Must the German/Axis in all WW2 Scenarios be Fundamentalist?

[Willhelm II]

I think Fundamentalism as the instant choice for so many scenario makers is the result of Steve Strayer back in 1998 with the Fascist Patch. Since then it has become almost text book to use Fundamentalism because of the slot which allowed 'Storm Troopers' rather than 'Fanatics'. I personally believe Strayer has himself influenced Civilization: Call to power, which gave Fascism a unique unit, the stormtrooper. This came out years after the original Fascist patch, and is testimony to how game companies look and listen to their customers; Paradox Entertainment that gave us the glorious Hearts of Iron is a good example, where the ideas & opinions of the actual players help craft the sequel.

The only reason Fundamentalism has always been a favorite is because of the option to have 'Storm Troopers'. But today we need to remember that things like 'storm troopers' matter very little, since we already make it a common factor of our scenarios that each nation is given their own individual units anyway. But by clinging to text book methods, we've neglected the important role that Government could play in a scenario, looking more towards individual units, events that can simulate history or other cool 'effects' within the game. But Government plays a very important factor in the standard game; there are different ways of playing for a Communist Government and a Democratic one.

When we take into consideration the important role government has on the game, we can then begin to implement some truly wonderful ideas with city improvements and wonders; Suppose National Socialism as a government replaces republic, if we wanted to make a WW2 scenario where war affects the populace at home; wonders like 'Total War' that put a police station in each city would be things that the different powers would all be fighting for, if democracy and republic were the governments that everyone used.

People look at Government in civilization and simply see the original name, and then adapt a government with 'similar tactics'. The name means nothing; it's how you portray the game through the rules.

[Eivind IV]

I might use some of these ideas myself for a project I'm working on. Cheers, guys!

Keep the discussion going!

How about the USSR as monarchy, so it wouldn't have as big scientific and economic strenght as the the Axis in communism and the Western Allies in fundamentalism?

Would also create the need for a strong secret police.

[Willhelm II]

Originally posted by Eivind IV
I might use some of these ideas myself for a project I'm working on. Cheers, guys!

Keep the discussion going!

How about the USSR as monarchy, so it wouldn't have as big scientific and economic strenght as the the Axis in communism and the Western Allies in fundamentalism?

Would also create the need for a strong secret police.

Russia as Monarchy? That's an interesting idea - to make up for the lack of economic and scientific strength give it the ability to build 10 units for free, simulating the massive armies that Russia was able to build.

[Elok]

Well, I lack the discipline (and factual knowledge) for historical scenario-making, but it seems to me that it's best to have the scenario limitations simulate the real world limitations as closely as possible. That is, the factors which caused the USSR to lag at the time should also be the ones causing its inferiority in-game. As a system, Stalin's gov't. wasn't all that terribly different from Hitler's. I'm guessing that what actually held him back was a combination of a sprawling country with bad roads, a lack of resources, a lack of solid educational and research facilities...stuff like that. If you just slice off Stalin's ability to compete economically at the government level for the sake of "realism," you're eliminating a possible alternative strategy for someone playing as Russia.

[Bostero]

[SIZE=1]
Well actually, the main problem with monarchy is the crushing corruption when cities are far away from the capital so it really depends on the size of your map.

well, actually, you can cheat (via hex-editing or with a tool, i guess civcity) some palaces improvements in some places to reduce this problem.
even, building a palace improvement in every city would reduce all the corruption in the total civ no matter what government you are using.

good luck,

[Willhelm II]

Originally posted by Elok
Well, I lack the discipline (and factual knowledge) for historical scenario-making, but it seems to me that it's best to have the scenario limitations simulate the real world limitations as closely as possible. That is, the factors which caused the USSR to lag at the time should also be the ones causing its inferiority in-game. As a system, Stalin's gov't. wasn't all that terribly different from Hitler's. I'm guessing that what actually held him back was a combination of a sprawling country with bad roads, a lack of resources, a lack of solid educational and research facilities...stuff like that. If you just slice off Stalin's ability to compete economically at the government level for the sake of "realism," you're eliminating a possible alternative strategy for someone playing as Russia.

No, we're not - we're taking the historical realism and making it as a playable feature that is possible to win.

You cite Russia here as being so weakned it wouldn't be able to play; perhaps Russia has the advantage over the German player's economic advantage by the ability to build more, cheaper units quicker.

It's all very easy to balance out.

You're also missing the point that Russia has a vast territorial advantage over Germany too, and so there are more cool features you could include in a scenario to show how this advantage works in Russia's interests.

Perhaps the German player has a massive industrial complex that's held together by the hoover damn wonder; but what would happen if you included an event that would give the german player a technology that rendered that wonder obsolete? Perhaps if a certain city was taken - the whole German War machine would be crippled and have to re-build itself.


Things like this are what I'm interested in with regards to building an historical game; ones that have a game element, but giving each game a seperate stradegy but each equally rewarding to play.

[techumseh]

Originally posted by Elok
Well, I lack the discipline (and factual knowledge) for historical scenario-making, but it seems to me that it's best to have the scenario limitations simulate the real world limitations as closely as possible. That is, the factors which caused the USSR to lag at the time should also be the ones causing its inferiority in-game. As a system, Stalin's gov't. wasn't all that terribly different from Hitler's. I'm guessing that what actually held him back was a combination of a sprawling country with bad roads, a lack of resources, a lack of solid educational and research facilities...stuff like that. If you just slice off Stalin's ability to compete economically at the government level for the sake of "realism," you're eliminating a possible alternative strategy for someone playing as Russia.

I disagree about the differences between Stalin's govt and Hitler's being minimal. In Fascism, the large industrialists were given control of different areas of the economy, which they explioted for their own benefit. Economic growth was short term, corruption was rife, and financial crisis averted only by looting conquered countries. A large army was feasible. Monarchy is a good fit in Civ2.

Under Stalin, there was impressive long term economic development and corruption was controlled. The economy was able to support a large army. This is well represented by the communist form of government in Civ2. However, the Republican government has greater revenues and faster technological progress. So I think the designers were pretty close to the mark.

[Patine]

Actually, in the 'World War II - Europe' scen that comes with vanilla civ, long before Stephen Strayer's additions, the Axis player is under a Republic gov't. I thought that was somewhat notable as to pre-Fascist Patch thinking.

[Dr Kellogg]

I agree with Monarchy being a good choice to represent Nazi Germany's government.

However, I think there should be no unit support at all. This would stand for the shortage of resources (iron ore etc) needed to build new units as well as the lack of oil, spares etc needed to maintain them.
The Crusade Wonder or industrial terrain at the Rhine-Ruhr area would back up the German production.
Gaining control of oher industrial areas or oil fields (Baku, Ploesti) would be essential to increase production.
With lots of units on all fronts at the end of the war there wouldn't be enough resources to mass-produce the new heavy tanks and jet aircraft.
Giving the Germans the Sun Tzu Wonder or making their units slightly stronger would ensure their army to be strong enough to fight six years althoug not being in the position to increase production extensively as the Allies did. (Tanks, tank-destroyers and sp guns built during the war: USA 130.000 (50.000 Shermans!) - USSR 100.000 - GB 25.000 - Germany 24.000)

[curtsibling]

In the upcoming remake of Dictator, I plan to make the Axis as communist,
so there can still be civil strife, to represent military occupation.

The Allies might have fundie government to represent the stable civil nature of the democracies.

...

[Stefan Härtel]

Couldn't there be some way to use luxury to represent the secret police of nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia? The weaker government forms that would represent these two entities need a big amount of "luxury" to keep the population calm anyway, while the Fundie/Democracy has no need for it at all. So, for example the game concept "luxury" could be renamed into something like "national security" or something more appropriate, entertainers could be made to look like Gestapo/NKVD officers etc... just an idea

[Dr Kellogg]

I like that idea, Stefan!

[curtsibling]

Really good!!!

Giving the scen a higher riot value would work too, to show that the
vast ears under Axis control would gro more unruly as time goes on!

Nice one, Stefan!

[Willhelm II]

Temples - Radio Station
Coloseum - Newspaper Press
Cathedral - Public Cinema

Democrats who were fundamentalist would make extra cash from these improvements, but a Totalitarian regime would need them to subdue the people with propoganda.

You could then have Wonder races between Russia & Germany for control over wonders like The Oracle & Michael Angelo's Cathedral.

[Stefan Härtel]

To add to that, Market Places, Banks and Stock Exchanges would become totally useless for those democratic fundies, so they could be renamed to such lovely institutions as "Propaganda Bureau", "Internation/Concentration Camp" and so on. Names should be kept in a broad spectrum, as Stalin and Hitler had equally charming ideas of protecting their people...