Seperating the Departments

[Strider]

We need to seperate Culture and Science, as it was in the old days. Not only is both of them being abused merged with other departments, but it's almost impossible for the Trade/Tech leader to handle two of the most demanding subjects at once, espicially once we get farther into the game.

Culture has always been an important part, but because several leaders failed to do anything in it, it was decided as un-needed and merged with another department. In reality, the culture department is muchly needed. Not only does it monitor other civ's cultural status as prepared to ours, it looks for cities that might be prime for a culture flip, and coordinates it's efforts with govonors to either keep that city from flipping, or encouraging it to flip to us.

Currently, culture is being abused, not even mentioned. We are sitting next to the Civ3 culture king, the babylonians, and there is no discussion thread on this possible threat, and how to counter it.

Science is another major aspect in this game we call Civ3. It must constantly monitored, yet trade must also. I assume that when they were merged, we thought that they would be easy to monitor together. This is wrong, they only area where these two departments unite is the trading aspect. Trade requires the constand monitoring of rival civ's economic status, and crippling the economy of civs, or even helping the economy of them.

Science requires monitoring of not only other Civs Scientific status in the world, but predicting what they will go for next, how fast they are capable of researching (based on land, size, etc). A tech at the right time can be the differance between a civ living, or dying. It could be the same for us.

 

[Chieftess]

And there are other points to consider.

1 - Trade and Domestic have become more powerful, combining the departments.

2 - For some reason, deputies, chatreps, judiciary, governors, and remaining citizens were left out of the chain of command (they've been in there for 3 demogames..) . With only 4 departments, it makes it all the more likely that a turnchat could be cancelled due to no participation. That makes the demogame look back on Thunderfall's part (and yes, he does lurk in here).

3 - More departments = more participation. There's simply more things for people to do. Science and Culture may be the "least stressed" areas of the government. DG2 - culture took a backseat to our warmongering. Science took a backseat to the 0% strategy, while trade took care of industrial techs. DG3, they returned just a bit more.

Take a look at DG1. Curufinwe was perhaps the BEST cultural advisor we ever had. Not only did he push for culture, he did so in the cities we just conquered, in cities that might flip, AND, (even if indirectly) encouraged roleplay. That's what makes this game fun. Culture is also history, and that was very much a part of the first 2 demogames.

Sure, science may look like just picking techs at random to research, but as Strider said, there's more to it. There's estimating what other civs are researching, announcing when a scientific civ might be headed for the next era (they get a free tech).

Culture is the same. At face value, they may just override build queues in border cities that have any of their 20 tiles under AI control. But, there's also analyzing the culture of other civs to see if there are "spikes" in the graph, indicating cultural growth (new culture buildings, 1,000 year doubling effect). The graphs also indicate how other civs are gaining on, or losing the culture 'race' to other civs. It's also an indicator of total culture (i.e., by doing a pixel count, and using our total culture, then figure out the AI culture varible).

That is how both departments should be run.

Strider, Civanator, Curufinwe. They were the masters of those departments.

 

[Sarevok]

I agree, these departments need to return to the demogame. A balance of power is required at this point, and it dosent exist at all due to the constitution.

Seperate those 2 and make them new departments, and also put deputies in the CoC.

 

[DaveShack]

Culture was merged in because the then-incumbent culture leader said there was nothing for that office to do. Once we opened the can of worms, discussion moved to "what would be the ideal number of advisors" and 4 advisors won the poll. At that point we had to decide which two offices to remove, and how to allocate the remaining work.

The impetus for putting science with trade was

• Most trades involve science, which meant that trade was constantly shaking up the science picture
• Early science decisions are far apart in number of turns
• Later science decisions become largely no-brainers. Once the decision of Democracy vs Economics (Smith's) vs Military Tradition (cavalry) in the Middle Ages is decided, and whether to go for Hoover or Infantry in the industrial age, the tech order is pretty much set.

I was in favor of keeping 6 advisors and revitalizing them.

 

[Strider]

Sure, it becomes *almost* useless later in the game, but so does mostly anything else. Once the game is in the bag, there is not much for any departments leader to do.

 

[Chieftess]

Originally posted by Strider
Sure, it becomes *almost* useless later in the game, but so does mostly anything else. Once the game is in the bag, there is not much for any departments leader to do.

Exactly. Take a look at DG2. I could give a reason why each department "wasn't needed" based on looking at the end of the game.

Domestic - After the "size 20 plan", domestic was pretty much done. The major productive cities at their max production and growth. They could have taken the last term off.

Culture - Yes, we were going for a domination victory that game. While it was important to have every tile covered, we didn't want to hit 100,000 culture (I think we had 80,000 when we won, so we were getting close).

Science - We were ahead in techs by the time we built Hoover's, and the rest of the tech tree was already in place. There was no need for modern era discussions, since we won the game right when we reached the modern era.

Foreign Affairs - There's not much you're gonna do when you're at war with the last 2 civs. Why, there's not even much to do at the start of the game with only a handful of civ and embassies (like the current game) when you don't even have a full plan.

Trade - Once you're in the tech lead, and have just about all the resources you'll need, there's not much left to do. When you're in the industrial and modern era, you don't WANT the AI to have tanks, mech inf, and modern armor. Most trades might be little "donate a resource to keep them happy" type trades, as was the case in the end of DG2.

Now, reasons for keeping the two that were taken out:

Science - Yes, I agree this may be the "Weakest link" in terms of things to do (discussion on the next tech), however we have to think about the whole picture, and who's in the demogame. There's some users, maybe they're new to civ3, maybe they're new to the demogame, who would like to be an advisor (because it sounds cool), but doesn't want a posistion that can mess stuff up. It's a low stress posistion. "What techs do you want?". Now, there is more to it, like tech costs, and what techs will the AI go for. It's one of the posistions where the player can grow into the game, and learn. There's no pressure to know everything from the starting gate. I consider this as a "learner's posistion". The next part is, deciding which techs to go for to meet a goal. Are we going for culture? If so, pick culture-related techs. Are we going for conquest? If so, pick unit-related techs.

Culture - Ok, there's ONE good reason why you'd need culture. Culture Victory (20k or 100k). Culture is going to have to calculate what improvements and wonders provide the most culture for the least amount of shields. They should also keep an eye on the culture graph (who's catching up/falling behind in culture?). There's also pushing for culture in border cities, or cities that were just captured. What are the chances that it might flip? Culture needs to be doing this.

 

[Sarevok]

General workloads can be lessed by making new departments, though I think that Octavian's plan is perhaps a better one with a better long-term result

 

[Civanator]

I am in full support of seperating the departments. I don't have much to say though, cause CT pretty much summed it all up, but i'll just voice my opinion to support.

It may seem like Culture and Science don't do anything, but where would we be without someone plotting our course in science, which can aid the Military and Cultural departments, as in DG1. Strider and I emphasized on this.

Culture, one of the most important aspects of Civ3. Curufinwe was a master at this. Make sure our cities wouldn't flip to the enemy, or finding weak spots in the enemy's culture and attacking that. Seperating the departments also lessons the workload, and adds more participants to the DG.

 

[Strider]

As there seems (close) to being overwhelming support for this. I'll do the constitutional matters, for it'll fit into the constitution, we can discuss those alittle bit, and run a poll over it.

 

[Strider]

Ok, here's the proposed change's (in const. format): There in bold BTW (codes messed up, give me alittle while to fix it )

2.  Council 
           
           e.  Ministry of Internal Affairs 
              1.  Is responsible for settler placement. 
              2.  Is responsible for wonder building, including prebuilds. 
              3.  Governor of cities that do not have a provincial governor. 
              4.  Is responsible for the mapping of Provincial Borders. 
              5.  Monitor overall happiness of COUNTRY_NAME.
              6.  Coordinate efforts of Governors on national projects.
            f.   Ministry of Defense       
              1.  Is responsible for troop movements. 
              2.  Is responsible for defensive plans. 
              3.  Is responsible for offensive plans. 
              4.  Is responsible for troop upgrades and terminations. 
              5.  Track relative strength of foreign nations
            g.   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
              1.  Is responsible for declarations of war. 
              2.  Is responsible for peace treaties. 
              3.  Is responsible for construction of embassies. 
              4.  Is responsible for rights of passage. 
              5.  Is responsible for trade embargoes. 
              6.  Is responsible for mutual protection pacts. 
              7.  Is responsible for placement of spies. 
              8.  Is responsible for intelligence gathering, spying and sabotage. 
              9.  Track world-wide diplomatic situation.
             h.   Ministry of Trade 
              1.  Is responsible for trade deals. 
              2.  Is responsible for tracking the status and expiration of established deals.
     [B]     3. Is responsible for monitoring other civilizations economical status[/B]
    [B]     i.   Ministry of Culture
              1. Is responsible for monitoring [insert civ name]'s cultural status.
              2. Is responsible for working with govonors to expand [insert civ name]'s culture.
              3. Is responsible for coordinating efforts to save a city from flipping, or to flip a city to us. 
              4. The Culture Advisor may override the build queues of a city in which any of its' 20 tiles falls within the borders of another civ. Only cultural improvements, and/or wonders (provided a Great Leader is used) may be placed into the queue as the next item to be built.
            j.   Ministry of Research
              1.  Is responsible for tech research queue. 
              2.  Is responsible for tech trades. 
              3.  Is responsible for tech espionage. 
              4.  Is responsible for coordinating with the Ministry of Trade to find the best trade/tech deals.
              5.  Is responsible for monitoring rival civs research and  tech status.[/B]

 

[Chieftess]

Looks good (but I'm the legal dunce here, remember? ), but I'd add something to culture. In the old, ancient books, culture could override build queues of cities that didn't have it's full 20 tiles. The origanal law implied that new cities would fall under that description, but I don't think anyone even caught that... So, I would add this:

"The Culture Advisor may override the build queues of a city in which any of its' 20 tiles falls within the borders of another civ. Only cultural improvements, and/or wonders (provided a Great Leader is used) may be placed into the queue as the next item to be built."

 

[Strider]

Originally posted by Chieftess
Looks good (but I'm the legal dunce here, remember? ), but I'd add something to culture. In the old, ancient books, culture could override build queues of cities that didn't have it's full 20 tiles. The origanal law implied that new cities would fall under that description, but I don't think anyone even caught that... So, I would add this:

"The Culture Advisor may override the build queues of a city in which any of its' 20 tiles falls within the borders of another civ. Only cultural improvements, and/or wonders (provided a Great Leader is used) may be placed into the queue as the next item to be built."

Added to the above proposal. (still having some problems with the codes, I really need to pratice with them.)

 

[Donovan Zoi]

Guys, we have bigger fish to fry regarding this ruleset. Not to mention the fact that the pains in removing the Culture Department have already been experienced, and we are finally getting used to our new leadership structure. We can expect the same type of pain trying to put it back in.

The ideas you guys have lined up for a possible Culture Dept. will still not keep that leader very busy. This was the main reason the department was axed in the first place. Plus we are mid-game, and I think that a change to our leadership structure is totally unnecessary at this point in time. It ain't broke, like some other parts of our ruleset, so we are we putting the effort here to fix it?

 

[Strider]

Originally posted by Donovan Zoi
Guys, we have bigger fish to fry regarding this ruleset. Not to mention the fact that the pains in removing the Culture Department have already been experienced, and we are finally getting used to our new leadership structure. We can expect the same type of pain trying to put it back in.

The ideas you guys have lined up for a possible Culture Dept. will still not keep that leader very busy. This was the main reason the department was axed in the first place. Plus we are mid-game, and I think that a change to our leadership structure is totally unnecessary at this point in time. It ain't broke, like some other parts of our ruleset, so we are we putting the effort here to fix it?

Technically it is broke, culture is currently being abused under the current ruleset, as there has yet to be one discussion over it.

Also, it will keep the leader plenty busy, busy enough, and it will also allow two other leaders more time to concentrate on my specific tasks, all together increasing the effciency of our executive department.

 

[Sarevok]

Personally, a Culture department should be in my mind an unofficial department of advice to give to domestic rather than its own department.

 

[Chieftess]

Even if it is a "lesser used" department, it can still be a department for someone who's new to the game, and wants to ease their way into the government without having TOO much to worry about.

 

[Sarevok]

yeah, but they can get really bored really fast... Perhaps it can be an elected position, but subordinate to the internal affairs or something.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

Originally posted by Chieftess
Even if it is a "lesser used" department, it can still be a department for someone who's new to the game, and wants to ease their way into the government without having TOO much to worry about.

I myself used this very argument in the hopes of keeping the Six-Leaders-Based-On-Civ3-Advisors(SLBOCA), but the people at that time still voted to introdcuce a leadership structure that efectively abolished the Culture Department.

However, now that the game is in full swing, I am really hesitant to alter the executive structure unless it is a significant change.

 

[Peri]

I agree. This would be a major change to implement in mid game. Those who voted to change it originally did not do so on a whim. They really thought it was the best way. If this current structure badly affects the game in future terms then we should re examine it but at the moment this is the least of our worries. We should concentrate on getting the areas fixed which are damaging confidence in the game.

 

[Chieftess]

Personally, I think that it's rather funny how everyone did away with culture, and then, origanally wanted to go for, of all things, a 20k culture win. (of course, our start changed that pretty quickly)