corruption reduction ideas

[Surgeon]

Originally posted by Wyrmo
What about reducing corruption with city-connection?
A connected city has less corruption than an un-connected
And railroads affects it more than ordinary roads.

Since a road makes the traveltime between cities shorter, communications would work better and corruption would drop
Also, make certain infra-structure-related advances, such as Radio, reduce corruption

Perfect! It should be travel time not the number of squares between each city that affect corruption

[codemast01]

How about the ablility to invest an amount of gold per turn into any city's courthouse. The gold makes the courthouse more effective. Seems to me to be the simplest solution.

[sophist]

That's a novel suggestion. I'm not sure how the mechanics of that would work. Please explain further what your idea entails.

Originally posted by codemast01
How about the ablility to invest an amount of gold per turn into any city's courthouse. The gold makes the courthouse more effective. Seems to me to be the simplest solution.

[Easy Rhino]

I like Sze's suggestions about the various advances. You could even stretch it a bit, and say certain ones (like currency) just reduce revenue corruption, and others (recycling) just reduce production corruption (waste).


ER

[Fidel]

the only corruption aspect that needs a tweak is another continent penalty.

[JayKay]

Originally posted by Auren


Actually this is already implemented. Cities that are connected to capital do have less corruption. To connect oversees cities you have to have harbor there and your capital connected to another harbor. And if there is sea or ocean squares between two harbors you also need to have advance that allows trade over those squares? (Magnetism/navigation I think, not sure.)

Indeed this is true! In order to connect two cities with a harbor, you'll need:

Astronomy - if the two cities are only separated by sea squares
(if Astronomy is far away, and you are desperated, you can build the Great Lighthouse that will make the same effects)

Navigation - if the two cities are separated also by ocean squares

P.S.: There's also the possibility to connect cities by air (Airport), but this is too late in the game.
_________________________________________________



Portugal
Nation of: Magellan's (from Magellan's Expedition);
Vasco da Gama (Discoverer of the Maritime path to India);
and Pedro Álvares Cabral (Discoverer of Brazil in 1500)

[MisterMuppet]

Originally posted by LeeBear
1) I think there needs to be a cap on the amount of corruption. Maybe something like a max of 90% in the ancient era, 80% in the medievil, 70% in the industrial, and 60% in modern times. This would still make it hard for early world domination in the opening games, but make it more possible later in the game.

This is a simple and effective idea, both to understand and implement. I just wonder if it would make the first Civ that jumps into each era too powerful. They would already be the most advanced scientifically, suddenyl they would also get a 10% lifting of the corruption cap.
Best suggesstion so far though

[codemast01]

Originally posted by sophist
That's a novel suggestion. I'm not sure how the mechanics of that would work. Please explain further what your idea entails.

This is my idea :
Any city that has a courthouse should be allowed the investment of money to lower the courruption rate. Because you can set how much money to give a city, you can give more gold to cities with high corruption and less gold to cities with lower corruption.
I am not certain how must courruption should be reduced for every one gold put into a city.I do know it should be connected to population. Maybe it should be something like this : If you put 1 gold for every 1 population than your courthouse will be 100% effective. The less gold the less effective. However the courthouse should never be as effective as the palace or forbidden palace.

For those that are interested in realism:
The realworld equivilant to this is : if a city has a high crimerate, a mayor's solution is to hirer more police officer. (which costs money/gold)

[sophist]

Hmmm... ok. I think that would become a micro-management nightmare.

7) A bunch of people have had the idea to have police stations reduce corruption in addition to courthouses

8) One that I just thought of that has the possibility of being a micromanagement nightmare, but might also work: in addition to entertainers, scientists, and tax collectors, have a fourth option of a judge. Each judge that a city has reduces corruption by some amount (10% rounded up? cumulative, so you have diminishing returns, so that rather than being able to completely eliminate corruption with 10 judges, they just reduce corruption 65%). That makes that pop 15 city 50 tiles away with 1 shield/1 trade viable all of a sudden.

Originally posted by codemast01


This is my idea :
Any city that has a courthouse should be allowed the investment of money to lower the courruption rate. Because you can set how much money to give a city, you can give more gold to cities with high courruption and less gold to cities with lower courruption.
I am not certain how must courruption should be reduced for every one gold put into a city.I do know it should be connected to population. Maybe it should be something like this : If you put 1 gold for every 1 population than your courthouse will be 100% effective. The less gold the less effective. However the courthouse should never be as effective as the palace or forbidden palace.

For those that are interested in realism:
The realworld equivilant to this is : if a city has a high crimerate, a mayor's solution is to hirer more police officer. (which costs money/gold)

[bahoo]

Maybe courthouses ought to do something, more than lower corruption enough to pay for their upkeep.

[Yoleus]

Originally posted by bahoo
Maybe courthouses ought to do something, more than lower corruption enough to pay for their upkeep.

You mean judges and advocates should really lower corruption?
This is completely against any historic accuracy, you know?

[bahoo]

Originally posted by Yoleus


You mean judges and advocates should really lower corruption?
This is completely against any historic accuracy, you know?

Don't tell me that, tell the civ designers that, they're the ones that implemented the courthouse as the primary corruption reduction agent!

I would be satisfied with IRS branches everywhere to audit all the swindling citizens.

[codemast01]

Originally posted by sophist
Hmmm... ok. I think that would become a micro-management nightmare.

I disagree. How is this different then having to choose what to build every few turns. Besides the governor option could be used to maintain the rate so that your city is its most efficient.

7) A bunch of people have had the idea to have police stations reduce corruption in addition to courthouses.

I think this changes little. You will only reduce overall corruption by a percentage. This doesn't solve the distance problem in the modern age. Cities furthur from the captial being more corrupt is not realistic in an age with fast and efficient communication.

8) One that I just thought of that has the possibility of being a micromanagement nightmare, but might also work: in addition to entertainers, scientists, and tax collectors, have a fourth option of a judge. Each judge that a city has reduces corruption by some amount (10% rounded up? cumulative, so you have diminishing returns, so that rather than being able to completely eliminate corruption with 10 judges, they just reduce corruption 65%). That makes that pop 15 city 50 tiles away with 1 shield/1 trade viable all of a sudden.

I am not sure if there would be enough food to support lower population cities that want to reduce corruption.

[siredgar]

Not a perfect solution, but...

I've been using the map editor to give courthouses 50% more revenue, like what I believe marketplaces or banks get. What do you all think of this idea?

[sophist]

I put it on the same level as maintaining happiness through entertainers. Plus the fact that smaller cities cannot support that many judges and still grow quickly is an indicator that rapid growth and controlled, stable growth are different things.

Originally posted by codemast01


I disagree. How is this different then having to choose what to build every few turns. Besides the governor option could be used to maintain the rate so that your city is its most efficient.



I think this changes little. You will only reduce overall corruption by a percentage. This doesn't solve the distance problem in the modern age. Cities furthur from the captial being more corrupt is not realistic in an age with fast and efficient communication.



I am not sure if there would be enough food to support lower population cities that want to reduce corruption.