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

[JamesJKirk]

Jon,

I like your ideas, I addressed them above or on the radical ideas page a bit earlier, but you went into far greater detail than I.
Isolationism would be a good word in place of "antiimerialism"
and I definitely agree with the use of sliders and losing control as you decentralize.
I would also like to see a difference between modern parliamentary republics and presidential republics. Where in the former business would get done quickly and you may have more power, but the public can go against you more often (seeing as they don't directly elect you) and in the latter, business could move on slower due to separation of powers, but it would be more easy to unite the public in your favor. Although in either of these, and in any form of government, the public should initially be in favor of you in times of crisis, unless they tend to drag out.

[Theben]

Double post.
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Theben (edited October 09, 1999).]</font>

[Theben]

Well, as Bell has said he can't finish this thread, I suggest that everyone who posted SE/govt suggestions (specifically me, Maniac, Harel, technocrat, Diodorus, others?) create one last post stating in detail everything they'd like for SE/govt. in civ3. Then someone could just stick them together and send to Firaxis. There isn't much time, couple of days at most, I figure, so hurry.

[Theben]

Sorry, John. If it makes you feel better you weren't the only person I forgot. But don't take offense, it wasn't personal.

I haven't forgotten about your COMBAT ideas, though. It's just that the real world has been taking up too much of my time to focus on it. If Yin is willing to give me a few more days I'll get on it.

[Jon Miller]

Hi all

James: most of my ideas date to before august, look in the early part of this thread, if you stated them before that it must have been back in June when I wasn't reading all the threads here in which case I did not know you had already stated them.

Theben: it is Jon (short for Jonathan) not John

as I have said previously: governments and economical structure just effects how the nation reflects the values of those in control

a dictatorship does not always cause effeciency lost nor does it limit growth nor does it benefit police

those things all depend on the grooup that creates and runs the dictatorship

a military republic for instance might give you complete control over national and city affairs but would give you little control over the military, it would also increase police rating if the military didn't value human rights

all government things would cause like effects

Jon Miller

[Harel]

Theben, why don't you list the posts yourself? It's not too much work to just make a big DOC file and list all the possible suggestions.
Me and Maniac allready posted our HUGE posts before.
Mine, part 1: 21 Aug
Mine, part 2: 25 Aug
Maniac: 23 Aug
Diodorus ( requires editing ): 20 Aug
Technocrat: 12 Sept

Ofcourse, people might have changed after that, and I can't be handle accountable.
I would have done this, but some posts requires editing, and I don't have the time.
However, I suggest that this DOC won't be SE ver 2.0. For that, use the old 1.0 summary, and create a new thread called SE models.

[Maniac]

My post of August 23 is not representable for what I have in mind these days. However I have a severe lack of time, so I can't make a new 'summary' of my ideas.
Eg I want to simplify the Government and Economy categories, I saw on the Firaxis forums some other neat ideas and I made up a new research system for Civ3 that also includes Education - Jon Miller will be happy.

[Jon Miller]

Harel: still disregarding my model, the only truely realistic idea out there?

Jon Miller

[Theben]

Jeez, Apolyton is slow loading these days. It's quicker to back up than wait for the page to finish reloading!
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Theben (edited October 22, 1999).]</font>

[Theben]

Harel: I'm not going to pick what I think other people want unless I get confirmation FROM THEM that that's everything they want to say for SE/GOVT. And I'm pretty busy with the other lists, including figuring out exactly what I want to say here, so people need to be responsible for their own ideas. I would think that Yin could 'cut n' paste' just as quickly as I could, and I know he's dedicated to the List, so...

As I said above, people can point to a thread that says everything they want included in the list, if one exists. Maniac just pointed out that there isn't one for him, so I wouldn't want to choose for him.

[subspace]

1. Ages of Civilization :
-Post Ice Age (10000 BC)
-Age of the Nomads
-Tool Age
-Stone Age
-Bronze Age
-Iron Age
-Age of Castles
-Medieval Era
-Renaissance
-Age of Explorations
-Age of Enlightment
-Industrial Age
-Atomic Age (mid 20th century)
-Information Age
-Genetic Age
-Global Age (2050 AD)
-2nd Renaissance
-Age of New Frontiers (2100 AD)
-Age of Galactic Explorations
-Diamond Age (3000 AD)
-Kingdom Come (????)

2. Migration, in and out, between cities in the same nation, between two regions, and between nations. Type of migrating citizens :
foreigner, tourists, legal alien, green card holder, refugees, etc.

3. Give names to geographical landmarks and historic battles.

4.Instead of the Advisors screen, why don't we just use the city improvements, like City Hall, Universities, Military bases, etc.

5. Where are the social deseases ? Organized crime, drug addicts, sociopaths, etc., they really influenced the shape of a nation.

[The Joker]

As the Firaxis Forum is being closed these days I (and most other people over there - I hope) am gonna move over here and continue our discussion here. We all have our own SE models, which will be posted with time. I will post mine as soon as I have Version 2.1 ready.

First off i will continue my debate with Techno:

GDP vs GNP:
Actually I don't even know what GDP is. I couldn't find it in the dictionary, but if you tell me what the D stands for I may be able to find the Danish term for it, and post it here. And according to my sources wealth is being measured by GNP per capita.

"...The International Institute for Management Developement ranked the US ... as the most competitive economy in the world marketplace ..."

Possibly, but those surveys always lay huge weight on wages, and as the wages in Skandinavia is very high they can't beat the US, as only very few products can compete if being made in Skandinavia (those being very capitalintensive products, R&D, management etc.). You could never make any clothes in Denmark, as it would cost 10 times more than if it was being made in South East Asia. Although all this Skandinavia is still wealthier than the US, Singapore etc.

And of cause no Skandinavian country is in the G8. They only have a few million inhapitants each. The G8 is large, wealthy countries. Switzerland is not in the G8, and that is the wealthiest country in the world. Monaco isn't in the G8 either, although it is by far the country with the most millionaires per capita. And Italy, which isn't among the wealthiest countries in the world (not at all) is in the G8.

Universities:
Ok, maybe you're right.

Growth and production:
Health care is free in Denmark, but i don't think it would make people have more children. And we don't support industry. The welfare state is made for the people, not the coorporations. Supporting industry is a thing from the protectionism in the 30s, and are not being used any more.

Agriculture:
Hmmm... I think you're right. I will include it in my version 2.1.

Morale:
Not sure about this one.

Enviromentalism:
If pollution is important (like in CCTP) it could be a modifier without the terraforming part. Besides, i don't think all modifiers should be equally important. I see your point, though.

Happyness:
Wouldn't an enemy unit consider the happyness in a country before moving there?

Militarism:
Of cause!

Relations:
I dunno. But in your model it said all trade routes, not just international ones.

Parliamental monarchies:
I don’t agree about your first point. By parliamental monarchies i didn’t mean the modern European monarchies (like UK, Spain, Sweden etc.), but the type from the dawn of modern democracy. When the European countries changed to democracy most of them kept the king, who was still the head of state (he chose the government – sometimes he WAS the government). At the same time there was a legislative power, elected by the people. This mix between democracy and monarchy was pretty common and in many countries it lasted up to the beginning of this century, and so it should be included.

Authoritarian:
My primary idea bout oligarchy was to be able to describe a wide variety of nondemocratic states, both modern and ancient. The concept is, that e.g. the USSR and Fascist Italy was way too different to be included in the same gov type. There therefor had to be made a gov type that could reflect many different oligarchies. And so i invented the supporting classes idea (BTW i heavily suggest to make it possible to be supported by one OR two classes – limiting it to one would be less realistic). In my mind an authoritan/totalitarian civ is simply an oligarchy with low freedom of speech, low privacy and high propagande. A lot of different authorian civs could therefor be portrayed. And, as i realised that Hitler, Stalin and a few more (but neither Mussolini nor Kruschov) were dictators. They ruled on their own. And so a dictatorship should be included. If you still want an authorian option, please describe in details what it would mean (as i have no acces to that book you mentiones) as i would really like to know.

Federal:
A nondemocratic federation would simply be a civ where the nondemocratic gov points out nondemocratic state leaders, who otherwise rule their state on their own. I realize that this would mean less direct control, and so i’ve given federation a –1 leg.

Centralized and Unitary:
Ohhh, now i see what you mean. And so i agree.

Economics:
Besides from the currency option i really think there should be a City states economics option. The special economic and social strucure of the city states of ancient Rome and Greece should really be included. And it can’t be described by the city state strucure option, as that has something to do with control, not economics and sociology.

Autarky:
My bons and pens are all meant relatively, not absolutely. By giving autarky a huge pen i simply mean that it should give WAY less trade than e.g. Laissez Faire.

BTW what do you think about my idea of having economic systems needing a certain amount of trade and raw materials to excist – and Autarky would be the only one always possible?

Fascism:
Except for the monopolistic large coorporations fascism was more or less like capitalism. You were free to open up your own company, the marked worked etc. And it’s real word is Corporatism, not fascism. Fascism was a concept including government and values invented by Mussolini in the early 20s. Also, corporatism should be availible with democracy. Here it would simply be the elected gov, that supported the large coorporations.

BTW what is your oppinion of having Anti monopoly laws as an options within capitalism? Low giving +1 pro –1 eco, med nothing and high –1 pro +1 eco.

Criminal rights:
You’re right. It’ll be included in my model too.

[The Joker]

As the Firaxis Forum is being closed these days I (and most other people over there - I hope) am gonna move over here and continue our discussion here. We all have our own SE models, which will be posted with time. I will post mine as soon as I have Version 2.1 ready.

First off i will continue my debate with Techno:

GDP vs GNP:
Actually I don't even know what GDP is. I couldn't find it in the dictionary, but if you tell me what the D stands for I may be able to find the Danish term for it, and post it here. And according to my sources wealth is being measured by GNP per capita.

"...The International Institute for Management Developement ranked the US ... as the most competitive economy in the world marketplace ..."

Possibly, but those surveys always lay huge weight on wages, and as the wages in Skandinavia is very high they can't beat the US, as only very few products can compete if being made in Skandinavia (those being very capitalintensive products, R&D, management etc.). You could never make any clothes in Denmark, as it would cost 10 times more than if it was being made in South East Asia. Although all this Skandinavia is still wealthier than the US, Singapore etc.

And of cause no Skandinavian country is in the G8. They only have a few million inhapitants each. The G8 is large, wealthy countries. Switzerland is not in the G8, and that is the wealthiest country in the world. Monaco isn't in the G8 either, although it is by far the country with the most millionaires per capita. And Italy, which isn't among the wealthiest countries in the world (not at all) is in the G8.

Universities:
Ok, maybe you're right.

Growth and production:
Health care is free in Denmark, but i don't think it would make people have more children. And we don't support industry. The welfare state is made for the people, not the coorporations. Supporting industry is a thing from the protectionism in the 30s, and are not being used any more.

Agriculture:
Hmmm... I think you're right. I will include it in my version 2.1.

Morale:
Not sure about this one.

Enviromentalism:
If pollution is important (like in CCTP) it could be a modifier without the terraforming part. Besides, i don't think all modifiers should be equally important. I see your point, though.

Happyness:
Wouldn't an enemy unit consider the happyness in a country before moving there?

Militarism:
Of cause!

Relations:
I dunno. But in your model it said all trade routes, not just international ones.

Parliamental monarchies:
I don’t agree about your first point. By parliamental monarchies i didn’t mean the modern European monarchies (like UK, Spain, Sweden etc.), but the type from the dawn of modern democracy. When the European countries changed to democracy most of them kept the king, who was still the head of state (he chose the government – sometimes he WAS the government). At the same time there was a legislative power, elected by the people. This mix between democracy and monarchy was pretty common and in many countries it lasted up to the beginning of this century, and so it should be included.

Authoritarian:
My primary idea bout oligarchy was to be able to describe a wide variety of nondemocratic states, both modern and ancient. The concept is, that e.g. the USSR and Fascist Italy was way too different to be included in the same gov type. There therefor had to be made a gov type that could reflect many different oligarchies. And so i invented the supporting classes idea (BTW i heavily suggest to make it possible to be supported by one OR two classes – limiting it to one would be less realistic). In my mind an authoritan/totalitarian civ is simply an oligarchy with low freedom of speech, low privacy and high propagande. A lot of different authorian civs could therefor be portrayed. And, as i realised that Hitler, Stalin and a few more (but neither Mussolini nor Kruschov) were dictators. They ruled on their own. And so a dictatorship should be included. If you still want an authorian option, please describe in details what it would mean (as i have no acces to that book you mentiones) as i would really like to know.

Federal:
A nondemocratic federation would simply be a civ where the nondemocratic gov points out nondemocratic state leaders, who otherwise rule their state on their own. I realize that this would mean less direct control, and so i’ve given federation a –1 leg.

Centralized and Unitary:
Ohhh, now i see what you mean. And so i agree.

Economics:
Besides from the currency option i really think there should be a City states economics option. The special economic and social strucure of the city states of ancient Rome and Greece should really be included. And it can’t be described by the city state strucure option, as that has something to do with control, not economics and sociology.

Autarky:
My bons and pens are all meant relatively, not absolutely. By giving autarky a huge pen i simply mean that it should give WAY less trade than e.g. Laissez Faire.

BTW what do you think about my idea of having economic systems needing a certain amount of trade and raw materials to excist – and Autarky would be the only one always possible?

Fascism:
Except for the monopolistic large coorporations fascism was more or less like capitalism. You were free to open up your own company, the marked worked etc. And it’s real word is Corporatism, not fascism. Fascism was a concept including government and values invented by Mussolini in the early 20s. Also, corporatism should be availible with democracy. Here it would simply be the elected gov, that supported the large coorporations.

BTW what is your oppinion of having Anti monopoly laws as an options within capitalism? Low giving +1 pro –1 eco, med nothing and high –1 pro +1 eco.

Criminal rights:
You’re right. It’ll be included in my model too.

[The Joker]

As the Firaxis Forum is being closed these days I (and most other people over there - I hope) am gonna move over here and continue our discussion here. We all have our own SE models, which will be posted with time. I will post mine as soon as I have Version 2.1 ready.

First off i will continue my debate with Techno:

GDP vs GNP:
Actually I don't even know what GDP is. I couldn't find it in the dictionary, but if you tell me what the D stands for I may be able to find the Danish term for it, and post it here. And according to my sources wealth is being measured by GNP per capita.

"...The International Institute for Management Developement ranked the US ... as the most competitive economy in the world marketplace ..."

Possibly, but those surveys always lay huge weight on wages, and as the wages in Skandinavia is very high they can't beat the US, as only very few products can compete if being made in Skandinavia (those being very capitalintensive products, R&D, management etc.). You could never make any clothes in Denmark, as it would cost 10 times more than if it was being made in South East Asia. Although all this Skandinavia is still wealthier than the US, Singapore etc.

And of cause no Skandinavian country is in the G8. They only have a few million inhapitants each. The G8 is large, wealthy countries. Switzerland is not in the G8, and that is the wealthiest country in the world. Monaco isn't in the G8 either, although it is by far the country with the most millionaires per capita. And Italy, which isn't among the wealthiest countries in the world (not at all) is in the G8.

Universities:
Ok, maybe you're right.

Growth and production:
Health care is free in Denmark, but i don't think it would make people have more children. And we don't support industry. The welfare state is made for the people, not the coorporations. Supporting industry is a thing from the protectionism in the 30s, and are not being used any more.

Agriculture:
Hmmm... I think you're right. I will include it in my version 2.1.

Morale:
Not sure about this one.

Enviromentalism:
If pollution is important (like in CCTP) it could be a modifier without the terraforming part. Besides, i don't think all modifiers should be equally important. I see your point, though.

Happyness:
Wouldn't an enemy unit consider the happyness in a country before moving there?

Militarism:
Of cause!

Relations:
I dunno. But in your model it said all trade routes, not just international ones.

Parliamental monarchies:
I don’t agree about your first point. By parliamental monarchies i didn’t mean the modern European monarchies (like UK, Spain, Sweden etc.), but the type from the dawn of modern democracy. When the European countries changed to democracy most of them kept the king, who was still the head of state (he chose the government – sometimes he WAS the government). At the same time there was a legislative power, elected by the people. This mix between democracy and monarchy was pretty common and in many countries it lasted up to the beginning of this century, and so it should be included.

Authoritarian:
My primary idea bout oligarchy was to be able to describe a wide variety of nondemocratic states, both modern and ancient. The concept is, that e.g. the USSR and Fascist Italy was way too different to be included in the same gov type. There therefor had to be made a gov type that could reflect many different oligarchies. And so i invented the supporting classes idea (BTW i heavily suggest to make it possible to be supported by one OR two classes – limiting it to one would be less realistic). In my mind an authoritan/totalitarian civ is simply an oligarchy with low freedom of speech, low privacy and high propagande. A lot of different authorian civs could therefor be portrayed. And, as i realised that Hitler, Stalin and a few more (but neither Mussolini nor Kruschov) were dictators. They ruled on their own. And so a dictatorship should be included. If you still want an authorian option, please describe in details what it would mean (as i have no acces to that book you mentiones) as i would really like to know.

Federal:
A nondemocratic federation would simply be a civ where the nondemocratic gov points out nondemocratic state leaders, who otherwise rule their state on their own. I realize that this would mean less direct control, and so i’ve given federation a –1 leg.

Centralized and Unitary:
Ohhh, now i see what you mean. And so i agree.

Economics:
Besides from the currency option i really think there should be a City states economics option. The special economic and social strucure of the city states of ancient Rome and Greece should really be included. And it can’t be described by the city state strucure option, as that has something to do with control, not economics and sociology.

Autarky:
My bons and pens are all meant relatively, not absolutely. By giving autarky a huge pen i simply mean that it should give WAY less trade than e.g. Laissez Faire.

BTW what do you think about my idea of having economic systems needing a certain amount of trade and raw materials to excist – and Autarky would be the only one always possible?

Fascism:
Except for the monopolistic large coorporations fascism was more or less like capitalism. You were free to open up your own company, the marked worked etc. And it’s real word is Corporatism, not fascism. Fascism was a concept including government and values invented by Mussolini in the early 20s. Also, corporatism should be availible with democracy. Here it would simply be the elected gov, that supported the large coorporations.

BTW what is your oppinion of having Anti monopoly laws as an options within capitalism? Low giving +1 pro –1 eco, med nothing and high –1 pro +1 eco.

Criminal rights:
You’re right. It’ll be included in my model too.

[The Joker]

As the Firaxis Forum is being closed these days I (and most other people over there - I hope) am gonna move over here and continue our discussion here. We all have our own SE models, which will be posted with time. I will post mine as soon as I have Version 2.1 ready.

First off i will continue my debate with Techno:

GDP vs GNP:
Actually I don't even know what GDP is. I couldn't find it in the dictionary, but if you tell me what the D stands for I may be able to find the Danish term for it, and post it here. And according to my sources wealth is being measured by GNP per capita.

"...The International Institute for Management Developement ranked the US ... as the most competitive economy in the world marketplace ..."

Possibly, but those surveys always lay huge weight on wages, and as the wages in Skandinavia is very high they can't beat the US, as only very few products can compete if being made in Skandinavia (those being very capitalintensive products, R&D, management etc.). You could never make any clothes in Denmark, as it would cost 10 times more than if it was being made in South East Asia. Although all this Skandinavia is still wealthier than the US, Singapore etc.

And of cause no Skandinavian country is in the G8. They only have a few million inhapitants each. The G8 is large, wealthy countries. Switzerland is not in the G8, and that is the wealthiest country in the world. Monaco isn't in the G8 either, although it is by far the country with the most millionaires per capita. And Italy, which isn't among the wealthiest countries in the world (not at all) is in the G8.

Universities:
Ok, maybe you're right.

Growth and production:
Health care is free in Denmark, but i don't think it would make people have more children. And we don't support industry. The welfare state is made for the people, not the coorporations. Supporting industry is a thing from the protectionism in the 30s, and are not being used any more.

Agriculture:
Hmmm... I think you're right. I will include it in my version 2.1.

Morale:
Not sure about this one.

Enviromentalism:
If pollution is important (like in CCTP) it could be a modifier without the terraforming part. Besides, i don't think all modifiers should be equally important. I see your point, though.

Happyness:
Wouldn't an enemy unit consider the happyness in a country before moving there?

Militarism:
Of cause!

Relations:
I dunno. But in your model it said all trade routes, not just international ones.

Parliamental monarchies:
I don’t agree about your first point. By parliamental monarchies i didn’t mean the modern European monarchies (like UK, Spain, Sweden etc.), but the type from the dawn of modern democracy. When the European countries changed to democracy most of them kept the king, who was still the head of state (he chose the government – sometimes he WAS the government). At the same time there was a legislative power, elected by the people. This mix between democracy and monarchy was pretty common and in many countries it lasted up to the beginning of this century, and so it should be included.

Authoritarian:
My primary idea bout oligarchy was to be able to describe a wide variety of nondemocratic states, both modern and ancient. The concept is, that e.g. the USSR and Fascist Italy was way too different to be included in the same gov type. There therefor had to be made a gov type that could reflect many different oligarchies. And so i invented the supporting classes idea (BTW i heavily suggest to make it possible to be supported by one OR two classes – limiting it to one would be less realistic). In my mind an authoritan/totalitarian civ is simply an oligarchy with low freedom of speech, low privacy and high propagande. A lot of different authorian civs could therefor be portrayed. And, as i realised that Hitler, Stalin and a few more (but neither Mussolini nor Kruschov) were dictators. They ruled on their own. And so a dictatorship should be included. If you still want an authorian option, please describe in details what it would mean (as i have no acces to that book you mentiones) as i would really like to know.

Federal:
A nondemocratic federation would simply be a civ where the nondemocratic gov points out nondemocratic state leaders, who otherwise rule their state on their own. I realize that this would mean less direct control, and so i’ve given federation a –1 leg.

Centralized and Unitary:
Ohhh, now i see what you mean. And so i agree.

Economics:
Besides from the currency option i really think there should be a City states economics option. The special economic and social strucure of the city states of ancient Rome and Greece should really be included. And it can’t be described by the city state strucure option, as that has something to do with control, not economics and sociology.

Autarky:
My bons and pens are all meant relatively, not absolutely. By giving autarky a huge pen i simply mean that it should give WAY less trade than e.g. Laissez Faire.

BTW what do you think about my idea of having economic systems needing a certain amount of trade and raw materials to excist – and Autarky would be the only one always possible?

Fascism:
Except for the monopolistic large coorporations fascism was more or less like capitalism. You were free to open up your own company, the marked worked etc. And it’s real word is Corporatism, not fascism. Fascism was a concept including government and values invented by Mussolini in the early 20s. Also, corporatism should be availible with democracy. Here it would simply be the elected gov, that supported the large coorporations.

BTW what is your oppinion of having Anti monopoly laws as an options within capitalism? Low giving +1 pro –1 eco, med nothing and high –1 pro +1 eco.

Criminal rights:
You’re right. It’ll be included in my model too.