23-03-2001 10:59									#1
	Government stability and revolutions Got spare money?

Inspired by some boardgame mechanism, I come up with the idea of civ unrest level and spontaneous revolution.

In civ2, you really don't need to worry about revolution unless you trigger it yourself. But in real life, the primary objective of many governments(in the past and even nowadays) is mere survival. Many many governments fell in history because they could not cope with social unrest and meet the oncoming crisis, best illustrated by the downfall of USSR.

To simulate this effects, I propose that each civ should have a parameter called Unrest Level(UL). The unrest level of a civ is dependent on its government form, tech level, economic performance, military performance, approval rating, city in disorder, financial situation, diplomat stance, etc. The results should be that if the government fails to satisfy the demands of the population, it is likely to fall.

The following example is used to illustrated my point:

All government begins to experience small chance of spontaneous revolution when its unrest level(UL) is 5 or higher. The higher the unrest level, the more likely spontaneous revolution is.

Monarchy begins with initial unrest level(UL) of 0
The unrest level +1 succesively after the discovery of Feudalism, Invention, Industrialization and Fundamentalism.
UL +1 if percapita income is 6th or 7th
UL +1 if any city lost last turn
UL +1 if more than 5 units killed last turn
UL +1 if approval rating 6th or 7th
UL +1 if any city in disorder
UL +1 if treasury < 50; UL +2 if running a deficit
UL +1 if at war with 2 or more civ; UL +2 if at war with all other civ

Thus a monarchy after industrialization with 6th income and 6th approval rating will have an unrest level(UL) of 5. If it fare badly in military and finance, it is likely to experience spontaneous revolution.

	23-03-2001 20:04									#3
	Inflate your Upload Space

Actually, what should be included in the list is less important than the idea that every civ should try to run a 'civil' government that satisfies the needs of its people. Blunt war machine that treats its people as slaves and canon fodder seldom survive for long in reality.

	24-03-2001 05:02									#4
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Great idea! But would unrest for a monarchy increase after feudalism? Wouldn't it enhance its power? The other ideas are really good.

	24-03-2001 06:10									#5
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

This is a good idea, but I agree with The Socialist that the development of feudalism actually made monarchies around the world more powerful and influential than ever before.

The only problem I see is with your adjustments for per capita income and approval rating. If you are referring to the demographics in Civ3, I don't know how to change these. If you are to make these factors for unrest, there needs to be an obvious way to correct them.

------------------
Any shred of compassion left in me was snuffed out forever when they cast me into the flames...

	24-03-2001 11:43									#6
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

To explain some of my ideas:

I propose to increase the unrest level as some techs are discovered to reflect the fact that as society advances and becomes more sophisticated, the government has more obligations, has to satisfy more diversified demands and has more difficulties balancing the various groups within the society. Feudal monarchs actually have more to worry about the church, the nobitity and the burghers than a simple monarch.

Economy always has a great influence on government stability. Revolutions are usually caused by poverty and hunger than mere ideology. My intention is to make poor nations more unstable and prone to revolutions. Per capita level is just a handy indicator, any reasonable index on economic well being can also do.

Again, approval rating is just a handy indicator. I just want to make nations with large section of population dissatisfied more unstable.

	24-03-2001 21:44									#7
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Its true that feudal monarchies had a lot to worry about, but what about the prior monarchies? They usually had to deal with angry subjects and no practical way to rule large tracts of territory. Feudalism allowed the local barons to deal with the subjects and allowed the king a way to rule a large empire. Also, there should be some kind of absolute monarchy. Like France under Louis XIV.

	30-03-2001 00:40									#9
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Good idea, perhaps the Unrest Level would also increase the inefficeny of the civ as it increased. (Assuming that's the same as in Civ 2/SMAC).
Demonstrations and strikes don't always bring a governemtn down, but it costs money.

Pingu: