Republic in fire

[Adrogans]

I wasn't saying that religious civs in reality can't be republic, mainly I see that more often they are not and also I get annoyed that even with all of the preferences for other types of governments in the game if you play long games they all tend to be republic because of the modifier. Also thought it might be neat to have an option if a player doesn't want a state religion.

 

[daladinn]

iirc , there are way to many ways to get happy people. on top of that , the tech to get republic yourself is fairly easy to get. all in all , the AI took a tech line with no military backing that instead socially handicapped you. sounds like its jsut using an alterative tactic. adapt , learn , overcome.

honestly its balanced and not hard to deal with on either side of the fence.

 

[Adrogans]

I am not saying it is difficult to get Republic. All im saying is that with that in over time it becomes difficult for the AI to counter-act and some civs. Thus leading to many AI republics, I like variety.

 

[Bringa]

Actually, speaking of pants...

 

[Arwon]

Is it possible for republic to cause different levels of unhappiness depending on alignment, ie, current levels for good civs, practically none for evil? I can see the population of good civs getting upset because they want representation, but somehow I can't see Calabim civil rights marches...

 

[QES]

Is it possible for republic to cause different levels of unhappiness depending on alignment, ie, current levels for good civs, practically none for evil? I can see the population of good civs getting upset because they want representation, but somehow I can't see Calabim civil rights marches...

"Our creed - we wont bleed" would be a popular picket sign.
that and "No Anemic Chicks" T-shirts.
-Qes

 

[Bringa]

Is it possible for republic to cause different levels of unhappiness depending on alignment, ie, current levels for good civs, practically none for evil? I can see the population of good civs getting upset because they want representation, but somehow I can't see Calabim civil rights marches...

Everything is possible (from my LIMITED knowledge of the SDK, this should be a relatively minor change)

 

[loki1232]

Given the recent not-off-topic post, QES has been extremely unsuccessful.
Should we give him more time to hijack it or just close down and sticky the thread now as an example of a failed threadjacking?

 

[Lloyien]

I wouldn't mind seeing Republic given a Good or Neutral Only tag, much in the same way Public Healers works. It seems to me that the evil civs (Infernal, Sheaim, Calabim, et cetera) would be far, far less likely to adopt Republic from the perspective of the civilizations and their leaders. On top of that, there could be diplo modifiers...maybe -4, +/- 2, and +4, ranging from Evil to Good, respectively, for a nation having a Republic, with various other modifiers for the other governments (for instance, Aristocracy, Theocracy, and God King might give a slight negative modifier, because of the authoritarian nature of those government types).

In this way, there's more "fuel" to make the AI more aggressive, and gives suitable reason for civs to try and stamp out Republican governments--if not only for the unhappiness they cause. It would also have the added benefit of making Republic a rarer government type amongst civs--at the least, you wouldn't see the Ashen Veil prancing around with it, and if the player really wanted it, it's only one religious conversion away.

 

[QES]

Given the recent not-off-topic post, QES has been extremely unsuccessful.
Should we give him more time to hijack it or just close down and sticky the thread now as an example of a failed threadjacking?

This might be true, except that you commented on it - which is definately not on topic.

Thusly, even challanging my threadjackery strengthens it.
-Qes

 

[vyapti]

I've always envisioned the unhappiness in cities as simply unproductive. A civil rights march in the Calabim capitol may never happen, but unhappy people don't work as hard, call in sick, do just enough to stay out of trouble, etc. Unhappy people don't need to demonstrate to have a negative benefit to a city.

As a game effect, I think Republic should cause unhappiness in other civs. It should also cause instability, though. A human knows that war is an option over switching to Republic, I don't belive the AI does. Diplomatic modifiers might help an AI civ see both options.

 

[Morganknight]

I don't like the idea of making Republic alignment flavoured. Even in "good" civs, Republic is (can be) just an illusion of power given to one's citizens. The real power never really changes. Why not allow "evil" civs the same power to delude their citizens.

 

[Bringa]

I guess the main point is a balancing point. If republic gives such strong unhappiness penalties to others, all civs are forced to go republic late-game. I don't like that.

 

[Gamestation]

I think a solution to this would be to move the unhappiness penalty to a different branch. In Vanilla CIV there is a reason that emancipation is a labor civic, the AI could not use the other options well. Hey why don't we have emancipation in this game? The AI probably can't use the current labor options well anyway. Sure some leaders will get the shaft for using one of the other options as their preferred civic but that would also ensure that some civs stick to a different option other than republic all around.

 

[onedreamer]

Republic is already a good gov. civic with its bonuses (culture, GPP, happyness) and doesn't need the unhappyness feature, which btw is very missplaced for FFH, IMO. Just remove this "feature" yourself. I think the staff has been too lazy in regards of this problem, because as it is, it's broken and it's been reported thoroughly.

 

[Sureshot]

i dont think its laziness heh

foreign trade had the same mechanic before, and it was removed, but it remained on republic, mostly im guessin to maintain the existence of that mechanic ingame

removing unique mechanics is not wise, and detracts from the game, there could be some intelligent revision, such as not giving the penalty to evil civs, but removing it outright only lessens the game

 

[Shadius]

Related thought: I'm thinking Republic should probably be off-limits for OO followers. I just can't imagine democracy working very well when you're enslaved by giant octopi.

 

[Arwon]

Nonsense. It's called "consensus decision-making".

 

[onedreamer]

i dont think its laziness heh

foreign trade had the same mechanic before, and it was removed, but it remained on republic, mostly im guessin to maintain the existence of that mechanic ingame

removing unique mechanics is not wise, and detracts from the game, there could be some intelligent revision, such as not giving the penalty to evil civs, but removing it outright only lessens the game

I said remove it from Republic, not from the game. And it's a bigger killer for a strategic game to place a feature that is a no brainer both for the AI and for the human player. Why not simply remove all other gov. civics ? I think this is a big problem of the mod that should have been addressed from a while already.
Anyways, I don't see why should the penalty be removed for evil civs ? Apart from it not making sense from a logical point of view, it would remain a no brainer for good and neutral civs from a strategic point of view.
Since the main point of this mod is the peculiarity of gameplay with each different civ... having a gov. civic that at a certain point of the game becomes a must is a sort of a paradox.

 

[Sureshot]

i never get republic, the unhappiness it causes can be counteracted and its not worth giving up City states for huge empires.

don't give in to peer pressure and then demand peer pressure not exist

its a mechanic that adds depth to civic choice, there may be another place for it, but so far republic is the most intuitive of the options