This system might be a bit complicated, and I don't know if it's too late to suggest such a radical change, but
how about making ideologies shape a lot of the game, dynamically but forcing the player to listen to the people's opinion?
Let me explain:
Ideologies would be somehow linked to civics so that running the wrong civic (ie the one the people don't like, based on ideologies, so communists like State Property and hate Free Market) would cause unhappiness in cities and the right civic would cause happiness. There would be many ideologies, some being political, some economical, some social and some others some others. The ideologies could be spread like religions (with propagandists [=missionaries]) but they would also spread according to the civics and happiness of the empire. This is complicated to explain but I hope this example of Russia helps: (vanilla civics shown)
pre-1917
Russian citizens are unhappy, and a new ideology, communism, spreads to their cities. Now the people begin to demand that the state switch civics to State Property.
1917
Russia switches to State Property, people are happy for a while, except those who don't follow communism.
late 20th century
Russian citizens are unhappy. Because the state is running Police State and State Property, the citizens think their unhappiness is caused by those civics and convert to ideologies opposing them, ie capitalism and [democratic political ideology (liberalism?)].
after 1991
Russia switches to Free Market and Universal Suffrage/Representation, but as the people aren't any happier now, nationalism and statism spread among some of the unhappy people.
The ideologies I've thought about and the civics they'd be linked to:
Mostly social/political
Liberalism
-supporting freedom, insisting that the traditional values need to be revised
Conservativism/Traditionalism
-somewhat opposed to rapid social change, insisting that traditional values would lead to a better society
Statism
-opposing freedom, supportive of strong leadership, claim that the masses aren't smart enough to lead
Religion (all religions in one?)
-any moderate religious people who are able to peacefully coexist
Fundamentalism (for each religion)
-opposed to religious freedom and other religions, consider own religion superior and heeds the religious texts literally
Nationalism
Mostly economical
Environmentalism
-opposed to environmental exploitation
Capitalism (need a better name after the Cold War?, if Liberalism is about economy as well, this could be Laissez-Faire)
-supporting free market and economic freedom (if split to two, Liberalism about free market and Laissez-Faire more extreme, about minimal state intervention)
Communism
-want that the state should control the economy
Civics:
(in red: not available at start)
name -ideology which favors said civic
Political
Social
Press & Speech
Legal and Civil Rights
Economy
Labour
(basically the same as in the civics thread)
Environment
(new, to allow more diverse solutions to GW etc)
Now, as you can see, many combinations of multiple ideologies are possible adding a lot of diversity to the game. A civ can make both liberalists and environmentalists happy, but making both communists and laissez-faire capitalists happy is impossible, as is statists and liberalists
What do you think?
how about making ideologies shape a lot of the game, dynamically but forcing the player to listen to the people's opinion?
Let me explain:
Ideologies would be somehow linked to civics so that running the wrong civic (ie the one the people don't like, based on ideologies, so communists like State Property and hate Free Market) would cause unhappiness in cities and the right civic would cause happiness. There would be many ideologies, some being political, some economical, some social and some others some others. The ideologies could be spread like religions (with propagandists [=missionaries]) but they would also spread according to the civics and happiness of the empire. This is complicated to explain but I hope this example of Russia helps: (vanilla civics shown)
pre-1917
Russian citizens are unhappy, and a new ideology, communism, spreads to their cities. Now the people begin to demand that the state switch civics to State Property.
1917
Russia switches to State Property, people are happy for a while, except those who don't follow communism.
late 20th century
Russian citizens are unhappy. Because the state is running Police State and State Property, the citizens think their unhappiness is caused by those civics and convert to ideologies opposing them, ie capitalism and [democratic political ideology (liberalism?)].
after 1991
Russia switches to Free Market and Universal Suffrage/Representation, but as the people aren't any happier now, nationalism and statism spread among some of the unhappy people.
The ideologies I've thought about and the civics they'd be linked to:
Mostly social/political
Liberalism
-supporting freedom, insisting that the traditional values need to be revised
Conservativism/Traditionalism
-somewhat opposed to rapid social change, insisting that traditional values would lead to a better society
Statism
-opposing freedom, supportive of strong leadership, claim that the masses aren't smart enough to lead
Religion (all religions in one?)
-any moderate religious people who are able to peacefully coexist
Fundamentalism (for each religion)
-opposed to religious freedom and other religions, consider own religion superior and heeds the religious texts literally
Nationalism
Mostly economical
Environmentalism
-opposed to environmental exploitation
Capitalism (need a better name after the Cold War?, if Liberalism is about economy as well, this could be Laissez-Faire)
-supporting free market and economic freedom (if split to two, Liberalism about free market and Laissez-Faire more extreme, about minimal state intervention)
Communism
-want that the state should control the economy
Civics:
(in red: not available at start)
name -ideology which favors said civic
Political
Spoiler :
Discord
(no organised government)
Autocracy -statism
(one leader in rule)
One-party system -statism
(the party in rule)
Republic -liberalism
(democratic nations)
Direct democracy -liberalism
(direct democracy)
Meritocracy
(post-modern, the ruling class is selected by testing the individuals in some way, and the most succesful in these tests are chosen to lead, like in Platon's "utopia")
(no organised government)
Autocracy -statism
(one leader in rule)
One-party system -statism
(the party in rule)
Republic -liberalism
(democratic nations)
Direct democracy -liberalism
(direct democracy)
Meritocracy
(post-modern, the ruling class is selected by testing the individuals in some way, and the most succesful in these tests are chosen to lead, like in Platon's "utopia")
Social
Spoiler :
Disorder
(everyone minds their own business to survive)
Authoritarian -statism
(the state says what's acceptable)
Fundamentalism -fundamentalism
(IT'S WRITTEN IN THE HOLY BOOK, YOU OBEY IT!)
Traditional -conservativism/traditionalism, religion?
(traditional values)
Total freedom -liberalism
(need better name, what doesn't (directly) harm others is socially acceptable)
Technocracy
(post-modern, the society is all geared towards technology)
(everyone minds their own business to survive)
Authoritarian -statism
(the state says what's acceptable)
Fundamentalism -fundamentalism
(IT'S WRITTEN IN THE HOLY BOOK, YOU OBEY IT!)
Traditional -conservativism/traditionalism, religion?
(traditional values)
Total freedom -liberalism
(need better name, what doesn't (directly) harm others is socially acceptable)
Technocracy
(post-modern, the society is all geared towards technology)
Press & Speech
Spoiler :
Ignorance
(people are busy surviving, they have no time to think about much else)
Propaganda -statism
(the press is used as a tool of the government to influence people's thoughts directly)
Censorship -statism
(the press is nominally independent, but if the gov't doesn't like what it says, it doesn't say it)
Biased press
(the press is "free", but strangely nobody questions some "truths")
Objective press -liberalism
(the press is free to say what it wants, and it sure uses that freedom. No state ideology)
Enlightened citizenry
(post-modern, the citizens have unlimited access to all information in the world, the government doesn't even try to affect their opinions. No state ideology, espionage penalty (the openness is bad for secret issues), tons and tons of war weariness, happiness, culture and science bonuses)
Thought control
(1984)
(people are busy surviving, they have no time to think about much else)
Propaganda -statism
(the press is used as a tool of the government to influence people's thoughts directly)
Censorship -statism
(the press is nominally independent, but if the gov't doesn't like what it says, it doesn't say it)
Biased press
(the press is "free", but strangely nobody questions some "truths")
Objective press -liberalism
(the press is free to say what it wants, and it sure uses that freedom. No state ideology)
Enlightened citizenry
(post-modern, the citizens have unlimited access to all information in the world, the government doesn't even try to affect their opinions. No state ideology, espionage penalty (the openness is bad for secret issues), tons and tons of war weariness, happiness, culture and science bonuses)
Thought control
(1984)
Legal and Civil Rights
Spoiler :
Rule of the strongest
(me is da boss. u do wat me sez)
Religious law -fundamentalism
(See Fundamentalism in Social category)
Martial law
(the military does the police's job)
Judicidal courts
(there are laws which apply to most of the people)
People's courts
(the people decide what to do to criminals in each case individually, makes some happier but allows prejudice/discrimination)
Human rights
(everyone has the unbroken right to live... etc)
Cybernetic
(post-modern, cases are fed to a complex computer program which tells what to do)
(me is da boss. u do wat me sez)
Religious law -fundamentalism
(See Fundamentalism in Social category)
Martial law
(the military does the police's job)
Judicidal courts
(there are laws which apply to most of the people)
People's courts
(the people decide what to do to criminals in each case individually, makes some happier but allows prejudice/discrimination)
Human rights
(everyone has the unbroken right to live... etc)
Cybernetic
(post-modern, cases are fed to a complex computer program which tells what to do)
Economy
Labour
(basically the same as in the civics thread)
Environment
(new, to allow more diverse solutions to GW etc)
Spoiler :
Exploitation -laissez-faire
(What, should we do something? the businesses can do it on their own)
Regulation
(inefficient but the only way in the early game to cut environmental damage without radical society changes)
Naturalism -environmentalism
(need a better name, the whole society is built around the idea of keeping the nature intact)
Technological solutions
(post-modern, technology is used to solve environmental problems [if there is any environment left when the civic becomes available])
(What, should we do something? the businesses can do it on their own)
Regulation
(inefficient but the only way in the early game to cut environmental damage without radical society changes)
Naturalism -environmentalism
(need a better name, the whole society is built around the idea of keeping the nature intact)
Technological solutions
(post-modern, technology is used to solve environmental problems [if there is any environment left when the civic becomes available])
Now, as you can see, many combinations of multiple ideologies are possible adding a lot of diversity to the game. A civ can make both liberalists and environmentalists happy, but making both communists and laissez-faire capitalists happy is impossible, as is statists and liberalists
What do you think?