Government

There are strategys which affect the military and then there's my idea governments.

GOVERNMENTS:
are kinda like strategys but they affect countries or your economy
example:capitalism provides extra 5% income
another goverment can provide faster population growth or more reinforcements or able to detect stealth a little bit farther away from your citys and so on.

but also to make it balanced there can be disadvantages like the opposite of ^
and if u dont want a government then u can put none just like strategy

Good idea : )

Seems cool, support!

Having Govts to mix your strats seems great!

Written by Goblin, 28.01.2013 at 11:36

Not bad ...like goverments types in Civilization that gave certain boosts.

I like this idea. We should also add Morale to AW in the future. If countries are taken away from a Player's empire then the morale of the player's army decreases and that lowers the success rate of an attack.

Written by Guest, 28.01.2013 at 11:44

Written by Goblin, 28.01.2013 at 11:36

Not bad ...like goverments types in Civilization that gave certain boosts.

I like this idea. We should also add Morale to AW in the future. If countries are taken away from a Player's empire then the morale of the player's army decreases and that lowers the success rate of an attack.

Morale seems nice, finishes games faster!
OT: Communism giving +2 reinfs at cost of morale or weaker units (based on massive armies)

Or, of course, we could add strategies that affect city income, population, reinfs, etc. I think a whole new system just for these elements would be a little too much. Perhaps a strat with extra reinfs or population growth, at the cost of reduced income? Or the opposite, more income but -1 reinfs for cities with 2+.

Naturally, you have to be careful with modifying income and such, as having a different starting cash can completely change the balance.

I like this idea !!!

Support

Support.

Imagine a self determination supporting country that cannot take neutral countries, only enemy ones.

Written by themartinmcfly, 30.01.2013 at 07:59

Support.

Imagine a self determination supporting country that cannot take neutral countries, only enemy ones.

Umm... How are you planning to expand in first turn then?

It would be fairly useless. Although maybe it could buy neutral countries.

I support, although I am worried if it will add too much complexity to the game.

Maybe there could be a militaristic government where cities had increased production, but grew at a slower rate (as if the government were drafting more people for the military than normal, so the population slowed as a result)

Maybe there could be some sort of genocidal government where cities taken took much higher collateral, and i'm not sure if I should add in a nerf, as taking destroyed cities may be a curse in itself.

Maybe even a government based on trade, where you would gain 5% of each of your allies' profit, and 2% of the profit of anybody you are at peace with. The drawback could be that ending a peace treaty would cause a slowing of your economy in every city, and ending an alliance would cause a larger decrease, where ending the subsequent peace treaty would cause an even further decrease. Having allies die would cause a similar effect, so it would require players to be more conscious of who they ally, while providing a benefit from those who you do ally.

One last one I can think of is a communist government. Every time you completely take a country, the values of every country you have is averaged, and the resulting country has the same income as all of your other countries. For example, you start off with one country that has 100 income, and you take a country that has 50 income. The value of both of your countries would be averaged (75) and distributed to both countries. This would permanently adjust the income, so if somebody took the country that WAS 100 income, they would be taking a country worth 75 income (at least, at 100% income). Since your countries are already all the same, losing a country will not effect the income of each of your countries. Since your countries are all the same, it makes it simple, yet ineffective to attack in areas. There is no weak point of the nation, as attacking anywhere will lead to the same effect. This is both a blessing and a curse, as there is nowhere that is critical to keep defended, yet, everywhere must be defended equally. This would be more useful in attacking rich nations, for if you took the USA: Atlantic with an average of 200 income per country, that land would lower to slightly higher than 200 income, and if taken back by the defender, would be land that is worth much less. However, if you take South Sudan, and had an average income of 200, and then South Sudan were taken back, your foe would be given land that is worth much more, and your enemy could build upon this.

Yeah civics like in Civ 4.

Very cool idea, i like it! I think it doesn't need to come as a replacement of strategies, and also not make governments as a strategy, but i like a combination of a strategy with a government. That will make the number of possible combinations high, and its hard to see for you enemy what combination you use.

Just a few more examples to add:

Anarchy: -
No goverment selected, no extra bonus

Capitalism:

Gives 10% extra income to cities and countries
- -1 Defense for the units in the city when attacked

Communism:

Gives unlimited reinforcements to your capital city
- -1 Reinforcements for all other cities

Facism:

Your cities will get reinforcements every 3 turns (instead of 4)
- -1 Defence for all units.

Monarchy:

Gives you a extra unit: King. Its the same like a general, but a king will give you +5 Attack and Defence for units with the King in stack.

Dictatorship

-25% costs for all units

Adds unit: Dictator (second general)
- When the dictator is killed, the player will lose 1 reïnforcement to all cities

Democracy

Will give you a new general every 4 turns
- -1 Defense for all units without a general in stack

Anyone got more idea's?

True, i used capitalism because it was already a example

Written by Hugosch, 31.01.2013 at 03:33

Very cool idea, i like it! I think it doesn't need to come as a replacement of strategies, and also not make governments as a strategy, but i like a combination of a strategy with a government. That will make the number of possible combinations high, and its hard to see for you enemy what combination you use.

Just a few more examples to add:

Anarchy: -
No goverment selected, no extra bonus

Capitalism:

Gives 10% extra income to cities and countries
- -1 Defense for the units in the city when attacked

Communism:

Gives unlimited reinforcements to your capital city
- -1 Reinforcements for all other cities

Facism:

Your cities will get reinforcements every 3 turns (instead of 4)
- -1 Defence for all units.

Monarchy:

Gives you a extra unit: King. Its the same like a general, but a king will give you +5 Attack and Defence for units with the King in stack.

Dictatorship

-25% costs for all units

Adds unit: Dictator (second general)
- When the dictator is killed, the player will lose 1 reïnforcement to all cities

Democracy

Will give you a new general every 4 turns
- -1 Defense for all units without a general in stack

Anyone got more idea's?

All of thinks looks OP. I'm talking about 3v3 or cws of course. Would be fun in world games : )

Written by Hugosch, 31.01.2013 at 03:33

Very cool idea, i like it! I think it doesn't need to come as a replacement of strategies, and also not make governments as a strategy, but i like a combination of a strategy with a government. That will make the number of possible combinations high, and its hard to see for you enemy what combination you use.

Just a few more examples to add:

Anarchy: -
No goverment selected, no extra bonus

Capitalism:

Gives 10% extra income to cities and countries
- -1 Defense for the units in the city when attacked

Communism:

Gives unlimited reinforcements to your capital city
- -1 Reinforcements for all other cities

Facism:

Your cities will get reinforcements every 3 turns (instead of 4)
- -1 Defence for all units.

Monarchy:

Gives you a extra unit: King. Its the same like a general, but a king will give you +5 Attack and Defence for units with the King in stack.

Dictatorship

-25% costs for all units

Adds unit: Dictator (second general)
- When the dictator is killed, the player will lose 1 reïnforcement to all cities

Democracy

Will give you a new general every 4 turns
- -1 Defense for all units without a general in stack

Anyone got more idea's?

I support Hugo's Idea. But complexity is a problem, so to reduce this problem I would suggest only being able to interchange with the different types of government. whenever the given players feels it necessary to do so.

Written by Roncho, 31.01.2013 at 08:49

Written by Hugosch, 31.01.2013 at 03:33

...

All of thinks looks OP. I'm talking about 3v3 or cws of course. Would be fun in world games : )

keep in mind that every player got the opportunity for this extras to this is not OP.

Written by Roncho, 31.01.2013 at 08:49

All of thinks looks OP. I'm talking about 3v3 or cws of course. Would be fun in world games : )

Why is it OP? It would be the same if i called all strategies OP. There just needs to be balancement, so every government has about the same strength.
Also; it where just some examples.

I like it very much, actually!

We could start with just a few "governments" and balance them, and as the time goes we (or they ) could add more of it.

Written by Hugosch, 31.01.2013 at 11:26

Written by Roncho, 31.01.2013 at 08:49

All of thinks looks OP. I'm talking about 3v3 or cws of course. Would be fun in world games : )

Why is it OP? It would be the same if i called all strategies OP. There just needs to be balancement, so every government has about the same strength.
Also; it where just some examples.

I'm not saying government will unbalance the game but I think your suggestions would make player op. Like unlimited rein in capital, rein week 3 etc etc. Some of them are fine but some of them are extreme.

I like the idea, maybe add it as an option? In my mind adding some simple things like this will make AtWar more fun and a little less repetitive. (and really this barely makes it any more complex) I do prefer a game of skill and if this is balanced you will still need the same amount of skill.

Written by Hugosch, 31.01.2013 at 03:33

Very cool idea, i like it! I think it doesn't need to come as a replacement of strategies, and also not make governments as a strategy, but i like a combination of a strategy with a government. That will make the number of possible combinations high, and its hard to see for you enemy what combination you use.

Just a few more examples to add:

Anarchy: -
No goverment selected, no extra bonus

Capitalism:

Gives 10% extra income to cities and countries
- -1 Defense for the units in the city when attacked

Communism:

Gives unlimited reinforcements to your capital city
- -1 Reinforcements for all other cities

Facism:

Your cities will get reinforcements every 3 turns (instead of 4)
- -1 Defence for all units.

Monarchy:

Gives you a extra unit: King. Its the same like a general, but a king will give you +5 Attack and Defence for units with the King in stack.

Dictatorship

-25% costs for all units

Adds unit: Dictator (second general)
- When the dictator is killed, the player will lose 1 reïnforcement to all cities

Democracy

Will give you a new general every 4 turns
- -1 Defense for all units without a general in stack

Anyone got more idea's?

What About:
Socialist. [Is like the middle of democracy and communism]
Republic/Parliamentary [ the middle between Deomocracy and Dictatorship/Monarchy]
Theocracy. [is the middle of Monarchy and Totalitarian]
Totalitarian [is the middle of communism and dictatorship]

I completely agree with sandtime. Some of the suggestions Hugosch made would seriously screw up the game, but I agree would be kinda fun in a more casual type game. So I'd just make it an option to allow governments.

Given that we have a choice in the matter, I support.

Attempt to better balance everything and make you play differently with each one (and hopefully making it into a implementable way).

Capitalism:
Gives 400% extra income for country bonus (basically country bonus is 40% better or 50% total)
-1 Defense for the units in the city when attacked

Communism:
Gives one reinforcement in all cities
+10 cost to all units

Facism:
Your cities will get reinforcements every 3 turns (instead of 4)
-1 attack for all units.

Monarchy:
Renames your general to King. Its the same like a general, but a king will give you (idk yet)

Dictatorship
Renames your general to dictator
-1 reinforcements in all cities
-10 cost to all units
When your general dies "cities prize the day" and all units gain +1 attack and +1 defense/but anarchy happens and all units cost 30 more.

Democracy
Will give you a new general every 4 turns
-1 Defense for all units without a general in stack
You don't start with a general (the democracy must grow first)

Note:Monarchy, dictatorship, and democracy are premium.

Why is this not implemented yet?

Who cares if they are socio-economic attributes instead of government types? This is a game, not your Ph.d. dissertation on the structure of governing nation states.

I think this is a great feature and should be implemented, at least as an option. Player can select one form of government that lasts the game. It is Civilization-esque.

We might want to nail down the bumps though. Infinite reinforcements in capital at the cost of -1 to other cities would be way OP, especially later on in a game when cash is not an issue.

Written by Goblin, 08.03.2013 at 04:32

Written by Guest14502, 07.03.2013 at 15:05

Who cares if they are socio-economic attributes instead of government types? This is a game, not your Ph.d. dissertation on the structure of governing nation states.

I think this is a great feature and should be implemented, at least as an option. Player can select one form of government that lasts the game. It is Civilization-esque.

We might want to nail down the bumps though. Infinite reinforcements in capital at the cost of -1 to other cities would be way OP, especially later on in a game when cash is not an issue.

Never said i didnt like the idea.

you never say you support it.

Having a combination of strategies and governments looks like it will create a much more unique gameplay styles for people.
Support, but some of those effects seem too extreme.

Written by NoOne, 08.03.2013 at 14:18

Having a combination of strategies and governments looks like it will create a much more unique gameplay styles for people.
Support, but some of those effects seem too extreme.

Also we can add religions, sanitation, administration of banks and then we have a game that requires 20 minutes each turn.
Thats unplayable.