-
-
April 16, 2009 at 4:24 am #1051
An idea that’s popped into my head over the last couple weeks regarding Clans/Clan Funds/Planetary Economies/Cargo prices.
Implement a Government Type feature like in the civilization games. Here’s how it’d work:
GOVT TYPE
Republic – Medium Upkeep cost per military unit (capital ship), Increased popular support on planets with active senators, War decreases popular support at a large rateMonarchy – Low Upkeep cost per military unit, Increased popular support on planets with multiple military units (scales with each additional unit), decreased trade income, taxes affect popular support at a greater rate, war decreases popular support at a moderate rate
Despotism (police state) – High Upkeep cost per military unit, +25/30% Unit production, war does not affect popular support
Anarchy – High upkeep, low popsupport, zero production, war tanks popsupport
This would provide a way to limit capships without a hard limit, and make the republic/DL/Empire etc run differently
other types could be added in!
-
April 16, 2009 at 9:34 am #9772
I really like the sound of this, but it needs more brainstorming and I have no suggestions whatsoever.
Talk about useless posts…
-
April 16, 2009 at 5:45 pm #9775
Well, the way upkeep would work is it’d basically drain clan funds per unit once you’re over certain thresholds. IE. 10 clanships pushes you into a certain level of upkeep, 50 into another, 100 into another, 200 into another.
Once a clan reached 0 funds the ships would begin to disappear and planets would start revolting.
-
April 17, 2009 at 8:48 pm #9784"Andvari":2xqw9b9h wrote:An idea that’s popped into my head over the last couple weeks regarding Clans/Clan Funds/Planetary Economies/Cargo prices.
Implement a Government Type feature like in the civilization games. Here’s how it’d work:
GOVT TYPE
Republic – Medium Upkeep cost per military unit (capital ship), Increased popular support on planets with active senators, War decreases popular support at a large rateMonarchy – Low Upkeep cost per military unit, Increased popular support on planets with multiple military units (scales with each additional unit), decreased trade income, taxes affect popular support at a greater rate, war decreases popular support at a moderate rate
Despotism (police state) – High Upkeep cost per military unit, +25/30% Unit production, war does not affect popular support
Anarchy – High upkeep, low popsupport, zero production, war tanks popsupport
This would provide a way to limit capships without a hard limit, and make the republic/DL/Empire etc run differently
other types could be added in![/quote:2xqw9b9h]
I’d change some of the specific pros and cons of the government types, and a couple of the names. For one, I don’t think that Anarchy would be a good government type; I’d replace it with, perhaps, Democracy–a weak, decentralized form of government. Below it, I’d add in Confederation–proven the weakest form of government around (see Articles of Confederation). That would allow you to do a more balanced spectrum: Confederation, Democracy, Republic, Monarchy, Despotism (from most libertarian to most overarching).Military upkeep – decreases as you go up the scale (subsidies, forced production)
Trade – decreases as you go up the scale (protectionism)
Popular support – if there were a way to do this, I’d say that the higher up on the scale you go, the more of a buffer there is–that is, the support can take so many points of impact that would otherwise drop the support before support actually drops. Additionally, make the natural decrease rate increase as you go up the scale–but just under the buffer. That would accurately represent the ability of those forms of government to effectively corral their citizenry, until the seed of dissent is planted; then, their tyrranical nature acts against them, and the citizens rebel more fervently than normal citizens would.
Finally, I’d say that each form of government should have one distinct advantage. The most obvious is the Republic; when a planet has a Senator, their popular support and trade are supplemented.
-
April 17, 2009 at 9:30 pm #9785
Anarchy doesn’t have a single possible benefit. Higher Upkeep costs = bad. L2Read.
-
April 17, 2009 at 11:17 pm #9786
Wouldn’t anarchy be low upkeep since there’s no government control?
-
April 18, 2009 at 7:33 am #9789
Well, "Anarchy" isn’t really anarchy.
In theory, local communities would form local governments/councils in charge of law, trade, et cetera and trade with all the areas around them.
But anarchy, by the definition that WE know it as today, is nothing like what "Anarchy" is. They honestly should be separate terms.
Anarchy, by it’s better definition, is the lack of a centralized government in a greater cooperative nation. That would be like having our 50 states, with no central government, but we’re still a nation/strong alliance kind of thing.
But most people think Anarchy is violence, rioting, et cetera.
So when you have Anarchy as a government type, you basically have smaller governments on all the worlds connected by a clantalk or something that work together in trade and protection.
-
April 18, 2009 at 12:43 pm #9792"Andvari":fxgtba0f wrote:Anarchy doesn’t have a single possible benefit. Higher Upkeep costs = bad. L2Read.[/quote:fxgtba0f]
Good as in good to implement–anarchy is already represented by the whole "Governed by: " aspect–not good as in good to use as your governing method if you’re an IC clan.
L2thesaurus"Rojan QDel":fxgtba0f wrote:Wouldn’t anarchy be low upkeep since there’s no government control?[/quote:fxgtba0f]
I think he’s getting at the fact that people would rather make food than bullets, and in an anarchy they have that choice, where as in a tyrannical government what they make is entirely forced."Skiia":fxgtba0f wrote:Anarchy, by it’s better definition, is the lack of a centralized government in a greater cooperative nation. That would be like having our 50 states, with no central government, but we’re still a nation/strong alliance kind of thing.
[/quote:fxgtba0f]
Wrong!
That, by its very definition, is a confederation."dictionary.reference.com":fxgtba0f wrote:a group of confederates, esp. of states more or less permanently united for common purposes.[/quote:fxgtba0f]
-
April 18, 2009 at 7:01 pm #9794
That was just an example. Imagine Anarchy as a confederation, but on a much much smaller scale. Say, on the size of communities.
-
May 6, 2009 at 7:26 am #9891
The problem is that there’s no real ability to "change your civics" according to your need. In LotJ, the clans are what they are, and the RP revolves around that. It’s not like Palpatine was sitting in his office and one morning, decided to browse through his advisor screens, and realized that Empire clan-types have unlimited free unit support and that compensates for the slightly higher upkeep and increase in unhappiness and then clicked the little overthrow button.
When I wanna play Civilization IV, I play Civilization IV.
-
This topic has 10 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 15 years ago by .
Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.