New Governments in XP?

[nationalist]

The announcement of the new XP said that they have added other features for both single and multi-player games. The added eight new civs, an addition that many people have been asking for and debating about since the release. I was wondering if there has been any word on new forms government being added. I know that Fascism has been discussed repeately on the formus, along with Fundamentalism. I think that new governments would add more depth to the game, and I hope that they listened to us in this area as well.

[Dom Pedro II]

I don't see much of a reason for caring about new governments... we can just add new governments ourselves. It's the easiest modding you can do.

The only way I'll care is if there's new toys for the governments like government-specific units, more corruption options, changes in optimal cities, etc.

[Mikhail]

Fundamentalism isn't technically a government though, just a state of mind within another type of government, like Monarchy or Republic.

Fascism would be nice to have, but Steven Strayer's existing Fascism patch is very well done, updated as needed, and no doubt better than something Firaxis would throw together.

Besides, I'd rather not see the game become like Call to Power 2, with 20 governments or some crap. Oligarchy/Confederation is more or less covered by republic, we really have the whole spectrum covered.

[Inverse Icarus]

i really like Social Engineering in SMAC, it really tailored to my political ideologies. oh well

[Dom Pedro II]

Well, I think it depends on what you have in mind with each government.

As I've said, its very easy to make your own new government, and it won't take more than 2 minutes.

Fascism is good, but what is more important than including every type of government is putting in governments that have a PURPOSE. For example, my Confederation government that I play with could go under Democracy or Republic, as my Absolute Monarchy and Constitutional Monarchy can go under normal Monarchy, but if these governments have a purpose... then its ok.

What my governments have essentially done is created several paths a civilization can take.

For example:

On an island map, Confederation is good because it has communal corruption, no maintenance cost, and higher worker rates than Democracy. Result? It's a good government for those far-flung, but peaceful island nations. War weariness is high and military costs are staggering, so its no good for the war-mongers.

Constitutional Monarchy is a stepping-stone to Democracy on a continental map. It gives some slight room for war-making as needed more than Democracy does and gives you time to gain hegemony on your continent while not falling behind in technology. The corruption, however, is a bit higher than Democracy, but most likely, you can play with Const. Monarchy right to the end of the game. It is NOT a government for a war-monger though.

Absolute Monarchy falls into more of a "trend"... Despotism --> Monarchy --> Absolute Monarchy --> Communism, Fascism. Absolute Monarchy is an intermediary military-friendly government that gives some extra cash, but has a bit more corruption than Communism. So if you're taking the military direction, you will likely never use Confederation or Constitutional Monarchy.

And for those who want nothing more than to just rampage across thousands of miles of terrain with an army built on numbers rather than the most technologically advanced (i.e. in the event of those extra fun UU's), there is Feudalism which gives all free units but curses the player with very high corruption.

[Eroberer]

Originally posted by nationalist
The announcement of the new XP said that they have added other features for both single and multi-player games. The added eight new civs, an addition that many people have been asking for and debating about since the release. I was wondering if there has been any word on new forms government being added. I know that Fascism has been discussed repeately on the formus, along with Fundamentalism. I think that new governments would add more depth to the game, and I hope that they listened to us in this area as well.

You mean windows is getting some guidance?!?

Yes! Oh I hope it's a democractically loaded registry!

[Il Duce]

I agree with have new govs being based on the older like the idea of different monarchies but the economic simplicity causes the differences in gov to be mainly ones being good for war and ones good for trade, and in the case of despotism good for nothing . But before the addition of new govs the economic system need to be advanced beyond corruption and a standard trade bonus. A system based on the current trade being divided up could and spending the excess taxes could have added on a more realistic setup were debt can be accuured and you pay interest, foreign trade would stimulate trade more than resource bonuses, and determining a socialist, capitalist, or other determining a certain amount of trade becoming production and vice versa. Or maybe something like that.

[Eroberer]

Originally posted by Il Duce
I agree with have new govs being based on the older like the idea of different monarchies but the economic simplicity causes the differences in gov to be mainly ones being good for war and ones good for trade, and in the case of despotism good for nothing . But before the addition of new govs the economic system need to be advanced beyond corruption and a standard trade bonus. A system based on the current trade being divided up could and spending the excess taxes could have added on a more realistic setup were debt can be accuured and you pay interest, foreign trade would stimulate trade more than resource bonuses, and determining a socialist, capitalist, or other determining a certain amount of trade becoming production and vice versa. Or maybe something like that.

Oh, way to avoid the real issue at hand here. That being that Microsoft is evidently overhauling its software with artificial governments!

[Grrr]

Fundamentalism Back. :expectant:

[player1]

FEUDALISM IS NOT GOVERNMENT TYPE!

It's more like economy system.
Like Slavery, Capitalism, etc...


Feudal Monarchy IS MONARCHY.




Personnaly ONLY thing I HATE in all Civ seriers is Government UPGRADING.
Like Despotism < Monarchy
Repiblic < Democracy

They all need to be balanced, and usefull in specific situations.

Like: Despotism, good choice for small, military, warmongering civs. Better choice then commniusm or monarchy in that case. (desporism IS dictatorship)

Monarchy: good for big empires
Repubic: good economy, but for smaller empires (remeber what happend to Roman republic, when it became too large)

Democracy: more effecive for bigger nations, republic should be better for smaller civs.

Communism: should have unique economic flavour, mix of despotism, monarchy and republic.

P.S.
Maybe in Civ4?

[Boris Godunov]

I don't think they will have spent any time developing new governments, as the current editor already allows you to add as many as you wish.

I always add Imperialism and Democratic-Socialism. The last, of course, being the best!

[Boris Godunov]

Democracy: more effecive for bigger nations, republic should be better for smaller civs.

Huh? No, reverse that. True Democracy only works in a small society, ideally a city-state, as it entails every citizen having a direct vote in matters of state. Anything large, like the United States, is actually a representative Republic, where civil functions are put in the hands of elected representatives.

[Grrr]

I agree with Boris' last point.

The US is not a Democracy. I would put it closer to a dictatorship though .

[Dom Pedro II]

I think that there should be special government amplifiers in the Editor. Like a Science Bonus option, a Military Bonus option, a Happiness Bonus Option, Industrial Bonus, etc.

Well, I have Feudalism as a government because like I said before, if the government can be useful, I put it in.

I think what would be most preferable is this:

Government - Monarchy, Republic, Confederation, Dictatorship

Liberty - Democratic, Constitutional, Oligarchic, Autocratic, Totalitarian

Economy - Capitalist, Protectionist, Socialist, Communist, Feudal

This is just a rough description of course.

[monkspider]

Yeah, I like miss the social engineering too.
But if we must have Civ 3 style governments, we could stand to have Socialism, Fascism, and Theocracy. Granted we can just add these in the editor, but I would like to have more ways to distinguish between different governments, right now there just is not enough options. Certainly, when I crush Fascist Pig-dogs I want them to have the true properties of Fascist pig-dogs.

[Jon Shafer]

Socialism and communism are actually different categories of the same thing basically. Socialism refers to government control of the economy, while Communism is government control of everything about a society. Therefore, I would prefer if Communism was placed as a type of government, rather than an economy type, for purposes of accuracy (besides, what would be different if they were both under the same category?).

[player1]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Huh? No, reverse that. True Democracy only works in a small society, ideally a city-state, as it entails every citizen having a direct vote in matters of state. Anything large, like the United States, is actually a representative Republic, where civil functions are put in the hands of elected representatives.

I am not talking about true democracy.
I am talking about MODERN democracy. (with maybe federal or confederal system if country is large enough)

[Miznia]

If I remember from all the stuff I had to read for PoliSci, the modern (or "scholarly"?) usages of "democracy" and "republic" were that a "democracy" is any govt with free elections etc. etc. (U.S., Britain, France, Japan, etc etc), and "republic" is a sub-category of "democracy," one which is headed by a president.

The civilopedia, if I recall, says:
Republic: collection of autonomous city-states
Democracy: something headed by a president (i.e. the "republic" from above)

Among others, I find these in an online dictionary:
Democracy: Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
Republic: A political order whose head of state is not a monarch and in modern times is usually a president.

But I suppose a better question is what the govt types are supposed to represent within the game...

[nationalist]

Originally posted by monkspider
Yeah, I like miss the social engineering too.
But if we must have Civ 3 style governments, we could stand to have Socialism, Fascism, and Theocracy. Granted we can just add these in the editor, but I would like to have more ways to distinguish between different governments, right now there just is not enough options. Certainly, when I crush Fascist Pig-dogs I want them to have the true properties of Fascist pig-dogs.

I hate it when my glorious Fascist armies call me "Comrade"

[lockstep]

Originally posted by nationalist
I hate it when my glorious Fascist armies call me "Comrade"

Well, you should be able to change this in the editor.

[Adagio]

Originally posted by player1
Democracy: more effecive for bigger nations, republic should be better for smaller civs.

Agree

[jadlakha]

Fascism and Communism go under the same category. They are both totalitarian governments, where the government has complete control over the lives of its individual citizens. In fascism, the government has complete control of all the businesses, and a fascist government is basically run by big business. The government has control of all the major industries. Its great for wartime economies especially since all production is controlled by government. In a way all governments do change to fascism during wars, because they control production of military supplies etc. Quite efficient for making massive war machines. I think military units should cost a lot less under fascism if the government is added. Actually Fascism isnt really a government itself, its more of an economic system, like capatilism. Communism is the exact opposite type of government. It too is more of an economic system. However communism and facsism is opposite in that workers run the governtment in communism.

To sum things up-
Fascism- Big Business and Industry
Communism-Workers and Laborers

[Dom Pedro II]

Thinking of the political spectrum with Communism on the far left and Fascism on the far right is not a particularly accurate model. They are not opposites of each other, and if anything the opposite of both of them is a liberal, capitalist, democratic society with as little government as possible. It's better to think of the political spectrum as a circle with Communism and Fascism right next to each other but starting from opposite directions.

[cody8200]

Well I agree that socialists and communists aren't as far away from each other's ideals that a political spectrum may make it seem but they still have quite differing opinions. There have been times when they have tried to team up together in modern societies such as France in the 1900's but eventually they break apart finding their ideologies too different. Both believe in making things better for the working class. Communism says that after a while there will be no need for a government...while socialism has never stood for that.

[Panag]

hi ,


who would not want new governments in civ3 , ....maybe a total of 10 would be good

have a nice day

[Andrew_Jay]

Like mentioned earlier I think, one must distinguish between economics and government:

Communism: totalitarian governemt, socialist economy

Socialism: democratic/republican government, socialist economy (well, at least it should be, to distinguish from communism)

Fascism: totalitarian govvernment, capitalist economy

[Imran Siddiqui]

While we'd all like new governments, for whatever reason I don't think we'll get any inserted into the main game.

However, since they've said there will be a WW2 tile set (as well as feudal Japan) that must mean that there is a WW2 scenario... therefore, a Fascism government has probably been created for that scen, and using the editor, we can take a look at it and place it into the main game.

[Spiffor]

I don't think there will be new governments, except perharps in the scenarios... In my point of view, if I expect too much from the game, I'll be disappointed.
Speculating is fun, as long as you don't take it too seriously : look at all the whiners : they were awaiting the perfect game of their dreams, and put hyper high expectations. They had just a good game.

[Grrr]

Imran, it probably already is in the actual game.

[Panag]

Originally posted by Spiffor
I don't think there will be new governments, except perharps in the scenarios... In my point of view, if I expect too much from the game, I'll be disappointed.
Speculating is fun, as long as you don't take it too seriously : look at all the whiners : they were awaiting the perfect game of their dreams, and put hyper high expectations. They had just a good game.

hi ,


think positive , ...

have a nice day