 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Sovereign
|
|
Vxma, do you mean C3C or vanilla C3?
Anyways, my reasoning behind my new corruption idea...
Ancient Age corruption reflects slow horseback messengers and many warlords feuding like in Ancient Greece like seen in the Hercules and Xena TV shows, as well as Ancient Rome.
Middle Ages corruption reflects improved communication, introduction of empire wide and local laws, magistrates, judges, the New World mentality, exploring new contients, etc.
Industrial Ages corruption would reflect nearly instanteous communication via radio, rudimentary electronics, phones, etc. But the introduction of gangs, mobsters, and general organized crime partially offsets this.
Modern Ages corruption would reflect computer records, instant communication, the internet, television, and mass media. People would be less likely to be corrupt as they are indoctrinated by the nation's media.
The corruption reduction bonuses from Future Tech would reflect several futuristic social technologies such as brainwashing, mind control, genetics, etc. to make people more obedient.
It would be pretty easy to code this into the game. I'm not sure if this can be modded by hacking C3 files, or if we can hope for this in C4.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ErikM
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sovereign
Medium corruption levels for a civ on the same contient as its capitol, and high corruption levels on the civ's cities on other contients during the Middle Age.
|
Spanish, Portugese, English, and Dutch got plenty of riches from their overseas colonies, though. Even without any Forbidden palace 
FWIW, Europa Universalis corruption model is nearly perfect. It works something like this:
-10% to province income if there is no land connection to a nation's capitol. This is farther modified by a country's army/navy domestic policies (naval-minded countries get smaller penalty). In Civ it could be that Seafaring civs are exempt from this penalty.
-30% to province income if province is of a wrong (non-state) culture. In Civ it could be something like +5% corruption for every foreign national in the city. Gradually lowered over time as foreign citizens are assimilated.
-30% to province income for non-state religion provinces. No real equivalent in Civ, but in Civ there are "cultural groups" (european/mideterranean/etc) so maybe double above number for foreign citizens of a wrong cultural group.
-5% for each point of the "revolt risk". In Civ terms, it could be something like +5% corruption for each unhappy citizen.
And there could be something like blanket corruption level for government type, ie 25% for despotism, 15% for monarchy, 10% for republic, 5% for democracy. Commercial civs could get a bonus -5% to the overall government corruption level (numbers are of course approximate).
One could tweak different governments to allow for different corruption effects. Ie communism halves corruption penalty for foreign citizens but democracy has better assimilation chance; democracy generates more trade but it is harder to keep citizens happy etc.
And no bloody distance/rank corruption. I mean, what is it trying to model? There is no freaking relationship between corruption level and distance to the capitol (not to mention city rank) whatsoever... Actually, I bet there is more corruption in Washington than in Seattle and there is more corruption in Moscow than in Vladivostok.
Ditto cultural flips. They are just plain silly
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Plotinus
|
|
I'm not sure I like this idea, from a gameplay point of view. It seems to me that one of the main purposes of having corruption is to weaken the strategy of simply going for a mighty sprawling empire. If the effects of corruption diminished as the game progresses, then the strategy of creating such an empire would be so superior to any other that the game would become boring. That is how it was in Civ1 (when democracies had no corruption whatsoever).
In any case, the game does simulate the diminishing of corruption over time, by lessening its effects in the "later" governments.
Besides which, as I've said before, I like to imagine that "corruption" simulates other things than unscrupulous local governors or mafiosos (mafiosi?). It could also simulate varying degrees of self-government. So, in the real world, the British Commonwealth might be all part of the same civilisation (they share a head of state), but far-flung parts of it such as Australia and New Zealand are self-governed to such a degree that they are essentially separate countries, and Britain receives hardly any Commerce etc. from them.
Oh, and remember, everyone, we've had this before - it's spelled "capital"!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sovereign
|
|
Hadn't thought of that, Plotinus.
However, if you have an empire or a huge nation like the USA, Russia, or China, high on-the-same-contient corruption can get annoying. In ancient ages, corruption was rampant due to many warlords, city-states, and multiple kingdoms sharing a common culture and nationality (like the Greeks and English) but in Modern Ages, civ's develop into nations with their own beliefs, perpsectives, and culture.
If cities are located on other continents, thats perfectly understandable to have high corruption. Thats why I stated in my model that even Modern Age civ's have medium corruption in cities on contients other than the one its capitol is on.
Does factories and science labs in Los Angeles, Silicon Valley, or cities in Alaska produce almost nothing? They produce just as efficiently as New York City or Boston or Baltimore.
Also, there *is* more corruption in Washington D.C. than these cities since Washington D.C. is where all the politicans live. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sovereign
|
|
As someone said earlier, sometimes Reality has to be sacrificed for good gameplay. But in this case, I think the gameplay will reflect reality, based on huge nations like Russia, China, India, and USA producing equally in all areas, even distant from the capitol, such as my examples stated above.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Xorbon
|
 |
Guelph, ON
Jul 2003
time: 00:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Skanky Burns
simple formulas = it's simple for the players to work with.
If you make the system complex, then the average player won't understand how it works, no matter how well documented it is. And besides, how often are these things documented anyway, let alone well? |
I disagree. The only ones who would be affected with complex formulas, etc. would be the 'ultra-micromanagers', and those that enjoy dissecting every detail of the game, not the average player. Like I said, if the system is well-documented, there shouldn't be any problems.
(I'll probably have lots of people on Apolyton disagreeing with me since there seems to be a lot of those ultra-micromanagers here. )
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33.
Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
31-01-2004 02:52
|