The designers should have consulted scientists...

[hoonak]

Has anyone else noticed that Civ3's corruption models a mess? The corruption model is a positive-feedback loop with no external control even during peacetime.

Stop and think about it and ask yourself these questions: have the levels of corruption that occur in the game ever occurred in history? are they happening now? if they have happened, what became of those cultures?

I freely admit corruption feeds upon itself, but most people do not have the stomach to be corrupt. They fear what others will think of them after they are caught. In short, most members of society have a sense of shame. Civ3 does not even address this issue.

In addition to shame, personal possesion enters into the picture as well. As a society becomes more prosperous, the individual members of society will acquire wealth of various kinds. They will become protective of "thier" possessions and will struggle to keep them. This includes taking action to prevent losing these possesions in the face of corruption.

The natural socio-economic model should include some corruption because there will always be people that will attempt to exploit others for thier own personal gain. The total amount of corruption should rise as productivity rises, but the percentage of corrution will probably increase at a slower rate (or possibly even decline) at higher levels because it will be easier to make an honest living.

Civ3's political sytem also fails under the weight of corruption. All over the world we see examples of what happens when governemnts become too corrupt. There are dozens of examples in this country alone of corrupt officials being sent to jail. There is simply no way to justify an elected government surviving when 90% of the productivity of half it's cities is being used for illicit purposes.

The current system where corruption is based on the number of cities is ridiculous. It has no basis in fact or theory to support it.

This is what I would like to see:

• elimination of the "cities" portion of the corruption equation;
• religious advances reduce corruption throughout the entire culture;
• all buildings except fortifications should decrease corruption;
• all transportation advances should reduce corruption; and
• there should be a fixed maximum corruption rate per city for each type of government (e.g. max 60% corruption for anarchy, %50% for despotism, etc).

It is my hope that the designers of this game (and MOO3) consult with economists and cultural anthropologists and put forward systems that more accurately reflect life as we know it.

john

[Setsuna]

They could have used such council for more than economics..

[GePap]

Bad economic model

The main reson that the corruption model is so bad is because the general econoic model makes no sense in Civ, never has in this series. According to Civ, the goverment, You, has total control of the entire economy and all wealth. Thus, corruption in Civ does not only show how much bad administrators pocket themselves, but also the inability (supposedly) to draw tax revenue from outer colonies.

[Ursa Major]

I disagree:

Corruption is very rampant across all times and cultures and is even present today.


For example the part of how spread out locations will revolt or go over to the cultures near them. Look at the mighty British Empire and what happened to it. U.S. revolted and had nothing more to do with them, same with India, Hong Kong, even the Falkland Islands.

Also most within the U.S. are blind to the corruption within our own society. Figure that if you add all of the taxes together on most products you are paying 50-75% towards the "Government".

Now where does all of this money go you might ask. First have you ever heard of the work "PORK"? Do you know what a lobyist does? Have you ever asked why a hammer costs the army 250$ and a toilet seat 500$. Or why it costs 50-80 million dollars to run for presidental office? What did Salt Lake have to do to get the Olympics? How much money did Billy Boy get from the Chineese Government?

Corruption is rampant throughout our society. It might be better hidden because people use the government to hide what they do. Things have just changed faces but its still as rampant as it ever was. And the bigger the society the worse it gets.

But give us our huge theaters, malls, and sports arenas. And don't forget those fine silks and wine and we will ignore the corruption and be happy.

[GeneralTacticus]

For example the part of how spread out locations will revolt or go over to the cultures near them. Look at the mighty British Empire and what happened to it. U.S. revolted and had nothing more to do with them, same with India, Hong Kong, even the Falkland Islands.

The Falklands didn't revolt, Argentina invaded them. Hong Kong was given back to China when the lease on it expired. India was given independance but I don't think it's had that bad relations with Britain.

Corruption is rampant throughout our society. It might be better hidden because people use the government to hide what they do. Things have just changed faces but its still as rampant as it ever was. And the bigger the society the worse it gets.

By the Civ model, yes it is everywhere, cos in Civ, corruption is money that doesn't go to you. You might as well say that in a Civ capitalism, then all trade is lost to corruption, because it's all meant to be held by private enterpreneurs.

[Zanzin]

Yeah, the designers should have done a lot of things. Like not make a crap game.

[Sze]

Corruption/waste in the Civ games goes way beyond theivery, exploitation, and inefficiency. It is a catch-all for every mechanism that reduces the quantity/quality of the end product in going from raw materials to consumer goods, from effort to outcome. Suburban sprawl, inefficient motors, laziness, crime, disabilities, ... an almost endless list.

It's better to just accept the rationale behind it and discuss the effects on gameplay. Corruption/waste is there purely to encourage you to play a certain way. it's there to make huge empires less attractive and to help keep small empires in the game. It's also integral with the march of government types.

The problem you're picking up on is that our perception of what c/w should be and the way it plays out are not in agreement. The kind of crippling c/w you see in your outer cities is ludicrous. The designers of Civ3 had(have?) a Herculean task because they had to make every gameplay decision echo a real-world concept. In my eyes, they failed in several ways (cultural defections, spearman beating tanks, c/w, naval warfare, etc...). Corruption is a solid game concept in theory, it was just poorly implemented. I recall the Civ2 c/w model was pretty accurate. Some local c/w based on city size and then an overall empire corruption to resources only that accounts for inefficient/corrupt national government. Waste can't be taken out at a national level because all shields are used locally.

How about this as a gameplay change ... have a national production rate (similar to the tax rate) that transfers shields to a national level. The shields pay for road/railroad/mine/irrigation upkeep. More development means more shields need to be siphoned from your cities. Also, wonders are built from this national shield source, not individual cities. An individual city is selected to build it and can't build anything else during the construction, but the wonder is funded by all the cities at once. Also with this scheme you could have a national waste level dependent on government.

[Action]

Which is more corrupt Washington or Hawaii in real life?

In Civ 3 Hawaii only produces one coin of taxes.

In the ancient era a really far away colony might be super corrupt becuase of communication problems, but nowadays corruption is not based on distance from the seat of government, since travel is alot easier.

A new corruption model is needed.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Sze
How about this as a gameplay change ... have a national production rate (similar to the tax rate) that transfers shields to a national level. The shields pay for road/railroad/mine/irrigation upkeep. More development means more shields need to be siphoned from your cities. Also, wonders are built from this national shield source, not individual cities. An individual city is selected to build it and can't build anything else during the construction, but the wonder is funded by all the cities at once. Also with this scheme you could have a national waste level dependent on government.

This would be cool. Want to build tanks? Build Tank factories in 2 or 3 of your cities. Then assign resources to the factories to churn out tanks. Aircraft? Aircraft factories. Ships? Ship yards. Infantry? Barracks.

I'd add to this a national Rail/Air cap. The concept is quite prevalent in historical military simulations (aka, old board games). You have 3 cities? You can rail 1 unit per turn. 9 cities? 3 units. Everyone else drives/walks on the roads. 4 airports? 2 Infantry units can redeploy by air. And so on. This alone would solve the civ2 howitzers conquer the world syndrome and the civ3 ultimate strategy is defence syndrome. Just wait till MP. Attack me; my 54 Art sally up and blow you to bits; you loose. Oh wait, maybe that's why there is no MP yet. With rails AND ZOCs the way they are, I don't see it as possible.

Salve

[notyoueither]

Oh, sorry for the suggestions.

If you think civ is tedious for moving units, try War in Europe or worse, War in the Pacific. Classics yes, but only that real grognards/staff officers could love.

Salve.

[hoonak]

Re-entering my own thread...

But give us our huge theaters, malls, and sports arenas. And don't forget those fine silks and wine and we will ignore the corruption and be happy.

Alas, I am unable to provide even these small amenities under the present model.

Corruption is very rampant across all times and cultures and is even present today.

Then why is the food supply unaffected?

I started the thread for two reasons:

1. to point out what I believed to be a major flaw in the system (a positive-feedback loop that restricts gameplay), and
2. to set forth my ideas for correcting the flaw

I had hoped to avoid the petty bickering that seems to have started.
I am also doing this for my own greedy reasons:

1. I want to have fun playing the game I spent $50 to purchase, and
2. I do not want to run into the same situation in other games I purchase.

I enjoyed Civ and Civ2. I was hoping that Civ3 would be a further development of the system. I want the game to be a success but I am beginning to have my doubts.

If the success of a game (or part of one) is based on how well the audience likes the game, then the corruption model is a failure. No need to take my word for it, just read the "corruption" threads. My theory is that the best system will be one the reflects reality. A system created to appease the sensibilities of the designers will probably fail.

john

[notyoueither]

Bickering? This is positively civil compared to many threads. We have to be prepared to address those who reasonably disagree with us if we are to get much from these boards. Ignore the odd troller, they may not be representative.

I agree with your selfish reasons. I agree that corruption is over-board.

Salve

[Willem]

For God's sake, am I the only one in this forum who knows that the game comes with an Editor? If you think the corruption is unreasonable, go in there and change the settings until it suits your tastes! You might even try your hand at creating a few new improvements that will help you solve that problem, like I've been doing. If you'd like some ideas on this front, please check out my thread entitled "A Justice System" Frankly I think it's a much more challenging approach than simply adjusting the levels. And certainly alot more fun than complaining about the game, as so many people here at Apolyton seem to enjoy doing.

[notyoueither]

Or just set Optimal Cities to 512. Corruption, what corruption?

Salve

[Libertarian]

For God's sake, am I the only one in this forum who knows that the game comes with an Editor?

And don't forget that the LE comes with designers notes.