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

[Jon Miller]

Hi all

one problem with your generalties is that you say things about a government but it is only true with the values that that government has

why is a senate always peaceful (this has not been true always in modern times)?

other things that are attributed to government or economics are really from values that might just happen to occur at the same time

that is one reason why my se idea is best

Jon Miller

[Harel]

Full version 3

Like I said before Maniac, read your post and my explnation on my SE options carefully. Till then, I am going to just ignore what you did in goverments.

List of modifactors

1. Police ( Pol )

2. Militarial ( Mil ): Once an for all. +5 mil will give you +25% shield output ( like production, only 5% ) when building military units, and reduce cost of all maintance by 5 gold each ( I reduce the production bonus to +5% since it needs to be united with support ).

3. Production ( Pro ): gives +10% per unit to civilan production.

4. Corruption ( Corr )

5. Growth ( Grow )

6. Expreince ( Exp ): for morale and spy sucess

7. Loyality ( Loy ): for increasing bring cost, conversion defence, reuce emigartion and espionage defence.

8. Culture ( Cult ): For senate intervension and rate of assmilting captured cities.

9. Research ( Res )

10. Economy ( Eco )

11. Enviroment ( Env ): for treating with pollution and gives +10% per unit to food-based tiles.

12. Happiness ( Hap )

13. Taxes ( Tax )

14. Relations ( Rel ): for diplomacy and bonus from trade routes. Colonization, maniac, had internal trade only: it didn't trade with other colonial companies. Therefor, colonization could get a small economy bonus, balanced by a rel minus which means the trade would suck.

Model 3 - using the new modifactors

Very few changes to the SE options themselfs: I almost perfected the system.
For numbers, I await maniac.
If he won't compile, I just give my own, "un-balanced" numbers

Goverment

* I added parlimental to monarchial series: but the king in this system would have more power then in today modern goveremnts ( some what more in the lines of the time of Magna carta in England, where the power transfer was only taking place ).
* Against my better judment ( it doesn't seem important enough for me ) I added tribal assembly.

Anarchy
Despotism->Military autocraty->Police state
Monarchy->Empireship->Parlimental
Dictatorship->Totalirist
Lordship->Theocracy
Tribal assembly->Republic->Democracy->True democracy

Markets

* I changed local markets to feudalism again since maniac seem to be too confused by the name ( or else I can't explain Fares ).
* I added capitlsm, since indeed the roman empire had a mostly free market.

Barter->Currency->Stock exchange
Feudalism->Protectionism->Colonial
Social->Communism->Utopia
Capitalism->Banking->Free market->Transnational

Structure

Structres don't evolve over time Maniac. Don't try to push extra name inside. This list is stasfactory.
A slider bar best fit here, btw.

City state <-> Confedarte <-> Empire <-> Federal

Values

Passive ( better 0/0 name )
Power
Wealth
knowladge
Wealthfare

Army

* By civic duty I am refering that Military service is required, but sport a feeling of acceptings and honor to serve the country.

Basic
Mercenary->Military caste->Trained
Militia->Volunteer->Civic duty
Leeve in mass->Draft->Conscription

Research

Naturistic, Philoshopical, Explorer, Prarical

Religon

* Who said that Monotheism should get a different bonus from Polytheism? Here are my suggestions:

Loose religon: 0/0
Strong religon: +Mor, -Res
Intolerance: +Pol, -Hap
Freedom: +Hap, -Pol
Athiesm: +Res, -Culture

[Harel]

Look at me. I just posted up the ver.3 model, and allready I want to change things. I had a very good friend at home, and being the civ-nut I am I asked him to help me with the model.

The end result is a very fundemntal change to market.
The only positive thing about the endless amount of versions i spawn off faster then i can type them in, that they DO become more historicaly accurate. I think that diodorus will agree that markets now are even more historicaly accurate then ever.

Model ver. 4 - partial ( market )

Ok, first I outline what I had before:

Barter->Currency->Stock exchange
Feudalism->Protectionist->Colonial
Social->Communism->Utopia
Capitalist->Banking->Free market->Transnational

And here is the new suggestions:

<u>Basic</u>

Three steps of the basical evoultion of economics over time.

Barter -> Currency -> Stock exchange

<u>Controled</u>

From a self-supporting market, to a global economy, a controled market was always thightly controled by the goverment.

Autarcial -> Fairs -> Feudalism -> Colonial

+ Prod, - Rel

Autarcial ( self supporting market ): The first market option right after bartering. This market system is comprimised by a series of small, autonomical markets that each is self sustaining. They are not linked in any way. Every city ( market ) stand alone by itself.

Fairs, that usally were financed and orginzed by the local/federal goverment, were mainly used by the 11th-13th centaury, and the post-major-cultures to show unique items from one city to another. A single annual fair sometime gave money to sustain familes for many months.

Feudalism were a form of better originzed autorcial and fairs system. Each single market was firmly placed and controled by the local bishop/lord/mayor that reported to the national govermenet and was in good connection with the other local markets.

As the nation grew, and trade with other nations was well established, the goverment stopped to control single markets: far too messy and in-effiecent. By using govermenet controled and financed companies, the goverment could control the nation at a much larger, more effiecent manner.

<u>Directed</u>

Directed markets were used by Europe, from the early 15th to the 20th centaury when direct control of the markets was either impossile, in-effeicent or not profitable. The independancy of those controled markets made it hard to trade with other nations: and some nations wants to trade.
Therefor, the used policies, either then direct control, to effect the markets.

Protectionism -> Meracntalism -> Nationalzation

+ Corr, -Eco

I think that by now we all know what protectionism and mecrantlism are.

Nationalazation

Main companies and factories and nationalized: thier CEO are elected and chosen by the govermenet and the policy and mostly shaped by the in-direct orders of the state. However, it grealy differ from Socialism by that the aim of this market option is pure effiency, other then gain to the people.

<u>Social</u>

Market type that are explicity aimed to treat the public.

Social -> Labor union -> Communism -> Utopia

+ Hap, - Tax

Communism and Utopia are clear enough by now.

Social market is when most vital industries, such as cloths, farms and water providing are nationalized to the direct control of the goverment. Major subdies, food quotning and job for every person who wants to work are what greatly differ this market system from Free market.

Labor union is a 19th centaury development, that beyond the govermenet control of vital industies, most workers have formed up into unions that can better treat, provied and understand the needs of the worker class.

<u>Free</u>

This has suffered the smallest change.

Guilds -> Banking -> Free market -> Transnational

+ Eco, - Mil

The only change is Guilds. The most early free markets were guilds: the first one date back to the days of the roman empire ( Capitlisation is a rahter new term ). Guilds have an almost unlimited autonomy in the market. Banking replaced the power of economical autonomy, and increased it by offering everyone citizen part of the action ( where guilds only helped each member ).

Summary

<list>
Barter->Currency->Stock exchange
Autarcy->Fairs->Feudalism->Colonial
Protectionsim->Mercantlism->Nationalization
Social->Labor union->Communism->Utopia
Guilds->Banking->Free market->Transnational
</list>

[Maniac]

Jon Miller :

"why is a senate always peaceful (this has not been true always in modern times)?"

You're right. That's why I would like the AI civs to have a reputation too. Then the senate could decide to continue military action against a betraying civ.

Harel :

"Like I said before Maniac, read your post and my explnation on my SE options carefully. Till then, I am going to just ignore what you did in goverments."

I read your explanation. What makes you think I didn't?

"Like I said before Maniac, read your post and my explnation on my SE options carefully. Till then, I am going to just ignore what you did in goverments."

If I don't agree completely with your SE factors and choices, I find it useless to give them numbers.

First we have to agree on 1) the factors and then 2) the choices.

Government

Parliamental is not the logical evolution of Empireship. Totalitarianism is.

Lordship is bad.
I suggest Monasteries. Similar buildings and communities (some with other names) appear in some religions.
In the case of spreading Christianity in Europe in the early Middle Ages, they had great power and were the actual authority.

Still don't agree with your police state track.

My Government

1) Despotism
->1.1)Military Junta
->1.2)Dynasty
-->1.2.1)Empireship/Abolute Monarchy
--->1.2.1.1)Totalitarianism
-->1.2.2)Parliamentary Monarchy

2) Tribal Assembly
->Republic
-->Democracy
--->True Democracy

3) Monasteries
->Theocracy

Economy

Harel, because you don't know Hanzes, doesn't mean they were historically important.
I stick with Hanzes.

Harel, there should be a distinction between state organized and private economies in 1500-1800.

The Indian companies determined the economies, and they weren't state planned.
You could call them the colonial time evolution of Hanzes, which were also trade groups.

So how would you call an economy with Indian Companies?

BTW, Mercantilism/Colonial was state planned, so then you could call Communism the next step in state planned economies.

Oh yea, I think the Greek City State economy before they began trading was Autarkie = Self Supply. Manorialism is also self supply. Perhaps I should rename it.

Barter
->Currency

Capitalist
->Free Market
-->Transnational

Manorialism/Autarkie
->Fairs/Hanze
-->Indian Companies?

Mercantilism/Colonial
->Communism
-->Utopia

So everything except Currency has 2 evolutions. Though I don't like the name cause it isn't a simple economy, an evolution of Currency could be Stock Exchange.

Structure

Sigh. Slider bars. I totally don't see how slider bars can be combined with fix SE factors.

Imperial
->Federal

City State
->Feudal
->Confederate
-->Commonwealth

Value

Survival
->Power
Imperialism
Socialism
Wealth
Knowledge

Research

Wise Men, Natural, Philosophical, Practical, Explorer

Religion

Animism, Religious Freedom, Establishment, Fundamentalism, Prosecution

Army

Draft is certainly not the same as conscription.

Basic
Mercenary ]_\
Military caste ] / Professional
Militia -> Conscription
Levee in mass -> Draft

[b]Reorganized Factors :[b]

Police, Urbanization, Research, Taxes, Economy : same old.

6) Nationalism :
Religious Defense/Conviction
Emigration Defense
Bribing Defense/Cost of enemy spy actions
Less punishment for atrocities

7) Production :
Non-military Unit/Building/Wonder Production
+ and - % of Irrigation/Farm Production (not all the food!)

8) Environmentalism :
Pollution
Natural Disasters
+ and - % of Forest/Jungle/any tree type terrain Production

9) Relations :
Diplomacy
Commerce

10) Bureaucracy :
same as Corruption

Now the problems.

11) Senate :
Senate Restrictions
A completely different 'factor'.
Perhaps, because it causes so much problems, I could make it a 'Special' Factor.

Every Government type gets a Senate + or -, dependent on how representative your gov is.

The Survival Value would get a large +(less Senate interference), simulating that in times of war the people are more warlike.

Name problems

12) Military :
Support
City Construction Bonus(100 free resources when founding cities)
Unit Production

13) Morale :
Unit Morale
Spy Morale
Spy Success Rate
+ modifiers halved

Military and Morale are bad names for what they represent.
Help from a military specialist needed. Harel?

These factors can be combined. Do it?

14) Happiness :
Assimilation Rate
Your Spy Operation Costs
Happiness Rate

15) Evangelism :
Ease of Cleric Conversion
Ease of Automatic City Conversion
Religious Attack(=Evangelism)

So makes again 15 factors. Reducing it to ten as in SMAC is impossible cause these factors do a lot more than the SMAC factors did.

[Maniac]

Hmm Harel, just saw your new post.
Glad we came independently on the Autarkie idea.
Only we(or I and your friend) seem to give a different meaning to it.

I agree of course with the Autarcial->Fair change, cause I made it myself.

But where did you get the idea Feudalism is a market? Manorialism is.

And where do you get the idea that Autarcial/Fairs/Manorial is state controlled.
Just the opposite.
That Colonial evolution is totally wrong.

Labor Union and Communism are historically spoken close to each other.
Labor Unions evolved to the communist idea very quickly.

Do you know what guilds are?
They did NOT exist in the Roman era.
They arose in the Middle Ages. They existed only in the city. Exception : trading guilds, like the Hanze. They were some kind of labor union. They are social.
And they stagnated cause individual change by one labor union member forbidden. So in later periods it had less economy, you could say. No +2 Eco.
Therefore the eg textile industry moved from the city to the countryside, where it was also cheaper.
I'm sure Diodorus agrees with this.

So out Guilds there should arise two types of economy.
The open international Indian Companies out of trading guilds.
The closed labor unions out of the industrial guilds located in cities.
The first option should have a small Eco bonus.
The second option an economy penalty.

Around the same time arose state controlled, protectionist economies. I think I shouldn't assume it as an evolution of Guilds.

Perhaps the evolution of Currency should be Autarcial.

Or perhaps I should combine Indian Companies to Mercantilism.
?

Better Market :

Barter
->Currency

Autarcial
->Guilds
-->Indian Companies(please provide me with a better name)
--->Mercantilism
---->Colonial
->Guilds
-->Labor Union
--->Communism
---->Utopia

Capitalist
->Banking
-->Free Market
--->Transnational

[Harel]

Hmmm.
You know? Your are right. Colonail markets WERE historialy connected to feudalism. But it IS a different market type. Since the colonial companies were directed by the govermenet, not controled, it's more fitting into the directed section.

However, you are wrong about the guilds. They DID have guilds in the roman era. I distincly remember reading I claudies ( I am very fond of those two books ), and i remember claudies debate with the "****wrighter guilds" to bring wheat cheaper to the famined rome.

About the hansa ( not hanze ), it was a trade alliance of several northen german cities ( mainly lobek and Hamborg ) in the 12th-14th cenautry. It could, and should, be described as a trade pact which was allready suggested at diplomacy. I know, I suggested it.

Therefor, look at what I suggest:

simple: 0/0
Barter->Currency->Stock exchange
Agreed?

stand-alone: +production / -trade
Autarcy->Fairs->Manorilism->?
Manorilism need to evolve inth something otherways it's a sitting duck.

directed: +effiency / -economy
Protectionsim->Mercantlism->Colonial->Nationalization
Agreed? Colonial was in a different time frame of merctanlism

Social: +Happiness / -taxes
Socialism->Labor union->Communism->Utopia
Agreed?

free: +Economy / -military
Guilds->Banking->Free market->Transnational

Guilds were a form of free market. They have an autonomy in the market, so they economy turned free. But the guilds only took care of them selfs, when banking was created the power of free economy was free to everyone.

Structres

Don't use evolving options here! Structre is a universal things, just like values! No -> at all!
And empire is distinct from federal, and confedrate is distinct from feudal! You can't unite them! And for pete sacks, let go of that commonwealth! You just seem to push it in everytime!

Slider bar:
Feudal <-> Confedarte <-> Empire <-> Federal

+Corr,-Tax<-------------------->+Tax,-Corr

Goverments

You can dance and your head for all I care. Dictatorship is distinct from monarchy, and it's disticnt from despotism. You need three groups, and no helping it.
I won't budge for this. I explained this enough times. My reasoning is flawless. Control/Absloute power/Monarchial. Three groups. No less , no more.
Beside, any person who wants totaliristm to replace monarchy doesn't no jack about history.
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Harel (edited August 14, 1999).]</font>

[Maniac]

Harel :

First of all, with all your spelling errors I don't really know sure, but you seem to confuse Autarki with Autocracy.
If you do, stop discussing.

And yes, in small nations as the Greek City States, Autarki is as state controlled as it can get.

But in large nations as all European medieval ones, each manor and village had it's own autarki and that was as decentralized as it can get.
So I think I'll have to split them.

The first thing comparable to guilds appeared in the 5th century.
The name appeared in the 8th century.
The first real guilds appeared around 1000.

Although I Claudius is good, if the name guilds appears in it, it's an anachronism.

In fact I know quite a lot about Roman wheat transport.
When Egypt became a Roman province, there was an STATE organized wheat line Rome - Alexandria that brought 150000 ton wheat every year to Rome.
The Praefectus Annonae had to take care it happened smoothly.
There were STATE owned ships built by the STATE of 50 meters length and 13 meters broad and deep.
Quite huge, he. Such large cargo ships even never made the trip over the Atlantic until 1820.

So sorry for your precious book, but wheat transport is organized by a Praefectus Annonae, so a conversation between the emperor and a simple trader is unlikely and secondly the state organized wheat transport, so it's unlikely they would hire a trader with tiny ships.

So YOU must recheck your sources.

I also read in a book about a Carthaginian bank(actually it was a simple money lender - that was why I said Banking existed in the ancient age) while that is very unlikely.
You insulted me for just assuming there could be something like a bank.

I see you have no clue what Indian Companies were. These independent not state controlled (owner by share holders) companies got a trade monopoly for a certain time and place from the country. For the rest they may do what they liked.
Not government controlled.

Oh, has manorialism no meaning? Well, then how would you describe the European economy between 500 and 1000?

I am very surprised you hold Empire and Federal as two seperate things.
They are the same, only is Federal even more centralized. Actually Federal is just a modern name for Imperial structure.
That slightly higher centralization is just possible by technology.
Without it most countries can still be called imperial.

Hansa which language is that?
Ok, it's a trade alliance. But that changes nothing to my economy category.
BTW, it wasn't only northern German city. It extended to the Netherlands and some other parts.
The Hanze of 17 (with the biggest Northern German cities) was only the most important.

And the summary is approaching so if we don't agree on choices quick, I'll have to make a model on my own.
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by M@ni@c (edited August 14, 1999).]</font>

[Maniac]

He, your post is edited while I was writing ymy response. Looks some politer. Although now I've read the second part...

OK, Dictatorship is different from Monarchy.
But Diodorus is right that it can end in a Dynasty.
And really, the only difference between them is that a king is legitimate while a dictator not. For that small change you don't make a separate category, right?

Manorialism an evolution of fairs???
Manorialism + production. You really need to read something about the period 500 - 1000 and learn what economical conditions they were then.

Why that protectionist option? The first simply is Mercantilism.

Guilds are certainly not free market. All members were bound to heaps of rules.

Sure I'll let go of that Commonwealth.
Now the British Commonwealth can be seen as Colonial.

[Maniac]

Isn't it possible that there is no evolution cause in new times the models sucked?
There simply is no evolution on Manorialism, cause that economy was superbad in reality.

Example of Nationalization cause that description really made me think of Russia, but you say it isn't 'people owned'.
I can't come up with an example right now.

[Jon Miller]

Hi all

in the times of the roman republic senators could not be involved in trade or like things

this was so they could not abuse their power

they had merchants called knights that would act for them

this ended up changing

Jon Miller

[Maniac]

Jon Miller :

That praefectus annonae was a state job.
So the senator that had the job wasn't using it's power for his own benefit.
He was using it for supplying Rome. He had no personal benefit out of it.
So even if that trade ruled still existed around Claudius, I'm sure they would make an exception for the wheat supplier.

[Jon Miller]

hello all

I'm no longer crazy, just going to go on with my setup (one of the only four or three very different ones out there)

I will put it here because I don't think any body is going back to the thread I edited

ECONOMICS

the economics settings mostly just affect the national values and control like governments but they only affect the control of cities and they have more of there own modifiers than do the governments

it can be looked at that governments modify the national values to get a se modifier and national values modify economies to get a se modifier

for example, if the people are not very individuslistic, shown by how much they value individualism they will work well with communism

the system will be set up like this

in communism increased individualism means increased corruption and decreased happiness

in freemarket increased individualism means increased trade

in freemarket increased wealth means increased trade

in communism increased wealth means increased corruption and decreased happiness

in manorialism increased individualism means decreased happiness (they don't want to be serfs any more)

all the values modify the economics in like manner (in differing degrees)

economics are

(I have not finished writing on any of them)

communist (real communism if you can get it right)
has increased happiness (this can go away with the right values)

free market (real free market)
has some harsh happiness penalties (especially for those groups do not rule), also has increased trade and production increases

socialist (maybe you should be able to choose a slider that goes between socialism and free market)
similar to communism but does not hav as big a penalties for individualism and wealth also increases happiness

manorialism (the feudal system)
those groups that do not rule are unhappy over this

mercantilist (ala Japan last 50 years and colonial britain)

barter (early system)

merchant (I'm not sure about the right word but it is meant to represent early non manorial non barter systems where merchants and small scale craftsmen as did farmers but information did not flow fast enough to make it like modern freemarket and governments did have there hand in it)

this is really really reall incomplete
________________

my threads for my se is/will be

POPULACE
STRENGTH - HAPPINESS - VALUES (incomplete)

STRUCTURE (unfinished)
GOVERNMENT (unfinished)

ECONOMICS (unfinished)

CONTROL (the idea is my AI idea as stated earlier in this thread, I will clean it up and repost it)

REVOLUTION (some of this idea is found in POPULACE post, will add to it)

I am sure there were others I have forgotten but since the need for them will still be there I will at least end up making something similar

Jon Miller

[Maniac]

Began to think about some choices and their effects.

Government

Absolute

1)Dictatorship : +2 Pol, -2 Hap

Dictatorship has two evolutions.

1.1) Dynasty/Monarchy : +2 Nat, +1 Pol, -2 Tax

Increased nationalistic feeling by a king to look up at, still a bit larger police and a lot of taxes go to the court (Diodorus' explanation).
eg : European monarchies

1.2) Despotism : +2 Pol, +1 Pro(duction), +1 Sen(ate), -1 Hap, -1 Corr

Harel doesn't want Monarchy to be the only option after Dictatorship. I think this suits well.
eg : Persian shah's

I don't know if I should include this one, but Harel seems to want something police state alike.
An evolution of Despotism

1.2.1) Military Junta : +1 Pol, +1 Sen

An evolution of Dynasty

1.1.1) Parliamentary Monarchy : +2 Corr, +2 Tax, -2 Mil, -1 Sen

Good effects?
A parliament allows less corruption in a large empire.
In the States-General extra money can be asked.
However since that States-General mostly isn't that eager for war -2 Mil and hates to support it.
And for the same reason -1 Sen.

I think the following option can be an evolution of both Dynasty and Despotism. If I had to choose between them it's Despotism.

Totalitarianism : +2 Pol, +2 Mil, +2 Sen, -2 Hap, -1 Corr

So, that's the Dictatorship branch.

Dictatorship -> Despotism -> Military Junta
. -> Totalitarianism
. -> Dynasty -> Parliamentary Monarchy

Representative

First base choice is

Tribal Assembly : +2 Hap, -2 Corr

+Hap because participating in politics gives them a happy feeling.
-Corr because this kind of government gets very ineffective when you have several cities.

The evolution of Tribal Assembly is Republic.

Republic : +2 Corr, +1/2 Pro, -2 Sen, -2 Mil

Since the Production/Centr factor is now less powerful, it could get a +2 bonus again.

Now there is a member of each city in the senate, means the Corr problem of Tribal Assembly is solved. This system even allows larger empires!
The senators tend to enrich themself and sometimes get the largest part of war loot. This was true in the case of Rome.
Again war difficult and more senate franchise.
Perhaps Republic and Parliamentary are too similar. Anyway they can't bother eachother cause they are available together only for a short time.

Democracy : +2 Corr, +2 Hap,(+1 Rel,) -2 Sen, -2 Mil, (-1 Pol)

Simple : democracy. Perhaps there's too little difference with Republic. Solution?
Perhaps +1 Relations and -1 Police?

True Democracy : +2 Corr, +2 Hap, +1 Eco, -2 Mil, -2 Mor, -1 Pol

Technology allows again that all people join the politics. Technology also allows better larger states. Means +2 Corr and +2 Hap.
Technology allows more trade and e-commerce.
Some -Mil reason. -2 Mor cause more decadent people and worse state security, Internet codes can be found.
-1 Pol?

So :

Tribal Assembly -> Republic -> Democracy -> True Democracy

Religious

First choice is

High Priestship : +2 Eva(ngelism), -2 Res

Impressive religions. High Priests have a lot of power. -2 Res cause suppression of free thinking.

Then the next evolution :

Theocracy : +2 Eva, +2 Tax, -2 Res

+2 Tax by donations and indulgences.

Next step :

Fundamentalism :

+2 Eva, +2 Nat, +1 Mor, -2 Res, -2 Rel

An idea of me in the Religion thread won't allow Fundamentalism to exist further as a Religion choice. + another benefit is that I have a modern evolution of Theocracy. Another problem solved.

So :

High Priestship -> Theocracy -> Fundamentalism

Means 3 great branches, but the Absolute one splits in two. Means you have always 4 choices.

What do you think of it?

Economy shall be for another time. Really difficult bussiness.
Structure is also a problem.
Other categories mostly the same. Will post them another time.

[CormacMacArt]

Well, thank you all for responding to my post!

[Westergaard]

I don't know how long civ III will go into the future, but what about future societies like in SMAC?

Whith this I mean other than the suggested markets of Utopia and Transnational and the Virtual Democracy government. Theese are indeed good ideas, but I mean something more like SMACs Cybernetic, Thought control, and Eudamonia. Something that is not excatly a government form or market type and which can only be done in a future society.

What if I discover advanced genetic engineering and want to make my civ into a totally genetic controlled society where everybody was engineered to be happy with his job (ie Brave New World)or where everybody was engineered to be a superhuman(ie the movie "Gattaca). Or if I wanted to turn the tasks of governing to AI computers? (ie SMACs cybernetic).

What if want to introduce the use of robots to do all the dirty jobs of society (ie manufacturing, service jobs, etc.) to leave humans to do more creative jobs? What about if I want to outlaw all of the major polluting industries and live in a totally green country, with a big bonus to happiness and ecology, but a major minus to production? (even tough I never played CtP this could sound too much like eco-fascists or whatever)

All of theese are just examples but I think that neither of them are very far-out (some more than other) and they could be reality within the timescale used in Civ II, and Civ III might run even longer in which case they certainly should be included.

Couldn't this be another of the SE categories, or would it result in a too crowded SE screen, with way too many SE choices? And much more importantly will Civ III even run that long? I don't know how long it'll go, but I think that at least we should have given future societies some thought, so that Brian and co. will know what we want in case the game has a future part.