24-04-2001 13:21									#1
	Gov't and Economy Tired of ads?

It was kind of been implicit in CivII that democracy means capitalism. In the real world that isn't true. There are a more socialistic democracies then full capitalist democracies. SMAC presented such economics/politics/society tradeoffs. I'm sure there are past forums on this, but I was wondering if anyone has any new ideas with how CivIII will confront this issue, especially reading into recent web updates and magazine previews.

	24-04-2001 14:29									#2
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Frankly, I was hoping they would do something like the social engineering screen in SMAC. Maybe I want to be libertarian one game and green the next. But the distribution of political power and the allocation of material resources are to an extent separate issues.

	26-04-2001 00:19									#3
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

free markets are really what capitalisms about, but industry can sometimes take too much control..

I think capitalism should still also be where production can be sold off for trade..

	26-04-2001 04:25									#4
	Tired of ads?

Governments:

Despotism
Monarchy
Republic
Democracy

Social Engeneering

Capitalism
Communism
Feudalism (would only work for Monarchy)
Facism

Im not quite sure though.

------------------
Its okay to smile; you're in America now

	27-04-2001 09:14									#5
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Perhaps all governments would have a slider, that goes from socialism to laisse faire capitalism... Each gov't would have a certain area on the slider that was permitted, for example a democracy could be anywhere from about -3 to 10 (on a 10 point scale, negative being leftist and positive meaning right) and a communist gov't could be -10 to -5 and a monarchy would be -4 to 1, etc.

Going to the right would decrease taxes, but perhaps boost trade, while going to the left would raise higher taxes but do worse with trade. More people would be content under a more liberal gov't, but a conservative gov't would make some very happy and some unhappy through more luxuries. Science would tend to take a hit at both extremes, working best near the middle. The possibility for revolts and riots would also increase slightly as you approach the extreme ends of the scale.

------------------
- Cyclotron7, "that supplementary resource fanatic"

	27-04-2001 01:56									#7
	Full PM-box? Change here!

the actual NAME of the government form would only be a nice word, of course, without any effect on the game... it's for those who defend the old government forms system so hard

	28-04-2001 09:56									#9
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Thanks, but I don't think I'm nearly old enough to be your professor!

I don't know how realistic this assumption is, but I haven't got any word that Firaxis was significantly changing the gov't system, but they might be... Anyway, I've never played SMAC so I don't know what SE is, but from what I hear it sounds similar to this and I hope Firaxis uses a more elastic gov't system such as this. CTP made some good progress with productivity/food/wages settings, but lost the unique benefits of Civ2 gov'ts. I think the ideal system would combine the sliders and settings of CTP, the special situations and benefits of Civ2, and the replay value and open-endedness of SE.

------------------
- Cyclotron7, "that supplementary resource fanatic"

	29-04-2001 15:22									#10
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Don't know about u guys but i think the gov't system in civ2 sucked. It lacked properties and you dont get the feel of a government. I would hope civ 3 will offer a similar range of gov'ts and similar system as ctp(1+2), except more reallistic.
And I hope that this time i wont have to make a modpack to get satisfaction from the game

	30-04-2001 02:29									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

One problem with all of these suggestions!

Most of you seem to think that being rightwing and capitalist is "correct" and preferrable. Is it really the position of a gaming company to be biased in this way? Would they really want to let a political debate over their government model detract from all the cool new features? In very crass terms, rightwingers substitute personal freedom for economic freedom for politically and socially accountable corporations, while leftwingers prefer to regulate big business to prevent exploitation and pollution, while granting more social and spiritual freedom for the ordinary man and woman.

Now you see the endless debates this would lead to?

I say Firaxis should just keep it simple like it was with Civ2--Communism means big armies and production at the expense of economic freedom, democracy means a more politically active people and more trade. Perhaps add some new models, theocracy and fascism. But please, let's not have this "Oh, but Firaxis must make capitalism the best economic model in the game!" rubbish....

(edited for the last time, hopefully)
[This message has been edited by David Murray (edited April 29, 2001).]