Character/Dynasty Model IV

[Lord God Jinnai]

Greir:
IMO it would be good if each city had a ruleing dynasty. This dynasty would be responsable for any units built in that city as far as maintinence and refitting. These units would be loyal to that dynasty and if the dynasty rebelled so would the units.
-----
This is an option. I have a section of ruling dynasties above. It isn't required however. Also there may be an option to have on the player (in non-multiplayer games) have a ruling class dunysty only. I dislike it on multi-player because if there is a CPU w/o a ruling class dynasty people will know early on its a computer civ (this might not apply to some scenerios).


The citizens happiness might be determined by how much they like the ruleing dynasty. Replacing one dynasty with another might have adverse consequences to the populace if they were well liked (i.e they may decide to rebel instead of accepting a new dynasty).
-----
Afermative. But this shouldn't apply to just ruling class dynasties, but all dynasties.


The abilities of a dynasty would affect how well a city was run (crime rate, happiness, gold, science etc).
------
Negative. This has more to do with either the player or the characters in particuler, not the dynasty itself.


Two dynasties may not like each other and may go to war with each other (causing a headache to the leader of the civ and forcing loyal troops to have to go and sort it out).
------
Afermative, if its a feudalistic society with a strong head ruler (this wouldn't work in a feudal society like Japan where the Emperor was in charge of religion only. The like/dislike will be heavily dependant of personalities based on the ruling character (and perhaps spouce) and heir apparant. Lesser with other siblings and relatives, advisors, etc. I don't want to get too detailed though or we could have a nightmarish problem with the CPU.


During a revolution all (or some) of can be disposed and replaced with dynasties supportive of the new regime. It may be necessary to forcably remove dynasties during a revolution and prevent cities from rebelling.
-----
I have this is there under the general dynsty section somewhere. However an unsecussful removal will always lead to a war of some type, most likely civil war. (after all you know the current admin. will keep trying to remove u from power so why stay and give them a chance)?


The powers of the dynasties could also be dependent on the form of government. For example:

Monarchy - Dynasties are Dukes, Barons, Lords etc..
Fascism - Generals.
Democracy - Members of Parliment.
-----
Monarchy---True, though the names will vary
Fascism---Afermative, though we should allow for other types, fascism doesn't have to be military based.
Democracy---(actually that's a repulic or represntative gov. ur talking about) Anyway what u say is possible (IE English house of Lords), but can also be for simply rich people such as Kenedy's or for sybolic dynasties such as in England and Japan.


In ancient governments Dynasties might rule with an iron fist, i.e population is unhappy but cant do much about it (marshall law). In a democracy however a dynasty with a low reputation could be voted out.
-----
First off the former applies to modern as well as ancient. We still have China FE, and not 100 years ago many nations in Europe still had monarchies that were similar, perhaps with some restraints. On your second point I'd like to put it in, however we have to be careful for ruling dynasty. First off if the player has 50+% they stay in. If they don't they are kicked out for a term, prob 1 turn, but can be several. After that they can try to get back in. Also they can try to splinter off and form their own civ also.


One good way to control an important city may be to allow a relative of rule it. Over time however the dynasty would grow away from the crown and may become less controlable.
-----
That's a good idea, except it would be for provinces. Except that once the current ruler dies it will then be considered a new dynasty (or maybe when the heir apparant when he was placed dies). However the control factor shouldn't be too much higher because they are indivisuals. It will basically be measured by loyalty level, maybe with a +2 added. Also an heir apparant couldn't be done this way and any local rulers who are relatives by marrage would have a +1 added to loyalty for control, but it would end at the death of the dynasty ruler. Also these modifiers would end if they ruler of that province died.


Alliances with other civs may include inter-marrage among foriegn dynasties. Hence if the alliance is broken one of your dynasties may break away and join the rival civ.
-----
Affermative. Also dynasties can be multi-civ oriented.

[alms66]

LGJ,
just one quick question, What do you mean by multi-civ oriented in the post above?

[Lord God Jinnai]

Non-ruling dynasties were not limited to 1 country, kingdom whatever. In most cases they owed allegance to more than one lord. This was the cause of many conflicts that escaated into major wars before the concept of nationalism.

[Grier]

Well it seems that this could be the best civ type game ever created. IMO they have always lacked an rpg aspect, and your dynasties are a great way to do this without having immortal heros or whatever.

Keep up thre good work.

[Lord God Jinnai]

Actually now that I think about it, the ties to dynasty's through marriage should last longer, as well as any new ones formed from siblings posted as provintial leaders. This would have to be modified with character creation so that the siblings would have a base loyalty, however, not ness as strong as their parent. A -1 Modifier would be used, the modified +-2 (-3 through +1) for their parent's loyalty. This would only be inital and can change.

[LOGO]

I'm just going to through out an idea that I'm not totally sure about, minor dynasties. Look at Romeo and Julliet, two influencial families who are in the same city that are basicly at war with eachother. I'm thinking this could make some of these cities very interesting. I'm not totally sure about how this could be implemented but it's worth thinking about. Anyone?

[Lord God Jinnai]

First off it would depend on how high u put the character level if there were a lot of dynasties. The more there are, the more likely there are to be minor ones.

However, from what I've seen the cities won't really play a pivitol role for any micromanagment and thus i may also be hard to use minor dynasties in as small of an area as a city. Though perhaps a city-state might be possible.

[Lord God Jinnai]

Mark from another thread:
Ummm... you really should put these comments in the current character thread where they belong. This thread should be pretty much used only for high-level issues. I think we have satisfactory answers for your problem, although they might not have made it into the summary. Last I recall (LGJ, please correct me if I'm giving bad information) we have two reasonable ways out of the dilemma. For multiyear timespans in a single turn we will either use the dynasties idea, where you rent/use a dynasty rather than just a single character, or simply make the characters arbitrarily have lifespan something like 20-30 turns. The basic notion is that when good gameplay conflicts with reality, screw reality...
-----
Currently those are the 2 options. I perfer the first since its more realistic and can fit easily in anytimeline. If we did go with that approach, each character in the begginning would last from 1-3 turns. As time went on, they'd last longer in general for decrease in time between turns and increase in medical tech. This is probably the way we will go maybe increasing the turns they last slightly in the begginning, but that would be all.

[Lord God Jinnai]

I'd like this to be discussed:

OK the reason for the character model is 1> to add more flavor to the game by giving it a more intimate and personal touch and 2> to allow the player to take risks by choosing people to represent various posts with the knowledge that they might not be as good as the AI in general, but the possibility of being exceptionally better than the general AI.

point 1 has already has a concensus on it so there really is no need to discuss it, but point 2 right now has a wide rift in it and i cannot even continue to work on it until atleast a general consensus is reached.

Here's the problem: Mark wants the computer to use the best available AI possible for the player, reguarless of whether or not the use characters. The problem is, if the player knows that he won't get anything better out of putting a character in command, 99% of the people won't. That then defeats a fundimental point of the character model itself and thus makes it all but useless.

The parital solutions sofar: Actually only 1 has been proposed...and that is the use of personalities for characters. While this can help, it still doesn't solve the problem because the AI doesn't ness have personalities and the AI could then still in all sitautions be just as good or better than the characters.

Right now, the only way i see around this problem is to allow really good characters to "cheat" by being able to produce better odds, more stuff, etc. by simply fudging with the results because they are better, thus bending the rules around them. I don't like this idea though, because i'd perfer it would be solved without using such cheap cheats.

PLEASE!!! PLRASE!!! put your comments in and suggetions!!! Although the character model might not be coded for a while, i still need a better idea of how to impliment it atleast from the start that the crude model i have.

[Mark_Everson]

LGJ:

I stress again, that we are not AI gods! Even the Absolutely best advice our AI will probably be able to give will be significantly worse than the analysis of a decent player. So your solution on having the AI of characters range from poor to brilliant is simply unachievable... I think in fact that your suggestion probably would make the character model useless to most players, because it would result in great characters giving so-so advice that the player probably would not use anyway. This would reduce characters to window dressing, which is clearly a bad move. I am firmly convinced that arbitrary bonuses for great characters, and penalties for poor ones is the way to go. That is the industry standard, has succeeded in numerous games, and is, I believe, practically the only way to go even though you regard it as a cheat.

The only place I believe your AI-quality idea would work is for newbies who are just getting a feel of the game. For those first few games I Hope our AI will be able to beat most players on an even playing field.

[Lord God Jinnai]

Still I don't like that idea. If there is a better one I'll take it. Also even if i do end up having to use it, i still intend on using personailties.

Also I have a slightly updated version of this model, not enough to post it right now. If u want it ask.

Also any model leaders who can send me what type of characters you want for your models (FE the Tech will have Scientists and Inventors and maybe one other) and how you want them to interact with your model(s). I may also if i deem ness find ways of having them interact with other models.

"I had a dream too. Only it wasn't nice...I dreamt I was a moron." Squall -Final Fantasy 8

[Richard Bruns]

I think it is acceptable and desirable for good characters to "cheat" by tweaking the game figures. The player, like historical rulers, is in charge of general strategy. In the overall strategy and direction of the civ, the human will almost always be more intellegent than the computers, so the advisors won't be much help for those matters.

The characters, like historical assistants, are involved in the detailed minutaie of life that are represented by the game figures. A good general should be able to "beat the odds" and produce upset victories. A good economic manager should be able to create "production miracles" that result in higher effeciency. This kind of tactical or managerial talent is best represented by direct changes in the numbers.

The players, like historical rulers, do not need to know exactly how such things are done and the computer does not need to model them extensively. I think that the players will accept that some assistants just do a better job than others, and that the results of their work are expressed in the game numbers. This is not really cheating; it is a simple way of quantifying talent.

Also, I think it is bad form to give the player poor advice in any context. That kind of thing is very annoying and would make players mad at the game.

[Richard Bruns]

LGJ: I'll let you create the technology model characters because you know both models. The Scientist and Inventor should be enough for now. Just make sure that they are not mindless research machines. Some of them, like Einstein, should have a set of beliefs and try to influence what you research.

By the way, are you working on integrating characters with the social model? The two models should work together very closely IMO. For example, a character would have some of the attributes of the social class it came from.

[axi]

I am too for character attributes affecting the game. But the affected variables had better not be "hard" (f.e. production, money, attack strength, etc) but "soft" (f.e. efficiency variables, unhappiness, morale, etc). I thing it wouldn't be bad if Research Points (or anything alike from other models) were given free, but out of the control of the player. Characters could also have drawbacks combined with their advantages (f.e. an interoir minister loved by one class but hated by another), so the player would have to choose what suits him best.

[Lord God Jinnai]

quote: I am too for character attributes affecting the game. But the affected variables had better not be "hard" (f.e. production, money, attack strength, etc) but "soft" (f.e. efficiency variables, unhappiness, morale, etc). I thing it wouldn't be bad if Research Points (or anything alike from other models) were given free, but out of the control of the player

Ok....i see. that's what i was thinking also....i can live with that.

quote: By the way, are you working on integrating characters with the social model? The two models should work together very closely IMO. For example, a character would have some of the attributes of the social class it came from.

I am trying to do so, but i need some ways of figuring out how personailities would be done. That's the sticking point right now, for that atleast.