SOCIAL ENGINEERING/GOVERNMENT (ver2.1): Hosted by Bell

[Maniac]

Snowfire :

Summary

"Bell: How will you do the summary?"

I think that Bell will have the hardest job of all thread managers.
How will he summarize all my SE factors?...
Will he just make a short explanation like
"Happiness : affects people happiness"
or will he do it like more detailed like
"+4 Hap = one extra aristocratian on every 4 citizens."
I think the latter is the best and even necessary to fully understand my model, but it will probably require too much space.

Technology

"Maniac, take a trip over to my Technology thread and look at the futuristic technologies I suggest. I want futuristic technologies, but near futuristic. Which as far as I'm concerned includes things like AIs, nanorobots, fusion drives... I do not want aliens or futuristic SE choices though."

I don't think that nanorobots will be discovered near 2060 or even 2100. So I want Civ3 to go some further.

Protectionism

"One more issue: Perhaps Protectionism should get an asterisk to indicate that income from foreign trade goes down when you use that as an economy. Or better yet, perhaps this should become part of the Dip stat as well (and make Protectionism -2 Dip)? Low Diplomacy reduces foreign trade?"

I mentioned shortly in my Diplomacy post that the player should have lower trade if he has a bad relationship/diplomacy rate. So this is already covered.

"Another good change to Diplomacy would be that a high diplomacy increases the "happiness cost" for another nation to declare war on you (unless they have spent a lot of money on propaganda)."

This is covered by the Culture rate.

Efficiency

Well in SMAC your efficiency rate represents the efficiency of your bureaucracy.
So I think if you recall corruption to efficiency, people will confuse corruption with the efficiency (of your bureaucracy). And that's not the same as I showed with Democracy.

Wealth, Feudalism, Confederate

OK, I am willing to give Wealth -2 Hap.
First because you are partially right and also because Jon Miller is right that Mercantilism/Wealth is too easy to get +2 Eco.

But that brings two other problems.
1) Too many Happiness penalties
2) Too little Urbanization penalties

My solution :
Tell me if you agree. It is VERY important to keep everything in balance.

If I give Feudalism/Manorialism -1 Urb and -1 Centr, the problem of too less Urbanization penalties is solved. That would also better simulate Feudalism/Manorialism. + your problem of Prussia/Confederacy is solved, cause I think they had a smaller pop because they were feudal, not because they were Power.
However then there would be too little Centralization penalties.
Therefore I should give Confederate -2 Centr instead of -1 Centr and -1 Nat.

So, there are 3 problems solved.

Power/Imperialism

Sorry, I stick with my point.
Power has -2 Centr.
I gave Manorialism/Feudalism -1 Urb.

Federal and Confederate

I am willing to delete the Happiness penalty(there are too much anyway if I give Wealth -2 Hap) if you come up with another negative penalty.
Until then I stick with -2 Hap.

I gave Confederate -2 Centr.
I am willing to delete +2 Corr, IF you give me another benefit, since I think the +1 Dipl makes no sense.

Atheism

I propose we move this question to the Religion thread.

Old questions

1)
Gov good. Glad to here it.

Feudalism
I reduced the Centr penalty, so it's a better option now, I think.
You're right. Two days ago when I was wondering how to make Feudalism worth the while, I came also on the idea that the Support would certainly make up for the Centralization loss, that is, in the early game.
Now I reduced the Centr penalty, I wonder if I shouldn't decrease the Sup bonus to +2.

Mercantilism
Perfect. It is meant to be used at the same time with Wealth (Democracy and Commonwealth are only available in late game).

Banking - Free Market
Yea I know the jump from Banking to FM is big.
Therefore I gave FM the Corruption bonus. That is necessary if you have a large empire at the end of the game (I think FM should be available with the Corporation technology).

Transnational
Keep this in mind before ignoring Transnational.
+5 Eco gives +20 energy per square!
20 = don't forget I'm using the x10 system.
So Transnational +3 Eco gives you a good jump in the right direction.
Plus I don't think the +2 Centr bonus is to be ignored.

Power

Yea, I would too avoid Power, but there seem to be people (like Jon Miller) that think Power as a good SE choice.

Environment

I know Environment is the weak brother of the Value choices.
Therefore I think the Environment factor/stat should have a new use : disease control.
There is a thread about it in Civ3-General/Suggestions, but I am still waiting for some concrete ideas (and I don't have good ideas for a disease model).

Space Expoitation

Well, I don't want to force the civs, but I think this should be a good choice if the player wants to win by terraforming Mars.
Also the +2 Urb should be good to avoid pop pressure, cause your pop limit is higher.

To know more about population pressure, I redirect you to my posts on the Space Exploitation thread.

Knowledge

Keep in mind that the Efficiency factor of SMAC is now split in Corruption and Happiness.
So just a +1 Hap or Corr as in SMAC is too less I think.

Army

Yea I know Army is unbalanced. Harel's idea. I'm thinking about reverting to my original Army idea.

Religion

I would also choose Multitheism or Atheism as soon as possible, but keep in mind Multitheism is a modern SE choice (it's available late in the game) and Atheism is a near-future choice.

Research

I think I'll use practical in times of war.
Besides if the Military Industry SE factor/stat is eliminated, how would you feel about giving
Practical : +2 Sup, -1 Res, 75% Military Science ?

3) I don't want Virtual either. Democracy is good enough.

THANKS

You're the only one giving real good advise about my SE model.

New Questions

1) Should Feudalism be :
+4 Sup, +2 Tax, -2 Centr
+4 Sup, +2 Tax, -1 Centr, -1 Urb
+2 Sup, +2 Tax, -1 Centr, -1 Urb

2) Should Wealth be :
+1 Eco, +1 Centr, -2 Urb
+1 Eco, +1 Centr, -2 Hap

3) Should Federal be :
+2 Nat, +2 Cult, -2 Hap
+2 Corr, +2 Nat, -2 Hap
+2 Corr, +2 Nat, -fill in yourself

4) Should Confederate be :
+2 Corr, +2 Hap, - 1Nat, -1 Cult
+2 Corr, +2 Hap, -2 Centr
+2 Hap, +fill in yourself, -2 Centr
+2 Hap, +fill in yourself, -1 Centr, -fill in yourself

5) Should I change Army?
I don't really like the Army category right now.
Cause the Morale bonuses and penalties can affect the senate.
Cheaters could develop tactics like
"Hmm, I have -2 Mor right now. Means 50% Senate interference. Oh, I'll change Army to professional(= +2 Mor) for a while to sneakattack that civ."
I like the idea of Army Readiness as in CTP.
That system affected the Morale(but it doesn't affect the Senate), the Support and the maximum number of hit points a unit can have.
For example when you are at 'off guard' status, you can maximum have 80% of your hit points.
Only at 'at war' status you can have your full potential of HP.

To everyone :

I'll change Support.
As in SMAC every Support rate higher than -2 gives newly found cities for free 10 labor or resources.

Don't mind the following, just reminders what I still have to do.(it's a lot of work keeping my SE factor and model posts updated)

EconomyCulture, ReligionAtheism, Technology
Power, Manorialism
Confederate, Federal, Wealth, Feudalism, HP
Support, Corruption
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by M@ni@c (edited August 04, 1999).]</font>

[Maniac]

How was I supposed to know what IRS means if I live in Europe???

I'm sorry, but I don't get why beaucracy and meritocracy are a method.
Beaucracy is the senior and meritocracy the most able. IMO these are clearly who's.

"The Roman aristocracy were the Who and they did have that value caused by being war like from early on, the masses of course did not have that value (perhaps every who would have its value and strength, you can only revolution to put a who in power if it has the strength)"

So now you're saying the who chooses the Value.
With that I completely agree. My suggestion is that only under a Democracy(who = people) you don't choose your Value, but under every other gov you do.

"there could be free market protectionalism, the US did it a few times (we call it isolationalist periods)"

In the Economy thread they are talking about certain levels of foreign trade going from embargo to open market.
I think protectionist is a bit leaning to the embargo side of the scale.

Again (I already said it to Harel)with Protectionism I mean the French Colbert protectionism under Lious XIV, not some modern one.

"you have Corr -4 being complete corruption (maybe you revised it and I could not find it?)"

I revised after reading your post.
BTW, perhaps '-4 Corr = no trade in every city except the capital' forces the City State to choose Corruption bonus SE choices.
So maybe I'll rerevise the post.

'example of problem +1 economy far better than + 1 to any other stat'

Do you mean that you'd rather have +1 Eco than eg +1 Env?
That was also in SMAC.
I'd rather have +1 Eco in SMAC than +1 Sup.
Don't you?
It's unavoidable that that happens. Everyone has his/her preferences.

"Power is to fight wars, Imperialism is to expand (they are different)"

Then why are/were there so many Imperialist states fighting wars? I think it's the same.

dictatorship is
who : one person
method : direct

[raingoon]

M@ni@c, Bell, Jon Miller, Snowfire, and others reading this thread... Without being disruptive of your discussion here, I invite to join the religion thread "next door", where a new religion model is quickly taking shape.

You can read the original proposal there. You've all been putting a lot of thought into an over-all SE model. This new idea is just that. It envisions religion as something separate from the SE model, and belongs on the "religion" thread only. Your comments there are welcome, and needed.

raingoon

p.s., m@ni@c I have responded to your post there of 8/4.

[raingoon]

M@ni@c, Bell, Jon Miller, Snowfire, and others reading this thread... Without being disruptive of your discussion here, I invite to join the religion thread "next door", where a new religion model is quickly taking shape.

You can read the original proposal there. You've all been putting a lot of thought into an over-all SE model. This new idea is just that. It envisions religion as something separate from the SE model, and belongs on the "religion" thread only. Your comments there are welcome, and needed.

raingoon

p.s., m@ni@c I have responded to your post there of 8/4.

[SnowFire]

I think the latter is the best and even necessary to fully understand my model, but it will probably require too much space.

I'm sure BR has an attention span. He can read longer posts explaining everything.

I don't think that nanorobots will be discovered near 2060 or even 2100. So I want Civ3 to go some further.

Check out http://www.foresight.org/ , http://nano.xerox.com/nano/ , or http://www.zyvex.com/ .

Efficiency

Well in SMAC your efficiency rate represents the efficiency of your bureaucracy.
So I think if you recall corruption to efficiency, people will confuse corruption with the efficiency (of your bureaucracy). And that's not the same as I showed with Democracy.

But corruption and efficiency are the same thing. I looked back in the old threads, and still couldn't find the difference (If there is one). They both reduce the amount of trade lost. I also am still missing your allusion to Democracy. Help me out here.

You say about Knowledge that Efficiency is separated into Happiness and Corruption now, but why not rename Corruption simply the old Efficiency?

Atheism

I propose we move this question to the Religion thread.

We should still have a "How religion fits into SE" thing here, though.

Transnational
Keep this in mind before ignoring Transnational.
+5 Eco gives +20 energy per square!
20 = don't forget I'm using the x10 system.
So Transnational +3 Eco gives you a good jump in the right direction.
Plus I don't think the +2 Centr bonus is to be ignored.

Good point, I had forgotten about the dramatic jump from 2 to 5. I figure I'll aim for my economy to either be at 0 or below, 2, or 5 to maximize my return.

Environment

I know Environment is the weak brother of the Value choices.
Therefore I think the Environment factor/stat should have a new use : disease control.
There is a thread about it in Civ3-General/Suggestions, but I am still waiting for some concrete ideas (and I don't have good ideas for a disease model).

Sounds good to me. Or perhaps your spies "Posion Water Supply" option gets more powerful? Or you have some other new attack with your spies when you switch to Environment values? It'll take 3 turns with the new value before you can use it of course, to insure switching for just one instance isn't so effective…

Knowledge

Keep in mind that the Efficiency factor of SMAC is now split in Corruption and Happiness.
So just a +1 Hap or Corr as in SMAC is too less I think.

Don't forget that me, like many other players, play very techno-centric games: Get the most technology the fastest. That +2 Research is very powerful. Add that to a happiness bonus… plus, the happiness bonus doesn't really fit. Unfortunately many people are technophobic, and plus, the "callous elitism" of the University could just as easily create a happiness penalty (not that it has to be that way: this is often merely grasping at possible penalties). To be honest, a straight +2 Research -2 Tax would be perfectly balanced right there, thought the inclusion of a slight efficiency bonus wouldn't hurt.

Research

I think I'll use practical in times of war.
Besides if the Military Industry SE factor/stat is eliminated, how would you feel about giving
Practical : +2 Sup, -1 Res, 75% Military Science ?

Sounds okay to me.

And thank you by the way, you're the one who came up with this thing… some very interesting ideas in it you have.

New Questions

1) Should Feudalism be :
+4 Sup, +2 Tax, -2 Centr
+4 Sup, +2 Tax, -1 Centr, -1 Urb
+2 Sup, +2 Tax, -1 Centr, -1 Urb

How about either +3 Sup, +2 Tax, -1 Urb, -1 Centr, or +4 Sup, +2 Tax, +1 Pol, -2 Cent, -1 Urb. I suppose BR can deal with two options.

3) Should Federal be :
+2 Nat, +2 Cult, -2 Hap
+2 Corr, +2 Nat, -2 Hap
+2 Corr, +2 Nat, -fill in yourself

I'm really not sure anymore… Perhaps +2 Corr, +2 Nat, +1 Cult, -2 Hap would be balanced?

4) Should Confederate be :
+2 Corr, +2 Hap, - 1Nat, -1 Cult
+2 Corr, +2 Hap, -2 Centr
+2 Hap, +fill in yourself, -2 Centr
+2 Hap, +fill in yourself, -1 Centr, -fill in yourself

See… this is a really difficult one. You need to have a reason for people to choose this… America under the Articles of Confederation, 1780-1789 was a mess. Different state currencies, trade wars between states, a Congress with no power, almost no national taxes at all, debt problems, rebellions from unhappiness… it just didn't work. The Balkans in America, with each kingdom becoming a state.

Perhaps simplest is best. +2 Hap, +1 Dip, -1 Centr.

5) Should I change Army?
I agree, readiness is plenty to simulate for the army. I don't like the army category much either.
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by SnowFire (edited August 05, 1999).]</font>

[Zorloc]

Just a quick comment on changing your SE ratings. It has been put forward that it should take 3 turns for the change to be made. The delay is nice but it does not account for the negative consequences of change. My suggestion is to phase in the new SE conditions:

Turn 0: Old SE benefits/penalties
Turn 1: Old SE benefits/penalties + New SE penalties
Turn 2: New SE penalties
Turn 3: New SE benefits and penalties.

For example: Changing from Wealth (+2 ind, +2 tax, -1 nat, -1 env) to Knowledge (+2 sci, +2 env, -1 nat, -1 tax).

Turn 0: +2 ind, +2 tax, -1 nat, -1 env
Turn 1: +2 ind, +1 tax, -2 nat, -1 env
Turn 2: -1 nat, -1 tax
Turn 3: +2 sci, +2 env, -1 nat, -1 tax

This will make changing your SE a bad thing in the short term, and SE will be a long term factor as it should be.

jbw

[Zorloc]

Woops double post.
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Zorloc (edited August 05, 1999).]</font>

[Maniac]

Snowfire :

Efficiency

The allusion is :
Real life democracy has less corruption but a lower bureaucratic efficiency.

How religion fits into SE

This is a post I made in the Religion Thread.

Raingoon, I have also read the Religion thread and I have a good and simple way to spread religion.
Here two extracts from my Culture post.

"2)If a neighbour civ has a lower culture rate, his cities become slowly and automatically converted to your culture. Cities converted to your culture get your city stile. If two civs already have the same city stile, I don't know yet what should represent the conversion. If the capital is converted you get a higher Diplomacy rate. If that civ attacks you, the citizens of the converted city become unhappier = lower happiness rate."

So, I think my Culture SE factor can also be used to simulate the spread of religions. A high Culture rate would mean you have a strong religion and as a consequence the closest cities of other civs become converted.

"5) Your culture rate determines how long it takes for conquered cities to assimilate to your culture and cause less happiness.
In SMAC it was 50 turns. For every +Culture you have more than the city of the previous owner, the city needs 10 less turns to assimilate.
If you have a lower Culture rate, the city doesn't adapt. Means more unhappiness and increases the likelyness of revolting and forming a new civ."

So, if you have a high Culture (=strong religion), the citizens of the conquered city assimilate faster.
But if you have a low Culture, they never assimilate (= they keep their own religion).

BTW, just rename my Religion names to the way the civ interacts with a religion, and religion can still be SE.

Animism stays the same.
Loose Monotheism -> Evangelism
Strict Polytheism -> Worshiping/State Religion
Strict Monotheism -> Fundamentalism
Multitheism -> Religious Freedom
Atheism -> Prosecution

I forgot to mention the penalty of Strict Polytheism/Worshiping/State Religion. It's -2 Culture.

Environment and Knowledge

I don't think Environment based civs are willing to poison water. Perhaps they should have an increased defense against poisoning?

OK, Knowledge gets +1 Efficiency.
Then there would be too little Happiness bonuses.
Therefore I should give Environment +2 Hap instead of +2 Corr.

Technology

Although I would like things like nanorobots, fusion drives I don't think they will add it to the tech tree, cause it's only available somewhere in mid-SMAC game. So unless somebody can convince them to neglect the Sweep of Time Trilogy, we won't have nanorobots; hell we won't even have normal robots.

Changes

Wealth : +1 Eco, +1 Centr, -2 Hap
Feudalism : +3 Sup, +2 Tax, -1 Urb, -1 Centr
Federal : +2 Corr, +2 Nat, -2 Hap
Environment : +2 Env, +2 Hap, -1 Centr, -1 Urb
Knowledge : +2 Res, +1 Corr, -2 Tax
Practical : +2 Sup, -1 Res, 75% military

Army : deleted, CTP army readiness system.
New problem : too less Police improving things(Cyborg had +2 Pol).
Give Feudalism/Manorialism +1 Pol or create new SE choice eg Fascism, Imperialism?
If I give it to Feudalism, wouldn't 3 bonuses be too much?

Confederate : +2 Hap, +?, -?Centr
I'm sorry, but I see no reason why it should get +1 Dipl.

Loose Monotheism/Evangelism has -2 Diplomacy, but I think that is a bad penalty.
What should it get?

[Jon Miller]

Hi All

Wow, a lot of posts to respond to

In smac the +1 econ was good but was best only moving from 1 to 2

also I only use Power in Smac when my units would otherise be to weak against mind worms (during a part of my expansionist phase), usually I use knowledge, occassionally wealth

with no mindworms/psi attack, moral and therefore power would not be as good

the roman aristocracy did not choose power values, instead they were forced to war in the Roman infancy and took on power values

Confederacy should definitely be bad corruption and bad effeiciency

M@ni@c, I like how your religious se choices went (It is what I support), however, you need to put on the modifiers to them again, the old modifiers won't work since the arguments have changed

Japan used Mercantilism to get to the place it is in the world economy, its still useful now and in some ways better than freemarket and transnational (otherwise they would not have become on of the worlds economic powerhouses)

On Chiron I always assumed they were using true democracy because it is a scifi game and there is no reason for them not to, I always thought that what they called democracy there really was democracy, not a republic

They deffinitely had the technology for it

virtual democracy is just a way to defferentiate a true democracy (that is allowed by the internet) from our present false named one

as I said, we basically have the technology for it now, there are already companies that are having voting (serious, not do you plan to buy smacx) on the internet and virtual democracy just is that combined with people willing to try true democracy

of course thye still have not triumphed over the hackers

I think that nano could come about in the next hundred years, we might hit a roadblock in science, we might not, but at our current rate nano is deffinitely a possibility

It is very important to keep everything ballanced (I agree with this statement), smac made pluses in econ hard to come by, you should too

sorry M@ni@c, I did not realise back when I first mentioned IRS that you lived in Europe, you must have something similar (that creates similar frustration)

Here I will give a short description of a beaucracy

imagine a government made up of different departments, the (who) can enter these departments at the lowest level, then, as those above them die, get fired, or get promoted, the ones at the lower levels with the most seniority move into the higher possition vacated (get promoted)

each department works like this to the very top of the department, each of the departments then work in the way that they choose is best for the country with the most senior of the department heads (the one longest at his post) lays the commanding policy

the departments could be education (surprisingly lacking from your se choices considering that it is the MOST important thing in a government), foreign affairs, internal developement, etc.

(this is not how all would be, rather it is just an example of a beaucracy)

education is like the only way besides propaganda that a nation can effect its peoples (the whos) values

a single city could easily have a true democracy, it is only when a nation gets more spread out that it becomes impossible to have true democracy (however, with the internet, I can be anywhere I want, including in a big forum where everybody has one vote (the moderators could be voted on, they would not have votes, rather they would make sure things ran smoothly) and every person was known by there DNA (so that everybody who voted would have to be citizens and could only vote once), the special voting computers(which would be available to everyone) would have DNA readers so that the person who is sitting at it must be the person they say they are at the voting forums (this could also all be done withh retinal scans), the moderators would make a forum for a specific subject once a certain percentage of those at the voting forums petitioned it, that forum would remain open for N# days to hammer out a perposal and then, after the N# days, those at that forum could could vote to set it before the big form (a quorum would have to be in the proposal forum), over 50% would pass and then the proposal would be open to debate and voting for another N# days whereupon with over 50% vote (and above a certain minimum of votes) it would become law, for proposals that change the constitution it would have to be a 66% or 75% vote (not sure)

I have probably got to specific but that is a vritual (and true) democracy and if we so choosed we could do it now (It would take a year or two to setup though)

Imperialist countries often fight wars because they are expanansionistic, power fights war because they are militaristic

an imperialistic country does not have to have an army, it is just expanding

the religion ideas at the religion thread are interesting, I just have so much time to post in a day and unfortuately that means I have many ideas that die forgotten

most eveybody is some form of tech expand and population expand, there really is no other way to win (some have complained about this) and the population expand is often used to just get more tech later

here is a proposal: add many more turns into the game (but not time) and slow down tech learning, as it is I often (at some points in the game) outdate my troops before I ever use them, this needs to change

In order to keep the games from getting to long I think we need the previous ideas of gaining points per turn (and totalling them at the end) and choosing starting and ending times, so that you can play just a certain tech time if you wish

I still think that policies come mostly from your policies as a nation and secondly from propaganda and education

by the way I think the pacifist value choice would make it harder to support your armies and they would have less moral, but they would have less corruption too and be happier

enough for now

Jon Miller

[Maniac]

Jon Miller :

In the beginning of the game, +1 Eco was good.
In the end of the game, +1 Eco meant nothing cause it affected only the base square.
I fixed that by giving +1 Eco a fix number.

Yea, I know. Without Mindworms Morale and Environment won't be assumed very important.
It would be great if Firaxis found a duplicate of MW, but I don't think that is possible.

To make Morale a bit more useful, I also made it affect your Senate. So one could comprehend Morale also as how warlike a civ is.

So I think Power could be a good choice in certain circumstances.eg Republic/Banking/Power, so then I don't have interference of the Senate.
This is BTW how I see Rome. Perhaps no Banking, but Currency.

After the Romans conquered Italy, there was no need to further expand. I don't think they were forced to attack Sicily, isn't it?

Yea, I know I'll have to adapt some Religion effects.

With Protectionism and Mercantilism I mean the Renaissance French, English and Dutch economies, not the modern(Japanese) explanation of it.

Let's set this straight.

Ancient : Barter, Currency, Banking
Medieval : Feudalism
Renaissance : Protectionism, Mercantilism
Industrial Revolution/Modern : Communism, Free Market
Near Future : Transnational

Perhaps I should begin with making a list of what SE choices require which technology.

I believe you Virtual/True Democracy is possible.

[Maniac]

Wow, half of my post is disappeared! Let's try again.

Strange nano so late in SMAC tech tree.

Thanks beaucracy explanation. What effects would you give it?

How simulate Education? SE category, SE factor, Value points to change Value?

BTW, education is a modern concept. Didn't exist earlier. So I stick with my point that only in a modern democracy the people determine your Value.

I know I have to adapt religion. Suggestions?
Cause now +2 Research for prosecution/atheism totally sucks. Perhaps +2 Police to simulate increased control and prosecution of certain believers?

Quickly outdated troops are a curse. Therefore there should be a building, called Military Academy. Every unit spending an entire turn in a city with that building is updated to the most modern version.
To avoid it being built in every city( and to simulate the high cost of upgrading) it should have a big maintainance cost. Best is increasing cost like Barracks.
+2 in ancient times
+4 from Gunpowder
+6 in modern times

[Jon Miller]

Hi All

hey M@ni@c, what did you think of my Pacifist value choice?

+ research, should be in religious freedom

my point is that + econ is equivilant to the other pluses in social engineering and a 2 econ is set up so that you have to have a number of negatives (more then just a linear relationship) to get it

I don't know any equivilant of MWs in real life, don't think they are possible, we could make pollution more important

like three steps of pollution so that if you have bad pollution it is going everywhere

make pollution have a big affect on happiness, on industry

what would Japan's economy be then?

Roman aristocracy took on that value (power) when fighting in Italy, then they wanted to continue fighting

I'm not sure with Education, maybe just make it that every learning building adds to the allotment of value points per turn?

any other ideas on how to handle it

by the way, some have understood the value of education, Plato (very famous, I'll assume you know of him) beleived it strict education, even miseducation to guide its people, others have agreed

Hitler used education to create his values as did the communists, some beleive in conspiracies some don't, about whether the US government guides its citizens values by education or not

maybe education could be another modifier to figure in like support or research

this limits government, but government is already limited (like feudal not making since now (I think someone could make a valid feudal government now)

Prosecution would have similar bonuses to state religion (and similar negatives) but they would be more pronouced

state religion would have bonuses in having a strong state but would have negatives in things like happiness and research (I'll have specifics later)

Jon Miller

[Maniac]

Jon Miller :

Have I missed a post of you where you gave effecs for Pacifism.

Japan = Democracy/Free Market/Wealth

In ancient times education was rare.
State organized education is a thing that appeared in the last century.

Religion - beginning a list of SE Religion effects

Animism : -2 Research(should stay the same)

Evangelism : increased culture(take a look at the Religion thread), lower diplomacy(other civs don't like it if you convert their citizen)

State Religion : increased urbanization(people gather around holy cities)

Religious Freedom : +Research, +Happiness, -Nationalism

Prosecution : +Police, -Happiness

[Jon Miller]

Here is Pacifism:


by the way I think the pacifist value choice would make it harder to support your armies and they would have less moral, but they would have less corruption too and be happier

Jon Miller

[Harel]

My post

Hey, Maniac. I been thinking about your model: it a good one, no doubt, but I think the options still need some tweaking.
So, I will now write how I think the list should be: ofcourse, it's your model and I probaly got everything un-balanced.
Ofcourse, what I post here are my ideas and opinions, not a summary of everything yet suggested ( hey, thats bell job! ).

First off, as you can see, I been away from quite some time: and since the post are SSSOOO long ( and mine would probaly take the ticket ), I am probaly returning on several things. My pardon in advance. By this post, and your response to it, I might understand what the hell is going on here . So, if we could all just use this post as some sort of harbor, a main reference ( that section is good, that one sucked, change this, etc... ), i would much appreicte.

Beside, I think that the only way Bell can post your SE model is that if we will create a finished model. In that case, Bell can say ( some people suggest a new sort of SE manual, and here it is... ).

BTW, SnowFire, the research section was originaly my idea .
And, also, I plan to defend the two things you wanted to delete: V.Democracy and Utopia. Now, I hated CtP but I think those two make a lot of sense. Just read on.

About how many options you should have: the evoultion of Se ( -> ) should be used much more freely. Having 8-10 types of goveremetns is a big no-no: this way, we might just keep old civ II option, were you picked from a variaty of goverements option. No, if we have a SE screen with multiple options, we need a small amount of options. The difference between a republic and democracy can be shown by other SE options: no need to have 2 types of such goveremtns. We need to shorten the list, greatly.
I think that SMAC had it right: we should only have 4 SE options per section. True, SMAC model was limited: but if we will have 7 sections ( not 4, like SMAC ), and most of the options would evolve over time, i think we have enough options to go around.
Besides, having too many options hamper strategy. Try to compare total annihilation to StarCraft. In TA, it didn't really matter if you pick a missle Kbot or a missle vechile, but in SC every unit had a critical role. So, every SE should offer a unique view and expreince. This is why i gave every SE option a special bonus.

Small civ:

I alborate what bonus I wish to give smaller civ on the value section. However, I would scrap city state. Time and time again, I explain that forcing certain SE on a civ ( if they want to compete, they have to select A+B, etc. ). The city state only fit, by it's name, smaller civ. Therefor, it's not fitting. All SE options should be universal.

Military industry:

The Mil SE modifator HAS to be added. Militarstic countries usally have poor indsutry but still make huge fleets, because they have a good military industry. The fact is could be used to cheat is not a consideration: what about the "morale" cheat? Switch to good army and power, get a +4 morale for X turns, win all the wars and then proceed to better option. So what now? Also scrap morale?
It's silly to think that you can define the military-pro apporch with only support and morale. Well, yeah they got a good support ratio so that they can support lots of units. They still need to BUILD them. China has a poor industry but still huge armies. Why? Because they got good militarial indstry infrastructre.
But, maybe it's better that mil would give +X% to indudstry, other then reduce cost. That would reduce the ability to cheat the system by switching SE. However, the CENTER modifactor won't give any bonus to military production.
For example, if you have +2 mil / -2 center, and your city produce 10 shields, you would produce 12 shields when you build military units and 8 shields when you build building.

About the enviroment modifactor:

Since it's not important now, I suggest that you transfer the food bonus from center to enviroment.

Changing SE:

I suggest the time it takes to switch SE relies on how many cities you got: we allready agreed that in big empires changes take more time.
The basic time is the square root of then number of cities, rounded up. Therefor, if you have 16 cities the change would take 4 turns.
In this time, you would get no bonus, but a fixed minus, depand on what SE you changes:
Market: -2 Eco, Army: -2 Mil, Strcutre: -2 Urb, Value: -2 center, Research: -2 Res, Religoun: -2 Hap. Changing govermenets would cause you, for the X turns, to be on Anarchy.


<u>The model:</u>


All SE sections have only 4 options ( which evolve ), and every item gives a special bonus. Every SE options have 3 levels: primitive, old to modern, and futuristic. I also alborate why I choosed those SE and while I think we should have the futuristic options ( like V.democracy and Utopia ). I think you will find that I thought a lot on this, and indeed every futuristic option is a logical improvment.

Goverments:

No Fundemnatilist govermenets: select a dictatorship and a strong religoun.

Control goverments:

Maniac, you did a mistake. Not monarchy should give the +0/-0 bonus. That bonus is only for the starting goverement, the basical one. Control goverments relay on creating the basic infra-strcutre for control. Those govermenets usally have no special direction or goals.
Despotism is clear enough. Police state is a control goverements with modern espionge system to make sure the people act like they should. Something like 1984.

Anarchy: -3 Hap, -3 Tax, -3 Nat
->Despotism: No pos, no neg.
-->Police state: +1 Pol

Free-will goverements:
Double votes in UN concuil

Gov's that give the power in the hand of the people, increasing happiness but makes war diffuclt. Republic better reflect old Athenas and Rome: only a limited fraction of the public hold "citizenship", and every such member is a part of the senate which grant the elected president ( or several tribons ) almost dictatorial power. Modern democracy ( first one, the new republic of France ) is one which gives every citizen citizenship and right to vote, but they are not part of the senate: those are elected officals that are chosen but the citizen. The senate hold most power, unlike republic.
Virtual democracy is the direct connection of this process. SnowFire, it's not some futuristic thing, it can even be created today. I don't mean it like in CtP, where everyone live in virtual worlds. No, in V.D, every citizen is again part of the senate. All the people vote toghter on the suggest laws. You have no senate and no president. Every citizen may offer to vote on a law, which needs to pass some prelimintary votes before it's presented to the entire nation. And thanks Jon Miller for supprtong the V.Democracy.

Republic: +2 Hap, -2 Sup
->Democracy: +2 Hap, +2 Cult, -2 Sup, -2 morale
-->V.Democracy: +3 Hap, +2 Cult, +2 Res, -2 Sup, -2 morale, -2 Nat

Monarcial govermenets:
+25% bonus to prodction when building wonders

Goverements which spawn an entire line of leaders from a certain blood line. Monarcy is clear enough, and empireship is achived by diverting power from the upper class ( lords, dukes, and such ) into the hands of the ruler, giving him even more absloute power. Dynasty is a far-future option which is based on genetic engineering and cloning to create a line of perfect kings.

Monarcy: +2 Tax, -2 Urb
->Empireship: +2 Tax, +2 center, -2 Urb, -2 eco
-->Dynasty: +3 Tax, +2 center, +2 mil, -2 urb, -2 eco, -2 cult

Absloute power goverements:
Twice hard for enemy bribe your own cities

Simple enough, those tyrant goveremnets are the process of brute control over the public. It is not police state from SMAC, or even despotism, those are the tyrant control goverements of Castro, Lenin, etc.
Brain-washed goverements IS the direct link to the tyrant goverement: technology used to keep the people in order.

Dictatorship: +2 Pol, -2 dipl
->Totalarism: +2 Pol, +2 Nat, -2 Dipl, -2 corr
-->Brain-washed: +3 Pol, +2 Nat, +2 Hap, -2 Dipl, -2 corr, -2 Res

Market:

basic:

From simple barter economy, to currency, to marcantlism ( simple trade ).

Barter: -2 Tax
->Currency: no pos, no neg
-->Marcantlism: +1 eco

Controled:
City building take one less gold to support

A controlled market is under direct survlience of the goverments. All, or most comapnies belong to the govermenets, and only very few people may freely buy and trade goods and stocks.
The primtive feudalism does it by creating classes. Protectionism is a direct link to it, when the govermenet over-see all trade.
Planned market is a critical thing: high-power computers are used to optimize industry. All goverment control is done automaticly.

Feudalism: +2 center, -2 hap
->Protectionism: +2 center, +2 Urb, -2 eco, -2 hap
-->Planned: +3 center, +2 Urb, +2 Sup, -2 eco, -2 cult, -2 Hap

Social:
One less drone in every city

Social market is when the goverment shape the market is better benefict the lower level of the public. While socialism and communism need to explanation, i would explain what I mean by Utopia. A Utopia market is very possible: just place old USSR in USA furtile and rich lands, and walla. While we never had pure communism ( China is not even close, and the soviets DID gives grants to important jobs, like farmers, etc ), a Utopia is communism with enough technology to be a TRUE communism. A utopia system is a no-money system, a lot like StarTrek. Every one gets the same wages, enough food to live, etc. It could be done, and SHOULD NOT be scrapped, like SnowFire suggested.
And Maniac, I agree the socialism is also a value, but a free-market is left without goverment control: in a social market I mean that the goverement uses big subsidies and large funding, to improve the the living conditions of the lower classes.

Socialism: +2 Hap, -2 eco
->Communism: +2 Hap, +2 corr, -2 eco, -2 Tax
-->Utopia: +3 Hap, +2 corr, +2 env, -2 eco, -2 tax, -2 pol

Free:
Free caravan for in every city the size of 10 or more

A free market is created when the goverment lives it in the hands of the public.
Banking markets were the first to do this: all control of the markets was in the hands of the banks, which worked equally well with every sector and class. While the power was centered, it was free to be exploited by every person ( with enough cash ). Free market is obivous, and transnational is when communction and transportion allow multi-nation unions.
BTW, since the eco bonus is much lower then it was in SMAC, no need to balance it out with such a huge -support ratio,

Banking: +2 eco, -2 center
->Free Market: +2 eco, +2 dipl, -2 center, -2 sup
-->Trasnational: +3 eco, +2 dipl, +2 cult, -2 center, -2 sup, -2 Nat

Army:

I been hearing troubling thoughts. CtP readiness? CtP?! Have we lost our minds? Can readiness truly descripe the balance in the quality, quanity and diversity of armies along history? While the description of the army options along history change a great deal, they all stay true to the need.
Read my updates army options. I think you would agree it's best the readiness.

Basic: No pos, no neg.

Small:
Twice more effective in reducing unrest.

Small armies are by no mean good armies. No, small armies are used by countries that have no need for a large standing army. The small armies are usally even at a every poor level. However, countries like denemark, Singapore, and other commerical countries tend to select this option. However, a small army drains much less for the economy.

Militia: +1 Hap, +1 Eco, -1 morale
->Volunteer: +2 Hap, +1 Eco, -1 morale, -1 sup
-->Reserve: +3 Hap, +1 Eco, -1 morale, -1 sup, -1 mil

Big:
Get a free infantry in every city larger then 10

Big armies are created by mass allocation from the entire public. In old days forced drafts requires every able person to serve. As culture develop, and people are less prone to agree to forced drafting, it relies more and more on public acceptence. In first, it evolves to drafts ( in which you gain proper treatment, training and sallary ), and finished by creating a civic duty order in which every person serve.
BTW, Maniac, I guess you got mixed up because of the name "the people army". I didn't mean China modern army. The people army is a name to a brute, barbatic system in which entire villages and cities were raiding for able men,

The people army: +3 Mil, +3 Sup, -3 Morale, -3 Hap
->Drafts: +3 Mil, +2 Sup, -2 morale, -2 Hap
-->Civic duty: +2 Mil, +2 Sup, -2 morale

Expert:
All unit start as veteran

This army option is dedictated to the creation of a qualified army. The size varies on how much you are willing to spend, ofcourse. It may be as small or as big as you wish. However, it's quallity remain the same.
The cyborg option is not that "hi-tech". It could be achived in the near-future. I don't mean full cyborgs: maybe some neural connections, a hidden bland/pistel and some armor plates. Full, cybernatic persons are really too much in the future.

Mercenery: +2 morale, -2 Sup
->Trained: +3 morale, -2 sup, -1 mil
-->Cyborg: +4 morale, -2 sup, -2 mil

Structre:

First off, I would like to point out the lack of a "no pos, no neg". Therefor, I suggest that we scrap tribal, and put "city state" as "no pos, no neg". Each city stands by it's own.

City state: no pos, no neg.
Federal: +2 Tax, -2 Hap
Confederate: +2 Hap, -2 Tax
Commonwealth: +2 eco, -2 pol

Religoun:

Once again, I say that fundemnatislm, facism, and the like can be descriped by selecting the proper SE options. However, since I have a hard time visioning a nation which ENFORCE atheism, religoun freedom should be atheism.

Polytheism: no pos, no neg.
Multi-ethism ( loose monotheism ): +2 Hap, -2 Dipl
Fundementalism ( strict monotheism ): +2 Pol, +2 Nat, +2 Morale, -3 Dipl, -3 Hap
Atheism ( religoun freedom ): +2 Res, -2 Urb

Values:

First off, I scrapped enviromentalism. You can simple used naturalistic on research.
Space explotion is just silly.
However, since you can pick philosphical in research ( res bonus ), you have no need to knowladge value. Therefor, I added a new value: Happiness. The common good of all citizens.
In here, I describe my suggestion to increase the bonus to minor civ. Every value contains 3 levels of bonus: for tiny nations, small nations and normal.
Civ size in relevence to map size:

Small map size: tiny: 1 city, small: 2 city, normal: 3 and mup.
Normal map size: tiny:1 city, small: 2-3 cities, normal: 4 and up.
Large map size: tiny: 1-2 cities, small: 3-4 cities, normal: 5 and up.
Huge map size: tiny: 1-2 cities, small: 3-5 cities, normal: 6 and up.

Survival: no pos, no neg.
Wealth: +1 gold per city.
Tiny: +3 eco, +3 Tax, -1 env, -1 center
Small: +3 eco, +2 Tax, -2 env, -1 center
Normal: +2 Eco +2 Tax, -2 env, -2 center
Power: needs old half the exp. points to upgrade level.
Tiny: +3 mil, +3 morale, -1 Cult, -1 Hap
Small: +3 mil +2 morale, -2 cult, -1 Hap
Normal: +2 mil, +2 morale, -2 cult, -2 Hap
Happiness: one extra happy citizen per city.
Tiny: +3 Urb, +3 Hap, -1 morale, -1 Tax
Small: +3 Urb, +2 Hap, -2 morale, -1 Tax
Normal: +2 Urb, +2 Hap, -2 Morale, -2 Tax

Do you all agree with those bonus? Are they too big or too small?

Research:

Not many changes here, but any suggestions would be taken heartfully.

Wise-man: no pos, no neg.
Naturisitc: +2 Env, -2 Urb: +25% for biology techs.
Philoshpical: +2 Res, -2 morale: +25% for mathemhatical and social techs.
Pratical: +2 Sup, -2 Res: +25% for combat-oriented techs.
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Harel (edited August 06, 1999).]</font>