Political Parties

[Tomasz]

Hey guys,

I just registered today, but I am a fan of the Civilization series since seven years. I really like the idea of the game, but since one year now, I've been thinking of a sort of a revolution in the idea. My suggestions are as follows, (most of them are later in the game, as they include political parties, plus more)although many may have been repeated on the forums(so if they were and were answered, please skip them and concentrate on the more relevant ones :

1. Political Parties.

After a certain technology is discovered, most (if not all) of the countries should go through a revolution resulting in the forming of different political parties (with different sides: left, right, greens, etc...). The parties would origin from the bigger cities. In the beginning there would be only two parties, but later on new parties would be formed. Their goal would be to get the most votes in the elections that are every 20 (maybe 15, it depends) turns. From the election results, the parties would be seated in the parliament. So even if the player's party will lose the election, they will still be able to influence the way the state is run. The parties can take alliances. The ruling party has the power to order the cities what they have to build, etc...

The player can create the name of his party, create its flag/symbol from the parts given by the game and he can also choose the side of the party (also if it is an extremist party: Nazis, Communists, etc...)

2. Law.

There will be different types of acts, rules etc... and their possible combinations. The different parties can propose them in the parliament, and then vote for their acceptance or refusal. The parties will make proposals typical to the side they represent. They can also ask to end a proposal that was accepted before (it had to be in the law for at least 25 turns) The goal of the proposals is to change the law so that overall the country improves. Proposals such as “war”, “peace” and other that have to do with foreign policy, would have to be accepted by the ruling party.

3. A radical party.

If a party represents a minority that is against the rest of the nation, and finds itself discriminated or it just wants to form an independent state, it can try to separate that minority from the rest of the country. If the parliament accepts, a new state is found and bears the name of its biggest city. If not, the party has to make a referendum if the minority wants to enter a civil war. Then, if the minority accepts (over 50%) a new state is found, immediately at war with its mother country. Such minorities can be the parts of the country or distant colonies. Now a case such as the Europeans in America that form an independent nation can result from the game play.

4. Advanced game mode.

The player can choose if he wants to start normally (4000 BC), just after the revolution (ca. 1800, the computer would play the game by itself until the player starts) or after (he can also be one of those parties that are formed later. That can be also a radical party.)

Of course, the player can name the party, create the flag and choose the side.

5. Social groups.

There are three social groups: the rich, the bourgeoisie, and the poor. The different social groups would be content and discontent from different reasons. Taking into account the different law passed in the parliament.

6. Revolution.

If a party has enough popularity in the poor social group and that group is discontent about the way the parliament works, it can make a call to arms. Such a call would result in forming a lot of conscripts throughout the country ( the number of the units would be proportional to the number of discontent citizens of the third group ). The party that will do the call will be in control of the units, but will lose its place in the parliament. If the uprising would fail, that party will be blocked for the next 20 turns ( or more ).

7. Foreign contacts.

Since different parties would govern nations throughout the game, only the symbol of the ruling party together with the frame in the color of the country would be shown during a contact. Only the ruling parties can make contracts like trade, etc... Other parties, however, that have access to the call to arms, or radical parties, can negotiate with their foreign counterparts as well as with foreign ruling parties. So sudden revolution in two bordering countries is possible, where the revolutionary parties would be allied.

Since the countries can separate, there should be a vide variety of colors.

8. Different Countries.

Since animated leader heads would be abandoned, there can be a bigger variety of countries (ex: Poles, Portugals, Numibians, etc...)

9. Upgrade of units.

The AI should upgrade its forces as fast as possible, so that cases of a warrior and a rifleman in one city won't happen.

The AI should also have a savings account, for it never has any money.

10. The map.

It would be really cool if the map would have a spherical shape. So the route across an ocean would be shorter near the poles. Also, it should be much quicker to pass the same amount of space by sea than by land. The "sea fields" should be bigger than the "land fields".



Tomasz

[Tomasz]

I'd also like to add a possibility that a party may divide. That happened in Poland lately, where the rulling party after a couple of affairs lost a lot of popularity and those people that were still "clean" formed a new party.

I suggest that if a rulling party loses more than 50% of popularity from 5 to 7 turns should divide forming a new party.

Another idea is companies and multi-national companies that would build factories near the cities ( not on city tiles ) and would pay the tax to the country ( the amount set by the parliament ). There would be two amounts for the two types of companies (national companies and multi-national companies )

Companies would also make citizens happy by giving them work ( for the poorest class especially ) plus it would increase the money per turn.


I also think that in 19 and 20th centuries, turns should evolve from 1 year to 4seasons. I dont really like that the 1 year per turn begins just after 1950 AD.

Any comments?

Tomasz

[Kuciwalker]

link

[Tomasz]

What?

I also thought about changing the barbarian group into more of a terrorist and underground criminal network that would stage attacks from one reason or another and the player would have to have some sort of anti terrorist units that would slowly scan the infected areas and eliminate them. The groups could by internal as well as multinational.

Tomasz

[Trifna]

Kuci, I have to say I didn't catched the joke neither. What's the joke?

[Max Sinister]

He wanted to tell Tomasz and the rest of us that he should search for threads where someone mentioned the same or similar ideas?

BTW, I don't think Tomasz' ideas are bad. The political system implemented in this or another way would be interesting.

[The diplomat]

I kow GalCiv had a system of political parties where if your party was in power, you'd get bonuses to your empire. Something like that in civ would be cool.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Max Sinister
He wanted to tell Tomasz and the rest of us that he should search for threads where someone mentioned the same or similar ideas?

Yes.

[Leland]

If a game were to have this political setup, what's the point of the early game prior to the revolution? In any case, I'd be disgusted if at first I was in full control of a civ, and then BANG some smartass revolutionaries would force me to come up with a party and instead of just ordering units and cities around I would have to propose laws and vote for or against them. The players would consider it a hindrance, not an opportunity. I'm not saying it's necessarily boring, but it's so different from the pre-revolution game that both styles wouldn't really fit in a single game in my opinion.

[realpolitic]

New governments should be unstable. Examples: The Wiemar Republic, the 40 administrations Italy had in the 40 years, the 60 years it took France after the French Revolution it took to establish a stable democracy after their revolution.

Even dictatorshios aren't immune, in the 80 of The Soviet Union it was led by Lenin, Stalin, Krushchev, Breshnev, and Gorbechev. It made some dramatic changes with changes in leadership. Nazi Germany could be added to the list, if one of the plots to assassinate Hitler had been successful.

[Nikolai]

realpolitic: Not neccessarily. There are plenty of examples in history of a potent new dynasty/person who takes control and gets the state back on track, with little unstability. I note that all your examples are less than 250 years old too btw, a coincidence?

[Max Sinister]

Maybe that's only because we don't know that much about earlier times... or were people less rebellous than? ;-)

[Nikolai]

Oh, there were rebellions, but there was no nationalism to talk about compared to present days, and people just carried on iwth their daily life when there was a regime change, except if they were forced to the opposite.

[Odin]

Yes, Democratic, quasi-democratic, and oligarchic nations should have political parties/factions. I was thinking it should be modeled like in Victoria, which would go well with the SE system they are implementing in Civ4, you would only be able to make reforms that fit the idiology of the ruling party, A party should also give bunuses; so a libertarian party would give a large income bonus, a socialist party would give a respectable production bonus and a small happiness bonus, etc.

[Zoid]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


link

I thought the DL dance was only made in the OT?

[Kuciwalker]

No

[Zoid]

Then I guess you´ll have a lot of dancing to do when the game´s finally released

[Kuciwalker]

well, this is one of those who definately needs to what posting and you

[Zoid]

That´s just mean...

[Tomasz]

Kuciwalker,

is that chanting on me? IF yes, then by looking on the video again and on my post and on ur posts, ull see ur hipocrisy.

Tomasz

[GeoModder]

I'm not the one saying this...

[Zoid]

Tomasz, Kuci is the king of self-pwnage. He just tries to get some of his dignity back by ripping on someone else

[Tomasz]

How childish.

Tomasz

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Tomasz
Kuciwalker,

is that chanting on me? IF yes, then by looking on the video again and on my post and on ur posts, ull see ur hipocrisy.

Tomasz

miss the part about the search button?