspectives come into conflict, this doesn't need to be one of them. Adding mechanical reasons for ideological tension, may be most important for strategy focused players, it doesn't take anything away from simulation/immersion focused players. In fact, it adds another system that can easily be enjoyed from a simulation perspective.


*As a side note, I think the agendas area mixed bag in this regard. Some of them, primarily BE style resource focused ones, do seem very arbitrary. Others, like disliking particular types of warmongers or players who take "your" wonders/city states/great people, are exactly the sort of strategies or playstyles a human player might adopt.