Civics make no sense

[DrSpike]

Re: Re: Civics make no sense

Originally posted by Sirian


Not me, and I contributed to where we ended up for nearly every civic in the game.

They are balanced to PLAY WELL. History came second, though we tried not to fudge things too much.

Civ4 is meant first and foremost to be fun to play; also to be balanced for single and mutliplayer, and to have a gameplay shelf life measured in YEARS.

Gameplay came first. It's that simple. I realize that displeases some, but it was Soren's design priority and I supported it 100%.


- Sirian

[Adagio]

I wonder how long time it'll take before someone makes a "New Civics" mod... or make that two, one that is more realistic, and one that is more balanced

[RGBVideo]

Short, subjective answers:

Anyone else here bothered at how many civics make no historical sense?

No

In previous civ games, the government choices generally reflected historical truths

HAHAHAHAHAHA - No they didn't.

[RadeonZero]

In 1989 (end of communism in eastern europe) I was 18, so do the math. Not that it matters.

So, you are exactly as old as I am

In you're poor and communist origin country:
- Children took weapons to school (as in USA)?
- There was death penalty ?
- Don't say me the police was brutal (as in USA)
- How you explain your sons (if you have them) the revolts of 1992 in USA?

You're talking about extremes. Everything in extreme is bad.

[Senethro]

Edit: 'poly ate my post. In summary, SeferKoheleth is wrong.

[Henrik]

Serfdom IS NOT the same thing as mercantilism

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Strudo
I don't understand when people say military units stop unhappyness?? Do the soldiers point guns at people's heads and say "Be happy or I'll shoot!"? I would think a more real view would be that military units cause unhappyness, but cities can't revolt. Or maybe all people work, unhappy or not, but the ones who would be unhappy work at half capacity.

Because it's been that way since Civ1 and people are used to it.

[Henrik]

Soldiers=content citizens surely? not happy

[Dis]

I think they tried to balance them too much like SMAC. Simply put, modern civics choices should be better than the old ones. People should not be efficiently running a marchy with slavery in the 21st century.

Most goverments today are what? Republics and communist. A few old fashioned monarchys here and there and a few dictatorships.

[EscapedGoat]

For those who actually think the old government systems were good:

The real world is a complex place, it's pure nonsense to say any given republic operates such and such, Democracy gives the best research, Communism is a war-government, etc... The old system was extrememly unrealistic! All political systems in the world are complex along more than one dimension.

The new civics system manages to model the political complexity of the real world better. You might think running representation and state property is weird, but it really isn't. That's the modern welfare state. Replace representation with police state, and you might have something like the USSR. This is a wonderful thing.

[Sloth_DC]

Originally posted by RadeonZero

So, you are exactly as old as I am

In you're[sic] poor and communist origin country:
- Children took weapons to school (as in USA)?
- There was death penalty ?
- Don't say me the police was brutal (as in USA)

How often did US police send someone to the gulag to die of overwork and exposure for their political beliefs? Before Guantanimo, I mean.

- How you explain your sons (if you have them) the revolts of 1992 in USA?

Revolts of 1992? WTF?

[Fidel]

Re: Re: Civics make no sense

Originally posted by Sirian


Not me, and I contributed to where we ended up for nearly every civic in the game.

They are balanced to PLAY WELL. History came second, though we tried not to fudge things too much.

Civ4 is meant first and foremost to be fun to play; also to be balanced for single and mutliplayer, and to have a gameplay shelf life measured in YEARS.

Gameplay came first. It's that simple. I realize that displeases some, but it was Soren's design priority and I supported it 100%.


- Sirian

amen to that. and my personal thanx for the maps...they are really beutiful...i finally have the pleasure of playing on them...
will try every single one.
also, i now understand solver's and martinus' explanations re: civics. even when all are enabled, you will think hard about which combo to use. very well balanced...so far

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by Dis
I think they tried to balance them too much like SMAC. Simply put, modern civics choices should be better than the old ones. People should not be efficiently running a marchy with slavery in the 21st century.

Most goverments today are what? Republics and communist. A few old fashioned monarchys here and there and a few dictatorships.

A well-run dictatorship is light years beyond a democracy or republic in terms of efficiency. Of course you need a genius who is willing to listen to other intelligent people as the head of state--without that it isn't that great.

-Drachasor

PS. All the governments in the game are basically dictatorships anyhow...and you're the dictator!

[Dis]

Originally posted by Sloth_DC


How often did US police send someone to the gulag to die of overwork and exposure for their political beliefs? Before Guantanimo, I mean.



Revolts of 1992? WTF?

1992. Rodney King riots I suspect. That's the only thing I can think of. Those really weren't too bad. Only affected one small area of one city. Though it also affected my city as well. We have a lot of former LA gang members in Las Vegas. They burnt down a shopping center in my city. Either way, those are just you run of the mill riots. Not a revolt.

[Mace]

In the little I've played, I think the civics are balanced; and I agree with gameplay/balance as a priority design goal--that was good.

As I play more, I do think the civics could be re-examined at some point--IMO the principle of modding to better reflect real-world scenarios --whether you think that's possible or proper in a "game" or not--has always been something I've been interested in. This implies that the stock Civ4 civics are not historically accurate. Actually I think most of them are fine, or are in the ballpark. The earlier comment about state property giving more food is an interesting comment, however...

I think the civics could be modded in such a way as to be just as balanced and fun as they are now, while being a little more accurate as to their effects. I understand how in the game design compromises for balance and fun factor had to be made, but they were designed the whole game and not just a civics system...so given time and experience, I think worthwhile civics mods will appear...I'll probably do one if I can figure out how to do it.