Make LAWS??????
- Thread starter POWER
- Start date
costanza
witty and informative
woohoo, 1st vote. 100% agrees with me. ;o)
Grey Knight
Old hacker
What exactly did you have in mind? Is it something beyond what the governments do? "Flavoring" the governments with "Laws" would be kinda fun...
How would you balance the laws?
How often could you pass them?
Cheers,
Shawn
How would you balance the laws?
How often could you pass them?
Cheers,
Shawn
Lt.Col. Kilgore
C.O. of 1st of the 9th
I don't see how this could be included? But I'd definitely like to see this only if there was an effective and logical way of incorporating it. But all in all its probably not feasible since it would be subject to so much complexity. I don't think it'd be possible to simplify it other than picking different overall judicial systems based on known codes. Anything to make Civ more realistic and complex is cool in my book.
Power, you took the words out of my mouth... anyone here play Tropico? well, it had a kind of very general way of dictating laws. it's the first time I see it in a game... anyway, I always thought it would be cool, but didin't think it could be practical... much more on a game like Civ. however, if you found a way to make it usefull, interactive and easy-to-manage (otherwise you'd have to be a lawyer to play Civ!!!) it's definitely a good idea if you ask me!
Just an idea but... you could have like a "tolerance" tab where low would mean very strict laws (- happiness, - corruption) and high, easy-to-bend laws (+ happiness, + corruption). And besides that, a "punishment" tab where high = seveer sanctions, and low = a spank every 100 corpses :slay: .
Or! What about this: your form of goverment is Democracy --> you want to sell Oil to another country --> you'd need Congress to aproove it! And, if you're anything like the politicians from over here, you could buy those votes off
satan: ) but, if you're caught, the people could revolt on ya (kinda like what happened here too)! The posibilities are endless!
Just an idea but... you could have like a "tolerance" tab where low would mean very strict laws (- happiness, - corruption) and high, easy-to-bend laws (+ happiness, + corruption). And besides that, a "punishment" tab where high = seveer sanctions, and low = a spank every 100 corpses :slay: .
Or! What about this: your form of goverment is Democracy --> you want to sell Oil to another country --> you'd need Congress to aproove it! And, if you're anything like the politicians from over here, you could buy those votes off
satan: ) but, if you're caught, the people could revolt on ya (kinda like what happened here too)! The posibilities are endless!Grey Knight
Old hacker
Actually J-S, the real trick is balance. Trying to abstract real-world examples into the Civ universe will only beget whiners (aka "spearman" unit killing a "tank" unit, which should really be 1/1 unit killing 16/8 unit...) of how unrealistic it was.
That said, I think it would be way cool to have the ability to make small, incremental adjustments to the "govermental" state. Give them silly names, but real gameplay consequences. So for the examples J-S gave, have the "Roger Protocol" mean +happiness and +corruption, and the "Bean Counters Construct" result in -corruption and -happiness...
Come to think of it, do away with governments entirely, and let it develop over time as the "laws" of the nation are laid down... Early laws evolve into "common law" and are hard to repeal / counteract... i.e. the "Work Harder" law gives good production, but poor science. "Passing" this law in the early game gives a good early boost, but since it was an early law the effect are hard to counteract. When you want to climb the tech tree, and want to pass the "Existential Examination" law to increase science output, you have to fight the effects of "Work Harder" being around so long and becoming part of the essence of your culture.
Hmm . . . I think I should have just written the game and not posted this idea... Um, er, well, OK, maybe we'll see this in Civ IV
Cheers,
Shawn
That said, I think it would be way cool to have the ability to make small, incremental adjustments to the "govermental" state. Give them silly names, but real gameplay consequences. So for the examples J-S gave, have the "Roger Protocol" mean +happiness and +corruption, and the "Bean Counters Construct" result in -corruption and -happiness...
Come to think of it, do away with governments entirely, and let it develop over time as the "laws" of the nation are laid down... Early laws evolve into "common law" and are hard to repeal / counteract... i.e. the "Work Harder" law gives good production, but poor science. "Passing" this law in the early game gives a good early boost, but since it was an early law the effect are hard to counteract. When you want to climb the tech tree, and want to pass the "Existential Examination" law to increase science output, you have to fight the effects of "Work Harder" being around so long and becoming part of the essence of your culture.
Hmm . . . I think I should have just written the game and not posted this idea... Um, er, well, OK, maybe we'll see this in Civ IV
Cheers,
Shawn
love that first idea!! (didnt like the senete stuff .... that should be included in santions that work better?? IMO) ... love that idea ... simple to use ... reasonably realistic and would add another level to the game .... just a question?? ... what u mean by the punishment tab? and sanctions? .... i would actually think that high punishment goes with strict laws? (say in some countries that cut theives hands off) ... top idea and top post
Bamspeedy
CheeseBob
I kind of like the idea, but don't know if it would work. An example of how this would work good is in the Sim City series. In those games you could pass city ordinances to do various things to affect your city. These ordinances were available at certain dates, so in Civilization it would be available upon certain techs. In Sim City you could pass things like a gambling ordinance to allow gambling. This increased population and income, but the negatives were increased crime. You could pass a mass transit to encourage people to use the subways. This costs you money, but it decreased pollution and you got some money back from transit fares. There were several other ordinances that would increase literacy rates or promote safety to ensure your citizens live longer, and make the city more attractive place to live, but there was usually some little negative to it (usually money), so it was a bit of a trade-off. This method if used in the Civ series would greatly allow everyone to be able to create their own ideal government without having to go in the editor and create one (with the limited choices on how to change it).
You could flavor Civ with a little bit of the Tropico edicts.
Depending on the government type and improvements that have been built, different edicts would become available.
eg: Literacy program when library or university built.
Papal visit when cathedral built - increase happiness for x turns
you could also use these edicts for foreign relations by using the praise edicts for the different civs to increase relations with them, and negatively with their enemies.
Of course, these edicts would not come without a price. Cold, hard currency in amounts depending on the potential benefits
Depending on the government type and improvements that have been built, different edicts would become available.
eg: Literacy program when library or university built.
Papal visit when cathedral built - increase happiness for x turns
you could also use these edicts for foreign relations by using the praise edicts for the different civs to increase relations with them, and negatively with their enemies.
Of course, these edicts would not come without a price. Cold, hard currency in amounts depending on the potential benefits
Hamlet
Manic Depressive
I quite like the idea.
I don't want to pee in everybody's pool, but presumably you would have to put your law before The Legislature under a Democracy and a Republic?
I don't want to pee in everybody's pool, but presumably you would have to put your law before The Legislature under a Democracy and a Republic?
Grey Knight
Old hacker
Glad to see my monologues don't bore the hell out of all of youOriginally posted by Selous
what u mean by the punishment tab? and sanctions? .... i would actually think that high punishment goes with strict laws? (say in some countries that cut theives hands off) ... top idea and top post
. About that Congress idea, in the last quote I went a little deeper into it. I know it's kinda hard to accept having to share power with a fake Congress, specially in a you're-god game like Civ, but I think it's an important and necessary aspect (plus it teaches you how to do politics! ).About the sanctions part, maybe "sanctions" isin't the right word in english (my english may be kinda rusty from lack of use). I meant to have a second tab where, aside from the fact of having many many laws or almost none at all (first tab), you choose the sevearness of the sentences (cutting off your hand for stealing | paying $1,99 as a fine for killing your mother-in-law). Did I make the idea clearer or just more complicated? lol!
Also, a great idea. I think that in time no civ player will want a pre-made goverment type, but instead make his/her own "home made" goverment type by combining several options, laws or whatever you want to call them. SMAC had something of this sort going on, although very limited.
Like I said before, this is in my opinion a good idea. This would add a whole new "political" dimension to a game like Civ, making it more realistic. I mean, even the most important and intelligent democratic presidents have had to convince Congress to pass them laws. So, Congress could act (in a Democratic/Republican goverment) as a sort of independent AI that, depending on what it considers convenient, accepts or rejects your law proyects AND also legislates all by it's own (that's why we have three independent 'powers': executive, legislative and judicial) with certain limitations to make it playable ofcourse.
In real life, for the USA to sign a treaty of any sort, first it has to be signed by the president, then ratified by the Senate, or otherwise it dosen't have any effects. Also, Bush's declaration of war against Afghanistan had to be approved by Congress. These are all examples of how this should be an important aspect of a game like Civ, totally ignored. The only time I saw something like that vaguely apply was in Civ2 where in a Democracy, the Congress could prohibit you from declaring war agains another civ (we all save-loaded but still!).
Don't forget though, that the process is something like this: law proyect -> Congress -> You (the President or Executive can lightly modifiy laws, think it's called promulgation in english), so it's not all that 'unfair'. Plus, depending on your Constitution, you (president) could have the ability to dictate decreets (sp) wich don't pass through Congress for ratification until later on. Also... it's just a game so if you don't have patience for all this and have enough "loyal" units you can attempt a 'coup'. Ofcourse, a Millitary goverment would have other serious disadvantages to balance this.
Just imagine your Minister of Internal Affairs telling you something like "Mr. President, in 10 turns Congress will review a law proyect that would decrease taxes from 90% (you damn tyran!) to 10% ( :suicide: )!" Hey, if you want that Democratic Trade Bonus you're gonna have to sweat for it!!
No seriously, maybe I'm going a bit too far but it's definitely an idea to work on if you want the perfect Civ game and I'm glad other people share it.
OK WAKE UP I'M DONE!!! I just had to get that off my chest... ! Actually, I'm going to open up a "Sharing power in Civ: yes or no?" thread to get deeper into this power-sharing theme exclusively. Hope to see you all there!
slothman
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2001
- Messages
- 1,223
1 law I thought of is a "no slaves" law. Basically it would make captured workers cost the same as regular but they would also work 75% ro 100% the speed. In my games I sometimes get up to 100 slaves. That could suck quite a bit of gold out of my treasury.
I just posted an article in the "Should Civ rulers share their power?" thread about things I think are missing from the Democracy in Civ3.
Please visit the thread here!
The Constitution
When a "Codification" 'tech' became available, the player would have to redact a Constitution. Kind of like the "Ordinances" book in SimCity, there would be several possible Articles to choose from. In these you would determine the form of goverment, etc. For example, if the form of goverment is a Democracy, the articles would determine number of turns between elections, if reelections are valid, if you have to ask Congress before declaring war, how it can be reformed later, how many citizens you can "Draft" per turn, etc. Anyway, you can think of the rest. Some of these articles could cause unhappiness but be necessary (obligatory military service) so it should be planned carefully or backed up by a higher "psi" funding, more hospitals... stuff that normally affect happiness.
Please visit the thread here!
The Constitution
When a "Codification" 'tech' became available, the player would have to redact a Constitution. Kind of like the "Ordinances" book in SimCity, there would be several possible Articles to choose from. In these you would determine the form of goverment, etc. For example, if the form of goverment is a Democracy, the articles would determine number of turns between elections, if reelections are valid, if you have to ask Congress before declaring war, how it can be reformed later, how many citizens you can "Draft" per turn, etc. Anyway, you can think of the rest. Some of these articles could cause unhappiness but be necessary (obligatory military service) so it should be planned carefully or backed up by a higher "psi" funding, more hospitals... stuff that normally affect happiness.
Ok this is the big picture....
I don't believe that laws could fit in the game so long as the game perceives your subjects as peoples and not as individuals.
On the other hand I think it would be great to be able to give your advisors a certain freedom to act, for example your trade advisor to be able to conduct trade arrangements, and you millitary advisor to be able to set a city production (and possibly hurry it) when you are at war, something like the governor but a bit more sofisticated, since advisors will have to work together in order to do what has to be done correctly and as fast as it can be done, and you ofcourse will just have to say yes or no to what they think that must be done....
WOW!!!!!!!!!TALKING ABOUT SERIUS AI PROGRAMING!!!!!
I don't believe that laws could fit in the game so long as the game perceives your subjects as peoples and not as individuals.
On the other hand I think it would be great to be able to give your advisors a certain freedom to act, for example your trade advisor to be able to conduct trade arrangements, and you millitary advisor to be able to set a city production (and possibly hurry it) when you are at war, something like the governor but a bit more sofisticated, since advisors will have to work together in order to do what has to be done correctly and as fast as it can be done, and you ofcourse will just have to say yes or no to what they think that must be done....
WOW!!!!!!!!!TALKING ABOUT SERIUS AI PROGRAMING!!!!!
napoleon526
Emperor
I think that 'laws' are already present in civ3: whenever your change the science rate, conscript units, or start any large building project. One could argue that any time a govt changes the lives of the citizens in some way, that's a law. Starting city ordinances and commisions and dealing with a senate just increases micromanagement interferes with the fun.
