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

[Jon Miller]

Hi all

wouldn't let me post this the first timelong and interesting post Harel, what do you think of my idea that value should be determined by what you do, also what do you think about my pacifism value

I completely agree with you that all SE choices should be universal, but what I mean by that is that all should be usable at any time of the game not that some should be more usuable for small civs

your plan already has some SE choices for industrial civs, some for militaristic civs, and some for population civs, ect.

why not some specifically for small civs (I think some choices should also be specifically for agro civs and some for industrial civs because in history that has been a big deviding factor, it caused the values and SE choices in the north and south to split so much so that there was a civil war, this was an example)

military industry might be OK

I think we need better descriptions of your governments

nice way of looking at governmments (it may have one thing over M@ni@cs and my systems, that would be that it is simple), I think it leaves a lot out though, please look at my postings regarding M@ni@cs ideas (about the who and the method)

Um, while I think some form of monarchial government good work now (and not just Englands current weak one) it is not really around now so I don't see where you see Dynasty coming in (I think peoples values will stop it from coming to be in the near future)

Read Plato's republic and Mores Utopia (both give explanations of communism which Harel calls Utopia with Socialism and Communism and steps to it

I admit there is a difference in Armies but can that be done best and simplest just by policies? right now that is what I think

also please show like I showed virtual democracy that cyborgs are possible with current technology

If you look at the tech, the human brain and it fact all brains are still a closed book to scientists, any "neural connections" are sci-fi at this time

why don't you use M@ni@cs religous se settings?

you have a hard time envisioning a nation enforcing atheism? look at USSR, Cuba, East Germeny, and China, all are/were very unfrendly to religions

cut atheism out or look at what myself and Snowfire have said about it

So one value (knowledge) gets split into four more choices

and what is universal about wisemen?

and isn't power done the same thing to by your army choices?

know out research and army and add in knowledge values

I also don't think you should contrain yourself to a set of four choices (interesting ideas though)


Jon Miller

there, that better go

[Maniac]

What the ****, I haven't posted here for one day and this thread is somewhere on the bottom of the page! Take initiative, guys!

Now especially for our friend Harel I'll give him a review of what's going on. But may I notice this isn't actually necessary cause I update my posts a lot.

But first this. In the light of the increased cooperation between the once divided and now reunited religion-SE discussions, I have altered the Culture and Nationalism factors.
Wonna know what I changed? Read it in my constantly updated posts.
Wonna know why I changed? Read it in the Religion tread.

Now the present model. You may notice that there is changed quite a bit since my last update of my post, originally posted on August 1. But yes, there can happen a lot in two days.

I also added a new category : State Religion.
Before you say:"another one, that makes eight!", consider that State Religion has no SE effects and that Army has only affect on Support.
To know more about State Religion, go to the Religion thread.

Government :

Despotism : +2 Pol, -2 Corr
->Totalitarianism : +4 Sup, +2 Pol, -2 Hap, -1 Corr
(Anarchy : -4 Corr, -3 Nat, -4 Hap)
Monarchy : no positives or negatives
Theocracy : +2 Hap, +2 Tax, -2 Res
Republic : +2 Centr, +2 Corr, -2 Mor
Democracy : +2 Corr, +2 Hap, +1 Eco, -2 Sup, -2 Mor

Economy :

Barter : -2 Tax
->Currency : no pos or neg
Feudalism/Manorialism : +3 Sup, +2 Tax, -1 Centr, -1 Urb
Mercantilism : +1 Eco, +2 Urb, -2 Mor
Protectionism : +2 Centr, +1 Tax, -1 Dipl, -1 Corr
->Communism : +3 Centr, +2 Nat, -2 Eco, -1 Corr
Banking : +2 Eco, -3 Pol, -4 Sup
->Free Market : +2 Eco, +2 Corr, -5 Pol, -3 Env
-->Transnational : +3 Eco, +2 Corr, +2 Centr, -8 Pol, -3 Env, -2 Mor

Value :

Survival : no pos or neg
Power : +4 Sup, +2 Mor, -2 Centr
Knowledge : +2 Res, +1 Corr, -2 Tax
Wealth : +1 Eco, +1 Centr, -2 Hap
Environment : +2 Env, +2 Hap, -1 Centr, -1 Urb

Structure :

Tribal : +2 Sup, -2 Centr
->City State : no pos or neg
Federal : +2 Corr, +2 Nat, -2 Hap
Confederate* : +2 Hap, +?, -1 Centr, -1 Nat
Commonwealth : +2 Dipl, +1 Eco, -2 Pol

Research :

Wise Men : no pos or neg
Nature : +2 Env, -1 Urb, Economic Science is 75%
Humanitarian : +2 Cult, -1 Mor, Social Science is 75%
Practical : +2 Sup, -1 Res, Military Science is 75%
Explorer : +2 Res, -1 Hap, Academic Science is 75%

Religion :

Animism : -2 Res
->with the invention of Polytheism the Research penalty disappears, resulting in 'no pos or neg'.
Worshiping : +2 Urb, +2 Nat, -2 Cult
Evangelism* : +2 Cult, +?, -2 Dipl
Fundamentalism : +2 Mor, +2 Sup, -2 Dipl
Religious Freedom : +2 Hap, +1 Res, -2 Nat, -1 Cult
Prosecution : +2 Pol, +2 Cult, -2 Hap

State Religion :

Atheism
Christianity
Islam
Hinduism
Buddhism

Army :

CTP Military Readiness system
Don't know specifics.
Don't know the CTP names.
Off guard?
At Alert?
At War?

Special :

*Fundamentalism : Certain units are free of support.
*Confederate : Confederate SE choice gives you certain bonuses with regions, eg more cities can be in one region.
*Evangelism : Your civ can produce Cleric units.
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by M@ni@c (edited August 09, 1999).]</font>

[SnowFire]

I don't usually post here on weekends, but let me say that evangelism's research bonus is a bit suspect. I would move that to religious freedom. More on Monday or Tuesday, perhaps.

[Maniac]

Yeah I know it's suspect. I don't know anything better right now. BTW have you already got a solution for Confederate? I find there is no reason for giving it a +1 Dipl.

[Jon Miller]

Hi all

good, we three all agree that the +1 res on evagalism is suspect

M@ni@c, I competely disagree that culture is the way you described (maybe it is religion conversion factor), you changing what it is will mess up every choice you put it in

you have not addressed my comments on research (its like a dual bonus)

you have not added beaucracy

you have communism continuing as an economy

socialism is more of an economy

what is your reasoning for the special city state rules

how about confederate be -2 central

why is common wealth + econ?

communisms pluses and minuses are not ballanced (worse minuses than pluses)

you force (based on all previous forms of winning, tech and pop growth) everybody to be democracy or republic in order to do well, especially with a big civilization

I disagree

Jon Miller

[SnowFire]

Jon Miller: I find communism quite well balanced.

As for Confederate, I agree that I'm not sure anymore either. I suppose the best you can say for Dip bonus was that England and France cozied up to the Confederacy, but that was more to keep the US weak than any love for their government structure… I really don't know. If the regions idea was put in from another thread, maybe Confed could have other bonuses.

Evangelism : +2 Cult, +1 Res, -2 Dipl
+2 Cult, +2 Nat is my suggestion. +2 Cult, +2 Hap also works, but doesn't make as much sense and repeats a stat.

Fundamentalism : +2 Mor, +2 Sup, -2 Dipl
Instead, how about +2 Mor, +2 Nat, +1 Sup, -3 Dipl?

Religious Freedom : +2 Hap, +1 Dipl, -2 Nat, -1 Cult
+2 Hap, +2 Research, +1 Dipl, -2 Nat, -2 Cult. Unbalanced? Perhaps. But RF is really, really good. Maybe simply go +2 Hap, +2 Res, -2 Nat if that's too many stats.

Harel: You yourself said every SE should offer a unique view and expreince. You have 4 cookie-cutter choices in each section that never change over time, merely get stronger. This may be what we end up with, but it's not what I, for one, want.

As for the Mil stat, perhaps there should be an asterisk next to power saying that centralization penalties don't apply to military units while using the Power SE? But see, that would probably make Power too good. What's more likely the reason China, etc. have huge armies is because that's what they're building, not structures for their people (the equivalent of buildings in CivII/SMAC). So I'm in favor of no asterisk and no Mil stat. I'm sure Bell can stick your ideas in the summary, though.
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by SnowFire (edited August 09, 1999).]</font>

[Maniac]

Just wanted to say I edited my model post of yesterday.

[Maniac]

Snowfire :

About Confederacy, perhaps a under a confederate structure, you can have more cities per region.

About Evangelism, I don't know. I indeed try to prevent repitions as much as possible though sometimes it is impossible to do that. But Worshiping(=strong State Religion) has already +2 Nat to simulate their great conviction.
Perhaps Evangelism should be the only SE choice that allows you to build Clerics(see Religion thread).

Fundamentalism, again that +2 Nat...
And if you can simulate a certain choice with 2 or 3 bonuses, always choose 2.

Religious Freedom :
+2 Hap, +1 Res, -2 Nat, -1 Cult?
A happiness and research bonus together is really powerful, so I think only -2 Nat is too less penalty.

[Harel]

I have a bunch of comments to say but I will only say this:

First, jon, I did notice your Pacfict value, and I used it, just called it in a different name. Happiness. Very much the same thing: people are happier but are poor in battle. I can change the name.

I wouldn't even talk about the ugly turn the religoun section took. Maniac, you were in the right way but then you took a step way way backward, only beacause some people are touchy. Religoun is a problemtic subject. But currently, it's just silly. Worship as a religoun? And state religoun? Either you go back to the old model or cancel religoun as a SE alltoghter.

BUT, and this why I post, I would like some more comments on my model. In the end, I think we are all here to build a finished model that bell can post. I use "4 cookie-cutter" SE in every section because I belive that every option should be distinctive. Having too many options don't allow you to really balance everything out. And yes, they are suppose to only get stronger over the time. Same apporch, different SE.

Please, Maniac, some comments on my model, ok? Cause I belive your own model ( I keep talking you guys, having both republic and democracy is redandent ) is very un-balanced.
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Harel (edited August 09, 1999).]</font>

[Maniac]

Jon Miller :

Your Pacifism choice is very alike Democracy.
+2 Hap, +2 Corr, -2 Mor, -2 Sup
Besides I don't think that countries choose Pacifism as a value. They just are pacifist cause they don't need war cause it would harm their real goal : Knowledge, Wealth, Environment...
So pacifism isn't a value.

Socialism makes more sense. Perhaps a Happiness bonus(obvious), Urb bonus(less poor, less death), Tax penalty(a lot of tax money needed to support the weak)?
+2 Hap, +1 Urb, -2 Tax?
But of course then I have too much SE choices according to Harel.
You see I can't satisfy everyone's wishes.
(Just put it in bold to make sure everyone reads it)

"M@ni@c, I competely disagree that culture is the way you described (maybe it is religion conversion factor), you changing what it is will mess up every choice you put it in"

How so? Is it just the name you disagree with or the choices I give a bonus?
Don't forget I changed the Democracy culture bonus to a Hap bonus.

"you have not addressed my comments on research (its like a dual bonus)"

??? Do you mean :
"So one value (knowledge) gets split into four more choices

and what is universal about wisemen?

know out research and army and add in knowledge values"
I thought that was to Harel.

"socialism is more of an economy"

No, no, no. You can still be Socialist and Free Market at the same time. Almost whole Europe is socialist. It's a value.
The extreme of socialism is Communism and that I made an economy.

"how about confederate be -2 central"

If confederate only has a +2 Hap bonus I think the penalty is too severe. Besides then I would have too little Nat penalties.

"why is common wealth + econ?"

It isn't common wealth, but Commonwealth. That makes a lot of difference. Never heart of the Commonwealth?
So why : increased trade.

"communisms pluses and minuses are not ballanced (worse minuses than pluses)"

That's your opinion. Snowfire and I think otherwise.
+3 Centr. That's a lot of extra industry, you know.

"you force (based on all previous forms of winning, tech and pop growth) everybody to be democracy or republic in order to do well, especially with a big civilization"

You don't have to be Republic or Democracy to be good. You can still get +2 Eco.

Look at the world. Democracy just IS better. It is unavoidable that that is represented in SE factors.
If you give eg Totalitarianism better factors just to make it more playable, then you cheat history and realism.

"you have not added beaucracy"

I already have said it several times and I won't say it again.
That beaucrats still have to rule by one of the gov choices. It is already covered.
I haven't read your literature, so I can't make up any bonuses or penalties of beaucracy.
Do it yourself.

Goodbye

[Maniac]

My reply on your post will be large, so I have to do it when I have a lot of time.

M@ni@c
Probably hated by Harel after my next post

[dinoman2]

Harel, I agree COMPLETELY with your SE ideas. except for a few things.
One: Rename Virtual Democracy True Democracy, because that's what it is, and it's less confusing.

Two: NO ONE would use Practical Research. Give it a +1 Mil too, and then it is much better.

Nitpicking session ended.

------------------
"Idealism is the despot of thought, just as politics is the despot of will"
-Mikhail Bakunin

[Theben]

Now I regret not reading this for a week.

To answer Maniac's question to me, it doesn't answer all my concerns. I also disagree with the idea of having only SE penalties for the turns of change, as the bonuses of the change should also filter in. I'd say 1st turn: still have old SE, 2nd turn: 1/2 bonus/penalties of 1st and of 2nd, 3rd turn: new SE in effect. Keep in mind the length of time a turn is. The main penalty I'd include is a happiness penalty for the switch. My idea for happiness is apparently different from Snowfire's.

Happiness affects everything. It is probably the single most important SE choice. If you've played MOO2, think of the morale bonus given to citizens. Happiness gives a bonus/penalty to pop growth, labor production, trade, how much your citizens will support your foreign/domestic actions in diplomacy, research, etc. For this reason the bonus/penalty should be 1/2 of regular SE choices.

How it works:
I still prefer sliding scales, which I will explain why later. However, if buttons are to be used then this requires that the SE choices be placed in an order from on extreme to the other: for ex. free market-regulated market-planned market-communal (green should not be an economic choice but a environmental value). Also Totalitarian-Monarchy-Oligarchy-Republic-Democracy (-Anarchy?). When a change is made, there is a happiness penalty incurred, mutliplied by each extra space of SE difference. Over time the happiness penalty will heal. This represents people's uncertainty to change, and to their resistance to the change. Now the healing rate is relatively constant in time; this is combined with any changes to the base happiness level of the SE choices. FE, you switch from totalitarian to democracy. This has a 4 space change, so it is a severe happiness penalty. However, totalitarian has heavy happiness penalties inherent to it, while democracy has happiness bonuses. A happiness indicator will be in the SE screen.

happiness with totalitarian SE:
--------------
happiness after switch to demo:
------|----------------------
happiness with demo SE:
-----------------------------
after switch to totalitarianism:
---|----------
The break represents where the current happiness is, while the end is the potential happiness the civ will get once all happiness is "healed". Healing fixes a given amount each turn, so in that time both SE choices will have reached their maximums. SEs with bonuses to happiness also heal faster per bonus, while SEs with penalties heal slower.

This is cumulative with changing other SEs. As you can see, anarchy & revolt can easily be the result of sudden, radical changes. However, suppression by military &/or police can limit the effects of unrest; this results in an artificial boost in happiness. The healing rate would be reduced in this case, but is the best & probably the only way to quell your populace, especially in dictatorships.

Things that raise happiness:
democracy
communal economy (free-marketeers must "buy" happiness, but they're better at it)
Strong religion
Decentralized govt
Certain techs
Pacifism SE
Welfare SE
"buying" happiness
Gifts from other civs
Certain buildings
Random events
Military suppression
Committing atrocities against cultures/religions that your people are opposed to

Things that decrease happiness:
Totalitarianism
free-market economy
Secular values (opposed to strong religion)
High POWER SE
WEALTH SE
Mixed cultures/religions in a city
Changing SEs
Units dying in combat
Centralized govt
Commiting atrocities or lesser offenses vs. certain cultures/religions in your empire
Riots/plagues/rebellion
Random events

Why I prefer sliding scales:
1) They're simpler to use in comparison. 5-6 scales are all that are needed as opposed to 20+buttons.
2) It allows for tweaking of SEs as opposed to radical changes. Using SMAC as an example, you have free-market, planned, & green. Maybe I want to have a regulated market, I can't do it. Maybe I want something between what reg market and planned wiil offer for buttons. I can't "fine tune" how the SE affects my civ.
3) I believe each "value" should have it's own slider. Why can't a civ be research AND power oriented? My ideas:

POWER<--->PACIFISM
FUNDY<--->SECULAR (secular has happiness penalty but research bonus; i.e.=knowledge; fundy is opposite)
DECENTRALIZED<--->CENTRALIZED (centralized has effic bonus but hap penalty, decentral is opposite)
WEALTH<--->WELFARE: Actually I think this is covered under free market & communal, and neither are needed for sliding scales. But if buttons are used they could flesh out the econ choices.

Another thing. I propose we change how the SE effects work. I propose using percentages in the choices, and smaller ones. This will also help fine tuning. They can be increased with new technology.

ECONOMY can be a % that is added/subtracted to trade.
EFFICIENCY works well as is. It seems to be a % already, or could be easily changed to one & no one would notice, I'll bet.
SUPPORT. Each city would have a base SUPPORT % (10-20%?). This % is subtracted from the combined cost of all maintenance of units (units should have production & money support costs, possibly food too). SE choices increase/decrease the % modifier.
MORALE should be replaced with EXPERIENCE. Only a minimal bonus/penalty should be possible with this SE. Most experience should come from training (and this only to a point; maybe hardened as SMAC?) & actual combat (all the way to elite status). Again, a % would be applied as in SMAC, but it would be in smaller increments.
POLICE represents the controls you can exert on your people. It "adds" to your happiness rating, but would have different effects in that your people would resent them if they're too strong.
GROWTH is affected by happiness and many other factors. It may not be necessary to include it as SE, as only a religious choice or environmental choice should affect it. Happiness would replace Growth SE in all other areas.
PLANET =a % reduction in pollution. However I can see it also reducing growth & economy.
PROBE =a % bonus/penalty to enemy espionage missions.
INDUSTRY is so powerful and easily abused in SMAC it should be gotten rid of.
RESEARCH as norm, but with smaller % increments.
HAPPINESS as described above.

With sliding scales 2-5% increments can be used, with happiness = 1-2% increments per bonus 'cuz it's so powerful. Buttons could use 5% increments (HAP=2%), if used.

That's about it. This list is by no means comprehensive. If I find time to read all those other posts I may add to this.

[Theben]

You don't want to read this again, do you?
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Theben (edited August 09, 1999).]</font>

[Jon Miller]

Hi all

M@ni@c, my point about Harels Army and research system and your research system is that it is double counting, not only do you get a bonuses for valueing knowledge, you also get a bonus if your research values knowledge, see what I mean?

Bell I expect you to post all the ideas here (even my who/method idea that M@ni@c seems to dislike and M@ni@cs original religion idea) just also put the problems of those ideas (as we have posted)

If you look at groupings of governments no one that has communism is viable

viable is a government that allows high trade (because later on, when you get communism, you cities have grown to the point where growth pluses are not your number one thing)

this is reflecting your own beleives and the chances of history, not what could have happened if the revulution was not ransacked all along the way

pluses in econ are too strong

a plus 5 econ provides 2 extra trade per city per square, no other setting that is not close to this will even be able to compete

from civ/smac we know that a plus 1 trade per square makes it so that any civ that does not have that plus 1 will not be able to keep up research, monetarily, or in happiness (the only time it is good not to have it is if you are so millitaristic that you are stealing all these things from the other civs)

I do not want to be forced into being millitaristic just because I have communism (And it does not even help you military a whole lot, you could have good military and have ok econ with other choices)

your structure is faulty in that it has selections which would not make since for veteran players ever to use

Jon Miller