 |
|
Dominae
|
|
How I would like to see Feudalism:
1. Unit maintenance reduced to 1gpt.
2. War Weariness set to 'None'. Monarchy's War Weariness set to 'Low'.
Then I believe the following descriptions of the governments apply:
Despotism: Good for extensive warfare in the Ancient era.
Republic: Good for peace and prosperity, not warfare.
Monarchy: Good alternative to Republic when some warfare is necessary.
Feudalism: Good for extensive warfare in the Medieval era.
Does that sound good to you guys?
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
Incidentally, I think Republic's free unit maintenance should be 1/2/3, and similarly for Democracy. This just gives yet another sorely-needed reason to switch to Democracy.
Something I've been toying with is reducing Republic's free maintenance to 0/1/2. This is somewhat drastic, but would really put Republic into the place we want it to be, namely, a peaceful government that is not better than Democracy.
It would be cool if we could get Democracy and Republic to both be valid choices depending on the situation, but let's face it: Civ3 is not complex enough for that. Therefore, in order to provide an incentive for non-Religious civs to switch to Democracy, Republic must clearly be the lesser of the two.
I would like to hear what you guys/gals think of this new proposal.
Dominae
Last edited by Dominae on 13-01-2004 at 07:27
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
You're ducking a high-five, Theseus, because that's precisely what I would like to see, too.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
alexman
|
 |
Hunt Valley, MD
Jan 1970
time: 00:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dominae
How I would like to see Feudalism:
1. Unit maintenance reduced to 1gpt.
2. War Weariness set to 'None'. Monarchy's War Weariness set to 'Low'.
|
I don't think it's a good idea to remove war weariness from Feudalism. With 5 free units per town and no war weariness, why would you ever choose another warmongering government? Just conquer and pop-rush everything outside your core to towns. Also, Monarchy loses much of its appeal compared to the Republic, if you give it the same war weariness as the Republic. I think these two governments are balanced in the Ancient Age now.
quote:
Incidentally, I think Republic's free unit maintenance should be 1/2/3, and similarly for Democracy. This just gives yet another sorely-needed reason to switch to Democracy.
|
We have already voted on a 1/2/2 unit support for Democracy. Did you forget, or are you proposing we have another vote to increase metro support by 1 for Republic and Democracy?
quote:
Something I've been toying with is reducing Republic's free maintenance to 0/1/2. This is somewhat drastic, but would really put Republic into the place we want it to be, namely, a peaceful government that is not better than Democracy.
|
Won't this kill the Republic in the Ancient Age, just from worker support alone? The AI would suffer big time. I think it's better to leave the Republic alone in the ancient age.
quote:
It would be cool if we could get Democracy and Republic to both be valid choices depending on the situation, but let's face it: Civ3 is not complex enough for that.
|
Actualy, it can be done. Nor Me proposed a flat empire-wide unit support for the Republic, which would make it better than Democracy for small peaceful empires, but worse for large empires. But we already have debated this, and we decided that the government map dependecy was not desirable. I still like it though.
quote:
Therefore, in order to provide an incentive for non-Religious civs to switch to Democracy, Republic must clearly be the lesser of the two.
|
This is already the case, with identical unit support and double Republic unit maintenance. So we're in business! 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ducki
|
|
I also don't think that WW should disappear from Feudalism - I think you could do that for Fascism, but not Feudalism.
Maybe Feudalism could get its own version of the SPHQ but that reduces WW? Call it a Castle or Jousting Field or somesuch? That's pretty extreme, though.
I like - no, love - the idea of making the Ancient governments, well, Ancient, and the Modern ones Modern. If you're in Rep or Mon or even Feudalism and prepping a space launch, I think you should be at a distinct disadvantage to someone in Democracy or even Fascism/Communism.
Actually, from a historical/logical perspective, I feel Feudalism (a smaller, clan-based govt) should come before Monarchy and/or Republic, but that's also too extreme for the mod, IMO.
What was my point? Oh yeah, Feudalism needs WW but should definitely have an edge or a hook making it superior to Rep and Mon in some ways that it will be chosen.
Demo, Comm, Fascism all need to be superior to the Ancient gov choices(including Feudal in Ancient here).
I think we could make all of them more attractive if we could cap the player's anarchy similarly to how the AI is capped at higher difficulty levels. Not capped as much as the AI, but capped so that the math doesn't support maintaining an inferior government.
I'd like to see at least 2-3 switches, also. Once for Rep/Mon/Feud and one for Dem/Comm/Fas. At least. For non-Religious civs. Without a cap, I don't think anything will make that an attractive option. Unless we seriously buff the moderns and seriously nerf the ancients.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Nor Me
|
|
If Communism is as good as I think it might be in the beta patches, then there are already plenty of situations when you'd have 2 switches.
In fact it's so good, it's likely not to stay that way.
The corruption reducing advantages of Democracy are going to be smaller as well, not that they were significant to begin with.
Until Firaxis decide what the corruption model is going to be, we're going to have to be prepared to radically alter any late game solutions. That's why we've been concentrating on early changes.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ducki
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by alexman
Does anyone have any real C3C examples of typical industrial-age empires, so we can compare the effectiveness of the various governments? |
I don't have that, but I do have a Feudal Japan that's about to switch to Republic - lots of size 6 and under towns rather tightly spaced with 2 to 4 size 7+cities- that might be a good comparison tool for Feudalism. (Although I do have about 6 luxuries due to trades and ownership,not sure if this helps or hurts.)
I'm about to start a war with the SoZ-owning(no-Ivory, cascaded into it), no-Iron-having Aztecs with Samurai, which might also be a good AC test-bed. Even better if I can dig up a pre-upgrade-to-Samurai save so we can see how AC do against a horse+sword+spear human as well as Pikes and Samurai. They've had SoZ since I build the Pyramids and I've carefully kept them at peace the whole time in order to maximize the number of ACs they have.
Do we want/need actual in-game, non-editor-created situations for AC and/or Feudalism? If so, I'll try to post that tonight.
Edit: We could also use this to take a look at Feudal WW.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ducki
|
|
Ok, here's the most recent save mentioned.
I was about to switch from Feudalism to Republic so I could reap greater GA rewards.
Tile improvements, however, are geared toward shields for the most part, or even mostly non-existent in the most corrupt cities, aside from roads. No aqueducts anywhere, as I wanted to stay below 7 pop for max unit support. THere are, IIRC 3, maybe 4 cities 7+ pop - two on purpose for wonders, and one or two by accident and in need of bleeding.
Please, someone with better knowledge and love for numbers/mechanics, feel free to use this to illustrate in-game differences.
The game is not very well-played/developed, as my initial goal was to see what happened with a neighbor AI left undisturbed to amass ACavs. I didn't realize Samurai cost 120 gold from horses - I was thinking more like 70. /shrug
Anyway, it's not a good example of how to play, but it's probably not a bad example of Feudalism, since I kept my cities small with pop-rushes, settlers, workers, and a lack of water.
Also, there are currently, IIRC, 6 luxes due to trades, so Republic shouldn't be too unhappy.
Have at.
(P.S. Once I dig up the older save, we can look at AC vs Horses/Swords/Spears and small towns instead of Samurai/Pikes/MI, but that'll show up in the other thread.)
 Attachment: tokugawa of the japanese, 380 ad.sav
This has been downloaded 0 time(s).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
donZappo
|
|
There's an interesint post over on the Conquests forum concerning the pop-rushing of AI civs under modern governments and how it can cripple an empire. I haven't looked into this issue myself, but from watching the AI in a couple of debug games I could see how this debilitating habit could transfer over from the ancient era to a fascist government later in the game. I have noticed that fascist governments seem to fall behind when the game reaches that point, and this might actually be a big reason why. Maybe the ability to pop-rush should be removed from communism and fascism to help the AI out if this is an issue. Does anybody have more extensive experience with watching advanced civilizations to know if this is a problem or not?
The more I think about it, the more I believe that modern governments will hardly ever benefit from pop-rushing as the loss in production is just a bit too high. I don't think that removing the ability for these governments to hurry production would hurt them as much comparitely, but I guess cash-rushing could be added if something was needed. I wish that pop-rushing could be made cheaper so that it wouldn't hurt as much, but I don't think that this is available in the editor.
Anyways, here's the link to the post:
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthre...threadid=106712
-donZappo
|
|
| |
|
|
|
alexman
|
|
Hunt Valley, MD
Jan 1970
time: 00:32
|
|
Since Communism has been improved so much in 1.15, I was wondering whether it would be a good idea to give Feudalism communal corrupiton after all.
This would give players three very different options as their first government: A Warmongering government, a peaceful government with a trade bonus but no MP, and a REXing government with communal corrupiton and a penalty for large cities or many units.
Feudalism would be worse than Communism, as there would be no Secret Police, there would be war weariness, and units would require 3gpt to support.
For a 'bad' FP placement, Feudalism would have less corruption overall than Monarchy/Republic, but for an empire with around the OCN and a well set up second core, non-communal governments would be better off. Of course, the Republic would get the benefit of the trade bonus.
It even makes sense in terms of realism, as cities in feudalism are more independent and decentalized, being run by their feudal lords.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ducki
|
|
quote:
It even makes sense in terms of realism, as cities in feudalism are more independent and decentalized, being run by their feudal lords. |
This actually makes the case that the further you get from the "High King", the worse corruption would be, as he can't see as well that far away, so to speak, realism-wise.
Gameplay-wise, however, I agree that communal corruption _might_ be a good idea.
Has anyone compared feudalism to other governments in-game? I think my save posted above can give a good idea of what "real" differences there would be, as I specifically built with an eye towards Feudalism - no aqueducts, only a couple of big cities, tight spacing.
And I used Japan, so doing a comparison should be much quicker than a non-Rel civ.
I'd do it, but I just go all bleary-eyed trying to figure out which numbers are important, where the differences are coming in, etc. I don't "work" at the game that hard - well, unless I can get +5 food per turn. 
Anyway, the main point was, realism-wise, communal corruption doesn't fit, but gameplay-wise, it may be a good distinguisher, though being able to pop-rush in your second government is a pretty big bonus if you have lots of food.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
donZappo
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by alexman
Since Communism has been improved so much in 1.15, I was wondering whether it would be a good idea to give Feudalism communal corrupiton after all.
|
*blinks* And here I was thinking that every time I made that suggestion everybody thought I was crazy since I was summarily ignored! Thanks for bringing this up, Alexman, since it is something that I would really like given some thought. It strikes me as an interesting idea and I can't see how it could possibly make feudalism any worse. I know one of their original ideas was to make feudalism a communal government so do you know why the developers decided against that? That might give us some insight for initiating this debate.
-donZappo
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ducki
|
|
I think lockstep does have a point, though, alexman. In my posted save above, I carefully kept small towns, but I also bit the bullet and let two cities grow for the express purpose of developing the larger improvements and hopefully a wonder or two. I was glad to give up the 5-unit support in each for, what is it, 1? 2? so that I could do so.
quote:
Feudalism seems to be designed for an empire with small towns |
I think it's designed for a largish empire primarily composed of small towns.
Under communistic feudalism, would there be any compelling reason to grow any of your towns to cities or would it be a specialist-type government, tailor-made for ICS and Oscillating War and very little else?
Currently, it is worth it to grow a small number of them specifically for wonders and improvements. At least in my opinion, which may be wrong.
And I actually think it's ok for an empire that did well in territorial expansion but is going to be stuck(voluntarily or otherwise) with a buttload of small towns.
If you did poorly in the expansion stage, then you probably don't have much corruption at your outskirts anyways, since by doing poorly, you either have low Rank corruption or low Distance corruption or, just as likely, both. Toss in a FP if you qualify and your underexpanded empire might just be a builder's powerhouse with enough military to keep the wolves at bay.
I dunno. Is the Slider O' Corruption in the editor yet? Maybe we could tweak on that in conjunction with communal corruption to make the larger feudal cities still Wonder-competitive but not top o' the line and make the outlying towns a bit more productive at the same time?
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32.
Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
13-01-2004 06:43
|