Democrocy. what's the point?

[zorbop]

when firaxis designed civ3, they gave democrocy and republic the advantage of less corruption, and a bit more money, but the money is cancled out because they pay for units...
but because to much corruption makes the game boring, bad, unfun, stupid and soforth, it has been reduced in patches, and further ruduced by most with mods.
all this makes democrocy so useless it is not even funny.


any ideas for improving it?

[Catt]

I think democracy is very, very powerful (but am coming to appreciate the power of republic).

Monarchy and communism do not allow one's civ to compete on a technological advancement scale (with rare exceptions). If one is able to remain in monarchy or communism for the entire game and compete in research, either (i) the game was won in the early middle ages, or (ii) the game is one prolonged war, or (iii) the player needs to step up to the next level (and if you're Aeson, who can win in any situation at Diety, then . . . . ).

Corruption has not been reduced too far in the standard game (though pretty close); if it's been reduced too far in most mods, then alter the mods.

Catt

[Nubclear]

IMO, Communism is actually quite weak. No war weariness and the free units are nice, but its not really worth the loss of commerce and research.

Which is actually quite unrealistic. Communist countries economies are beginning to go up (China, for example), and even if you dismiss that the Soviet Union produced MANY MANY advances, especially over the United States. Of course most people ignore those and focus on the one fact that the US put the first human on the moon, but....Now I'm just ranting.

But, I simply tweaked the editor and fixed communism. It's much better now

[GeneralTacticus]

Which is actually quite unrealistic. Communist countries economies are beginning to go up (China, for example),

Only after having ditched everything except the form of communism.

and even if you dismiss that the Soviet Union produced MANY MANY advances, especially over the United States.

You could probably say they did this simply by spending masses of money on acience and letting themselves go into the red in their budget.

But, I simply tweaked the editor and fixed communism. It's much better now

How did you 'fix' it? I'd like to know.

[Solver]

Democracy is not as powerful as it used to be in Civ 2, but is still a very good government. If you just plan to rest in peace and research your way, it's what you need. However then, military conflicts will be causing you some serious problems, very probably.

[dunk]

Originally posted by Tassadar5000
IMO, Communism is actually quite weak. No war weariness and the free units are nice, but its not really worth the loss of commerce and research.

Which is actually quite unrealistic. Communist countries economies are beginning to go up (China, for example), and even if you dismiss that the Soviet Union produced MANY MANY advances, especially over the United States. Of course most people ignore those and focus on the one fact that the US put the first human on the moon, but....Now I'm just ranting.

But, I simply tweaked the editor and fixed communism. It's much better now

While I agree with you that the USSR was a scientific powerhouse, they had to run a deficiet to do so. I would consider them as generating negative gold per turn (in Civ terms) moreso than the US. The two countries were on a par science-wise, yet the USSR collapsed due to lack of money.

[dunk]

With the religious trait, you can switch governments willy-nilly, so you might as well switch to the government that best suits the situation at every turn. You're not fighting, switch to Democracy, fighting, switch to Communism, fighting a short war, switch to Republic. Etc, etc.

[Thrawn05]

Originally posted by Tassadar5000
and even if you dismiss that the Soviet Union produced MANY MANY advances, especially over the United States.

mmm... Like forbidding their scientists to study evolution? I would suggest you take away your extra "MANY", then I'll agree with you.


"Tonight a 5 alarm fire burns in downtown Moscow, paving way for a glorious new tractor factory. In other news, many evil capitalists are about to die in lunar shuttle disaster. HAHAHAHAHAHA [BANG!]"

- Russian News Anchor, Airplane 2: The Sequel

That was just somthing to came to mind, pay no attention to it, I thought it was funny.

EDIT: Oh, and not to mention the russians were the ones who put wooden floors in Nuke reactor buildings. They thought radiation would go up into the air, no into the ground, so they only put concrete and lead dome around the reactor housing. They laughed when they saw our nuke reactors with concrete and lead flooring as well as the dome... then cryed with chynobal.

[Thrawn05]

War weariness is not much of a prob for me. I can deal with it. So long I have the happy wonders, and if I'm in war, pump money into entertainment. I don't capture new cities that often, so I raze them and keep the workers, which work just as well as my own workers in a Rebublic government, and often I take my own workers and have them join my new cities I built, so I can save some cash.

[Jaybe]

In Democracy, there is also the increased Worker speed to consider (especially when you get steam power).

[Nubclear]

I would suggest you take away your extra "MANY", then I'll agree with you.

Just placing a little more emphasis on it.

: Oh, and not to mention the russians were the ones who put wooden floors in Nuke reactor buildings. They thought radiation would go up into the air, no into the ground, so they only put concrete and lead dome around the reactor housing. They laughed when they saw our nuke reactors with concrete and lead flooring as well as the dome... then cryed with chynobal.

Wasn't it the United States that tested a dubbed down nuclear missile on an island for training purposes...But they didn't really know what would happen and then hundreds of native islanders along with US Soldiers were poisoned by radiation?

Also, in 1957, didn't a small 10-Megaton Hydrogen bomb get
dropped on some US state?

And in 1953, I'm pretty sure that a nuclear test that happend above ground caused radioactive rain to fall on Troy, New York. Apparently, the US is not without its share of accidents...

And isn't the US moving nuclear waste through it's cities to put it all in some mountain in the west?

But now were getting into stuff that doesnt belong in this forum

[Marquis de Sodaq]

Originally posted by Tassadar5000
And isn't the US moving nuclear waste through it's cities to put it all in some mountain in the west?

Yes, Yucca mountain, if the Nevadans don't find a way to keep it out. There is also a scheduled move of something like 30,000 pounds of plutonium from a Colorado weapons plant to a "facility" in South Carolina.

[zorbop]

even if i try to go peacefully some ai declares war on me because i won't just give them my advances.... then get the other ai to team up on me.
the only way to get out of the war without paying the ai bundles of money is to capture a city of theirs so they will pay me... with advances... to get out of war.
then someone else declares war on me.

and yes, the U.S. is moving plutonium through cities. specifically, St. Louis, the city I live in... by train... old train tracks.... drivers that like to park there cars ON train tracks...
and chernoble did not happen because of wooden floors. it happened because someone thought it would be a good idea to crank it up to maximum for a few hours befoure a short holiday. that is it's cause.

another U.S. accident is 3 mile island, remember the china syndrom?

[Thrawn05]

Originally posted by Tassadar5000
But now were getting into stuff that doesnt belong in this forum

Agreed, perhaps we'll meet each other in the Civ forum, but I'm better at defending Roma then US... mainly because I care less about specific US history.

I just find it funny that all your counter aguements were about nukes. Isn't there ANYTHING else other then nukes?

Please PM so we don't kill this thread.

[Free Enterprise]

This struck a nerve:
[QUOTE] Originally posted by Tassadar5000


"Also, in 1957, didn't a small 10-Megaton Hydrogen bomb get
dropped on some US state?"

This incident has nothing to do with the U.S. being inferior the the idiotic Soviet Union. The U.S. never blew up any city before.


"And isn't the US moving nuclear waste through it's cities to put it all in some mountain in the west?"

You call this a weakness or blunder? This is outrageous. They are moving toxic materials to a dump site in South Carolina, which is my state by the way. It will not poision anyone, unlike the Soviets did many times.

The average per captia income is far greater in the U.S. than the formerly 'alive' Soviet Union and to top that off the U.S. polluted its self far less than did the communistic USSR. The techonology in the average household and in buisnesses far exceed the USSR also. Every heard of Microsoft? Or IBM? What about Ford and other car comapines? Don't forget to mention the U.S. wasn't the one with food shortages. Like *cough* North Korea.

On topic,
Civ 3 is highly accurate about each governments strengths.

I find Democracy only seems to be effective if you are playing a religious civ that way you can switch governments at a moments notice if war breaks out. The war weariness seems to be a server problem unless the battle is very short.

So therefore I use Republic(or Monarchy) if I am not a play a religious civ. And Democracy is good if you are playing a religious civ. It is possible to try it without religious however you may want to wait until you are a major superpower just in case of....

[Dan Severn]

Actually, the soviet made its way ahead by having complete disregard for ethics or safety. As far as I can remember, 8 US citizens were killed in spacecraft. (Apollo 1, Challenger). We'll probably never know how many cosmonauts died. And the Soviet Union is one of the most hopelessly polluted realms in the world. Tens of millions of people were killed by the USSR in the name of progress. Furthermore, their entire focus was on war. That was a large factor in their downfall.

You mentioned the Bikini atoll tests. The Islanders were not poisoned, they were removed beforehand. The risk to the navy and airforce men was not nearly as great as you might think. It is true that the Islands are still not liveable, and that the islanders are justly pissed, but it was not an accident or a mistake.

The Us id do above ground tests on home soil. They built a mock-up of a town and blew it up. They gained quite a bit of data during their experiments concerning how to protect people if the USSR attacked.

As for china, it is and was a third-world country. There are many wealthy chinese, now that it has been opened up to american business. (Apparently slave labor is more profityable for major corporations than american workers.)

As for this threads intention, Democracy is fairly useless compared with republic (my fave). You find yourself with minor advantages in trade, but with major problems for the military. In my experience, communism is too much of a wimp in the game. If they had clear advantages in production and military research, it would be more accurate. (Perhaps reduced cost for Military improvements, such as in AOE?)

[Venger]

Originally posted by Dan Severn
Actually, the soviet made its way ahead by having complete disregard for ethics or safety. As far as I can remember, 8 US citizens were killed in spacecraft. (Apollo 1, Challenger). We'll probably never know how many cosmonauts died.

An awful lot.

As for this threads intention, Democracy is fairly useless compared with republic (my fave). You find yourself with minor advantages in trade, but with major problems for the military. In my experience, communism is too much of a wimp in the game. If they had clear advantages in production and military research, it would be more accurate. (Perhaps reduced cost for Military improvements, such as in AOE?)

I reduced Democracy war weariness to low when it became apparent that it had been implemented so poorly in the game. This of course makes Democracy simply an evolutionary step of Republic. I left Republic at low war weariness as well. I am considering giving Republic a 1 factor for MP and 1 free unit per town to make a difference between them, and to make a Republic more feasible during wartime (no reason you should have to go to a communist government when fighting...).

Venger

[Thoth]

Democracy's sole advantage over Republic is the faster worker speed. If I'm playing an Industrious (and non-Religeous civ) I stay a republic. If you've got the happy wonders and Universal Suffrage, you can wage war for a *long* time as a Republic while continuing to enjoy the trade bonus and cash rushing.

[daveroswell]

Dan,

I don't think that Disregard for human life is a matter of government choice, it's a matter of greed. Ever hear of asbestos, tobacco, or medical malpractice? Corporate murder as in the numerous ruining of lives--i.e. WorldCom or Enron? This country (democracy) isn't completely innocent; it just shows it's evil head through corporate greed.

[dojoboy]

Democracy = faster worker speed and faster research rates. If you can keep wars off your continent or within your enemy's borders, WW is minimal.

The best thing to do during war while in democracy is to utilize artillery to continually weaken the enemy and to minimize the loss of units. Fight slowly, fight w/ the advantage (terrain bonuses), protect (save) units (lives), and take/raze cities.

[SpencerH]

I go from despot to republic and never change. Why bother?

[crowatbitemedotcom]

Dave,

Does WorldCom, Enron, asbestos, tobacco and medical malpractice, even all rolled into one with all our questionable government programs, really compare with the tens of millions of Soviets that Stalin had killed/'disappeared'/worked to death? The US is of course not completely blameless, but do you not think that the differences in government had anything to do with the relative number of lives ruined?

Despite all the problems we've (the US) had, I don't think that the regard for human life in the US in the past 100 years has been anywhere near as low as it was in the USSR from the 20s through the 40s. Except for WW2 when the USSR was fighting for it's very existence I would say that the type of government was the main cause of these differences.

[Bambul]

"Democracy's sole advantage over Republic is the faster worker speed"

Democacie's advantages over Republic
-----------------------------------------
1.5x workers speed
Less corruption
Immune to propaganda (next to useless in SP I know)

Disdvantages
--------------
Higher war weariness

I think you meant sole *dis*advantage over Republic!

There's also the anarchy in between, so you could theoretically see that as a disadvantage I guess

[frostycreep]

I always play with democracy, but in order to avoid war i give in to all demands. I put the emphasis all on science and never trade with anyone(techs anyway). I can usually get a tech lead of about three techs and then win by building spaceships. If i do get a war, i go on defensive and pay a neighbouring civ to fight the war for me. This is all on monarch level. In conclusion, democracy = excellent

[Phil_de_geezer]

People always point to Stalin when they say Communism is evil - but this man was a murderer not a Communist. Don't forget that there are a lot of dictators around pretending to run democratic states. People like Stalin just use anything they can to gain power - think about Mussolini joining the Communist party and then switching to the other side.

What i'm trying to say is that it is difficult to gauge the true effects of a government type simply by looking at countries who claimed to be running it. Communist countries don't have to kill people.

[Dan Severn]

Originally posted by Phil_de_geezer
People always point to Stalin when they say Communism is evil - but this man was a murderer not a Communist. Don't forget that there are a lot of dictators around pretending to run democratic states. People like Stalin just use anything they can to gain power - think about Mussolini joining the Communist party and then switching to the other side.

What i'm trying to say is that it is difficult to gauge the true effects of a government type simply by looking at countries who claimed to be running it. Communist countries don't have to kill people.

But those countries were intended to be communist- says a lot about human nature, eh? Your "true" effects would be what happened if people acted the way you wanted them to. I know communist countries don't have to kill or oppress people. But the fact is, they do. That's like saying Republics don't have to be full of corruption, or despots don't need to use the military to control people. Communism means a powerful government, and power means corruption. In their effects, fascism and communism were very much the same; censorship, intimidation, and lies.

And I never claimed the United States was blameless, but comparing enron with stalin? All they did was take people's money. They didn't murder them. Believe it or not, to be poor in the US is a hell of a lot better than it is to be wealthy in many parts of the world. This is actually one of the cleanest, safest countries in the world, because people are free to criticize the government- something very dangerous in much of the developing world.


Oh, frostycreep. "Millions for defense, not one cent for tribute!"

[Darkworld Ark]

I can see Democracy becoming alot better with MP, picture this;

One civ (preforbly Scientific) enters a unofficial one-way protection pact with a War Civ. In exchange for the War civs protection, the Demo civ gives the War civ advances & builds it's improvments. If another civ declares war on the Demo civ, they'll have to deal with the War civ, which doesn't have to worry about science or workers.

Currently though, since there's no one-way protection pacts, democracy's pretty useless.

[phunny_pharmer]

People always point to Stalin when they say Communism is evil - but this man was a murderer not a Communist. Don't forget that there are a lot of dictators around pretending to run democratic states. People like Stalin just use anything they can to gain power - think about Mussolini joining the Communist party and then switching to the other side.

All right, we'll ignore Stalin and his murders. But how about [pardon the misspellings] Trotsky, Motolotov, and the whole bunch back in the 1920s? They were just as bad. They had legalized anarchy because the only rule was the rule of guns.

Then, the Soviet land reforms all ended in disaster. Ignoring the dead (which was huge, by the way, but I said that I would ignore murder), the land reform ended in lower productivity. In fact, it was so low just after the revolution that the "Great Leap Forward" had to be implemented: a not-so-veiled return to rural capitalism. Of course, once productivity rose and the state became stable, all those farmers got... (whoops, I said I would…) By the late 20th century, the Ukraine, one of the most fertile areas in the world, was importing food.

Furthermore, as Free Enterprise and others point out, the per capita income in Russia was much lower than in the US. Because the command economy was not self-correcting (it was ‘infallible’), six factories made refrigerators when only one was needed. The five-year plans and ten-year plans were smoke and mirrors, because the people always had to be directed in one way or another to prevent revolt. In many cases, the same five-year goals were recycled into the next plan, because the original objectives were not achieved, or were achieved in such a shady manner that a new repair plan was necessary.

During the Second World War, it is true that the Russian people slaved to evict the Germans. Yet they did this despite their government. Russian propaganda during this period does not emphasize communism, but instead highlights nationalism and the fatherland. If Stalin and his henchmen had openly fled Moscow, and the populace found out, the whole system would probably have collapsed within a week. Only by military rule could the government remain in power.

I do not mean to be inflammatory with this post. I just wish to point out that history cannot be too apologetic to this state. Granted, it wasn't communism in an unadulterated form, but these men were responsible for its perversion.