Political Parties

Space05us · June 9, 2002, 03:49

Should we have political parties in the Civ3 demo game?

Eli · June 9, 2002, 07:31

Great idea.

But I think we should see how the game works out and how good the cooperation between the players is before introducing more "dividing elements".

Gramphos · June 9, 2002, 08:08

Well, nothing stops it from being people with differnet oppinions.

That's why a PW minister is needed. The party who gets this posts get a hook on the other ministers needing improvements.

Alex · June 9, 2002, 11:06

No. If we follow the greek democracy model, then one man = one vote. That means: one opinion = one vote. Of course, we can have 5 men = one opinion, but it would not change the fact that those 5 men would represent 5 votes, so...

Okay, just no.

Gramphos · June 9, 2002, 12:56

Well, nothing stops people from grouping together to get their ideas through. All that is needed is to get to the controlling positions (i.e. Financial and PW)

Inverse Icarus · June 9, 2002, 13:09

yes. political parties WILL form no matter what you say.

don't start any until the game starts to unfold though, as it is stupid to bring your real-life views into a game that could be a completely different scenario.

Ninot · June 9, 2002, 13:39

i think the political parties would work well tho..

cuz not everyone will be having strictly political positions, correct?

So those not having anything to do related directly to what a government directly does would be the voting people... and (IF we have enough politically orientated folk) we could have various groups who form parties who go up for election every so many turns.
i dunno, just the prospect of elections sounds fun, and elections without parties seem odd.

Inverse Icarus · June 9, 2002, 13:49

i can see it now. the "Warmonger Party"

Nikolai · June 9, 2002, 14:46

And then we could have the Rant Party, the Positivist Party etc.

Actually, I think this can become something very fun!

Kuciwalker · June 9, 2002, 16:11

There's no reason to ban them. They're, fun, and they never really had any affect on the Game - except the Sodaquistas, of course!

Alex · June 9, 2002, 16:17

Bah! Then I am an anarchist.

Space05us · June 9, 2002, 16:45

about political parties bringing real world views into the game; that won't happen go look at the Civ2 Demo-Game

HazieDaVampire · June 9, 2002, 18:08

no, i like the idea of everybody getting a vote on issues, but also having a party they belong too. The leading party would be able to run the country and press their veiws, while people in the other partys can vote for whatever they want belonging to a party means should we vote that party into power, the people belonging to that party are going to have a better place. and the prime minister, or president, will be the person who sits around and actualy plays the game, forfilling out set objectives, goals and tasks, while also handling small tasks. Should these small tasks create a war or something bad, the prime minister, and their party is heald responsible!

I would however like a simple starwars republic style government (minus the hovering platforms and jedi Knights), with a leading senitor.

civman2000 · June 9, 2002, 22:18

Why not? They don't have to be official but not allowing them denies free speech (or at least free association)!

Pythagoras · June 9, 2002, 22:50

You should neither officially condone or outlaw political factioning. I am going to have to support the 'american' system of political parties. They are not officially a part of the constitution but they just seem to happen.

Inverse Icarus · June 9, 2002, 23:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Pythagoras
You should neither officially condone or outlaw political factioning. I am going to have to support the 'american' system of political parties. They are not officially a part of the constitution but they just seem to happen.

exactly.

eventully there will be a bunch of people who belive in "Manifest Destiny" of our home continent, and are all for the eradication of any civ in our way, and then again there will be those who oppose it, citing friendship and good trades.

it's going to be a hell of a time isn't it

Jon Shafer · June 9, 2002, 23:48

Hmmmmm. Fun.

I think I may start something like the 'Imperialist Party' or something to that extent.

Muahahaha, Manifest Destiny, here I come.

civman2000 · June 9, 2002, 23:55

AAACC3 has been founded (if parites lose in this poll it will just be an 'association', after all it just stands for Association of Apolytonians Against a Constitution of Civ 3 (as opposed to the AAAC of the civ2 game)).

MrWhereItsAt · June 9, 2002, 23:58

And the AAACC3 has its second member too.

Jon Shafer · June 9, 2002, 23:59

You could join the Imperialist Party, since I'll absorb that cause.

MrWhereItsAt · June 10, 2002, 00:02

Au contraire, Trip. Our party has a pedigree and a list of members already.

Jon Shafer · June 10, 2002, 00:02

LoL, oh geeze.

*Fears what may be coming.

*

civman2000 · June 10, 2002, 00:18

AAACC3 members: how about making our name cooler:
3A2C3

Chandragupta · June 10, 2002, 00:40

Political alliances will form regardless (i.e., that show... er... oh yah, "survivor"), so i'd say go for it. Also, how about Expansionist Party instead of Imperialist, since expansionist is a civ trait, and this is a democratic game?

Jon Shafer · June 10, 2002, 00:43

I suppose we can work with things, but I just think 'Imperialist' sounds really nifty!

Chandragupta · June 10, 2002, 00:47

Quote:

Originally posted by Trip
I suppose we can work with things, but I just think 'Imperialist' sounds really nifty!

That it does, that it does.

Space05us · June 10, 2002, 01:04

so make the party instead of talking about it, of course you'll need to state your political agenda as well.

Jon Shafer · June 10, 2002, 01:07

Who me? I think I already have.

Check out my Presidential Canidacy thread. I also think that AAACC3 and the Imperialist Party may be working out some kind of merger, but we'll have to see tomorrow.

Space05us · June 10, 2002, 01:18

sweet...more members