Government types ideas

[Xanthippe]

I felt it was inappropriate to start with Despotism. Also I wasn't sure about having Warrior Code and Chivalry (another kind of warrior code). So I replaced 'Warrior Code' with 'Despotism' which makes Despotism (government) and Archers (unit) available.

I introduced a new default start government type which I initially called 'Council of Elders'. That was too long, so I did a little reading and came up with 'Polyarchy' (rule by many - clan chiefs, elders ?). With the following characteristics:

* nuisance level corruption
*1 free unit for each town or 2 for a city (though I'd expect a government change before any towns grew big enough to be cities) , maintenance costs of 1 for each other unit.

Fundamentalism - some thoughts.

Fundamentalism shouldn't be a civilisation advance (maybe a civilisation reverse ?) it's more of a reaction to another development, maybe communism (a godless political philosophy), maybe to the perceived threat posed by other cultures (radio, modern weaponry, ?).

I'd have fundamentalism made available in response to some other appropriate civilisation advance, but only available to a non-communist civilisation sharing a land border with a communist civilisation that is technologically and militarily inferior to that communist civilisation. But how do you write that into the programming ?

I'd also build in a fairly high corruption level (mostly to represent incompetence in the use of resources) and a reduction in 'science' production.

[Optimizer]

I have got a default government called Chiefdom, to model a system where the ruler lives close to the rest of the citizens, and does not use force or indoctrination to control them.

No production bonus/penalty
Rampant corruption
12 free units, regardless of number of cities
1 military police
Low war weariness

This government will allow small civs to get a good start, and it hampers early rapid expansion. When you get lots of cities and a large army, Despotism might become more suitable.

My changes to Despotism to make it feel more barbaric:
Corruption is Problematic - violent punishments make your people a little more loyal
Military police increased to 4 - extensive oppression
Max science rate is 50% - no free speech, less new ideas!
Zero assimilation rate - you cannot change anyone's cultural identity by force

I have also changed Monarchy to have only Nuisance corruption.

[Xanthippe]

On reflection it seems to me that Fundamentalism is Despotism clad in religious intolerence. Similarly Fascism is Despotism clad in 'Nationalism'.

[Xanthippe]

With Polyarchy I tried to set up a 'government' where there isn't really yet a government. That's why I have only one free unit per town. It's difficult to afford more than a couple of other units to explore or build roads etc. with and equally difficult to raise research funding over 50%.

The limits, along with the nuisance level of corruption also reflects the idea that you have several clans / tribes / factions who are primarily interested in their own internal politics (internal to clan or tribe). Other than being prepared to band together for mutual defence they aren't yet functioning as a state.

Another thought is that before the development of currency, the economies of ancient civilisations tended to be re-distributive (e.g. a central authority took in primarily agricultural products and re-distributed these as pay to craftsmen and other specialists. This kind of economy requires writing for record keeping. Should writing be a requirement for the establishment of cetral authority ?

[GeneralTacticus]

Fundamentalism has existed since long before communsm. Oliver Cromwell in England, the Wahabbis (sp?) in Arabia, the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages...

On reflection it seems to me that Fundamentalism is Despotism clad in religious intolerence. Similarly Fascism is Despotism clad in 'Nationalism'.

While that's technically correct, as far as Civ 3 is concerned they are different because they are more organized and efficient than the original despotism.

[Xanthippe]

"Fundamentalism has existed since long before communism."

I agree, I think that's why I've concluded that it's covered (along with Fascism) by Despotism.

I'm not sure I agree with you about Cromwell. I think he was the opposite of fundamentalist. Also he intended to create a Republic, but the situation never permitted that.

Also I think that there are enough different types of government in Civ3 without adding more. In fact do we really need Despotism and Monarchy ?

Both are rule by one person. Monarchs can be despots too. Monarchy is theoretically hereditary, but despotic rule can be too. The UK is a 'Constitutional Monarchy', but it's also a democracy.

I'm really more interested in creating an alternative 'initial' form of government to Despotism . . .

[Ozymandias]

Tyranny

One difficulty with the Civ system is that certain combinations of attributes (corruption, etc.) are given labels -- and these "labels" are nouns like Democracy, Communism, Fundamentalism, etc., which most of us either tend to have a visceral reaction to OR see in one very specific context (one annoyance for me has been the confusions between an "ancient republic" a "modern republic" and a "democracy" which I maintain are very different beasts).

Be all that as it may --

"Chieftain"/"Chiefdom" really refers, in most usages, to social organizations without cities.

If what you are looking for is a more historically evocative name than Despotism, then I'd recommend 'Tyranny", from the Greek Tyrannos (sp?). The name is historically neutral, and is often ironically mistranslated from Greek into English texts by use of the Latin "Rex". Regardless, it means one guy in charge -- which seems to be how most early civilizations began, with one ruler in charge of one city-state.

-Oz

[Xanthippe]

In my mod I replaced warrior Code with Tyranny, which allows the government type Despotism and allows organised military units (e.g. archer) and barracks.

I've decided to re-name the 'Polyarchy' government type I created 'Aristocracy' or rule by Aristocrats. Civilisation comes from the Latin 'Cives' (City) and you can't have a civilisation without one or more cities. But did the very first cities (e.g. Catal Hujuk in Anatolia, Mohenjo Daro in India) have a single ruler ? There is no evidence that they did, presumably they were ruled by an 'aristocracy' of 'clan chiefs' or 'elders' in a sort of primitive version of a republic, in which clans or interest groups may have tended to put their own interests before those of the city.

I thin it was aristotle who first categorised six types of government, put crudely / briefly:

Monarchy - Good (Constitutional) rule by one.
Tyranny - Bad rule by one.
Aristocracy - Good (Constitutional) rule by few.
Oligarchy - Bad rule by few.
Democracy - Good (Constitutional) rule by many.
Ochlocracy - Bad rule by many (e.g. mob rule).

[Ozymandias]

Originally posted by Xanthippe Ochlocracy - Bad rule by many (e.g. mob rule).

Given your name and flag, I'm almost embarrassed to clarify --"ochlocracy" literally means "mob rule" -- French ochlocratie, from Greek okhlokrati -- okhlos, mob + -krati, -cracy.

If I recall correctly, Aristotle actually directly equated "Democracy" with "Ochlocracy" (both bad) and differentiated both of these from "Constitutional Government" (good).

Which raises the interesting question of a "good", non-democratic, constitutional government ...

Given the (for us) ensuing confusion, it is perhaps ironic that it was Aristotle who stated that, "Plato with his ideal forms, rather than explaining things, doubled the things which need to be explained".

Abraxas,

Oz

[WarpStorm]

Organized Crime

It's like a government, but more effective.

[Ozymandias]

Originally posted by WarpStorm
Organized Crime

It's like a government, but more effective.

Hmmm ... a "kleptocracy"?

I like it!

-O.

[Xanthippe]

"Plato with his ideal forms, rather than explaining things, doubled the things which need to be explained".

Reminds me of something the head of my department said when I was doing my degree:

"In academia you aren't allowed to provide a definitive answer to a question unless you pose two more in the process."