Return to “Suggestions”

Post

Re: Managing Planetary Government

#48
the graph up there symbolises the relation between the 2 input parameters (the policies) and an output factor (i think you used economic strenght)

so now just change how the output behaves at certain input states and use it for something else, research output for example

and do the same for every parameter you want to modify
economic strenght
probability to revolt
research output
etc

place the "good" points at different places for every output and you have no "the" policy combination and have to choose
Post

Re: Managing Planetary Government

#49
Cornflakes_91 wrote:the graph up there symbolises the relation between the 2 input parameters (the policies) and an output factor (i think you used economic strenght)

so now just change how the output behaves at certain input states and use it for something else, research output for example

and do the same for every parameter you want to modify
economic strenght
probability to revolt
research output
etc

place the "good" points at different places for every output and you have no "the" policy combination and have to choose
The plots are showing Political Policy (Who your government derives power from, ranging from no one (Molotovism) to yourself (Psychoticism)) versus Economic Policy (Economic Far Right (Atlasism, named after Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand) to the Economic Far Left (Plan & Command, based on the soviet command economy). The squares are indicative of how stable your government will be - how easy it would be to collapse unless you're careful.

The second graph is the same thing, but on how much economic output you have the potential to have.
Lurker Mode: DEACTIVATED
The most intriguing fact about imagination is that its all in your head.
Post

Re: Managing Planetary Government

#55
MyNameWuzTaken wrote:Lets just put a drop down menu with those choices, but not have them change anything. Then the player thinks he's running a government but really the AI is just doing its thing. Or we could slap a forum in game, call it a senate and a House of Representatives, let them argue endlessly, but never change any game settings.
How cynical and deviant.
Lurker Mode: DEACTIVATED
The most intriguing fact about imagination is that its all in your head.
Post

Re: Managing Planetary Government

#56
HKY09 wrote:Just for a demonstration, I drew up a quick plot to measure stability:
Image The Red squares represent total instability and maximum unhappiness - where revolt and change is most likely to happen.
Yellow represents neutral, corresponding policies where you're unlikely to draw revolt.
Green represents cheaty policies to ensure you would never lose power anywhere ever.

Now, below is a plot to measure economic health and which policies will bring you the most money, versus ones that might haemorrhage money if used incorrectly:
Image Red = Bad economic health
Yellow = Stable economic health
Green = Immensely Quick economic growth.

Notice the correlation between Economic Freedoms and Stability?
As you gain more order, your economic health may suffer.
As you grow more chaotic, your economic health will grow.
How Libertarian of me xP
Question: I see that the more libertarian the policy is the more developed your economy is. Whether that is true or not is another thread but the point is that in that case very little of the wealth of the economy is at the disposal of the government! Perhaps this should be a penalty of sorts?
Post

Re: Managing Planetary Government

#57
Forgive me for two consecutive posts but they regard two different subjects so they should not be lumped together.

That being said let us begin. I see that this thread talks allot about set categories of governments. This government is socialist this one is liberal this one is imperialists etc...

But my question is why should that be so? Why can't we have a system of government emerge procedural?
Allow me to give an example to better explain my point:

Say group X decides to set up a colony on planet Y. In order for that to happen they would need some sort of hierarchy, someone or some group of people to elaborate a colonization plan and to organize the basic infrastructure for the needs of the colonists. At this point there is no government per say but rather an organizational structure with clearly set and finite goals (build the roads, the sewers the water purification plant etc)
Then say some other unforeseen or unexpected problem emerges (pirates, toxic or hostile native life etc), now you have a choice either you organize a separate project for defensive purpose, be it under the authority of the initial project management teem or a totally separate teem. With just two project teams put together the risk of overlap would be minimum but as more and more teams are put together to deal with different emergent problems you need someone to coordinate them to insure that there is no or minimal overlap.
Now this central authority at this point is not exactly what you might call a government but it does fulfill some of the basic needs of it.
Say that this central structure or authority becomes incompetent, people want to change it or replace it so they put in place rules on how and under what conditions the one or ones that are the central authority can be replaced or can take the place of the central authority.
And so on and so on till you get closer and closer to an actual system of government. You need needn't a clearly defined constitution just look at the UK.

My point is that government should evolve from small colonial project teams to government with no clearly defined line that states this is a government and this is just a colonial project team.
Post

Re: Managing Planetary Government

#58
Hadrianus wrote: Question: I see that the more libertarian the policy is the more developed your economy is. Whether that is true or not is another thread but the point is that in that case very little of the wealth of the economy is at the disposal of the government! Perhaps this should be a penalty of sorts?
The idea behind it was that there was more money flowing in the market without regulation or intervention - therefore, you'd be technically just another corporation competing in the market with everyone else. It was supposed to be a massive monetary boost to your income on all planets, but it couldn't possibly last very long before you or another faction seized more economic control, causing revolution. Ideally, you'd need to think "What is the government with this combination?" - as with the AnCap (Molotovism and Atlasism) policies, you'd be more a corporation than a government. You wouldn't be installing leaders, or creating laws, etc.
Hadrianus wrote:Say group X decides to set up a colony on planet Y. In order for that to happen they would need some sort of hierarchy, someone or some group of people to elaborate a colonization plan and to organize the basic infrastructure for the needs of the colonists. At this point there is no government per say but rather an organizational structure with clearly set and finite goals (build the roads, the sewers the water purification plant etc)
Then say some other unforeseen or unexpected problem emerges (pirates, toxic or hostile native life etc), now you have a choice either you organize a separate project for defensive purpose, be it under the authority of the initial project management teem or a totally separate teem. With just two project teams put together the risk of overlap would be minimum but as more and more teams are put together to deal with different emergent problems you need someone to coordinate them to insure that there is no or minimal overlap.
Now this central authority at this point is not exactly what you might call a government but it does fulfill some of the basic needs of it.
Say that this central structure or authority becomes incompetent, people want to change it or replace it so they put in place rules on how and under what conditions the one or ones that are the central authority can be replaced or can take the place of the central authority.
And so on and so on till you get closer and closer to an actual system of government. You need needn't a clearly defined constitution just look at the UK.

My point is that government should evolve from small colonial project teams to government with no clearly defined line that states this is a government and this is just a colonial project team.
Well, yea, but then how does the player get involved? How does the player choose to govern his empire? How does he co trol its inner workings to benefit him, or help him expand?
Lurker Mode: DEACTIVATED
The most intriguing fact about imagination is that its all in your head.
Post

Re: Managing Planetary Government

#59
Ooh, I've got it. Screw the square grids. Government is handled very simply by using sliders that equate to the traits all AI are assigned. You set the sliders and three things happen:

1. The happiness of AI is affected by how similar their traits are to your government type.
2. Gradually, the personalities of the colonies and players you control shift to be more similar to your government type.
3. Actions contrary to your government type will cause increased unhappiness. Example: waging continuous wars when you have declared your government to have low aggression.

This system would be simple to implement and use, but have plenty of depth.

AI that are unhappy enough can begin rebellions that have different government "personality" types. Other unhappy AI with similar traits may join the new faction.

I don't know, throw a wrench in it. So far as I can see, it's pretty good. Hate typing on IPhone, so keeping it short.
Post

Re: Managing Planetary Government

#60
MyNameWuzTaken wrote:Ooh, I've got it. Screw the square grids. Government is handled very simply by using sliders that equate to the traits all AI are assigned. You set the sliders and three things happen:

1. The happiness of AI is affected by how similar their traits are to your government type.
2. Gradually, the personalities of the colonies and players you control shift to be more similar to your government type.
3. Actions contrary to your government type will cause increased unhappiness. Example: waging continuous wars when you have declared your government to have low aggression.

This system would be simple to implement and use, but have plenty of depth.

AI that are unhappy enough can begin rebellions that have different government "personality" types. Other unhappy AI with similar traits may join the new faction.

I don't know, throw a wrench in it. So far as I can see, it's pretty good. Hate typing on IPhone, so keeping it short.
Can you elaborate? Maybe draw some concepts? c:
Lurker Mode: DEACTIVATED
The most intriguing fact about imagination is that its all in your head.

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron