The Senate (Ideas)

The_Aussie_Lurker · June 18, 2002, 21:25

I realise that I'll probably get howled down for this but, as a concept, I liked the Senate in Civ2. What I didn't like was the COMPLETE randomness of it!!
I believe that, in Civ3, it could be brought back in a way which could work!
At it's most basic, democratic governments would have a chance of blocking war, or signing peace, with a nation depending on it's cultural characteristics-i.e. militaristic and expansionist regimes would have Senates more likely to support war and even BLOCK peace, wheras commercial and religious ones would be more likely to try and block attempts to make war, or sign cowardly cease-fires behind your back!! Industrious or scientific would be in the middle. A civ's senate would be based on it's PRIMARY characteristic, with the secondary characteristic acting as a bonus, penalty or no effect on chance of blocking war!
The same sort of system could work for trade.
Other factors which would effect ALL senate decisions would be cultural similarities of the civ you're dealing with, their government, and the which improvements predominate in your civ (for example, if the majority of improvements you have built have the militaristic and/or expansionist trait, then your senate would be more prone to warlike tendancies, even if it's religious!)
Again, based on cultural factors, Senate interference could even extend into what techs you research and what buildings you construct (or whether you build improvements or units!)-this bit would be OPTIONAL only!!
If you don't like your senates decision, you should have the option to dissolve it, in which case civil war would break out and you'd need to choose a new, transitional, government!
Anyway, it's just an idea, but one which I think could work with a minimum of fuss!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker

Pythagoras · June 18, 2002, 22:19

Well in the US these days the president pretty much does what he wants within reason with the military.

Jethro83 · June 18, 2002, 23:21

I hate the senate telling me I can't fight a war. Especially if I just lost a city to the enemy.

IMHO, we should just give this Senate idea a decent burial and think about more important issues of the game.

I say that war weariness is enough of a deterrent to war under a republic or democracy.

The_Aussie_Lurker · June 18, 2002, 23:32

No, LordAzreal, I won't let this go idea go down without a FIGHT!!!
War Weariness would need to be built into the Senate system, as should mobilisation. Also, it would need to be dependant on other, mitigating, factors. For example, let's say you just lost 6 units in a massacre. This might make even an aggressive senate consider peace, but if you lost one of your OWN cities (not a captured one-unless it's been assimilated) then the chance of senate blockage of war should decrease to ALMOST nothing!
If they did bring back a Senate system, I would also envisage a number of Small and Great Wonders which might improve your chances of making war/peace better, or even eliminating the need to dissolve the senate!
Anyway, I like this idea-I do think it should be an OPTION, but it'd be an option I'd play with!!!!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

dexters · June 18, 2002, 23:53

The senate was done away with for gameplay purposes.

notyoueither · June 18, 2002, 23:53

The problem Aussie, is when your militaristic civ is going down under the weight of WW and the Senate blocks peace. Quite annoying.

Coracle · June 19, 2002, 00:51

The demise of the Senate is one of those rare improvements Civ 3 made over Civ 2.

The_Aussie_Lurker · June 19, 2002, 01:49

Hmmph,

All I can say is that a genius is never appreciated in his/her own lifetime! (Tongue-firmly-in-cheek!!). Seriously, though, I apprecciate your concerns NYE, but I figure that it would work, as I said above, on the basis of mitigating circumstances. Even the most military Civ, if outclassed and fighting a losing battle, will realise that and let you make peace, it might just take a little longer for them to come to that point! Before that happens, however, you would have the option to dissolve the Senate. This might risk a civil war, but in the meantime you can get your ass out of the fire!!!
As before, I like the idea but I accept that others don't! Which is why, if it were brought back, I'd like to see it as an option! (With the default as "No Senate")

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker

dunk · June 19, 2002, 09:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Pythagoras
Well in the US these days the president pretty much does what he wants within reason with the military.

The key phrase there is "within reason".

My opinion on what a Senate should do...

I think the Senate should vote on your war every 5 or 10 turns. To either allow continuation or RECOMMEND ending it. If the Senate votes to continue the war, then there is no penalty for you to do so (other than regular war weariness). If the Senate votes to end the war, then continuing the war would cause double or triple war weariness (whatever makes the game play best).

Of course, to make this viable, any civs you are in a n alliance with at the time of peace making would have to stop hating you for the rest of the game.

This way, if you can placate your people enough, you can oppose the Senate and prolong your war.