It's time to ditch Fascism

To create a socialist clerical monarchy, look to Civ4's Civic system, where the player can really mix and match bonuses and disadvantages to make a unique playthrough.

Here is an example of a civics tree fleshed out in a mod. Want to play a theocratic, aristocracy that also happens to be a welfare state run on forced labor? Go for it!

Spoiler civics :

civics.jpg



Another mod with 14 options to who rules....this is distinct from government choice. The inclusion of 'instability' and revolution in civ4 mods gave government/civic choices a great deal more importance...your choice could literally rip your empire asunder!
Spoiler civics :
1735838278450.png
 
To the first, there is no way of separating, "the people," from, "player," to determine Governments that would make the game bearable to play. To the second, you are still talking about historical scripting in game, which does not occur in any vanilla game of any iteration of Civ.

It is a non -historical simulation but based on events on resources on narrative events also on the climate and the government system
 
To create a socialist clerical monarchy, look to Civ4's Civic system, where the player can really mix and match bonuses and disadvantages to make a unique playthrough.

Here is an example of a civics tree fleshed out in a mod. Want to play a theocratic, aristocracy that also happens to be a welfare state run on forced labor? Go for it!

Spoiler civics :


Another mod with 14 options to who rules....this is distinct from government choice. The inclusion of 'instability' and revolution in civ4 mods gave government/civic choices a great deal more importance...your choice could literally rip your empire asunder!
Spoiler civics :
You can't mix ideologies too much, a clerical socialism doesn't make sense ideologically and is contrary to the principles of any religion.
 
You can't mix ideologies too much, a clerical socialism doesn't make sense ideologically and is contrary to the principles of any religion.
North Korea is practically a hybrid a Communist regime and a, "divine dynasty of monarchs," regime of old, complete with the reverence and rituals.
 
It is a non -historical simulation but based on events on resources on narrative events also on the climate and the government system
It is indeed, and it does it very well.
 
No its a cult of personality
No, it isn't. It's just not exactly what you want and demand it to be, by your own personal opinions and desires, and you can't stand it, and have no tolerance for the way it has always been, and the VAST majority of it's player base, more or less, you like it's setup, with varying reservations.
 
No, it isn't. It's just not exactly what you want and demand it to be, by your own personal opinions and desires, and you can't stand it, and have no tolerance for the way it has always been, and the VAST majority of it's player base, more or less, you like it's setup, with varying reservations.
I could explain to you the Confucian ideology mixed with the nationalist ideology, of Asian nationalism and the dynamics of Confucianism and Taoism, and Buddhism, in Korean society, but you would not understand, the difference and that I use knowledge to debate you cling to 4 people who support you and who do not know. Not even the basic principles of Marxism, Leninism4 o
 
I could explain to you the Confucian ideology mixed with the nationalist ideology, of Asian nationalism and the dynamics of Confucianism and Taoism, and Buddhism, in Korean society, but you would not understand, the difference and that I use knowledge to debate you cling to 4 people who support you and who do not know. Not even the basic principles of Marxism, Leninism4 o
I have no idea what baseless presumptions you're making here. But, it seems further debate with you is impossible, because you're inflexibly stuck on a viewpoint for this game series no one shares, but declares everyone is objectively wrong for disagreeing with you and enjoying the game as it is, and stating this quite obtusely. By the responses to your recent posts, it seems most others have already to the viewpoint I have, as well.
 
Nationalist forces opposed to communist ideas and the general crisis of liberalism of the epochs led to fascism with the indulgence of the monarchy and the clergy.
 
Luca, you may enjoy Victoria 3, a game that does focus on diferent power blocs when running a country. (And this thread is probably not the one for a discussion of NK politics, a topic that is muddied by the West's own reporting on the place and their own propaganda making it difficult to tell what's legitimate or exaggerated, from either end)
 
Ideologies are more important than leaders because they last much longer than leaders and influence economic international relations and politics and like technology are the same as our world
 
Ideologies shape the world and are much more durable than leaders. Arab and Iranian Shiites and Sunnis are inflaming the Middle East today. China and the US are in fierce competition. The Cold War has kept the world in the balance for 45 years and the only thing Firaxis can produce is the Mississippian civilization, La Fayette, Franklin, and Machiavelli! Not a hint of government? Tree of ideologies? Political evolution?
 
Ideologies shape the world and are much more durable than leaders. Arab and Iranian Shiites and Sunnis are inflaming the Middle East today. China and the US are in fierce competition. The Cold War has kept the world in the balance for 45 years and the only thing Firaxis can produce is the Mississippian civilization, La Fayette, Franklin, and Machiavelli! Not a hint of government? Tree of ideologies? Political evolution?
One solution to the ideology problem would be to create ideology trees like in heart of iron and have poll pies to represent ideology and consensus.
 
I feel like at least starting with 5 the ideology system has been inherently flawed because it makes the claim that there's 3 world ideologies that are more or less progressing towards their own singular end goal. In theory sure but I feel like the goals of Canada and the US for example are very much different despite both being western style democracies.

While Humankind didn't give complexity to every mechanic the idea that your ideology shifted due to your policies and actions was the most realistic depiction of ideology i've seen so far. You could pass huge policy changes that could grant strong bennefits with the trade off of destablizing your empire by catering to a more extreme ideology. It also meant your government was truly unique, you could be a Culturally Liberal state with an Authoritarian government or run a Socialist country that was focused on Globalization.
 
I feel like at least starting with 5 the ideology system has been inherently flawed because it makes the claim that there's 3 world ideologies that are more or less progressing towards their own singular end goal. In theory sure but I feel like the goals of Canada and the US for example are very much different despite both being western style democracies.

While Humankind didn't give complexity to every mechanic the idea that your ideology shifted due to your policies and actions was the most realistic depiction of ideology i've seen so far. You could pass huge policy changes that could grant strong bennefits with the trade off of destablizing your empire by catering to a more extreme ideology. It also meant your government was truly unique, you could be a Culturally Liberal state with an Authoritarian government or run a Socialist country that was focused on Globalization.
I have already explained to you that one cannot be free in culture and authoritarian in government, be communist and monarchist, at the same time one can be communist and tolerate a minimum of private property, encourage industry or agriculture, be Trotskyist instead of Stalinist, but never liberal or capitalist! In the period of the post-Napoleonic restoration, Austria, Prussia and Russia were strongly hostile to liberalism and to the ideas and progress of the French Revolution and to the constitutions: this brings us to the myth of 1820-1830 and to 1848, the spring of the peoples.
 
I have already explained to you that one cannot be free in culture and authoritarian in government, be communist and monarchist, at the same time one can be communist and tolerate a minimum of private property, encourage industry or agriculture, be Trotskyist instead of Stalinist, but never liberal or capitalist! In the period of the post-Napoleonic restoration, Austria, Prussia and Russia were strongly hostile to liberalism and to the ideas and progress of the French Revolution and to the constitutions: this brings us to the myth of 1820-1830 and to 1848, the spring of the peoples.
I mean I wasn't responding to you specifically but you make some points but ultimately I think it boils down to being tied to the idea of labels. Yeah maybe communism and monarchy aren't cooperative, then ditch the labels. The game revolves around alternative history, maybe in the history of the world of the game new ideologies were founded apart from the trichotomy the games usually present. Maybe you could implement a system like religion where you found an ideology and your diplomacy with other nations hinges on how close their national ideology is to yours based on their policy selection.
 
I mean I wasn't responding to you specifically but you make some points but ultimately I think it boils down to being tied to the idea of labels. Yeah maybe communism and monarchy aren't cooperative, then ditch the labels. The game revolves around alternative history, maybe in the history of the world of the game new ideologies were founded apart from the trichotomy the games usually present. Maybe you could implement a system like religion where you found an ideology and your diplomacy with other nations hinges on how close their national ideology is to yours based on their policy selection.
New ideologies could be created but the interests and needs of the various strata of the population cannot coincide: the working class cannot get along with the bourgeoisie, or with the clergy or aristocracy. You could create a Marxist-Communist system, not Stalinist, Trotskyist, with the possibility of private property, as in Lenin's NEP. You could create a non-anti-Semitic fascism. Until 1938, Mussolini was not anti-Semitic. Many Jews were fascists in 1922. Hitler was anti-Semitic. You could create a republican fascism as in the origins of 1919 or as in 1943. In the Italian Social Republic, you could create a Trotskyist, Maoist communism, more tolerant towards private property as Nagy did in Hungary in 1956, but it would be difficult to abandon the Leninist concept of the dictatorship of the proletariat and the party. unique. ideologies must be respected, and the needs and desires of the various strata of the population are in contrast with each other and cannot coincide: the aristocracy and the workers, the republicans and the monarchists, the fascists and the communists
 
Fascism existed (and still exists in new forms) and you can't tell the story of the 20th century without fascism. The game is about history. Unless the game is going to end before the 20th century, fascism belongs in it.
 
Back
Top Bottom