Why did social engienering gone?

[RedWhiteArcher]

I know this is not news but I wondered why didn't they put social engeniering from SMAC. This was absolutly great idea that also removed the myth as Socialism, Comunism is a government and not ecomics style.
Anyone else thinks that this should have stayed?

[Pembleton]

I didn't play SMAC since I don't like sci-fi games in general...what did social engineering do?

[Ralf]

Originally posted by RedWhiteArcher
I know this is not news but I wondered why didn't they put social engeniering from SMAC.

I think SE worked in SMAC because the game simulated ideologically cleansed test-tube societys/ factions on a strange far away planet.

This was absolutly great idea that also removed the myth as Socialism, Comunism is a government and not ecomics style.

Well, I think you unwittingly pinpoint the problems of having SMAC-style SE in Civ-3 also.

[tniem]

Re: Why did social engienering gone?

One of those downgrades from SMAC. Others are no MP support and flat terrain.

[Asesino_Virtual]

I think its fine that the SE feature were not included. The game is based in certain aspects in reality, so, goverments are based in real stuff, and cannot be modified in any of its aspects (but with the editor probably yes). This is not a game about future, but dealing with differents stuff of the history of mankind, and goverments were and are, very important in our civ.

[Ironwood]

Actually, I think it's there, but in a juvinile state. First, you have the various governmental forms (which can be edited and changed and added and stuff). Another thing I noticed is this whole concept of "mobilize for war" once you've discovered nationalism. Then there's the civilization defining factors (or whatever they're called, like militaristic, scientist, religeous, etc.), and in this game, rather than disallowing certain types of civilizations, they give each civ a relatively unchangable nature.

It just looks like they're experimenting a bit. Personally, I'd like to see a bit of MOO2 style population management in that the various nationalities, even after being "assimilated", retain certain unique traits.

[Mister Pleasant]

One of those downgrades from SMAC. Others are no MP support and flat terrain.

Exactly.
As for SE not corresponding to reality - I saw no possible combination in SE (with the possible exception of "green" economy - but perhaps green economics could be discovered with recycling) that was not possible in real life.

I'll probably be using the gov editor to recreate some of the CTP govenrments - like technocracy, ecotopia, and pure democracy while adding older forms like theocracy. Hopefully AI will be able to use new government forms.

[Lorizael]

Re: Re: Why did social engienering gone?

Originally posted by tniem
One of those downgrades from SMAC. Others are no MP support and flat terrain.

The terrain may look flat but as far as it affects on the game it isn't. Since units can see farther away from higher locations, then terrain elevations do have an effect.

And MP will be available eventually. SP is the heart of the game. Oh no I shouldn't say that. Don't want to start that up again

[Trifna]

Maybe because civilisations in history were not changing so much things, they all had some few general paterns. Future paterns are now more diversified, even if some paterns are almost unused these days, such as "green economy" and such.

In history, did you ever saw something getting out of the general paterns of socio-economic systems? Very very little... They all oriented in some way after having the rest beeing a certain way. Socialism with communism, a certain specific economy with monarchy, etc.

There are variations of course, but generally...


It is my opinion and I'll be happy to see some criticism :-)

[fanatic civver]

One thing is that using governments keeps in the spirit of the civilization series. The old debate for when to change governments will occur all over again.

Maybe you could use a mix of the two eg you can choose one social trait to go along with your government that gives you a small bonus. That wouldn't unbalance or overcomplicate things too much.

I think the main problems with social engineering in SMAC is that your choice of faction chose your basic strategy for that game. Any deviation from that strategy would be sub-optimal.

Also, one thing I disliked about SMAC is that you could only maintain relations with those factions that you shared the same traits with. As soon as you changed then the faction you were previously allies with suddenly became your enemy.

Obviously you could change the system to get rid of these disadvantages....I wouldnt really mind what system they used.

[tniem]

Ironwood -
Any proof of that?

Mr. Pleasant -
I never liked all of the govs in CtP because I never found that the AI could handle them. Nor did I like switching every couple turns. But the SE system with modest changes is something I did enjoy.

Loriazel -

The terrain may look flat but as far as it affects on the game it isn't. Since units can see farther away from higher locations, then terrain elevations do have an effect.

So what that means we have mountains looking farther? I mean that is the only elevation there is on the map correct?

Trifina-

In history, did you ever saw something getting out of the general paterns of socio-economic systems? Very very little... They all oriented in some way after having the rest beeing a certain way. Socialism with communism, a certain specific economy with monarchy, etc.

I think there have been quite a few versions of representative democracies even today. There is the more parlimentary versions and the more federal systems. Everything has some modifications depending on certain policies. I think very easily it could have been included for this game and should have. As I said, a downgrade.

[Cyclotron]

I would like to ask exactly wat are the benefits of this "non flat terrain." What does it do that so called "flat" terrain does not?

[Asesino_Virtual]

Oh well, i tried to say it in the diplomatic way, but, **** all. The truth is that SE is useless and sucks!. And the so called "3d" terrain sucks too!. I think its a cool idea, but if the firaxis guys really wanted to implement that, powerful 3d acceletator cards would be required. Because in SMAC there was only ONE kind of terrain, without textures (except the fungus and the forests). If u wanna do a 3d terrain for EARTH, which contains a lot of textures (desserts, mountains, hills, beaches, etc) u gotta need 1) a lotta time for developing, and 2) a powerful 3d card to display the graphics correctly.

A_V has spoken.

[dainbramaged13]

i hated that elevated terrain crap anywsay

[Moral Hazard]

Elevated terrain and SE are both examples of added complexity which don't add very much to the game. SE is better than elevation; and I personally prefer it, but I think that's why they were cut.