AU mod: Balancing the Governments

[Dominae]

Would it not make more sense to tweak Fascism after we play the "Power of Fascism"? How many of us have actually switched to Fascism since the release of Conquests?!

[Krill]

ER, me? I've used once or twice, but not often...

[Theseus]

Originally posted by Dominae
Would it not make more sense to tweak Fascism after we play the "Power of Fascism"? How many of us have actually switched to Fascism since the release of Conquests?!

Yes, good point.

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by Dominae
Would it not make more sense to tweak Fascism after we play the "Power of Fascism"? How many of us have actually switched to Fascism since the release of Conquests?!

That depends on what we think we'll do with Fascism in the longer term. If we think we'll probably reject the change long-term, it makes sense to play Power of Fascism without it. If we think we'll probably keep the change long-term, it makes more sense to play Power of Fascism with it so players can evaluate Fascism the way it will be in future games.

In my view, Forced Relocation can make Fascism a joke even in situations where it might otherwise be useful. Fascism's biggest potential advantage over Communism is that for smaller civs, Fascism can provide greater productivity until the civ conquers enough territory for Communism's advantages to kick in. But Forced Relocation takes a significant bite out of that short-term advantage, and can make the difference between a short-term advantage and a short-term disadvantage in marginal cases. If we don't fix that, my expectation is that what we learn in Power of Fascism will be of almost purely academic interest, with people rarely if ever applying it in future games.

(Yes, I know I haven't used Fascism. But Fascism is similar enough to Monarchy that it's not hard for a player who knows how Monarchy and Communism compare to extrapolate approximately how Fascism and Communism would compare.)

Nathan

[pvzh]

I agree with nbarclay. I had a feeling that flag forced re-settlement will be the first to go after this game, so I proposed to remove it.

BTW, why not up the unit support cost for republic to 3 gpt per unit? Once you have cities, marketplaces, banks and even stock exchanges, paying 2 gtp for unit is not a big deal anymore. You can stay in republic all you like unless you are fighting multi-front war and WW is unbearable. With 3 gtp for unit industrial era war goverments will have their place.

Edit: with 3 gpt even Monarchy and Feudalism will be a good idea to fight war.

[Dominae]

Force-resettlement, while certainly annoying, is one of the defining characteristics of the Fascist government in C3C (that and the ridiculous unit support). I recommend trying to beef up the other aspects of Fascism, for diversity's sake.

(Yes, I know I haven't used Fascism. But Fascism is similar enough to Monarchy that it's not hard for a player who knows how Monarchy and Communism compare to extrapolate approximately how Fascism and Communism would compare.)

Care to play just one game with the stock version? Who knows, you might be surprised!

[pvzh]

I think xenophobic is enough for flavour.

[JimiD]

just on principle, I think that changes should be made after a game to assess them, rather than in anticipation: we play the one time with max impact, then work out what to do to ensure we would use it again.

perhaps there is a strategy that minimises the impact of relocation

[Modo44]

Originally posted by Dominae
Force-resettlement, while certainly annoying, is one of the defining characteristics of the Fascist government in C3C (that and the ridiculous unit support). I recommend trying to beef up the other aspects of Fascism, for diversity's sake.

Exactly.

I would add that forced resettlement is also an important part of a good role-play leading to Fascism. Let's not forget that important fact.

[edit]

Originally posted by The pirate
perhaps there is a strategy that minimises the impact of relocation

Yes, there is. Get new land ASAP. The conquered AI territory usually has huge food surpulus in cities, so the population skyrockets there. The least you get is a fast developing new part of the empire (pop-rushing galore). The extreme way would be to force-move the new population. How would pop-rushing Settlers to add them at home sound to you? Or perhaps using them to quickly plug the holes in city spacing the AI made? Nice anti-flip tactic, eh?

Yes, it's extreme, but that's what the government is about. No, it's not doable in all circumstances, but then again, nothing is.
[/edit]

[lockstep]

Probably too late, but anyhow:

1. Yes
2. No

[nbarclay]

Actually, it's not too late because we're still short of votes. Even with lockstep's added, my count is a vote of 3-1 in favor of the first proposal and 3-1 against the second, which leaves us short of a majority of the panel. We still haven't heard from ZargonX or Nor Me on these issues.

Theseus, as far as I'm concerned, it's up to you to decide whether to go ahead and start the game based on the vote totals we have now or to wait for additional votes to show up (if in fact they do).

[Theseus]

I'll wait out today, and then go for it either way late this afternoon... gentlemen (and ladies), you may start your engines, but leave them running for a bit.

[alexman]

I will go ahead and post version 1.07 of the mod, using the results that are currently winning the vote (1:Yes, 2:No). If Nor Me and ZargonX change the outcome when they vote, we will of course make the necessary changes to version 1.08.

[pvzh]

Alexman, check cossacks in 1.07. What are they supposed to be? 5/3/3 or 6/3/3? In Nathan's test mod they are 5/3/3, but from the disscussion I understand they should be 6/3/3.

[alexman]

They are 6-3-3 in 1.07, as they should be, I think.