Maybe smuggle in illegal refugees aswell.

Can't corps have anything to do with space? want to have some space type thing with satellites and all like SMAC/SMAX (which i have hard getting the AI to get into itm when they do, goes corrupt over something.....)

quote: I see! "Stock market" as it is. Is there any way to simulate stock market as part of the game without provoking "complexcity issue" & "micromanagement issue"? How much you want it to be simplified? or you want to put it as they are.

I think the stock market possibility would be less micromanagement than what has been discussed so far.

In your city menu it would say with a percentage how ready that city is for corporations to move in and whether the city can be home to a new corporation. Corporations would then move to cities that needed more manufactured food (Restaurants), goods (factories, car dealers), and luxuries (stores).

Corporations would be controlled by the AI. A corporation that through the base city is in a position where it makes money and can expand would move to new cities. The new cities that it moves to would be ones where there is a demand for whatever the corporation was selling.

The more successful a given corporation is (i.e. the more cities it has moved to), the more money that the original city gets. A city that is the base for a corporation would get both trade arrows and some deal of tax.

The cities that the corporation has moved to would gain luxuries, manufactured food, etc. that are needed for people to be happy.

There would still be national corporate warfare, but you just wouldn't be involved directly with the corporations. I think it could add to the strategy and could be very well balanced.

Let's say you have three car companies but they are making less than the Japanese makers. You can then raise tariffs on Japanese imports. Your car companies would sell more and the Japanese would make less money off of trade. Hence helping your cofers and hurting a potential enemy. The tradeoff would be that if you cannot completely cover the need for cars in your nation your people would become unhappy with higher prices and less cars.

Another example could be that France has most of the restaurants, while Russia builds most of the world's cars. Those two nations could agree not to tax each other. Both nations would see an increase in trade, but a decrease in taxes. Meanwhile corporations are strengthened by selling stuff without tax and thus are able to expand faster. Both nations corporations would then be able to other cities around the world for large profits.

quote: illegal corps and so in it too that can hire barbarians as mercenaries

?? What's your definition of "ilegal coroporation" in game term of course.

quote: Maybe smuggle in illegal refugees aswell.

Sounds like you're taliking about a crime syndicate here.

quote: Can't corps have anything to do with space? want to have some space type thing with satellites and all like SMAC/SMAX (which i have hard getting the AI to get into itm when they do, goes corrupt over something.....) Corps can manufacture satellites into space. create a mobile fun business or something,

Hmmm I'm not so sure....will it be fun to include those things?

quote: Let's say you have three car companies but they are making less than the Japanese makers. You can then raise tariffs on Japanese imports. Your car companies would sell more and the Japanese would make less money off of trade. Hence helping your coppers and hurting a potential enemy. The tradeoff would be that if you cannot completely cover the need for cars in your nation your people would become unhappy with higher prices and less cars.

Yes that's exactly what I had in mind.

quote: Another example could be that France has most of the restaurants, while Russia builds most of the world's cars. Those two nations could agree not to tax each other. Both nations would see an increase in trade, but a decrease in taxes. Meanwhile corporations are strengthened by selling stuff without tax and thus are able to expand faster. Both nations corporations would then be able to other cities around the world for large profits.

another good example tniem.

quote: So I see that there could be a strategic element if added to the game and while it may be something else to think about, it would not have to add to the micromanagement. It would deal mostly with diplomacy and if cities are well maintained and established.

Love the idea.

Minor point: Perhaps one hidden "benefit" of switching to Communism would be the complete protection from foreign companies? In other words, switching to a Communist government instantly removes all foreign Corporations from your civilization and prevents them from ever appearing. Sort of like how Democracy protects cities from being bribed. So, if your civ has become too infested with foreign corporations, you could start a revolution, switch to Communism for a few turns, kick out the foreign capitalist scum, then turn Democratic again. Fundamentalism might have the same effect, and possibly Fascism, Despotism, and a handful of totalitarian governments. Monarchy, Republic, Democracy, Anarchy, and goofy futuristic quasi-govs like Corporate Republic and Ecotopia would handle corporations normally.

Hmmm... though it might be interesting to gradually add more and more kinds of corporations as technology progresses, i.e., airlines with Flight, internet companies with Computers, car manufacturers with Automobile, grocery stores with Refrigeration, publishers with Printing Press... I think that would be needlessly complicated.

It would be easier to just have the three categories as Youngsun set out in the beginning. It might lead to a few anachronisms, like Microsoft before computers, but it would make for better gameplay. Internet companies like Amazon.com would be in the "Service" category, whereas computer manufacturers like IBM would be "Manufactured Goods." Microsoft is a little from column A, a little from column B, I dunno, but it doesn't matter all that much.

The reason I haven't said how the stock market would appear in the game is because the way I have imagined it, the market wouldn't be on a screen.

Instead corporations would affect how much money each stock market city improvements is bringing into your cities. There would be no screen, only Corporation A based in Moscow is doing very well, so stock market city improvements bring in more money for the Russian cities.

and your idea of kicking out corporations based on what form of government you got is very good.

quote: Major point: You lost me with your idea of "educating the citizens." This corporation model is a very good one, but adding an "education level" that separates people into classes is unnecessary. I don't mind separating citizens into class depending on what they do, that sounds okay, but dispense with schools and "text books" and newly created citizens as being "uneducated." Unnecessary. Superfluous. "Unemployment" is an unwieldy statistic that shouldn't clutter up the City Window. Maybe include it in the "Statistics" window, along with things like life expectancy and years of military service, but keep it out of city management. So the model should remain, as in Civ II, if you remove a Farmer from a Grassland square, he becomes an Entertainer (and upper class), not Unemployed.

I want see "Unemployment" in civIII whether my idea is used or not. If there is another way to represent "unemployment" idea more than pure stats I'll be happy support it. and "3 level class differentiation" is the simplest way to deal with social hierarchy throughout the game I believe.

Any other suggestion EnochF?

tniem
Oh dear. I sense some sadness from your words why? I don't know I just feel it.

quote: Instead corporations would affect how much money each stock market city improvements is bringing into your cities. There would be no screen, only Corporation A based in Moscow is doing very well, so stock market city improvements bring in more money for the Russian cities.

That perfectly makes sense. Great! I think Bank,Factory,Stock exchange and power generating facilities should be the key city improvements which interact with corporations.

quote: Oh dear. I sense some sadness from your words why? I don't know I just feel it.

Probably because I just got crushed in a game of Shogun that my friend begged me to play.

quote: Any other suggestion tniem?

This isn't really for this thread but the idea has come up.

Education, classes, etc. should be a part of Civ III. The way it would relate to corporations is that the more education your population has, the more likely that city can be the base of a corporation.

quote: Probably because I just got crushed in a game of Shogun that my friend begged me to play.

haha your friend must be eager to show his skills he has mastered.

quote: Education, classes, etc. should be a part of Civ III. The way it would relate to corporations is that the more education your population has, the more likely that city can be the base of a corporation.

Yes! Furthermore small number of educated pop can do better againt large number of peasant pop so China syndrome in the game can be fixed.

quote: Classes would then be effected by corporations. The more companies in a city the lower unemployment would be.

Exactly! tniem. In CivII everyone has guaranteed job which means zero unemployement. Building a school/university in a city should have positive effect on its citizens by increasing their education standard so they can afford more decent job easily otherwise their choice will be limited to basic manual labourers such as farmers/miners.

Hi Mihai we meet again here.

quote: Civilization is a state-based game. Capitalism Plus is a corporation-based game that include most of the ideas posted on this thread.

Read this plese.

quote: Ways of achieving final victory. 1.Military/diplomatic conquest-territorial victory(36%) 2.Economic supremacy-financial victory(25%) 3.Space race-research/engineering victory(14%) 4.cultural or religious domination-social victory(25%) Note:The percentages are not to be fixed and can be changed.

We need more Mihai things like "corporate warfare".

Roman

quote: I don't think it is overly complex at all.

Amen!

quote: The micromanagement involved is not too great either as you could have the equivalent of a major (CEO) for each company, which would automate the establishment of branches, etc. I believe the idea enhances both historical simulation and gameplay, so it meets both important criteria to be included in the game.

quote: Originally posted by Roman on 01-07-2001 05:31 AM The micromanagement involved is not too great either as you could have the equivalent of a major (CEO) for each company, which would automate the establishment of branches, etc.

The problem is that the average player, more or less must have it AI mayor-controlled, in order not to get drowned in micro-management. Mayor-controlled corporate warfare means automated; which means outside the players direct control. How fun is that? Isnt that like buying a piano, and then let it play mostly through computer-controlled automation?

Also; as a TBS gameplay fact:
Does city-mayors generally do a good enough job? Well, do they? Didnt SMAC-players complain about mayor-controlled terraformers, and also about other mayor-tasks? What about the city-mayors in CTP-2? No complains?

Now, dont misunderstund me. Im not AGAINST the city-mayors option. Its just that Firaxis shouldnt implement features that is so overloaded in terms of micro-management, that it more or less force on the help of AI-mayors, as a pre-understood assumption.
Yes, i understand that you have an option to control it yourself. But i suspect most players will have an idea as complex as this one automated. So in practice, the help of AI-mayors IS a pre-understood assumption.

I am very pleased you are still alive and "back" here again! Hurray!
Happy New Year and my best wishes for 2001! (for you too Ralf!)

Since your return the quality of discussions on this Forum has increased with about 75%, which is a relief!

On essentials I agree with you, especially with this part:

quote: Ways of achieving final victory. 1.Military/diplomatic conquest-territorial victory(36%) 2.Economic supremacy-financial victory(25%) 3.Space race-research/engineering victory(14%) 4.cultural or religious domination-social victory(25%) Note:The percentages are not to be fixed and can be changed.

In my view the importance of the military/conquest option should become even less than 36%.
Civilization is more than a war game! And should become less so!
In my view cultural and religious factors should become most important.

Hurrah and best wishes once again!

quote: Originally posted by S. Kroeze on 01-07-2001 11:32 AM Happy New Year and my best wishes for 2001! (for you too Ralf!)

Thanks! Well, what can i say, except likewise to you two!

quote: In my view the importance of the military/conquest option should become even less than 36%. Civilization is more than a war game! And should become less so! In my view cultural and religious factors should become most important.

How do you think above fits with below quote? Its a rehazed version of a post i wrote about 9 weeks ago about alternative gamepaths/ways to play the game/victory-conditions:

"What is the Civ-3 formula for FUN? Well, im of course bias, but for me it should mean:
Constantly being forced to make calculated choices that, whatever i choose; always going to give me both attractive benefits and hard-to-swallow trade-offs, in different, but non-soluble mixtures.
In other words: Never being able to succeed in ALL areas simultaneously, no matter how good i am. I must choose. I can win, but i cannot win simultaneously over the AI in all and every areas. While im perhaps have a 100% comfortable lead to one victory-condition, the AI might just win the overall game anyway, by being even more supreme in areas concerning some other victory-condition.

The FUN-part is that i have to constantly worry/make calculated quesses - and never being absolutely sure before the game is actually over."

Finally:

quote: The problem is that the average player, more or less must have it AI mayor-controlled, in order not to get drowned in micro-management. Mayor-controlled corporate warfare means automated; which means outside the players direct control. How fun is that? Isnt that like buying a piano, and then let it play mostly through computer-controlled automation?

Did you really read the thread carefully? Corporations are controlled by AI no matter who play(veteran players or newbies) Our job is to make the city enviroment favourable to corporations to make them flourish nothing more. But you can give some support fire to your corporations such as subsidies,tax exemption or tariff wall.

quote: Finally (again):Im not totally against the whole "economical warfare" concept. Infact, i like it. Its the way the whole concept is suggested to be implemented that i dont like.

Hello oppostion leader what's your alternative policy for that matter? this is prime minister speaking . Then please show me your version of corporate warfare or something similar to that. I'll be glad to take part in your model. Also I'm sick and tired of working alone at corporate warfare which nobody really gave me substantial alternative way to replace the original.

S.Kroeze. my best wishes for you too.
and thanks for the warm welcome buddy

quote: In my view cultural and religious factors should become most important

quote: "What is the Civ-3 formula for FUN? Well, im of course bias, but for me it should mean: Constantly being forced to make calculated choices that, whatever i choose; always going to give me both attractive benefits and hard-to-swallow trade-offs, in different, but non-soluble mixtures. In other words: Never being able to succeed in ALL areas simultaneously, no matter how good i am. I must choose. I can win, but i cannot win simultaneously over the AI in all and every areas. While im perhaps have a 100% comfortable lead to one victory-condition, the AI might just win the overall game anyway, by being even more supreme in areas concerning some other victory-condition.

Well said I agree.

quote: Youngsun, if you read this: Dont get all worked up over the fact that im not so crazy over the corporation-idea. Previous post was my last rant under this topic. Thats a promise. As i wrote in the other thread: The important thing is what visitors from Firaxis thinks about our ideas. Its really up to them.

So you still think all that debate started because I didn't like that fact you were not crazy about my idea.
haha. Well That's your perception. Oh Ralf Ralf Ralf... I explained in your thread about how it all got started.