Despotism-
Tax Collecting- 50% (taxes)
War- 100% (unhappy by war)
Infastructure- 20% (production)
Happiness- 25%

Tribal-
Tax Collecting- 25%
War- 50%
Infastructure- 75%
Happiness- 100%

City State-
Tax Collecting- 50%
War- 25%
Infastructure- 100%
Happiness- 75%

Monarchy-
Tax Collecting- 75%
War- 75%
Infastructure- 40%
Happiness- 40%

Feudal-
Tax Collecting- 50%
War- 100%
Infastructure- 30%
Happiness- 30%

Theocracy-
Tax Collecting- 40%
War- 40%
Infastructure- 50%
Happiness- 70%

Communism-
Tax Collecting- 100%
War- 50%
Infastructure- 30%
Happiness- 30%

Fascism-
Tax Collecting- 75%
War- 100%
Infastructure- 40%
Happiness- 20%

Socialism-
Tax Collecting- 75%
War- 60%
Infastructure- 40%
Happiness- 40%

Socialism-
Tax Collecting- 75%
War- 60%
Infastructure- 40%
Happiness- 40%

Republic-
Tax Collecting- 75%
War- 40%
Infastructure- 50%
Happiness- 60%

Democracy-
Tax Collecting- 85%
War- 55%
Infastructure- 60%
Happiness- 80%

quote: If we were also doning a bit into the future, a "Hive Mind" government could also work. I must be watching too much Star Trek...

Isn't that the same as your true democracy.

How does:
-socialism differ from communism
-feudalism differ from monarchy
-tribalism differ from despotism
In the game sense. I know that in real life these systems may differ in some respects, but how do you represent that in the game.

Personally I prefer social engineering.

quote: -Despotism -Tribal (New!) -City-State (New!) -Monarchy -Feudal (New!) -Theocracy (New!) -Communism -Fascism -Socialism (New!) -Republic -Democracy -Market (New!)

"Tribal" should be the form of government for civs less advanced than the starting civ2 civs - it would be the "government" of the nomadic tribes idea that some people here like.

"Feudal" would be a very specific type of government that reduce efficiency a lot (the peasants each manage a small lot of land) , and yet at the same time allow cavalry/infantry units to be more easily built. Under this, a castle improvement could be built for more cheaply (it would allow for perhaps defence bonuses against non-gunpowder units). Taxes would be harder to collect, but there would be less unhappy people.

quote: -socialism differ from communism

In realistic in-game terms (ie. how the two are percieved in R/L): Socialism is a "milder" form of communism, in that it still retains some of the features of the democracy (more freedoms, less autocratic control). A "compromise"-type government for those who want a clean, easy government type without major drawbacks.

In idealistic in-game terms (ie. how the "pure" marxist would view the two concepts): Socialism is the government which is now designated communism. Communism is an ideal stateless world in which either (according to Marx) no politics exist, or (according to Trotsky) only very superficial politics exist. Leadership would therefore be removed, and your entire existance will cease to be important. Everyone lives in a perfect paradise world. You've won the game!

quote: "Tribal" should be the form of government for civs less advanced than the starting civ2 civs - it would be the "government" of the nomadic tribes idea that some people here like.

I like this idea.

quote: feudalism differ from monarchy

Feudalism is really an economic system where feudal lords own vast tracts of land that were farmed, for free, by serfs. Since creature comforts were kept at a minimum (for the peasants) and the huge numbers of "free" workers to conscript from it would allow you to build a large army. Of course since the peasants could only work the lord's crops and not their own, and the occasional plague, would lower efficiency a whole lot.

The rest of the list looks great except for city-state and market. In a city-state you would either find a true democracy or some kind of monarchy, nothing else really since the era of city-states is well far behind us. I assume market would lean towards something like the Morganic faction of SMAC. This could be a economic system, though.

A true democracy is a good idea.

Darkcloud- UK and Scandinavia are democracies, aside from health care, that UK economy isn't much more socialize that that of the US- the political systems are similar, although Europe tends to follow a parliamentary system, and the US has a presidential system. Big whoop, people still vote for representatives, etc etc. And I think it's established most gov't functions will be replaced by Social Engineering. Perhaps, maybe even hopefully, we can have a basic government shell and control the SE of that gov't. It would allow popular revolutions, while letting the player control the specifics.

Socialism and Communism are not governments but economy models. They are usually enforced by dictatorships (Which should be on the list!)

I hope I'm not sounding too pushy.

BUT we have a parliament and democratic elections, so we are a democracy.

BUT we are a welfare state, so we are socialistic.

I'm a bit confused.....

quote: Originally posted by Christantine The Great on 11-24-2000 01:33 AM Socialism and Communism are not governments but economy models. They are usually enforced by dictatorships I hope I'm not sounding too pushy.

Not pushy, but still wrong IMHO.

Communism is a government type, ruled by a single political party that makes all the decisions, economic or otherwise. Because of this it can hardly have anything else but a planned economy, if it wants to function at all. However, other government types can also have a more-or-less planned economy.

Socialism is not a government, nor is it an economy model. It is an ideology that calls upon the (any) government to take care of all citizens, in contrast to "laissez fair". This encompasses economic factors (key industries controlled or directed by the government, so at least partly planned is mandatory) as well as social (welfare, healthcare, housing).

Both Democratic and Communistic governments are well capable of carrying out "socialist" policies.

The Netherlands do not have a Monarchy type of government, but a (rather socialistic) Democracy. Iraq is a Monarchy, like Jordan. Lybia is a dictatorship (Despotism), Egypt a Democracy. As far as I know there are no Arab Theocracies; Iran (non-Arab!) was one but is now in transition again.

The difference between a Democracy and a Republic is that is a Republic the few elect the few (like the Roman senate chose its own members), while in a Democracy (be it "pure" or representative) "everyone" has the right to vote and "anyone" can be elected.

quote: Originally posted by DarkCloud on 11-22-2000 06:05 PM Market- *Most advanced form of Government Tax Collecting- 100% War- 60% Infastructure- 75% Happiness- 85%

I dont know how long Civ-3 is supposed to stretch into the future, but generally i DONT think "Market" should be the most advanced form of government.

Its just too controversial. Like having Marxism/historical materialism as a base to build the economical mechanics behind the game. The game-designers of Civ-3 must avoid having such traditional "red" or conventional profit-worshiping choices as so-called "most advanced" governments.

Market economy is about economical dog-eat-dog ideals, that limps along because, at present, there isnt any believeable alternatives. But, for the next 100, 200 or even 500 years into the future? Please, dont give up hope...

To cheer you guys up, i give the following simile about our civilisations history and future:

The mid-winter (dec) is the darkest part of the year, but often not yet the coldest. By comparison, the late-winter period (feb) is gradually more brighten, but at the same time often the coldest month of the year.

Similarly, we aften talk about our medieval/ancient history as a morally "darker times", but also a time where people was much less cynical and jaded about believe-systems and ideals (= dec: yet not so "cold" times).

By comparision, our modern world, symbolises februari: We live in somewhat "brighter times" in some limited ways: We have education, medical and geriatric care, red cross, social work and material/technical conveniences, that all contributes to make our lives somewhat easier to live.
At the same time the modern man have found himself in much "colder times". Many modern people dont beleive in anything anymore. Not in a God and overal purpose, and not in any other beleive- or value-systems either.

Well, im maybe incredible naive here - but what comes after late-winter? Our civilization has perhaps not reach its coldest turning-point yet: Maybe there are temporary social and economical collapses, and even major wars along the way - i dont know.

But, does late-winters last forever an ever? Nope!

But there is NOTHING that says a Communist country can not have free elections (a cornerstone to a Democracy). And there is no reason why a Communist country can not have a Parliament or Congress, and there is no reason they can't have a fair court system. And in Civilization, the game should be showing the fundamental intentions of a government not what the results have been.

I think that the best thing to do is have different economies and governments, and even different levels of democratization as was previously suggested.

------------------
"...The highest realization of warfare is to attack the enemy's plans; next is to attack their alliances; next to attack their army; and the lowest is to attack their fortified cities." - Sun Tzu

"I think anybody who doesn't think I'm smart enough to handle this job is under-estimating" - George "Dubya" Bush

quote: Originally posted by Dom Pedro II on 11-26-2000 01:38 PM But there is NOTHING that says a Communist country can not have free elections (a cornerstone to a Democracy).

As was always the case in Yugoslavia. However, under Communism only members of one party can be elected, so it isn't the same as under Democracy.

Tical_2000, I think your definition of "pure" Communism is a bit strange, but if we want Civ to represent history there is no place for "pure" Communism or Democracy anyway if the real world never had something like that.

I'd much prefer to adjust the definitions so that they fit common reality, instead of the other way around

quote: Originally posted by Tical_2000 on 11-26-2000 03:52 PM Don't be stupid! Of course there can be no 'pure' communism.

Mat 24:35 "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away".

"Heaven" means mankinds present value-systems and believes.
"earth" means mankinds present ways of doing things.
"my words" means the underlying moral in the Sermon on the Mount.

quote: If you think you are amusing anyone with your political theory knowledge, you are mistaken.

quote: Originally posted by Tical_2000 on 11-26-2000 03:52 PM -Don't be stupid! Of course there can be no 'pure' communism. So what the hell is your point? If you think you are amusing anyone with your political theory knowledge, you are mistaken.

Darn, you were in my target audience and I didn't amuse you... I was planning the Trotsky Stand Up Hour and even contemplated building the Adam Smith Comedy Hall Wonder. Would you perhaps snicker at the Lenin List of Jokes? I heard Marx bombed on the Issac Newton Show!

How can I go on....?

Market can be real: look at Wall Street, now imagine an entire world governed by free enterprise and stocks, that is Market.

NO! Under a true democracy the people can vote for ANYONE they want to. They do not need to constantly vote for Democrats, as under a Republic you don't need to vote for Republicans.

Communism is an economic model. Dictatorships usually use a combination of a secret police and a communist economy to keep the people of a country in check.

[q]but if we want Civ to represent history there is no place for "pure" Communism or Democracy anyway if the real world never had something like that.
[q]

Remember, we are rewriting history. That means we can do what history says we can do but never really did it!

Market...Hmm...not too realistic, the world being governed by the rise and fall of stock prices. It sounds like the people will be a bit pissed, not too happy.

In Civ II the designers favored a Democratic government probably because they lived in a democratic republic (U.S.). They made democracy the "best" government with the communist government that history shows us in second place. Each government should have its strong points that other governments cannot have.

quote: Originally posted by Christantine The Great on 11-27-2000 08:40 PM Under a true democracy the people can vote for ANYONE they want to. They do not need to constantly vote for Democrats, as under a Republic you don't need to vote for Republicans.

Like I said, that's where Communism and Democracy differ. A Republic may or may not have parties, but "you" don't get to vote anyway. Only the "elite" can vote in a Republic.

quote: Communism is an economic model. Dictatorships usually use a combination of a secret police and a communist economy to keep the people of a country in check.

Get real! Dictators don't consider industries etc. state- or people-owned, they consider them their personal property. A Communist government is not a dictatorship.

quote: In Civ II the designers favored a Democratic government probably because they lived in a democratic republic (U.S.). They made democracy the "best" government with the communist government that history shows us in second place. Each government should have its strong points that other governments cannot have.

Well, the 3 "modern" governments do. It depends entirely on how you play the game whether Democracy, Communism or Fundamentalism is best.

quote: Maybe, along with the regular choices, there should be a panel of check boxes on the side of the screen that differ from each type of government. The check boxes would be small changes you could do to your government to further refine it.

I agree, refinement is a nice option . I prefer Social Engineering (as in SMAC) to accomplish this.

Btw DarkCloud here is yet another government type: the military Junta.

- Rib -

quote: Originally posted by Ribannah on 11-28-2000 08:00 AM Btw DarkCloud here is yet another government type: the military Junta. - Rib -

Like, no unhappiness. Population decreases, lowering of science, more money, like the facist patch for civ2 if you ask me.

lots of unhappiness if changing into a democracy.

may replace anarchy for modern age.

quote: Originally posted by DarkCloud on 11-28-2000 09:20 PM Ribannah- the "Junta" if that truly is a utopic society, ...

Huh? Of course it isn't, far from it! It has many disadvantages. But it IS a government type that is often used in the real world.

- Rib -

Cryptocracy - secret rule (ie. the government is "hidden", so nobody knows who rules. It could also involve a democracy on the surface but in reality...)

Technocracy - rule primarily by scientists (and the educated elite)

quote: Originally posted by Roman on 11-29-2000 02:48 PM Some more theoretical government types (though I don't think they should be included unless the game continues far into the future, which I oppose and even then...): Cryptocracy - secret rule (ie. the government is "hidden", so nobody knows who rules. It could also involve a democracy on the surface but in reality...) Technocracy - rule primarily by scientists (and the educated elite) And one historical gov: Oligocracy - the rule by merchants

Some of these sound more like ideologies than government types.

quote: A Republican is not from a Republic, and a Democrat is not from a Democracy,

Sorry.

quote: A Communist government is not a dictatorship.

That is not what I said. I said that in Civ II, they describe a communist dictatorship in the Civlopedia entry for Communism.