The Concise and Universal Civics Proposition

[Drake L. Dragon]

This proposal is an attempt at categorizing and defining civics in the most concise and universal manner possible in order to see the reactions towards such a proposition. In order to implement inflation, it is as well necessary to implement the theory of the Bubble, and these civics will have that concept.

All fractions are rounded up.

ORGANIZATION

City-States (No Upkeep)

Confederacy (Low Upkeep)
-All Cities +2 Happiness
-All Units +50% within Borders
-Distance from Palace -50%
-Local Rebelliousness Decreased
-National Rebelliousness Decreased

Centrism (High Upkeep)
-Capital +25% Gold, +25% Science
-All Cities save Capital -5% Gold, -5% Science
-Capital +(Number of Cities/10) Happiness
-All Cities save Capital +(Number of Cities/20) Unhappiness
-Distance from Palace +25%
-Local Rebelliousness Increased
-National Rebelliousness Decreased

Federalism (High Upkeep)
-Capital -75% Hammers
-All Cities save Capital +5% Culture, +5% Espionage, +5% Gold, +5% Hammers, +5% Science
-Capital +(Number of Cities/2) Unhappiness
-All Cities save Capital + (Number of Cities/20) Happiness
-Distance from Palace -25%
-Local Rebelliousness Increased
-National Rebelliousness Decreased

FOREIGN POLICY

Survivalist (No Upkeep)

Savagery (Low Upkeep)
-All Units +25% Outside of Borders
-Local Rebelliousness Increased
-National Rebelliousness Decreased
-All Captured Cities May Only Be Razed
-All Pillaging +25%

Imperialism (High Upkeep)
-Capital +100% Gold
-All Captured Cities -5% Culture, -5% Espionage, -5% Gold, -5% Hammers, -5% Health, -5% Science
-Capital +(Number of Cities/20) Happiness
-All Captured Cities +5 Unhappiness
-All Units +25% Outside of Borders
-Distance from Palace +25%
-Local Rebelliousness Increased
-National Rebelliousness Decreased

Secret Government (Medium Upkeep)
-Capital +50% Gold
-All Captured Cities -25% Culture, +25% Espionage, +25% Gold, +25% Hammers, -25% Health, -25% Science
-Capital +(Number of Cities/30) Happiness
-All Captured Cities +2 Unhappiness
-Local Rebelliousness Increased
-National Rebelliousness Decreased

Neocolonialism (Medium Upkeep)
-All Cities save Captured Cities +25% Gold
-All Captured Cities -50% Culture, +50% Espionage, +50% Gold, +50% Hammers, -50% Health, -50% Science
-All Cities save Captured Cities +(Number of Cities/40) Happiness
-All Captured Cities -2 Unhappiness
-Distance from Palace -25%
-Local Rebelliousness Increased
-National Rebelliousness Decreased

Equilibrium (High Upkeep)
-All Cities save Captured Cities +5% Gold
-All Captured Cities +5% Culture, -25% Espionage, +5% Gold, +5% Hammers, +5% Health, +5% Science
-All Cities +(Number of Cities/50) Happiness
-Distance from Palace +25%
-Local Rebelliousness Decreased
-National Rebelliousness Decreased

The New World Order (High Upkeep)
-All Cities -75% Culture, +75% Espionage, +75% Gold, +75% Hammers, -75% Health, -75% Science
-All Cities +10 Unhappiness
-All Units +25% Outside of Borders
-Distance from Palace +90%
-Local Rebelliousness Increased
-National Rebelliousness Decreased

HIGH RULE

Pack (No Upkeep)

God (Low Upkeep)
-All Cities +5% Culture, +5% Espionage, +5% Gold, +5% Hammers, -5% Science
-All Cities with State Religion +2 Happiness
-All Cities without State Religion +5 Unhappiness
-All Units +5%
-Distance from Palace -5%
-Local Rebelliousness Increased
-National Rebelliousness Decreased

The People (Low Upkeep)
-All Cities +25% Culture, +5% Hammers
-Each City +(Each Population of City/2) Unhappiness
-All Units +25% within Borders
-Distance from Palace +5%
-Local Rebelliousness Increased
-National Rebelliousness Increased

The Constitution (High Upkeep)
-Capital +25% Culture, +25% Espionage, +25% Gold, +25% Hammers
-All Cities save Capital +5% Culture, +5% Espionage, +5% Gold, +5% Hammers
-All Cities +5 Happiness
-All Units +25% within Borders
-Distance from Palace +25%
-Local Rebelliousness Increased
-National Rebelliousness Increased
-Anarchy +100% Length

The State (High Upkeep)
-All Cities -5% Culture, -5% Espionage, -5% Gold, +25% Hammers
-All Cities +2 Unhappiness
-All Units +5%
-Distance from Palace -5%
-Local Rebelliousness Increased
-National Rebelliousness Decreased

The State of Nature (Medium Upkeep)
-All Cities +75% Culture, -25% Espionage, -25% Gold, -25% Hammers, -25% Health, -25% Science
-All Cities +5 Happiness
-All Units -25%
-Local Rebelliousness Increased
-National Rebelliousness Decreased

The Cosmos (Medium Upkeep)
-All Cities +25% Science
-All Cities +2 Happiness
-All Units -25%
-Distance from Palace +5%
-Local Rebelliousness Increased
-National Rebelliousness Increased

RULE

Rule of Nature (No Upkeep)

Rule of One (High Upkeep)
-Capital +25% Culture
-All Cities save Capital +5% Culture
-Capital +(Number of Cities/2) Happiness
-All Cities save Capital +(Number of Cities/50) Unhappiness
-Distance from Palace -25%
-Local Rebelliousness Decreased
-National Rebelliousness Decreased

Rule of Majority (Low Upkeep)
-All Cities +25% Hammers
-All Cities +(Number of Cities/25) Unhappiness
-Distance from Palace +5%
-Local Rebelliousness Increased
-National Rebelliousness Increased

Rule of Minority (Low Upkeep)
-All Cities +25% Gold
-All Cities +5 Unhappiness
-Distance from Palace -5%
-Local Rebelliousness Decreased
-National Rebelliousness Decreased

Rule of Elites (Low Upkeep)
-All Cities +25% Science
-All Cities +5 Unhappiness
-Distance from Palace -5%
-Local Rebelliousness Decreased
-National Rebelliousness Decreased

Rule of Law (High Upkeep)
-All Cities +5% Gold, +5% Science
-All Cities +2 Unhappiness
-Distance from Palace +25%
-Local Rebelliousness Increased
-National Rebelliousness Increased

Rule of God (Low Upkeep)
-All Cities +25% Culture
-All Cities +2 Happiness
-Distance from Palace -25%
-Local Rebelliousness Decreased
-National Rebelliousness Decreased

 

[Killtech]

see here: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=369690
this was my approach to civics.

 

[wilson6907]

I love your take on the civics Killtech.. but when is the final going to be done I would like to see instead of "Presidential Republic" have it be "Constitutional Republic" instead it sounds more politically accurate. If you could give me maybe a run down on how to write civics that would be cool, because I could help you. I'm a historian and I know we can make a final version to perfection without any kind of bias at all. Get back to me and maybe we could work on this together?

see here: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=369690
this was my approach to civics.

 

[Drake L. Dragon]

I modified the first two civic categories and added two more civic categories. Please know that the civic category RULE is not yet completed. I want to see the reactions, nevertheless. Plus, note that the reason that the civics a majority of you might consider, "Good" or "Just" have higher maintenance, distance to palace expenses, and rebelliousness, because, from what I've observed, the people are less easier to manage, when the people have been empowered; therefore, those civics would provide more prosperity, but you'll as well have to contend with a more active citizenry, if you want that prosperity for your civilization. That's the only fair way to balance it out.

see here: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=369690
this was my approach to civics.

Pretty good. We have different approaches but the same care for civics in the modmod.

 

[Killtech]

I love your take on the civics Killtech.. but when is the final going to be done I would like to see instead of "Presidential Republic" have it be "Constitutional Republic" instead it sounds more politically accurate. If you could give me maybe a run down on how to write civics that would be cool, because I could help you. I'm a historian and I know we can make a final version to perfection without any kind of bias at all. Get back to me and maybe we could work on this together?

well, the government civics are a bit mixed systems so they can be in one group. basically i used the info i found on german wikipedia. the problem was that there are basically only three different basic forms of government: republic, monarchy and dictatorship. then are different republican forms: presidential system, parliamentarian and the single-party system. i cannot put them into an own civic category because they only apply to republics. similar issue with monarchies. thus i merged them into one e.g. "presidential system" + "republic" = "presidential republic". i know it doesn't sound that historically correct but it is due to the civics system in the game. after all you don't want to have "parliamentarian dictatorship".

about "constitutional republic" i don't know what this system is. english is not my native language... thus it might be used to different terminology. thus my question is : what is an un-constitutional republic?

but i'm open for suggestion. especially for the early economy civics. still don't know how to call an early market economy and i'm also not sure if something like a palace economy is understandable enough for most players.

Pretty good. We have different approaches but the same care for civics in the modmod.

your organization civics are too unbalanced. federation gives far too much boost. consider that large empires will surely switch to this civic. and as it eliminates nearly every negative aspect of a large empire these will grow totally overpowered leaving smaller empires chanceless. large empires have already too much economic power due to their size alone. additionally they can acquire tons of resources boosting their economy even further.

 

[Drake L. Dragon]

well, the government civics are a bit mixed systems so they can be in one group. basically i used the info i found on german wikipedia. the problem was that there are basically only three different basic forms of government: republic, monarchy and dictatorship. then are different republican forms: presidential system, parliamentarian and the single-party system. i cannot put them into an own civic category because they only apply to republics. similar issue with monarchies. thus i merged them into one e.g. "presidential system" + "republic" = "presidential republic". i know it doesn't sound that historically correct but it is due to the civics system in the game. after all you don't want to have "parliamentarian dictatorship".

about "constitutional republic" i don't know what this system is. english is not my native language... thus it might be used to different terminology. thus my question is : what is an un-constitutional republic?

but i'm open for suggestion. especially for the early economy civics. still don't know how to call an early market economy and i'm also not sure if something like a palace economy is understandable enough for most players.


your organization civics are too unbalanced. federation gives far too much boost. consider that large empires will surely switch to this civic. and as it eliminates nearly every negative aspect of a large empire these will grow totally overpowered leaving smaller empires chanceless.

Well, Federalism has historically been the strongest civic in the world. The reason that the United States is a powerhouse at the present is because of Federalism. It cultivates individuality and state autonomy and sovereignty while nevertheless allowing for a strong nation. However, I don't see how a Federalist Civilization with my civics system would be invincible. There are steep restrictions against the Capital, and rebelliousness and high upkeep aren't necessarily good neither. Plus, foreign policy and other civic categories have more to do with how well a civilization would be able to invade other civilizations' cities. Ultimately, my civics system is intended to cover the entire spectrum of political life in a civilization, and the choices in each of the multitude of civic categories are intended to make each civilization in the game unique towards its own gameplay style and environment, each with its own positives and negatives. If anything, the economic system I would implement, with the inflation and my new proposal of booms and busts, would be infinitesimally more important than Federalism or any other civic.

For example, I recently designed an "American Union" if you will, my own empire that stretched across North America and South America with 288 cities, but my entire civilization crashed when I overinflated the economy, and I was left defenseless and stagnant with all the strikes. A large civilization doesn't necessarily agree a strong civilization. The Spanish Empire, after all, controlled virtually all of South America, but it would have never been able to combat the English after the fall of the Spanish Armada. If anything, the present system in most mods make large empires too powerful by not accounting for an overstretched economy and army and a higher likelihood of rebellion and, of course, less prosperity per city by not being able to concentrate on each city. My civics system is intended at least to aid in some of those injustices towards history.

 

[Killtech]

Well, Federalism has historically been the strongest civic in the world. The reason that the United States is a powerhouse at the present is because of Federalism. It cultivates individuality and state autonomy and sovereignty while nevertheless allowing for a strong nation. However, I don't see how a Federalist Civilization with my civics system would be invincible. There are steep restrictions against the Capital, and rebelliousness and high upkeep aren't necessarily good neither. Plus, foreign policy and other civic categories have more to do with how well a civilization would be able to invade other civilizations' cities. Ultimately, my civics system is intended to cover the entire spectrum of political life in a civilization, and the choices in each of the multitude of civic categories are intended to make each civilization in the game unique towards its own gameplay style and environment, each with its own positives and negatives. If anything, the economic system I would implement, with the inflation and my new proposal of booms and busts, would be infinitesimally more important than Federalism or any other civic.

civic upkeep is next to irrelevant part in your expenses right now. and with the -90% for dist to capital you effectively eliminate all expenses for your empire. so each city you have more makes you more powerful. empires with less cities will have a puny army compared to yours (due to higher production, larger income) so you can easily overrun every neighbor and extend your empire further. you will have infinite gold due to no expenses and research will be one tech per turn from medieval age even on snail speed.

but you are free to try it.

 

[Drake L. Dragon]

civic upkeep is next to irrelevant part in your expenses right now. and with the -90% for dist to capital you effectively eliminate all expenses for your empire. so each city you have more makes you more powerful. empires with less cities will have a puny army compared to yours (due to higher production, larger income) so you can easily overrun every neighbor and extend your empire further. you will have infinite gold due to no expenses and research will be one tech per turn from medieval age even on snail speed.

but you are free to try it.

The criticism about the 90% lift of expenses from distance to palace for Federalism, however, does not incorporate expenses from other civics that a player might try as well. For example, if someone chooses Imperialism, it would inflict a +25% from distance to palace expense. With the many other civic categories as well, I could expect that some civilizations, even with Federalism chosen, would have used up the -90%. Of course, I could just change it to -75% or -50%, but it wouldn't do justice to Federalism, because, historically, it allowed for local governments, and therefore an empire like the United States was much easier to manage.

While it may be true that a large empire may have more of an ability to spam neighboring cities with more troops, there are many things that could counteract that. For example, if a smaller civilization chooses, "The People," all of its units within the borders would have a massive +25% bonus, which would effectively allow it to defend itself therein. Gold from a larger empire, as stated, is checked and balanced by the fact that there's inflation, and the bust for an economic depression, a new feature I advocate, would effectively nullify a lot of the economic power from a huge empire. Plus, as stated beforehand, not only will the high upkeep of the, in a sense, better civics be a problem, but these better civics will have a higher likelihood of rebellion for reasons I stated beforehand. As experimented, I did, after all, develop that American Union, but it collapsed because of inflation (Only 15% inflation for my civic of choice Coinage); therefore, the economy would be a major part in my civics, and it already is in a New Dawn, to check and balance both the smaller nations and the larger nations.

 

[Killtech]

The criticism about the 90% lift of expenses from distance to palace for Federalism, however, does not incorporate expenses from other civics that a player might try as well. For example, if someone chooses Imperialism, it would inflict a +25% from distance to palace expense. With the many other civic categories as well, I could expect that some civilizations, even with Federalism chosen, would have used up the -90%. Of course, I could just change it to -75% or -50%, but it wouldn't do justice to Federalism, because, historically, it allowed for local governments, and therefore an empire like the United States was much easier to manage.

that is an error you make. trying to convert reality one to one to the game results in unbalanced games. i had originally lowered the dist to palace cost for federation. but that didn't work out. the maintenance cost is somewhat needed as it is one of the few expenses you have. thus i suggest you raise cost for dist to palace for other civics and take the default maintenance value for federation. also note that -90% maintenance means that you have 10 time less expenses then someone without any changes to default maintenance! on the other hand +100% means just that someone must pay 2 times the costs. i hope you see the problem.

 

[Drake L. Dragon]

that is an error you make. trying to convert reality one to one to the game results in unbalanced games. i had originally lowered the dist to palace cost for federation. but that didn't work out. the maintenance cost is somewhat needed as it is one of the few expenses you have. thus i suggest you raise cost for dist to palace for other civics and take the default maintenance value for federation. also note that -90% maintenance means that you have 10 time less expenses then someone without any changes to default maintenance! on the other hand +100% means just that someone must pay 2 times the costs. i hope you see the problem.

Although I don't agree that complete reality leads to an unbalanced game, because the game is based on reality fundamentally, I do see the point you were making now because of the inaccurate mathematics. What do you propose the distance to palace value should be for Federalism and the average value of the other civics?

 

[wilson6907]

Thats alright.. a "Constitutional Republic" would be almost the same as a "Constitutional Monarchy" the people have the majority of power, Its what the United States of America its "We the People" read our constitution you'll understand that a "Constitutional Republic" is not only the greatest form of government we've ever had but its the most stable that give the people all of the rights, because our rights come from God not a few people in a Democracy.

well, the government civics are a bit mixed systems so they can be in one group. basically i used the info i found on german wikipedia. the problem was that there are basically only three different basic forms of government: republic, monarchy and dictatorship. then are different republican forms: presidential system, parliamentarian and the single-party system. i cannot put them into an own civic category because they only apply to republics. similar issue with monarchies. thus i merged them into one e.g. "presidential system" + "republic" = "presidential republic". i know it doesn't sound that historically correct but it is due to the civics system in the game. after all you don't want to have "parliamentarian dictatorship".

about "constitutional republic" i don't know what this system is. english is not my native language... thus it might be used to different terminology. thus my question is : what is an un-constitutional republic?

but i'm open for suggestion. especially for the early economy civics. still don't know how to call an early market economy and i'm also not sure if something like a palace economy is understandable enough for most players.


your organization civics are too unbalanced. federation gives far too much boost. consider that large empires will surely switch to this civic. and as it eliminates nearly every negative aspect of a large empire these will grow totally overpowered leaving smaller empires chanceless. large empires have already too much economic power due to their size alone. additionally they can acquire tons of resources boosting their economy even further.

 

[dudeSDCA]

Under organization, could we add one before Confederacy -- something like the City-State?

To me, city-state rule is a REALLY loose confederacy, whereas a confederacy is a bit more structured (think the difference between Greek city-states and the pre-US confederacy).

I'd also add one between Confederacy and Centrism -- REGIONAL. So it would be:

City-State
Confederacy
Regional
Centrism
Federal

 

[Iceciro]

Thats alright.. a "Constitutional Republic" would be almost the same as a "Constitutional Monarchy" the people have the majority of power, Its what the United States of America its "We the People" read our constitution you'll understand that a "Constitutional Republic" is not only the greatest form of government we've ever had but its the most stable that give the people all of the rights, because our rights come from God not a few people in a Democracy.

Please keep your personal viewpoints about which is "better" in real life from clouding your judgment about how such civics should work in a game. Especially when you let your deism get into it.

 

[Drake L. Dragon]

With the suggestions, I did the following.

(1) I added City-States as the default civic. I would add, "Regional," but I don't know the mechanics of it. Was it how Bosnia was before Bosnia-Herzegovina? I as well changed the Distance to Palace for Federalism to make it more conformist towards the real world, mathematics, and therefore the game.
(2) I am doing three things with revolutions. The civics that empower the people will increase both local and national rebelliousness, because, as stated, empowered people will be more likely to stand against their government. This fact will force the player and the A.I., most likely, to mix up the civics with the good and the bad ones in order to keep their population under check, while nevertheless having some good aspects with their empire for the clear benefits thereof. Now, in terms of bad civics, or dictatorial civics or civics that are opposed to freedom or rights for the population, it will only impose a local rebelliousness but not a national rebelliousness, because people under a dictatorship usually only rebel in their locality rather than rebel on the national stage, unless that dictatorship is just falling apart. Now, there are some civics that decrease rebelliousness both ways, because it really does decrease rebelliousness both ways. Equilibrium, for example, is a good, moral civic, and it obviously would not be disagreeable by anyone's standards. However, a civic like the State of Nature will also do the same, but it will heavily hurt the infrastructure of the entire civilization. However, I frankly think that it's only fair to add that civic, because anarchism is definitely something that cannot be ignored in advocacy by today's society -- whether it's Karl Marx's anarchism or traditional anarchism.
(3) I also omitted the first three civic categories from affecting health and, at least mostly, science. The reason is because, realistically, political theory would not in application affect the health nor science of the cities, because those theories typically deal with organization and therefore money, culture, work, and espionage more than health or science, except in cases of the State of Nature, where there is no organization at all, or imperialism for the captured cities. Health and science should probably be reserved specifically for the welfare and educational civics that I would propose later onwards.

I want to see what other comments and suggestions people have, but only do so for the first three civic categories -- the last one is still being worked.

 

[wilson6907]

Uhhh i'm pretty sure anyone would choose individual freedom over the collective. Unless your a so called "elite" and what the hell is deism all about is being a Christian deist now? Wow...

Please keep your personal viewpoints about which is "better" in real life from clouding your judgment about how such civics should work in a game. Especially when you let your deism get into it.

 

[dudeSDCA]

I like the way this is going.

Another suggestion: What about adding back in the Ideology Civics? To me, this is macro-enough to be at a similar level to organization, foreign policy, rule, high rule.

Ideologies:
- None
- Objectivism
- Individualism
- Capitalism
- Centrism
- Egalitarianism
- Progressivism
- Socialism

In case your interested, I attached the old ideology civic xml file for consideration.

 

[Drake L. Dragon]

^^^ In terms of the ideology civics, I will definitely add that later onwards. However, I don't know why Objectivism is different from Individualism. Ayn Rand accepted the presumptions of Existentialism -- that people are autonomous, sovereign individuals. Her theory would thenceforth advocate how society can develop and prosper with individuals, first and foremost with self-respect and that sense of individuality, acting freely with one another for self-interest, which, Ayn Rand argues, would ultimately benefit the community as a whole. So, it's basically a more philosophical theory of Capitalism, but I don't see that distinction between Individualism and Objectivism. Egalitarianism also looks about the same as Progressivism. Egalitarianism is just a step up from an advocacy of Meritocracy, which argues that everyone, at birth, should be totally equal. Egalitarianism goes further by saying that, even after birth, those people genetically or luckily inclined to do better than the unsuccessful man or the poor man should have to relinquish a good portion of the fruits of his labor to society, so that it can redistribute that wealth to the people at the bottom. That's essentially the same thing as Progressivism. I do acknowledge that Karl Marx's theories, as in Socialism, are quite distinct from Egalitarianism or Progressivism though. I don't necessarily understand what Centrism is as a political theory, so I would like you to explain it. However, from my standpoint, I really just see these civics for the ideologies.

Objectivism
Libertarianism
Meritocracy
Egalitarianism
Socialism

However, some Eastern Philosophies should be included as well for cultural balance in the game, such as Legalism and Confucianism, which aren't necessarily similar to the Western Philosophies aforementioned.

Uhhh i'm pretty sure anyone would choose individual freedom over the collective. Unless your a so called "elite" and what the hell is deism all about is being a Christian deist now? Wow...

Well, I believe that he was referring to this part: "[O]ur rights come from God not a few people in a Democracy." I do believe that the game should be founded a lot on reality, and of course there will be interpretations of it, but I do see the point he was making about this Deistic interpretation of natural rights. John Locke predicted that. He believed that natural rights were from God, but he also accounted for people who may not believe in the Christian God at all. That's why he also said, and I'm paraphrasing here, that natural rights exist, because they are axiomatically what people would want in their most rational state of mind. I frankly think that John Locke should've justified that more, but that's really what people should say about where natural rights originate, because it then becomes a secular interpretation of the theory, and you always want a secular interpretation of everything, or else it becomes a religious and not a philosophical discussion.

 

[Iceciro]

Uhhh i'm pretty sure anyone would choose individual freedom over the collective. Unless your a so called "elite" and what the hell is deism all about is being a Christian deist now? Wow...

My apologies, it would've read how it was intended if I had asked you to keep your religion out, as opposed to saying deism.

And individual rule over the collective is of course better, in real life, but we're talking about a civics discussion for a game where you play a near Omnipotent leader of a country - so in Civ IV, you ARE an elite, in fact you are THE elite, and letting your citizens choose whatever they want to build is probably not the best for your planned course of action...

That was my point -when we're working on civics we need to approach them from the correct perspective - the perspective of Civ IV: the game, not Real Life.

 

[Drake L. Dragon]

My apologies, it would've read how it was intended if I had asked you to keep your religion out, as opposed to saying deism.

And individual rule over the collective is of course better, in real life, but we're talking about a civics discussion for a game where you play a near Omnipotent leader of a country - so in Civ IV, you ARE an elite, in fact you are THE elite, and letting your citizens choose whatever they want to build is probably not the best for your planned course of action...

That was my point -when we're working on civics we need to approach them from the correct perspective - the perspective of Civ IV: the game, not Real Life.

This is an important, important point, because this is what I've been talking all along. The player's identity in Civilization IV is a mess. Are you a god? Are you an elitist? Are you George Washington and therefore subject to politics? The most startling thing I've seen is that, if you have a Democracy or a Republic in a New Dawn, if your population is too rebellious, you can actually be voted out in an election, and you'd have to wait about fifty turns until you retain control of your civilization again. Therefore, I think it's important for everyone in a New Dawn to make a final decision about the role of the player in the game, or else the civilization-player relationship becomes arbitrary, and a lot of projects don't have set limits or guidelines in implementation.

 

[Killtech]

Thats alright.. a "Constitutional Republic" would be almost the same as a "Constitutional Monarchy" the people have the majority of power, Its what the United States of America its "We the People" read our constitution you'll understand that a "Constitutional Republic" is not only the greatest form of government we've ever had but its the most stable that give the people all of the rights, because our rights come from God not a few people in a Democracy.

a constitutional monarchy does not imply that the people have the power. it only says that there is a constitution and everyone has to obey the law - even the monarch. however it does not imply any kind of elections. a parliamentary constitutional monarchy (which i call shorter parliamentarian monarchy) does. the constitutional monarchy in my civics is to be understood as an non-parliamentarian but constitutional monarchy where the monarch usually holds the power for a lifetime. this also follows the german terminology on governments when a "Konstitutionelle Monarchie" indeed implies the lack of an elected parliament.

also note that my government civics do not specify who is allowed to vote and how much it counts. e.g. the census suffrage in the early us and germany. that is what the power civic should determine and which is why i moved democracy there (after all i live in a "federal republic" that is considered to be a democracy).

as for the civics the democratic emancipated civics should not be the only good civics in a late game - so here evidently realism must be bounded. as for the dark side for democracy and the constitutional republic one can say that everyone above a certain age is allowed to vote - no matter how little he understands about the consequences of his vote. and to point out that this is a problem remember that hitler was an elected chancellor of the Weimar Republic... so as good as democracy is it also opens the door for the worst (if the monarchy was still in power after WWI they'd never allow hitlers rise to power).