Police State: Positive

[Darrell01]

Hey guys, been a while...
Anyway, I was thinking about a thread a while ago talking about SE choices and thinking about Police State. Personally I hardly ever use it and try to get off it as soon as I can. However, this is not what this is about. I was defending Yang's ideals for some reason and I got to thinking about the police today. Many functions of the police today are not just enforcing the law, containing riots, and such. Many of the new things that police do include prevenative actions, such as counseling, helping out in the community, training, etc. I am sure that the Police State in SMAC might be more along these lines, considering they had the best of humanity on that rocket ship. The key point here is that a Police State might not be all billy clubs and nerve staplers. The inefficiency that comes about from having a huge nanny police state leads to more of the energy funds going to help out some drone who is lazy with a problem and thinks the faction leadership is supposed to do something about the problem he has instead of doing it himself. The good effect of this is that the citizens have a good repiore (that how you spell it?) with the military, and thus volunteer more often. Thus Lal, who already has an unwieldy bureaucracy, does not want to limit his energy income even further by implementing Yang's "bizarre social experiments".
Non-Lethal Methods could be some sort of social improvement attache to the military division of a set of troops. That is a Non-Lethal method. Maybe Maniac could rename Non-Lethal Methods to "Community Minded", "Socially Responsible" or something like that for SMAniaC.


Any other positives on implementing a Police State? How about any other infamous SE choices?

[One of the many]

I think police state works well in an early Morgan game since supply and police are a problem for a free-marketeer

[Hydro]

Hi Darrel,

Hmmm. Your friendly-police description sounds more like the non-lethal methods ability on garrison units. Based on the society effects it seems clear to me that the purpose of Police State is control of the populous, and it is more along the lines of the USSR (and a resurgent PS in Russia) and China. I don’t see it as being very touchy feely, unless the touching involves a billy club or a cattle prod (or its high tech descendant the nerve stapler).

The primary benefit of PS is that you don’t have to invest much or anything in infrastructure devoted to social control (rec commons, holo theatres), which to me further indicates the bleak life of PS societies. This is reason that conquerors like PS. To some extent the lessened energy cost of not needing this infrastructure compensates for the lower energy output from the PS lack of efficiency.

As to the best and brightest being on Unity, please remember that the best and brightest of many societies have not chosen what the West considers socially enlightened policies. The UN’s Unity mission would include these societies, too (especially if they helped bankroll the project), and therefore would represent more than just the West. Yang (China) and Miriam (from the Christian States of America) were officers on Unity, and it would be hard to argue that either of these societies were socially enlightened in the Western sense. Likewise, others would harbor ideologies that may run counter to Western ideas (e.g. – Santiago).

Nanny states that focus on the well being of their citizens will more emphasis on efficiency, infrastructure, and talents. None of these is on Yang, Miriam, or Santiago’s list.


Cheers!
Hydro

[Maniac]

Re: Police State: Positive

Originally posted by Darrell01
Maybe Maniac could rename Non-Lethal Methods to "Community Minded", "Socially Responsible" or something like that for SMAniaC.

SMAniaC is dead. Long live Planetfall!

[CEO Aaron]

The key point here is that a Police State might not be all billy clubs and nerve staplers.

Way to take the fun out of running my own fascist dictatorship.

Seriously, the shorthand society effects in SMAC bear little resemblance to their real world equivalents, and I'm not too comfortable with the real-world definitions in the first place. Every government in the history of civilization has relied on some degree of coersion over its subjects, and even democratic nations have moments when, in spite of having the mandate of plurality, they behave like oppressive autocracies. The CIA waterboarding scandals now, the Japanese internments of World War II, and the FBI harrassment of Civil Rights groups in the 60's are all examples of a democratically elected government falling back on police state tactics to maintain their rule.

At the end of the day, drones are dissidents. They may be uneducated, criminal dissidents, or they may be sophisticated, idealistic dissidents, but they don't like the way you run things, and you're sending the troops in to shut them up. So paint that situation up with whatever justifications you wish, you're still choosing to solve your problems with force instead of using the other alternatives available to you, ie: facilities, psych and specialists.

[Hydro]

Master CEO,

I think the key difference is in the type and methods of drone management. The ‘good’ (or Western) side uses bribes and persuasion (energy into psych, rec commons, holo centers, etc) as their primary methods for drone control. The ‘bad’ or totalitarian side uses the blunt end of a stick or Mister Nerve Stapler and dispenses with many or all of the niceties of more nuanced persuasion. This spectrum of methodologies of persuasion defines how the various political, economic, and societal systems of SMAC work.

Hydro

[CEO Aaron]

Oh, I utterly agree, that the conceptual difference between a police state and a... I don't know... NON-police state? is the bluntness, if you will, of the methods used to bring their misfits to heel. I guess my point would be that if all governments utilize some form of coercion to maintain their orderly rule, then the only meaningful distinction that can be implied by calling a government a police state is that the Man has his boot on your face. So to speak.

The funny part to me is that the developers decided to put the negative police effect on Free Market instead of democracy. I mean, just because you have laissez-faire policies, you can't send your thugs out to quell rioting? Of course, we all know the reason the police penalty is in FM is because market would be unstoppably powerful if you could field an army while making all that money.

Which is, in the final analysis, my point. The Society Effects were devised for game balance first, and verisimilitude second. So hey, if you want to imagine that your police state forces drones to participate in punitive square dancing, then enjoy yourself, bow to your partner and do-see-do!

[Hydro]

Quite right.

I guess your point is one reason I find the SMAniaC Mod so much fun. The reconfiguration of the SE rebalances the game based on years of blast-the-game-out-of-the-water and dig-out-all-the-permutations player play-testing. The Devs did an great and insightful job but, but they can't spend the thousands of hours with the game that players do.

Hydro

BTW - the mental image of Square Dancing in the People's Utopia Hall of Punishment gave me a smile

[Eldramatico]

I think police state is efficient only with the spartans (or the hive of course), as they get +3 police and then get double police effects. When they get clean police infantry, they can get great populations. The problem is the growth. But I will try this strategy soon in a multiplayer game every player controling 3 factions. I will try to stay in planned at the beginning, then planned + democratics. With children's creches, the spartans will get population booms. I would keep 3 police clean infantry in each base. But riots will start. It is a very exciting strategy... I don't know if it'll work. While the population is booming and reaching very high numbers, then I will switch to police state: riots will end, as the police would do double effect. Then I will switch to Green: to get an acceptable efficiency. A great boost in the middle of the game to get more population fast, without incurring the huge growth penalty the Police State+ Green SE the spartans would get. Let`s see how it's gonna be...

[Lord Avalon]

Even if not playing one of the typical Police State factions, if I'm fighting a war pre-Bioengineering, I find the extra support of Police State quite useful.

[CEO Aaron]

Sure, early on Police is very nice, when your empire is tiny and the efficiency penalty is not steep. However, the costs of police aren't just the explicit cost of the efficiency penalty, but also the opportunity cost of not running Democracy, with its HUGE bonuses to growth and efficiency.

To borrow parlance from another game (Star Fleet Battles), Police induces the 'cocaine effect'. First it feels great (hey, extra troops!), then you need it (quelling drones), and finally, it kills you (because your rivals pop boomed and have now shown up with the chop n' drop).

As for running Police as Sparta, it's still not worth it. By all means, do grab Non-Lethal Methods and Ascetic Virtues, but don't bother to run Police State. At +1 police, 2 police 1/1/1 units will quell 4 drones. Add another 2 from your rec commons and you're golden all the way up to hab limits. I'd much be pop booming and have to resort to doctors and holo-theaters then be unable to pop boom and not have any drone problems at all.