Republic and Pillar of Chains

[[to_xp]Gekko]

I remember there was a thread going on a couple weeks ago where a lot of people were basically saying that the republic civic causing unhappiness in other empires didn't really make sense in this fantasy setting IIRC.

while I do agree with that ( if I'm playing the clan there's no way my orcish minions are ever going to whine cuz they want a republic, etc. ) , I feel like that's a minor issue. what bugs me though is the effect it has upon gameplay and immersion. one of the great things of FFH2 compared to BTS is that newer civics are not always better than older ones. which is good cuz it allows for more choices, variety and strategy. now, if I'm playing let's say Calabim, I want to stay with aristocracy all throughout the game and not have to suffer heavy penalties just because those unworthy goody guys decided that republic is the most awesome thing ever. I don't think that's fun really.

the pillar of chains has an awesome concept, I really like it, but it feels unfair that it's a world wonder and the first guy to get to it is cooler than a penguin (sic) and all the others are kinda screwed.

IMHO it would be better to make it a national wonder, and have it give another negative effect beside the ones it already has, so that it's a strategic choice you're making: switch to republic or build the pillar and face the consequences of your evilness (sic) ? a negative effect that makes sense and should work good imho is giving it a negative diplomatic modifier vs civs that didn't build it/are running republic/whatever . they shun you cuz they see you as a tyrant, makes sense to me.

although I think that in the future republic's effect should get an overhaul so that not all civs are affected by it in the first place ( clan, doviello, you name it, etc. ) , this would be really awesome imho.

ok, I do realize that I used the acronym "imho" waaay too many times in this post, so Gekko out. I'm really curious to hear others' opinions about this, and sorry if this had been discussed already.

 

[cyther]

well it should be banned from good but an increase in the AC would make a good counter for using it. (I can fight off hell terain every turn or have extra unhappyness.)

 

[fuzzy_bunnies]

Wow, thanks for bringing this up... I didn't realize the Pillar effects were for the whole civ... I thought it was just the city. I guess I'll have to build it from now on

But yea, to balance it, it seems like a creativity vs authority thing... maybe a penalty to research would be appropriate?

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

well I have to say I'm not 1000% sure it is civ-wide, but I'm guessing it is cuz otherwise it would be pretty worthless. I'm saying this in case Blackmantle drops in and yells at me for giving out uncorrect infos

( j/k of course, no pun intended )

 

[Kael]

well I have to say I'm not 1000% sure it is civ-wide, but I'm guessing it is cuz otherwise it would be pretty worthless. I'm saying this in case Blackmantle drops in and yells at me for giving out uncorrect infos

( j/k of course, no pun intended )

It is global.

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

see, this time I got it right

care to tell us what you think about the topic Kael?

 

[Kael]

It's iterative design. I dont think the OP likes republic's unhappiness effect. Rather than recommend that it be removed (because that argument has already been made and lost) the request is made to take the wonder that counters it and make it available to all civs, effectively removing the unhappiness effect from the game.

The problem with this sort of design is that it leads to really messy systems. Stick with your core belief of what you would do if it was up to you, dont go for more complex ways of going at it.

So lets triple F republic:

Function: Is republic balanced? I think it is, we halved the normal Civ4 unhappiness rate so its a weaker version of what was in the main game which seems to allow it to work out about right.

Flavor: Are republics mechanics intuitive? Yes, I do think that even in a medieval world stories and travelers from other lands would talk abotu the freedoms available to their neighbors. Its certainly not difficult for a new player to understand that if his neigh has a republic and he doesnt his people may not be to happy about it.

Fun: Is republics effect fun? Its a negative effect, which never score high on the fun scale. But as negative effects go its reasonable, easily applied and doesnt detract from activities. As a ruler using republic its easy and good to know your opponents are suffering even if you arent seeing the effect.

And for the Pillar of Chains:

Function: Mechanic is fairly easy to see and use. Allows players who want to avoid the republic unhappiness to trade production (the hammers required to make the pillar). Its unnessesary for leaders running republic which gives player 4 ways to deal with the unhappiness effect (adopt republic, build the pillar, take the pillar through conquest, accept the penalty).

Flavor: The is no intuitive draw here. A new player wont immediatly get that a piller of chains should stop unhapiness from other players civics. So a pedia entry is supplied to try to lock into the players imagination and tie the pillars concept with the mechanic. Flavor wise blocking it from good players makes sense given the story behind it, but there is no functional need for that restriction.

Fun: Its okay. It allows the player to avoid a negative effect and run his even people abusing country without suffering with one of the typical penalties. It also means that he has denied the block to his opponents.


So you could advise lowering the republic unhappiness effect further (which would weaken republic and the pillar), remove the republic unhappiness effect and the pillar (which would ruin republic and the pillar). But, in my opinion, making the pillar of chains a national wonder would be the sloppiest way to deal with this (and I kinda like it how it is).

 

[MagisterCultuum]

I still think that the civic-envy should be causes by Liberty, not Republic.

 

[Monkeyfinger]

Look at it this way.

If you have a lot of "we demand republic" unhappiness, it means a lot of AIs are running republic. Which means they aren't running government systems that give actual benefits.

Take your buffed farms or your heavily reduced city maintenance and be happy. Build a few happiness buildings. That's more than worth the fact that your competition aren't getting these benefits.

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

ok Kael I see your point, thanx for taking the time to answer this so thoroughly. I still don't like how it works, but I guess you're right when you say that making it available to everyone would kinda remove the point entirely. although, I have to say I didn't really want to remove the penalty altogether. I just wanted to let there be the choice of either sucking up and suffering the penalty OR build the pillar and get some OTHER negative effect, so the choice would still be there but would be EXPANDED to everyone instead of just the guy who built the wonder, not DELETED entirely. I really like having lots of choices, it's what makes Civ a great game in the first place. I'd never suggest something that subtracts from the number of available choices that was the whole point of the thread actually . I still have a question though, what does OP mean?

anyhow, it will still be great to see a debate about this going on to know what people think about it. mod-modders might find something they like here.

 

[Kael]

ok Kael I see your point, thanx for taking the time to answer this so thoroughly. I still don't like how it works, but I guess you're right when you say that making it available to everyone would kinda remove the point entirely. although, I have to say I didn't really want to remove the penalty altogether. I just wanted to let there be the choice of either sucking up and suffering the penalty OR build the pillar and get some OTHER negative effect, so the choice would still be there but would be EXPANDED to everyone instead of just the guy who built the wonder, not DELETED entirely. I really like having lots of choices, it's what makes Civ a great game in the first place. I'd never suggest something that subtracts from the number of available choices that was the whole point of the thread actually . I still have a question though, what does OP mean?

anyhow, it will still be great to see a debate about this going on to know what people think about it. mod-modders might find something they like here.

OP = Origonal Post, meaning the first one in this thread

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

I see, thanx

 

[Mailbox]

Amusingly enough, building the pillar will lower the amount of hammers it would produce with the way that the unhappy production works now. I think that's a funny self effect of the way unhappiness works.

I agree with the decision to keep republic as it. Having to make decisions and weigh benefits is vital to a fun strategy game and the options add to the overall complexity and mechanics in an interesting way.

 

[cyther]

Well also you could go out and destroy/ force the civic change by attacking the ai.

 

[Sarisin]

I started the original "We Demand A Republic" thread.

Since it looked like there would be no changes to the way the Republic civic works, I think you pretty much have two choices:

1. Adopt Republic

2. Build the Pillar of Chains

Not having Republic really DOES affect you if you tend to have a few mega-cities as I do rather than a bunch of smaller ones. For example, even with that modifier Kael mentioned, in my last game I had -7 in cities with 20 pop. or more until I adopted Republic. That is a bit impact IMO. An AI civ beat me to Pillar of Chains.

The other point I made in my original thread is that it appears one or more AI civs beeline Taxation to get Republic. I don't understand this as there are certainly more appropriate civs rather than taking many, many turns to get Taxation. So, you find yourself in the hole early as Republic seems to come online faster. Maybe that's just in my games, though.

The discussion in the prior thread echoed pretty much what Kael wrote: you could make a case for just about any civic in addition to Republic giving unhappy faces for not adopting. There are two ways of looking at this - why, then, Republic? And, maybe we should be glad that Republic is the only one posing this dilemma for the player - I think there WERE others in the past.

Again, you really are forced into choosing Republic or beelining Pillar of Chains, and, IMO, that lessens the FUN.

 

[Blackmantle]

I get along without it rather well (and i did dislike the pillar for the AC-increase until now. Even delaying AI acess to taxation in some instances.).

But i don't play with rather crouded maps so it might be an issue if you play with plenty of civs. (perhaps some sort of adjustment to number of civs or perhaps better some kind of overall cap might help at least a bit for those who like all-leaders games.
-12 or even more sure can suck)

Also a question: is the hammer-effect for unhappy empire-wide as well?
Then this is one really hefty wonder. You never start to learn... Even more nice reasons for Taxation than i thought anyways.


@ Sarasin: Add running Order (social order offers happiness only limited by upkeep after all or high-priests with the big grey emotion-equilibrium-button.) or having few cities and having some confessors turned druids to the list (the druids thing works for any alignment with a short detour best done during a golden age. Only the Grigori which need some Grigori medics following the Order and Hyborem who doesn't care anyways get the pass on that options i belive.).
Nothing beats the "good guys" going after those pesky whiners with some mind erasing goodness (this should be especially viable for rather crouded maps).
All agents of the veil spreading their corrupted influence really... and even worse () major violation of unquestioning obidience. (or playing Calabim and culling the herd a bit or running slavery and liberally using the whip for that matter. ).

 

[Sarisin]

I forgot to ask a question on this subject I have been meaning to ask:

An AI civ adopts the Republic. You don't get the immediate "We Demand A Republic" penalty. But, soon you do.

What happens if you wipe out the only AI civ that has adopted Republic?

Will your citizens, then, stop demanding it? Or, once they have it in their notion they can 'improve their lot' will they still demand it and give you the unhappiness?

I've never tested this, and it is difficult when you have other AI civs adopting it.

Blackmantle, thank you for your customary good additional suggestions.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

Oh, I also really don't think that Republic should require Taxation. I much prefer to have It require Philosophy (which I make into a later/more expensive tech, and the prereq for the Luonnatar)

 

[Fafnir13]

I'm reasonably certain that the republic unhappiness goes away once you crunch the jerks who implemented it. Honestly, I haven't checked to see if it did. By that point in the game, I'm just focusing on driving the steamroller along and not spending too much time microing my cities anyway. Just my major ones and the rest tend to take care of themselves.

 

[Aroldo]

I agree with Sarisin, and in this case completely disagree with Kael&team. In my opinion, the way Republic works neither makes sense nor is fun - as discussed in an older thread. But since things are gonna stay like they are, no need to discuss this further, no?