My radical ideea for better gov !!

[Mîtiu Ioan]

I post this already, but now I have some new ideea ...

Let's have instead of actual simplistic form of governement ( which isn't nor historically or socio-politically corect nor increase gameplay feeling ) the next panel named Politics with the next subcategories :

Political organisation :
- Tyrany ( default ) -
- Aristocratic
- Police state - will allow pop-rush any time.
- Representative democracy
- Descentralised governement - great for culture and little corruption, but bad for production of military offensive units and BIG wonder.

Economical policy:
- Simple or survival ( default )
- Oligarhic/Corporatist ( in modern time )
- Planned
- Welfare liberalism - more happines, but some waste and also decrease science output.
- Anti-trust free market

Cultural dominant value :
- Fundamentalistic ( default )
- Power - units are automatically produced at veterean level, increased chance to get military liders, +25 bonus to attack.
- Wealth
- Knowledge
- Comfort

Future utopia
- Moral fundamentalism
- Orwellian society
- Ecologistic harmony and hedonism
- Utopical communism
- Virtual government

Also a major change : in revolution concept. Revolutions will ocurred randomly in a period of 100-150 turns ( sorry, but no governement seems to be perfect and almost there existed protest against any kind of governement ). A revolution will change the society to
VARIANT A - default status
VARIANT B - opposed form - this is a personnaly historical observation .

Insteed of actual revolutions there will be transition period which will costs 3-4 turns, money and/or lives of some citizens.

Chances of revolution :
- decreased if combine some form of Politics - e.g. Police State with Free Anti-trust market will be a extremly unstable combination - ussually there are
a) or a popular revolt => change of Police State Status;
b) oligarhic "putch" ( I'm not sure if this is the english term ) => change of Free Market Status !

- existance of some city-improvements or small Wonders for some of this aspects :
e.g. - Cinema - for a wealth society - presents model of "succes people"
- Secret Police Center - for Police State
- Inquisition Tribunal - for Fundamentalistic and so on.

VARIANT - This buildings may also have impact in aspect of a revolution.

- stability increased if you use a leader ( military one or a new created category - political leader ) for this. This will assure you let's say a 100 turns of stability !!

I'm also a programmer - this changes shouldn't be very hard to implement - but the major problem will be that from that stupid AI players will be hard to implement a decent style to play ...

Any feed-back is welcome ...

Regards,

P.S. : Please excuse my bad english ...
P.S.S. : The main problem with such style is that will move the "attention" from millitary aspects ( still predominant in my opinion and experience ... ) to micro-management - but that's exactly my intention ...

 

[etj4Eagle]

The socio engineering from SMAC, which is essentially what you are proposing with the addition of revolutions, is probably the one thing that I miss the most from that game. It appears that they are attempting to keep the civ line "simpler" so hopefully we will see the return of this build you own government structure for a SMAC sequal (hopefully we will see that as well).

One suggestion would be that if you attempt too great a change in government structure your civilization may decend into anarchy. And that also it should keep track of recent previous changes to your structure. As if you fiddle too much you should at least get some waste/corruption from citizens getting confused and possibly even a slip into anarchy as well.

 

[Citizen_K]

to Ioan:

Great! Go do it.

Edit: added

 

[Selous]

nice work Mîtiu Ioan ... i have seen this thread come up a few times and it is obvious u have given it some thought, i love all your governments there and at the worst i hope that firaxis impliment them simplistically without the revolution stuff

now to the revolution
i like your ideas of automatic social change, perhaps they could start to happen after u have decovered the tech for, lets say representive democracy, your people start wanting this new form of government and in 50 turns without intervention by the controlling player your civ would go into bloody revolution, but, u could use different methods to speed up the revolution (and increase the sucess of it) or to pre-empt the revolution and put it down, either by brute force by soldiers or by some sort of great leader ... perhaps certain wonders could also make some governments more popular with yopur people
the trouble with having to engineer revolutions is it could get quite complex (not always a bad thing) and it would have to be very well done or it would ruin the game

the other trouble with the AC government system is that firaxis would have to admit that AC had better aspects of the game and i highly doubt that would happen
and one from the grape vine ... i heard that sid and brian renolds had a large falling out with the making of civ3 and that is why he left firaxis .... and i guess that is why civ3 bites as hard as it does

and Mîtiu Ioan ... no need to apologise for your english ... looks great to me

 

[narmox]

Who left Firaxis?!!??!?!?! Sid or Reynolds?

 

[dannyevilcat]

Reynolds did. I hear he's working on a new civ-like project of his own.

Oh, and Civ3 doesn't bite, though 1.17 does.

 

[narmox]

ahh.. I didn't know he left. I guess that's what happens when I don't play civ3 or follow civ3 news for nearly 3 months

As for 1.17.. It's not that bad. I can't go back to 1.16, I think 1.17 is better. As for the too-fast tech progression, I fixed that by playing huge world maps with small archipelagoes. Some civs you don't meet till the 1800's (at Regent) with that setup..

 

[Selous]

Originally posted by narmox
Who left Firaxis?!!??!?!?! Sid or Reynolds?

teehee ... sid is firaxis
i heard that tidbit of info from a chat room nor even related to civ .... just word on the net ........ as it were
and u dont think civ3 bites dannyevilcat? ... the fact that people wish that it had so many features out of AC such as governments and so on .... and was made a few years before (many people beleived AC was civ3 but due to legal reasons .... was AC) ... but then "they" in all their wisdom decided to scrap all the development in AC and develop a small amount on civ2 .... that is why it bites .... civ3 is an enjoyable game ... but so is civ2 ... and for what it could have been if only they decided to expand on AC rather than civ2 .... and that is my reasoning behind why civ3 bites

but .... anyone got government sugestions?

 

[Mîtiu Ioan]

Sorry for post this third times - but until now I posted in a queue ... I want a thread dedicated to this.

Originally posted by Citizen_K
to Ioan:

Great! Go do it.

I can't do this. Why ?:

1. This kind of changes cannot be done via a mod .... I tried but the result was pathetic

2. From tommorow I have to get to work for ~1 month for a VC++ project for a new austrian partener. So - until May - no more time for CiV playing&editing ... . Sad, but true ...

Anyway - see you in May.

Have a nice Civ & regards,

 

[JoseM]

Originally posted by Selous


the other trouble with the AC government system is that firaxis would have to admit that AC had better aspects of the game and

what the hell is "AC" ??????? ...i hate when people use only letters to explain something... plz write the whole word so we all can understand what u mean!!! thanks

 

[JoseM]

ohh no matter AC = Alpha Centauri jaja ....

 

[hzm]

That system is perfect. I have nothing else to say but that I'm saddened it will never be in a game.

 

[Mîtiu Ioan]

Originally posted by hzm
That system is perfect. I have nothing else to say but that I'm saddened it will never be in a game.

It's very possible.
But I feel that's my duty to present some ideea ...

Regards