What could Ideology look like in a Third Expansion?

acluewithout

Deity
Joined
Dec 1, 2017
Messages
3,496
Third Expansion Hype! Man, I’m really hoping we get a Third Expansion. If we do, I think we may get more mechanics around ideology, and I wanted to chat about that.

This thread is for wild speculation – is FXS likely to do more ideologies? Is there even room for Ideologies? If so, what are FXS likely to do, and how might they tweak other existing mechanics?

I’ve posted in the Ideas thread, because I’m guessing this will rapidly turn into “this is how I’d like FXS to do ideologies” rather than actual speculation on how FXS will do it. And that’s fine by me.

Will we get Ideologies?

I think so, because not having them is a big gap. First, ideology has been central to at least 20th century history, so their absence is really felt (just like the lack of a real “industrial revolution” was prior to GS).

Second, the game lacks the feeling in the mid and late game of Civs falling into competing “blocs”, which to me is part of what’s missing from making the late game more fun.

Third, currently, there’s not much in the game that lets you really personalise your Civ, other than your Pantheon or, if you found a religion, Beliefs. Ideologies would be a good way to fix that.

Fourth, ideologies could also help re-invigorate the World Congress and some other mechanics (government plaza etc).

What might FXS do? Is there room for Ideologies?

I’ve been looking at some of the gaps in Civ VI (e.g. tourism not having any real independent effect) and mechanics in Civ V (particularly ideologies and culture, and social policies) and C:BE (particularly affinities), and I think there’s clearly some stuff FXS could be tempted to borrow from Civ V and C:BE. Yes, Civ VI’s mechanics are starting to get a little crowded, but I think with some tweaking FXS could introduce ideologies without bloating the game.

Overall, I think FXS might do something broadly like this...

Rework Governments. Having ideologies means getting rid of the current Tier 3 Governments, given they are currently explicitly described as “ideologies”. I think the logical way forward is to split “government institutions” from “ideology”, and so replacing the current Tier 3 Governments with Representative Democracy (instead of Democracy, i.e. rule by the many), Republic (instead of Fascism, i.e. rule by the few / elite), and Dictatorship (instead of Communism, i.e. rule by the one). The existing Tier 1, 2 and 4 Governments are fine as they are.

Beliefs. Broadly, I think ideologies could basically work like affinities in BE, with a touch of Social Policies thrown in. The starting point is that, once you unlock Political Philosophy, you start earning “Monarch” points from certain game actions (e.g. particular civics, recruiting particular great people) and or projects (“nation building”). Whatever. You can then spend these Monarch Points on levelling up in three main beliefs - Honour, Tradition or Freedom. You’d also maybe get free points for particular beliefs via your Government and Gov Plaza, (eg spending time in Oligarchy and building the equivalent of Warlords Throne would give you points in Honour) and maybe competing certain quests and or having envoys with particular city states (eg Military City states give you Honour points).

Each belief level would give you access to unique policy cards (which might synergise with particular governments or governors) and access to unique buildings in your government plaza (basically replacing the existing plaza buildings). Each of these beliefs would have maybe 5 levels all up (a bit like Social Policies in Civ V). In the medieval era, there might be some additional “minor” beliefs that would have, say, two levels max each, so you can mix a match a little (Piety, Patronage, etc).

Ideologies. Just like in Civ V where you transitioned from Social Policies to Ideology, in the Industrial Era you’d have access to Ideologies which would largely replace Beliefs. Basically, after (1) you’ve earned a minimum number of Monarch Points overall, and (2) you've reached level 5 in one of the main beliefs, you can found an ideology, being either Fascism, Communism, or Liberalism. The first Civ to found a particularly ideology would get some bonus (e.g. extra diplomatic favour). Once an Ideology has been founded, all other Civs can adopt that Ideology by spending Monarch points on that Ideology even though they haven’t reached level 5 in the main beliefs, however they’d still need to have completed the other pre-requisite i.e. earning enough Monarch points overall.

Ideologies wouldn’t have levels per se, instead you’d spend Monarch Points to unlock various perks or “tenets” (kind of like unique civics). These perks again provide unique cards and buildings for the Government Plaza and empire wide buildings, and each tenet you acquire increases your loyalty pressure to Civs with different ideologies. Just like beliefs, you’d also get addition points for particular ideologies based on your Government (eg Republic gives you points for Facism), Plaza buildings and maybe who you’re allied with (if you ally with a Facist country you earn points for the Facism Ideology). You're empire's Ideology would be whichever Ideology you currently have the most points in.

The big difference between Ideologies and the previous Beliefs would be that you exert loyalty and happiness pressure on other Civs with different ideologies based on your cultural output (i.e. foreign tourists) and other policies – just like in Civ V.

What else might get reworked?

Given the points above, I think there’s three things that would need to be reworked. First, Government Plaza. My feeling is GP buildings would stop being “free choice”, but instead you could only build GP buildings based on what Beliefs and Ideologies you’ve unlocked.

Second, Legacy Cards and Wild Cards. You’d basically need to get rid of Legacy Cards, with equivalent cards instead coming from your Beliefs / Ideologies. Most other Wild Cards would also therefore likely come from your Beliefs / Ideologies, rather than the Civics Tree or Governments.

Third, Alliances. You’d probably need to rework Alliances to just have a more basic Alliance pre-ideologies (instead of Cultural, Religious etc.), and then have an upgraded version of Alliances once you have Ideologies.

Ideologies would probably let FXS do a bit more with Tier 3 Buildings (different effects based on Ideology), amenities (+/- amenities in certain situations), and World Congress (e.g. maybe have permanent security counsel members based on Ideologies). ...Actually, there’s probably a lot that could be done with the World Congress. Just having resolutions targeting specific ideologies would be interesting, because you might then have to choose between sticking with your favoured ideology but being stuck with some negative resolution, or swapping ideologies and being clear.

Ideologies might also be an opportunity to do more around finance, economics, corporations, and just empire management generally.

Final thoughts

It’s obviously almost impossible to guess what FXS might do. They could obviously do something completely different to what I am suggesting, and even if they did do something along these lines there’s lots of room still.

My main points are really just that (1) I think there is room for ideologies in the game, indeed they could really improve some existing mechanics and fill in a big gap in the game, and (2) past versions of Civ already have mechanics that FXS could use to create a good Ideology system.

#onemoreexpansion

Just saying.
 
These are some great ideas! I've tossed around ideas related to basing Ideology on BE's Affinities before; I like the way you put this a lot. I'm not sure what to respond to exactly, this post is a lot to go over, heh.

I actually think it might be worth it to take another look at how government works in 6 overall; policy cards and slots are fun as they are, but the structure behind them could use improvement. What I'd love to see is being able to more gradually build a government; choosing policy slots to gain, selecting bonuses, things like that. And something along those lines could more easily evolve into ideology, I think, too!

Your security council concept is interesting; that'd basically be a resolution making members of a certain ideology the most influential in the WC, right? That kind of thing is an especially good idea; I support anything to spice up the WC for sure. :>
 
I really like the current Government and Policy System, and the tweaks in GS has made it a lot better. But I do think FXS could do a little more with the system, and I do find the Tier 3 Governments sort of jarring - you basically go from Tier 1 and 2 Governments which are focused on institutional forms of government, to Tier 3 which are about economic ideologies not governments at all, and then sort of flip back to institutional forms of government at Tier 4.

I mean, how does Civ VI hope to describe modern China? It's clearly not actually a Communist State anymore. But it's also not actually a Democracy. Really, in terms of government institutions, t's a kind of Autocracy or Oligarchy (it sort of flips between the two), and Ideologically its Free Market.

I think the current set up is "fine", and was good enough for Vanilla and a few expansions. Governments, Policy Cards, like City States and a few other mechanics, are really good mechanics and I don't want FXS to muck them about. But yeah, those same mechanics could maybe be expanded to make them work a bit better (provided FXS don't screw them up in the process!!!).

I do think overall, FXS should look at Civ V and Civ: BE for mechanics there that should be added to Civ VI. Not because I want all the old mechanics carried over (God, I really hope we don't get Corporations. I can barely cope with Silly Rockbands), but because there are some really good ideas buried in those games. I've just posted in another thread, for example, how maybe FXS should have used Civ V's approach to "Walls" instead of Civ VI's approach - basically, you have one level of Walls, and then after that you build a "Castle". Affinities are another area where I think Civ VI could borrow heavily. There's maybe a few other areas too, like having an Orbital Layer.

Anyway. I hope we do get Ideologies. I really think part of the reason the late game is boring, and the WC is lacking, is that there isn't this sense of Civs breaking up into "blocs", and then having military and political competition between those blocs. It's a big chunk missing from what is otherwise a really great game ATM.
 
Man, I like the idea of Rock Bands, but I don't like how they executed it very much. Then again, I can't think of many better ideas myself; also, you mentioned corporations as a possibility with this system in your first post, but you don't want them? I'm curious to hear more about that, might wanna take it to conversations though. ;0

One thought I've had for Ideology before is making it a bit more open-ended; allowing things like RT's hybrid affinities, or, uh, modern China, as you mentioned, and more varied playstyles in general. Heck, maybe the T4 governments could be added into VI-Ideologies too, letting you do crazy stuff like setting up an Oceania, or a full-on cyborg society, or other out-there stuff like that?
 
Just splitting Government Institutions and Ideologies I think would allow for a lot of flex. So, you could have a Communist Digital Democracy etc.

I'm not sure about Hybrid models - I think I'd rather see how a straight three way split worked. I think what might work better is having some alternate Ideologies, perhaps in some later DLCs. e.g. Anarchy. But, yeah, for a third expansion, just breaking up Ideologies and Governments would do me, and keeping it all fairly straight to make sure everything works.

Something else that could be done with an Affinities type mechanic, is that each Leader could start with +1 in a particular Affinity and then get another +1 in, say, the Modern Era. Hopefully that could be done without being too controversial. Anyway, my thinking is that having Ideology Affinities means you'll need to think more about who you Ally with, because your Ally will influence what Affinities you earn points in. So, having leaders lean towards particular Affinities will help players staying weighing that up from the start of the game.

You could also have maybe some Great People also award points for particular Affinities. Not every Great Person, but just a few in each category, so you'd have to keep an eye on the Great People more - e.g. you might not really care about Great Merchants, but you may want to grab Adam Smith to get +1 Freedom. ... Really, I just think an "Affinities" type model for Ideology would bounce off the existing mechanics really well and would give FXS a lot of things to play with. It just seems like an obvious change / evolution of the current mechanics (... along with being able to place envoys with other Civs and basically merging the existing victory conditions into the Diplo Victory, which I've posed about before).

On Corporations, I just don't like the idea of founding a specific Corporation and or Corporations having "units". Just seems all a bit silly to me. I'm "okay" with Rockbands, but I find them jarring. That might be partly because they lack wider context - I'd like them better if they didn't all look and sound exactly the same (it feels like the map is overrun by Status Quo Cover Banks) and if there were other units that did similar things and or it worked in conjunction with Great People more.
 
Makes sense to me! Question- when you say government institutions, you basically mean the governments we have now, aye?

Yup.

The ancient era government institutions, Autocracy, Oligarchy, Classical Republic, also roughly align with Plato's classification of governments, which consisted of (I think) Monarch (one guy in charge), Aristocracy (rich people in charge) and Polity (everyone in charge).

In real life, and speaking very roughly, the currently main government models we have in the world are:
  • Republics - basically, government systems where power sits with a President (and their cabinet), which are usually have elections (although, not all are "free and fair"). Think the US or Russia.

  • Parliamentary systems - I call this Representative Democracy. Governments where the executive and parliament are somewhat fused (i.e. Prime Minister and Ministers are also Members of Parliament, and require the confidence of the Parliament to remain in power). Think UK or Australia.

  • Autocracies - I've called these Dictatorships, but basically countries where one guy or a small number of people are in charge, and you don't have elections.
You could also probably classify a few places as actually Anarchic if you tired, and some small islands etc. actually have direct democracies. There are also a few Monarchies around that wield absolute power, but I've sort of lumped these into Dictatorships.

You could also split this up systems between unitary systems and federal - i.e. one government for everybody, or separate governments for each Provence or State, with an overarching Federal Government handling national matters. You could also split things up by "written" and "unwritten" constitutions, and include constitutional monarchies, although these really aren't as big as distinction as some might think.

These models can sort of bleed into each other though, e.g. Singapore is a Republic (i.e. it has a President), but really it's a Parliamentary System (power sits with the Prime Minister, who is a member of Parliament). Russia is a Republic, but in reality it's more an autocracy or oligarchy. I think North Korea is a Republic technically, but of course that's a Dictatorship.
 
Back
Top Bottom