There should be NO replies to this post if I'm right.

[Arrian]

Not that this justifies anything, but of course Dem and Comm have always been broken in the Civ series... well, in Civ II it was Fundy instead of Commie, but whatever.

The governments are definitely simplistic, but I think that was the idea. Sid always thought demo was best, and this is clearly reflected in the games.

I wouldn't mind more government choice, and more variety in what each choice offers (strengths/weaknesses), but there will probably always be preferred gov't types for warmongers and peaceful types.

-Arrian

p.s. Shouldn't "militaristic" help out with war weariness?
p.p.s. Shouldn't "religious" civs have issues with switching to communism?

[Velociryx]

I love your "ps" ideas, Arrian! See!? It's stuff like that...little details like those you just pointed out that coulda made all the difference in the world.....wanna job? We're always looking for new ideas over at my site.....

-=Vel=-

[Arrian]

Will work for computer games

Vel,

The Devil's in the details, right? I will confess that I am not a detail oriented guy, and so I think that stuff bothers me less. I'm the type of guy who watched the Civ II wonder videos once, and then shut them off, because they took up precious seconds during which I could have been moving my little pixels toward greatness.

I should swing by and check out your site... although I bet the discussion has been going for a while and I'd have *just a bit* of catching up to do before being able to offer suggestions with any degree of confidence.

-Arrian

[Velociryx]

Hey man! Swing by anytime you like! We'd be glad to have ya!

-=Vel=-

[Mars]

Getting back on topic...

I think war wearness, although a good concept some of the time, needs to be reworked. For instance, although war was greatly discouraged in Vietnam and protests nearly tore this country apart, the war in WW2 was fought with a lot of support from the people.
Now you may ask how could we implement these things. I mean how would the computer decided wether the war weariness should be so high it should send your country into choas or instead your people should get into the war spirit and contribute to production. (if you remember correctly US went into overdrive during WW2 kicking out armors and what not faster than ever before. this coupled with other things led to the US coming from a middle of the line power to one of the superpowers.)

[Mars]

alright i accidently sent it and don't feel like going back to editing it so get over it...

Several possible solutions to this delamia.

1) If very few units our dying and a great number of the enemys units are dying people are satisfied with the war. Vice versa and they go into revolt. The problem with this is that, like in WW2, it is not always the case that people care about the kill to loss ration. So..

2) Make a new variable in the program. Call it a resentment number. Every time a country does something bad to your nation it adds to this number. The worse the action against the more the number added. Likewise everytime they do something good to you subtract it from the resentment number. IF the country does something really bad, or they continuely reject your country your people will love to go to war with them. If the kill to loss ration remains somewhat equal and the resentment number is moderate nothing happens. If the resentment number is high then you get a production boast similar to that of being mobilized, if it is low youir people will revolt. However if you start losing the war by significant amounts your people will start to beg to get out. Also their should have to be a reason to enter the war. Say they took your city, refused to give you a vital resource or asked outragous amounst for it, or they just be plan rude to you and keep moving their units in your territory. That will be sufficent cause to go to war, rally your people against the common foe they resent dearly and fight for all the marbles. Repeated brutal warfare, unless you civ is militristic, will result in a less motivated people which will be reflected by higher nessicary resentment numbers to achive the same results. Also the resentment number will not be directly know by you except that your foreign advisor will tell you if your people love the nation, hate them, or whatever.

This will allow for greater realism without much added complication to the user. All you have to do is go to the foreign advisor and see your peoples attidue towards a nation. If they love them don't go to war, if they don't care much you better think long and hard, otherwise go for it whenever you please.

There can also be a length number. Something that determines when a war even with a terrible foe has gone on to long. This will not be measured in time, but in number of units killed by the foe and the results you have achived. For instance if you've gone no where in tthe war , such as WW1, but have lost enourmous numbers of troops then it would be high, however for every four units loss you've gained an enemy city and have almost won the war then it won't be that bad.

Although this may sound confusing, it would only be more extra work for the programmer not the user. After all you don't have to remember those numbers. All the user has to know is that i should only enter the war with people my people hate, or i should think it over long and hard, as it is in the real world. And that if you're not getting anywhere in a war and losing a tremendous number of troops then you should sue for peace otherwise keep on going for it.

[Cairo_East]

I think the governments need to be tweaked. A governmental system of "imperialism" would be beneficial to those who colonize portions of the map for the resource. A government that benefits this form of cash-cropping at the expense of corruption would be extremely helpful.

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by Cairo_East
I think the governments need to be tweaked. A governmental system of "imperialism" would be beneficial to those who colonize portions of the map for the resource. A government that benefits this form of cash-cropping at the expense of corruption would be extremely helpful.

Good idea.

[aahz_capone]

how did that happen?

I think I totally lost control of this thread. There should be NO replies if you are satisfied about govs, and there are now 50! mostly complaining! Well, at least there are a lot fo good ideas being thrown around

[Brutus66]

I think that if your country is attacked and you have no choice but to fight to survive, war weariness should not be an issue.

As for fundamentalism, I think it should have been included but done differently than Civ II. There's just no denying that it exists and is a significant form of government in the world today. To omit it is to ignore states like Iran.

Lastly, the corruption does need to be fixed. I can't understand why this hasn't been satisfactorily patched yet- they have fixed so many other lesser things! Although personally I would like to see an option to turn off pollution first and foremost, the corruption thing is really driving some folks bonkers depending on which civ they like to play.