Social Policies???

[Che Guava]

I've been searching furiously through all the information I can get on this (I'm chokin' on my own excitement here!!!), but thus far I haven't been able to make much sense of this whole "Social Policies" idea. It's like civics, but it's formed 'like a tree'? So you can 'plan your civilization'...? What in the name of Darius is this all about????

As a gamer that is pretty strictly a civver, I was wondering if this kind of system has its roots in another game (as the new combat apparently takes its cue from Panzer General). Is there anyone out there who knows anything more about what this might look like??

 

[Ahriman]

No SP info has been released yet. Most likely their design hasn't been finalized.

 

[Che Guava]

I just hope it keeps some of the elements of the CIV4 civics system. IMHO, it was the best addition in that sequel...

 

[cybrxkhan]

I don't think this was necessarily the inspiration behind it, but from what I sense, it seems that the Social Policies are similar to the way the "government sliders" (or whatever they were) worked in Europa Universalis III, that's assuming you can go "back and forth" between the "newer" and "older" social policies if you wish to do so.

 

[Che Guava]

I don't think this was necessarily the inspiration behind it, but from what I sense, it seems that the Social Policies are similar to the way the "government sliders" (or whatever they were) worked in Europa Universalis III, that's assuming you can go "back and forth" between the "newer" and "older" social policies if you wish to do so.

Hmmm...well, I think I could live with that. I've heard generally good things about that game, and I like the idea of a graded spectra of options....

 

[Hypernova]

It seems that you develop your government along a branch of the tree, or multiple branches. I remember reading that fascism was further along the branch that absolute monarchy was on for example. So you couldn't just transition from fascism to democracy in one step like you can with Civ IV because you would be way behind democracy on that branch of the tree, you would have to develop it gradually.

I think this is a great improvement. It was silly in previous Civs that you could change government on a whim to anything you had researched. This represents the entrenched attitudes and ways of doing things that go along with all societies.

 

[Minor Annoyance]

It was silly in previous Civs that you could change government on a whim to anything you had researched. This represents the entrenched attitudes and ways of doing things that go along with all societies.

Well there was the anarchy from changing, but this would be a better system.

 

[bonafide11]

It seems that you develop your government along a branch of the tree, or multiple branches. I remember reading that fascism was further along the branch that absolute monarchy was on for example. So you couldn't just transition from fascism to democracy in one step like you can with Civ IV because you would be way behind democracy on that branch of the tree, you would have to develop it gradually.

I think this is a great improvement. It was silly in previous Civs that you could change government on a whim to anything you had researched. This represents the entrenched attitudes and ways of doing things that go along with all societies.

I'm not one to point out realism, but it's worth noting that Hitler was democratically elected... I don't see why fascism would make any more sense following a monarchy than it would following a democracy.

 

[cybrxkhan]

Actually in Civ4 there was something called "anarchy"... Although it would be cool if that anarchy actually caused a bit of damage in your cities, besides the "no research and construction of anything for 1-2 turns, very very very damaging indeed!"

 

[Hypernova]

I'm not one to point out realism, but it's worth noting that Hitler was democratically elected... I don't see why fascism would make any more sense following a monarchy than it would following a democracy.

It's stupid fascism follows monarchy if that's actually how it works. Looks like they may have just picked two autocratic government types and pretended one followed on from the other.

Of course I know about anarchy (it actually dates all the way back to Civ I). It is a tiny interruption in your production and research that has nothing to do with the fact that you can change your government on a whim. It certainly does not represent the evolution and gradual change of societies that the social policies tree appears to.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Probably you van be on multiple levels at once... remember Weimar Republic cam Out of a Monarchy

So
By The 1920s Germany was

At Monarchy on the Tyrrany Scale
At Republic on the Democracy Scale
etc.
So instead of going to Free Republic on the Democracy Scale they went to Facism on the Tyrrany Scale.

From the looks of it it should be possible to "max out" on multiple scales...
So you can have a Theocratic Democracy, a Facist Theocracy, a Facist Democracy, a "Traditional" Theocracy, "Traditional" Democracy... etc.

So Stallin's USSR might be Socialist Facism, and the Third Reich a Facist Republic

 

[Louis XXIV]

It's so vague that it's open to lots of interpretation, but it definitely seems to cover lots of areas, not just government (religion being another). It almost seemed like something you invest in and it gives you benefits over time the more you invest. Aside from that, it's very vague. I have a partially formed theory, but I'm waiting for a little more info to see if I'm even close to the right track.

My guess is it won't necessarily be better, just different. Something that clearly makes the two not compatible, but could be fun in it's own right.

 

[tom2050]

Could be similar to the way Alpha Centauri worked... that would be interesting to implement it in a similar way... because not all democracies, monarchies, fascist governments, communist governments work in the same way, they all have differences, or are a combo of 2 or more.

This would give player a good amount of freedom to develop a particular style they enjoy the best depending on their type of gameplay.

 

[Decimatus]

Probably you van be on multiple levels at once... remember Weimar Republic cam Out of a Monarchy

So
By The 1920s Germany was

At Monarchy on the Tyrrany Scale
At Republic on the Democracy Scale
etc.
So instead of going to Free Republic on the Democracy Scale they went to Facism on the Tyrrany Scale.

From the looks of it it should be possible to "max out" on multiple scales...
So you can have a Theocratic Democracy, a Facist Theocracy, a Facist Democracy, a "Traditional" Theocracy, "Traditional" Democracy... etc.

So Stallin's USSR might be Socialist Facism, and the Third Reich a Facist Republic

I like the sound of these options.

Hearts of Iron 2 had some neat sliders that went into Dove and Hawk, Conservative and Liberal, and quite a few other sliders I can't remember.

It might also be nice to be able to choose more than 1 option on the slider as well.

Democratic Rempublic.

Monotheist Theocracy.

Facist Monarchy.


They mentioned ecology paths as well. If ecology has a path, then I am sure the paths are numerous indeed.

 

[Gliese 581]

Heh no PG was very clear about keeping it a military war game only for obvious reasons.

Also I disagree that Hitler was democratically elected, at most the nazis had 1/3 of the vote, they never got a majority. One also has to consider that they had armed thugs out in the streets threatening people and encouraging voters to vote for the nazis as well as openly attacking communists and other leftist factions so the proceedings wasn't exactly 100% fair given this atmosphere. Hitler then browbeat Hindenburg into appointing him Reich Chancellor, after which he step by step abolished the democractic system.

 

[Tomice]

I hope/believe it won't be a simple 4 or 5 branches tree. It might be more like a network between different types of government:

You start by taking one of the basic ancient governments (greek/roman republic, despotism, egyptian style religious state) and you can advance further, but there are shortcuts between the branches (democracy -> fascism), maybe even one-way choices (violent slaughter of the royal family: no easy switching back to monarchy)

So ideally shifts that happened in reality will happen fast and directly ingame, completely changing the system is difficult (full-blown democracy to theocratic monarchy would be a long term-shift, because you don't have a royal family or nobility at all and also no powerful religious institutions). Mixtures (representative monarchy, half-open market communism like modern china) link the branches.

As some guys mentioned, there are a lot of grey zones and mixtures of social policies, so this network will either hopefully have a lot of options to choose or you have additional sliders for topics every government has to care about (social insurances, enviroment, military budget,... are all important issues for every state at any time). The possible slider positions however are limited by your basic type of government and tech level).

I guess this could be a realistic and interesting system!



Examples:

Ancient Rome:
Despotism
Primitive republic
Military Emperor (Caesar)
Hereditary Rule (Augustus and later)
back to military emperors (and finally decay!)

France:
Monarchy
Primitive republic (french revolution)
Military Emperor (napoleon)
primitive republic
Democracy
Social democracy

Germany
Monarchy
Representative monarchy
Primitive republic
Fascism
primitive republic
democracy
social democracy
eco-social democracy



This was not meant to be overly historically acurate, just to give you a feeling what i mean! Please no flaming!

 

[Che Guava]

I don't think there are real 'realism' issue tied to big changes in government, it does happen (say, russian revolution, for eg), but I think that big changes, in game as in real life, should make for big instability. Sure, you can switch from an Absolutele Monarchy under feudalism to an emancipated social democracy in a turn, at least in name, but it's going to take you a while to make that system efficient by building the appropriate buildings (e.g. castles under monarchy, couthouses under representation) to make the civic worth its while. In that same way, you could prepare for an upcoming revolution by setting the groundowrk for a new government earlier.

At the same time, I'd love to see sliders for more abstract concepts like personal freedoms, social spending, so your 'Democratic/Beaurocracy/Free Market' government could also move back and for on the economic/social freedoms scale....

 

[Minor Annoyance]

I think this is more a question of what is happening with a change in civic settings. Is it a revolution, or a voluntary chance? If it's a revolution a drastic change is possible, but if it's a natural progression then it would be much slower. I don't know the details of the history, but England was a monarchy, then when parliament was established and over time the monarchy became a powerless figurehead. It didn't happen over night. For it to happen quicker there would probably have to be some beheadings.
So there in lies the difference. What's being modeled?

 

[Che Guava]

I think this is more a question of what is happening with a change in civic settings. Is it a revolution, or a voluntary chance? If it's a revolution a drastic change is possible, but if it's a natural progression then it would be much slower. I don't know the details of the history, but England was a monarchy, then when parliament was established and over time the monarchy became a powerless figurehead. It didn't happen over night. For it to happen quicker there would probably have to be some beheadings.
So there in lies the difference. What's being modeled?

Well, if I recall my history correctly, there was a little tipping point called the english civil war (which did end in the execution of Charles I), firmed up by the glorious revolution, which definitely tilted things towards parliament. So while there is a social progression in government, I'd make the argument that it is usually punctuated by some moments in history called revolutions, whether they are violent, peaceful, quiet or loud...

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

However the system works, I just hope there's no *inevitability* about certain choices-like there was with the Free Religion & Emancipation Civic. That always bugged me.

Aussie.