Chapter I - Introduction This is a style of play that I think some historically and politically minded players may find more rewarding than purely playing for points or winning the game as early as possible. The strategy should be applicable to all difficulty levels. The Man Niccolo Machiavelli was born in Florence, Italy at a time when the country was in political upheaval. He became an important diplomat and an ardent supporter of the Florentine republic at during a brief interruption in the rule of the Medici’s in Florence. When the Medici’s regained their power however, Machiavelli was removed from his post. Eager to ingratitate himself with the new princes who ruled Florence, he broke from his strong support of republicanism and wrote “The Prince”, a work that describes in plain pragmatism how a prince should acquire and maintain power. It is interesting to note that while The Prince was written to win the Medici’s favor, Machiavelli never actually mentioned anywhere in the book that he preferred a monarchy over a republic. He only described how a new prince ought to rule over its new subjects. In this light, the book, both in its content and its historical context shows Machiavelli’s pragmatic approach to politics. He essentially argues that morality is secondary to what is practical. In The Prince, Machiavelli offered a monarchical ruler advice designed to keep that ruler in power... Machiavelli wanted to persuade the monarch that he could best preserve his power by the judicious use of violence, by respecting private property and the traditions of his subjects, and by promoting material prosperity. Machiavelli held that political life cannot be governed by a single set of moral or religious absolutes, and that the monarch may sometimes be excused for performing acts of violence and deception that would be ethically indefensible in private life. Excerpt: “Niccolo Machiavelli Statesman and Political Philosopher” by: Robin Chew May 1996 http://www.lucidcafe.com/library/96may/machiavelli.html Chapter II -Background Historically, Civilization (Civ) players have differentiated themselves through two labels. Those who engage in war, and domination of their immediate landmass are the warmongers. For definition's sake, we base our definitions based on intent over method. A "warmonger" usually takes advantage of the benefits of war and seeks victory by domination or conquest. Of course, there will be times he will be devoted purely to building, but in the end, sees military might as the road to victory (i.e. the building is to gear up for war) A "builder" takes advantage of the benefits of peace and seeks victory by culture, diplomacy, or space race. The builder will of course be forced to warmonger, when he is threatened or when he sees no other alternative. However, he sees building as the road to victory (i.e the wars are to allow room for building peacefully) Exerpt from MasterZen’s builder/warmonger post at Apolyton.com Players who play the role of Machiavelli’s prince fall in between, and encompass members of these two groups and are players who prefer to use 'influence' as a major part of their empire building strategy. For a prince, the objective is not score maximization, diplomatic, space race, cultural, domination or conquest victories. These hard-coded victory conditions are merely goals a player may choose to end their game and record a victory. The objective is control. A dichotomy can also be made in how power is exercised. That is, the use of hard power versus soft power. Hard power is the use of military force and conquest to achieve one's goals. This method is the most popular thus far and is probably the best measured by the game's scoring system. Soft power in contrast, is the use of trade and indirect means to achieve one's goals. This method is not well measured by the hard-coded scoring system and may require a bit of imagination for the player to understand. Given that hard power is well documented and straightforward and well practiced, this treatise will focus on the exercise of soft power.