What should the Civ VII political system be like?

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Part 1:
Replace the Culture tree with an expansive RPG style tree. Not too dissimilar from Civ 5 (or maybe 4 I've not played that).

Players would be able to expand their core cultural beliefs in particular directions, for boosts towards military, economy, etc.

Part 2:
As players accumulate Culture, they unlock new slots. Slots can be filled with policy cards unlocked via the tree. There's a small amount of slots, and a bunch of powerful cards.

These act not like policies but more like Agendas. This lets you customise your current political structure for your desired goals.

I like your Part 1. That's something I would want.

As for Part 2 I'd like it to be similar but type of slots I would want to be related to the type of government that you choose. Maybe a Monarchy and Theocracy could have an extra religious slot where a Merchant republic would have an economic one instead.

 

[luca 83]

I like your Part 1. That's something I would want.

As for Part 2 I'd like it to be similar but type of slots I would want to be related to the type of government that you choose. Maybe a Monarchy and Theocracy could have an extra religious slot where a Merchant republic would have an economic one instead.

However, we must overcome the fixed leader because it is a political issue. The government should have repercussions on the population, if a government taxes citizens too much there could be rebellions if you spend too much money on the military or you spend too much money in general there could be revolts and then become revolutions , this mechanism has never existed in any civilization

 

[pokiehl]

However, we must overcome the fixed leader because it is a political issue. The government should have repercussions on the population, if a government taxes citizens too much there could be rebellions if you spend too much money on the military or you spend too much money in general there could be revolts and then become revolutions , this mechanism has never existed in any civilization

Why do any of those ideas preclude having the standard fixed Civ leader?

 

[luca 83]

Why do any of those ideas preclude having the standard fixed Civ leader?

And simple: a different government provides for another ideology, other ministers, or presidents, conservatives , progressives, then fundamental in a revolution : in that case and a huge difference, even the support of the population changes, some parts of the population will support you depending on the ideology

 

[Naokaukodem]

Part 1:
Replace the Culture tree with an expansive RPG style tree. Not too dissimilar from Civ 5 (or maybe 4 I've not played that).

Players would be able to expand their core cultural beliefs in particular directions, for boosts towards military, economy, etc.

Part 2:
As players accumulate Culture, they unlock new slots. Slots can be filled with policy cards unlocked via the tree. There's a small amount of slots, and a bunch of powerful cards.

These act not like policies but more like Agendas. This lets you customise your current political structure for your desired goals.

I fear I quite don't understand those, for those being too vague I believe ; maybe by "expansive RPG style tree" you mean something like in modern hack&slash ? Like in Titan Quest (one of my favourite games) : you have to spend 3 points per level up, either in the "general" bar, unlocking new powers and strenghtening your character (depending on the class : more HP, more MP, more strenght, more intelligence, dexterity etc.), either in the powers themselves ; that can have up to 16 levels, with a minimum of 6, depending on those powers (unique to each class, and you can choose 2 different classes per character). Either way I don't see much difference with the Civ5 social policies trees, except maybe with a larger number of possibilities for each tree, that would end up more or less being Civ6 cultural tree.

Part 2 is more clear, but it seems very limiting and not fun, at least for me.

 

[GeneralZift]

I fear I quite don't understand those, for those being too vague I believe ; maybe by "expansive RPG style tree" you mean something like in modern hack&slash ? Like in Titan Quest (one of my favourite games) : you have to spend 3 points per level up, either in the "general" bar, unlocking new powers and strenghtening your character (depending on the class : more HP, more MP, more strenght, more intelligence, dexterity etc.), either in the powers themselves ; that can have up to 16 levels, with a minimum of 6, depending on those powers (unique to each class, and you can choose 2 different classes per character). Either way I don't see much difference with the Civ5 social policies trees, except maybe with a larger number of possibilities for each tree, that would end up more or less being Civ6 cultural tree.

Part 2 is more clear, but it seems very limiting and not fun, at least for me.

Not sure you understood it right maybe I didn't explain it well -

Part 1 would be like the Civ 5 system except there's no "sections" it's all one tree - each direction you go away from the centre for example would represent a different focus of your core culture (and these are permanent bonuses)

Part 2 represents your fluid era to era agenda, or your government so to speak, and allow you to switch out cards you unlock from Part 1 (or otherwise) into your government.

Your part 1 represents your people and who you are as a culture (warmongers, artists, merchants, whatever) and your part 2 represents how you lead them (theocracy, monarchy, whatever)

This also allows the potential to let the players keep their method of leading however they like. You can be king forever! Simply slot monarchial cards into your Part 2 slots. And this way, players will scale with Part 1, and can customise more with Part 2.

I really hope my idea comes across better but maybe it comes across even more confusing

 

[Naokaukodem]

Thx for the reply ! I understand your idea better now. (I think) This seems quite interesting, especially the RPG tree part. (1) That's funny how I never thought about it however it's quite simple and seems interesting too. Obviously I guess you would unlock not only cards ("powers") but substantial bonuses also. But how those could not overlap with cards ? I don't know.

 

[luca 83]

What is the form or government, or technological one must always consider the politics and the ideology

 

[luca 83]

Each government represents a different ideology, and who governs differs according to the type of ideology, both as a representation of class interests: rich, bourgeoisie, proletariat, even in the highest figures, Louis xiv is not Louis Philippe d'Orleans, William IV of England is not Elizabeth I. From the age of absolutism, to the French Revolution, to the Restoration, to the bourgeois age, to the nationalist period, these are profoundly different epochs, however, the social classes have different interests that change over time and influence governments and types of government.

 

[civilizationfanatic2000]

we should try to account for all possible political systems, yes, this is possible, this is DOABLE, WE CAN DO THIS, WE CAN ACCOUNT FOR ALL POSSIBLE POLITICAL SYSTEMS IN A GAME

 

[luca 83]

Let's discuss mechanics policy, for example the people must have demands an agenda, which you player must comply with? How can you proceed?

 

[Evie]

By playing some other game where I'm actually playing a game and not just following whatever instructions the game is throwing at me?

 

[luca 83]

As. How could you simulate a political system run by good AI that is consistent and creates a real simulation?

 

[SupremacyKing2]

I've always liked the social engineering system in SMAC. So for fun, I came up with a civ version. As you can see I expanded it from what SMAC has.

Politics	Tribal Ruler	Despotism	Monarchy	Democracy	Republic	Oligarchy
Economics	Barter	Merchant	Socialist	Mixed	Free Market	Green
Administration	Tribe	City-State	Kingdom	Empire	Nation-State	Federation
Society	Clan	Aristocratic	Merit	Caste	Egalitarian	Secular
Military	None	Defensive	Mercenary	Volunteer	Professional	Elite
Values	Survival	Strength	Knowledge	Wealth	Spiritual	Peace

Politics would be your government type. You start as a tribal leader. I added new categories from SMAC to be more historical.
Economics would be your economic system. You start as a barter system. I added a few categories from SMAC to be more historical.
Administration would be a new category from SMAC. This would represent how you administer or organize your territory. You start as a simple tribe. You could be a city-state, a kingdom, an empire, a nation-state or a federation.
Society would also be a new category from SMAC. This would represent how your society is structured. You start as a clan. You could be aristocratic (a social elite like nobility that rules on top), merit (a society where the best rise to the top), case system where people are divided into castes that serve different functions, egalitarian where everyone is treated as equal and given equal rights, and secular (society that is based on being non-religious).
Military would also be a new category. It would denote the type of military you have. You start as none. Defensive would be a military is focused on defending the home territory, mercenary is based on paying others to fight in your army, volunteer is where your population volunteers to serve in the military perhaps for a short period of time as needed, professional would be a standing military that is paid and trained and elite would be a small but highly effective, well armed, highly trained, focused military.
Values is the same as in SMAC and it would represent what your society values the most. I added some new categories. Strength is the SMAC "power". I added spiritual to denote a society that values the supernatural and the religious. Peace would be a pacifist society.

Each choice would have modifiers in different social effects, similar to SMAC. I kept the names like SMAC. I changed "probe" to espionage to be a bit more historical. And I added happiness and culture to also reflect civ more.

Social Effects

Economy

Efficiency

Support

Morale

Police

Growth

Environment

Espionage

Industry

Research

Happiness

Culture

I think this could be the best both worlds. It would have a distinct government type (politics) but also allow the player to customize their civ in terms of the type of economy, type of military, how they organize their territory etc... You could be a democracy city-state like ancient Athens. A republic empire like Rome etc...

And like in SMAC, I would have different choices have different effects on diplomacy. So a democracy would dislike despotism. A strength value society would dislike a peace value society. A spiritual society would dislike a secular society. A socialist civ would dislike a free market civ, etc...

The big difference would be in how you can select some choices. They would not all be unlocked from the tech or civics tree. The society, politics and economics would be unlocked from the civics tree. The administration and military might be unlocked from the tech tree. The values would be unlocked from your choices. Levying troops from a city-state would unlock the "mercenary" choice. Building X military districts would unlock the "professional army" choice. And if you build lots of commerce districts, the "wealth" choice would get cheaper. Building a bigger military would make the "strength" choice cheaper. Disbanding military would make the "peace" choice cheaper. Building campus districts would make the "knowledge" choice cheaper. If the cost of adopting a specific value drops to zero, you would automatically switch to that value. So for example, if the cost of adopting "strength" drops to zero, you would automatically switch to "strength". This would represent the fact that your society is so strongly linked to that value that your people embrace on their own without you having to "pay" to adopt it.

 

[luca 83]

I've always liked the social engineering system in SMAC. So for fun, I came up with a civ version. As you can see I expanded it from what SMAC has.

Politics	Tribal Ruler	Despotism	Monarchy	Democracy	Republic	Oligarchy
Economics	Barter	Merchant	Socialist	Mixed	Free Market	Green
Administration	Tribe	City-State	Kingdom	Empire	Nation-State	Federation
Society	Clan	Aristocratic	Merit	Caste	Egalitarian	Secular
Military	None	Defensive	Mercenary	Volunteer	Professional	Elite
Values	Survival	Strength	Knowledge	Wealth	Spiritual	Peace

Politics would be your government type. You start as a tribal leader. I added new categories from SMAC to be more historical.
Economics would be your economic system. You start as a barter system. I added a few categories from SMAC to be more historical.
Administration would be a new category from SMAC. This would represent how you administer or organize your territory. You start as a simple tribe. You could be a city-state, a kingdom, an empire, a nation-state or a federation.
Society would also be a new category from SMAC. This would represent how your society is structured. You start as a clan. You could be aristocratic (a social elite like nobility that rules on top), merit (a society where the best rise to the top), case system where people are divided into castes that serve different functions, egalitarian where everyone is treated as equal and given equal rights, and secular (society that is based on being non-religious).
Military would also be a new category. It would denote the type of military you have. You start as none. Defensive would be a military is focused on defending the home territory, mercenary is based on paying others to fight in your army, volunteer is where your population volunteers to serve in the military perhaps for a short period of time as needed, professional would be a standing military that is paid and trained and elite would be a small but highly effective, well armed, highly trained, focused military.
Values is the same as in SMAC and it would represent what your society values the most. I added some new categories. Strength is the SMAC "power". I added spiritual to denote a society that values the supernatural and the religious. Peace would be a pacifist society.

Each choice would have modifiers in different social effects, similar to SMAC. I kept the names like SMAC. I changed "probe" to espionage to be a bit more historical. And I added happiness and culture to also reflect civ more.

Social Effects

Economy

Efficiency

Support

Morale

Police

Growth

Environment

Espionage

Industry

Research

Happiness

Culture

I think this could be the best both worlds. It would have a distinct government type (politics) but also allow the player to customize their civ in terms of the type of economy, type of military, how they organize their territory etc... You could be a democracy city-state like ancient Athens. A republic empire like Rome etc...

And like in SMAC, I would have different choices have different effects on diplomacy. So a democracy would dislike despotism. A strength value society would dislike a peace value society. A spiritual society would dislike a secular society. A socialist civ would dislike a free market civ, etc...

The great ideologies of the secolo century are missing : fascism and communism . If then you choose the federal system to be organized as a decentralized federal system, then it lacks theocracy, ecotopia from call to. A bureaucratic system to be organized present in every organized government : I mean bureaucracy not as a government but as a class

 

[SupremacyKing2]

The great ideologies of the secolo century are missing : fascism and communism .

I don't think they are missing. Fascism and communism are represented as certain combos already. Despotism+socialism+secular = communism. despotism+mixed+strength+professional army = fascism. Despotism+kingdom+spiritual = theocracy.

Perhaps to make this clear to the player, the game could change the name of your government based on the combos you pick. So if you despotism+socialism+secular, it would say "communism" at the top of the screen. Or if you picked despotism+socialism+nation-state+secular, it would display your civ name as "communist state of {insert civ name}".

 

[BuchiTaton]

we should try to account for all possible political systems, yes, this is possible, this is DOABLE, WE CAN DO THIS, WE CAN ACCOUNT FOR ALL POSSIBLE POLITICAL SYSTEMS IN A GAME

Let's discuss mechanics policy, for example the people must have demands an agenda, which you player must comply with? How can you proceed?

I had already suggested many times a system around population identities. This model is an abstraction of most of the main historical groups that are behind political changes, to be portrayed in game in a simplified way that allow the player to still handle them to fit certian gameplay styles. So the population turn in a mean and justification for civ customization, they are a core mechanic but they are NOT the ones determinig your path.

The idea is that most city districts and villages (current tile improvements) had slots for denizens (current citizen+specialist) the essential population unit. Everyone of these denizens (included ones from "minor" non playable civs) have three identitarian parameters:
> Class (social caste) that is related to the kind of job they do therefore the district/village they employ. These are just the next...

- Labourers, include both the food and production related buildings like farming, pastoral and fishing villages, plantations, mines, factories, etc. They usually are the majority of your population.​

- Traders, money centered we can find them in markets, ports, corporations, etc.​

- Artisans, they are culture related representing both performers and artisans, so theaters, arenas, resorts, studios and workshops were they manufacture cultural products like textiles, jewelry, cuisine, records, etc.​

- Scholars, the science thematic population.​

- Clerics, are about religion that by the way is a synergic element to culture and diplomacy.​

- Warriors, representing in things like professional soldiers, mercenaries, raiders/pirates and the aristocracy. They are requiered to train most of the militar units.
> Heritage (ethno-cultural) here like in CIV4 every civ (both the playable and the "minor" ones) have their own Heritage that is like the culture in CIV4. So we gain a reason for populations to be loyal or unloyal based on their cultural indentity (not the only factor but still a very relevant one). Also the Heritage include a new kind of bonuses to gain, the Traditions.
Every heritage have their unique Tradition, these traditions are both a direct bonuses plus either an units, buildings, resources or eureka. So this way every main civ gain an extra unique elements in the specifc aspect they need it the most. Even more, additionaly to their deffault own Tradition civs can gain a limited number of extra traditions when you manage to integrate population of other Heritage in your empire (this ballanced to a small number and just when they represent X% of your population being very loyal).
> Belief (religion) this is kind of obvious. Of course this allow to manage our population based on their beliefs, so you can sponsor to build a temple of certain religions in some village or district to attract population of that religion, or set a policies about Laicism, Syncretism or Fundamentalism, etc, or for example if you declare a war to a CIV that have the same main belief that part of your population that is different from your main belief these would turn that population less loyal, in the same way oppress population of certain belief woul trigger the denunce of civs with that religion as their main.
So the population's beliefs are a powerfull way to expand your cultural and diplomatic influence.

Also note that the struggle between the different identities is closely related to a mission system were your actions trigger decision events were you must choose an excluyent solution that change your society. So you have clear objetives similar to eurekas/inspirations that open the chance to personalize your civ.

 

[BuchiTaton]

I've always liked the social engineering system in SMAC. So for fun, I came up with a civ version. As you can see I expanded it from what SMAC has.

Politics	Tribal Ruler	Despotism	Monarchy	Democracy	Republic	Oligarchy
Economics	Barter	Merchant	Socialist	Mixed	Free Market	Green
Administration	Tribe	City-State	Kingdom	Empire	Nation-State	Federation
Society	Clan	Aristocratic	Merit	Caste	Egalitarian	Secular
Military	None	Defensive	Mercenary	Volunteer	Professional	Elite
Values	Survival	Strength	Knowledge	Wealth	Spiritual	Peace

Politics would be your government type. You start as a tribal leader. I added new categories from SMAC to be more historical.
Economics would be your economic system. You start as a barter system. I added a few categories from SMAC to be more historical.
Administration would be a new category from SMAC. This would represent how you administer or organize your territory. You start as a simple tribe. You could be a city-state, a kingdom, an empire, a nation-state or a federation.
Society would also be a new category from SMAC. This would represent how your society is structured. You start as a clan. You could be aristocratic (a social elite like nobility that rules on top), merit (a society where the best rise to the top), case system where people are divided into castes that serve different functions, egalitarian where everyone is treated as equal and given equal rights, and secular (society that is based on being non-religious).
Military would also be a new category. It would denote the type of military you have. You start as none. Defensive would be a military is focused on defending the home territory, mercenary is based on paying others to fight in your army, volunteer is where your population volunteers to serve in the military perhaps for a short period of time as needed, professional would be a standing military that is paid and trained and elite would be a small but highly effective, well armed, highly trained, focused military.
Values is the same as in SMAC and it would represent what your society values the most. I added some new categories. Strength is the SMAC "power". I added spiritual to denote a society that values the supernatural and the religious. Peace would be a pacifist society.

Each choice would have modifiers in different social effects, similar to SMAC. I kept the names like SMAC. I changed "probe" to espionage to be a bit more historical. And I added happiness and culture to also reflect civ more.

Social Effects

Economy

Efficiency

Support

Morale

Police

Growth

Environment

Espionage

Industry

Research

Happiness

Culture

I think this could be the best both worlds. It would have a distinct government type (politics) but also allow the player to customize their civ in terms of the type of economy, type of military, how they organize their territory etc... You could be a democracy city-state like ancient Athens. A republic empire like Rome etc...

And like in SMAC, I would have different choices have different effects on diplomacy. So a democracy would dislike despotism. A strength value society would dislike a peace value society. A spiritual society would dislike a secular society. A socialist civ would dislike a free market civ, etc...

The big difference would be in how you can select some choices. They would not all be unlocked from the tech or civics tree. The society, politics and economics would be unlocked from the civics tree. The administration and military might be unlocked from the tech tree. The values would be unlocked from your choices. Levying troops from a city-state would unlock the "mercenary" choice. Building X military districts would unlock the "professional army" choice. And if you build lots of commerce districts, the "wealth" choice would get cheaper. Building a bigger military would make the "strength" choice cheaper. Disbanding military would make the "peace" choice cheaper. Building campus districts would make the "knowledge" choice cheaper. If the cost of adopting a specific value drops to zero, you would automatically switch to that value. So for example, if the cost of adopting "strength" drops to zero, you would automatically switch to "strength". This would represent the fact that your society is so strongly linked to that value that your people embrace on their own without you having to "pay" to adopt it.

I am glad that more people venture to suggest a more detailed idea.
This is also kind of similar to civics in CIV4. In your classification I like that Society, Military and Values have options that seem to be actually alternative focuses, but for the other topics I think there some options seems to overlap with others, or in the case of Barter it seems to be in essence obsolete compared to others options.
Again nice suggestion.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

I am glad that more people venture to suggest a more detailed idea.
This is also kind of similar to civics in CIV4. In your classification I like that Society, Military and Values have options that seem to be actually alternative focuses, but for the other topics I think there some options seems to overlap with others, or in the case of Barter it seems to be in essence obsolete compared to others options.
Again nice suggestion.

I am sure someone could improve my proposal. Yes, there could be some options that could be deleted. Keep in mind, I brainstormed this idea in like 10 minutes and posted it. It is just a first draft.

Well, barter is the first choice. It s the default economy that you start with, that gives you zero bonuses, that you would quickly switch out of.

EDIT: I do think that there is a careful balance between trying to have choices that cover every historical system versus giving the player meaningful gameplay choices. The more choices you have, they might cover history well but the choices may not be distinct enough in terms of gameplay. Alternatively, you could have too few choices that are very meaningful and distinct in terms of gameplay but are missing a lot of historical systems.

 

[luca 83]

I am sure someone could improve my proposal. Yes, there could be some options that could be deleted. Keep in mind, I brainstormed this idea in like 10 minutes and posted it. It is just a first draft.

Well, barter is the first choice. It s the default economy that you start with, that gives you zero bonuses, that you would quickly switch out of.

EDIT: I do think that there is a careful balance between trying to have choices that cover every historical system versus giving the player meaningful gameplay choices. The more choices you have, they might cover history well but the choices may not be distinct enough in terms of gameplay. Alternatively, you could have too few choices that are very meaningful and distinct in terms of gameplay but are missing a lot of historical systems.

Communism is a consequence of a philosophy and then a party born out of the industrial revolution and heir to French Jacobinism, Robespierre's and Saint Just's, and fourier's in the 1800's and starts with the English lelellers in the 1600's revolution and continues up to Saint Simon , fascism and a reaction to communism in Italy to the non-annexation of territories considered part of Italy in Germany to the crisis of the Weimar republic and the inflation of 1929 are separate phenomena that must be simulated as an eventual crisis of society loss of a war and social and cultural changes