Can you make it so that when a policy affects less people it costs less political capital. For example when you have zero alcohol usage changing the tax should be pretty easy.
@tyalikanky3 жыл бұрын
"Реакция ядерного распада" => "Ядерная энергетика" "Пользователи транспорта" => "Пассажиры" Would be better to use smaller fonts or two-level captions
@miki-kun3 жыл бұрын
on behalf on Polish fans I send huge thanks
@PESTREAM3 жыл бұрын
So im actually Polish and i won’t but your game for couple of reasons; -first and foremost, Democracy should be all about elections and parliamentary actions and this is a 4th Democracy and elections are still more basic than some online freemium games out there - no polling suspense, no maps, no personas, unrealistic party proportions, !no role of the opposition, !!inability to be in opposition to fight back for the powrr i mean whaaat?! As if political process ended for any party with its defeat...NO! This is where the fun begins, where intrigues should commence. Then there is a single-chamber aspect - its basically a cabinet-dictatorship game not a democratic one - no courts, no presidents, bo custom systems for specific countries, no constitutional courts and nominees. There is no cooperating with other parties, no deals to make to get law introduced... Overall i had HUUUGE hopes for 3rd sequel of the game and found myself extremely disappointed. Sorry to say that cuz i love in-depth political simulators (eg Political Process). Sadly all of the most exciting aspects of political sinulator are either flat or not present at all in this game. Im SAD...
@chandr49193 жыл бұрын
Please add the Turkey
@Paradoxarn.3 жыл бұрын
Warning: long post After having played the game in its current state I have written a long list of ways in which I think the game could be improved (with explanations why) in ways which improves balance, realism and just makes the game more interesting. While I certainly don't consider it plausible to implement them all during early access development, I think some should be relatively easy changes while others could be part of expansions or mods. No matter what gets implemented or how the final game looks, I hope I offer food for thought. My suggestions are as follows: 1. Make foreign policy more important and interesting, especially as it relates to climate change. While I wouldn't consider myself an environmentalist, I do think that everyone should be able to agree that climate change should be taken seriously as the complicated issue that it is. Climate change is a global issue and can only be mitigated on a global level. Even if a major carbon emitter such as China or the US would stop all emissions over night the effect on the climate (with no other reductions in emissions) would only be marginal. In Democracy 4 the opposite seems currently to be the case; stopping your own emissions means you don't have to worry about global carbon emission. There should be more policies allowing you to tackle global issues as a country interacting with the rest of the world. For example a climate change campaign similar to a tourism campaign, green foreign aid, sanctions targeting human rights abusers, authoritarian countries or polluters as well as tarriffs targeting carbon emissions are just some examples of such policies. There should be more of these policies which promotes an conservative, liberal, socialist, capitalist, religious and patriot agenda. The effectiveness of these policies should depend not only on how much money is spent but also on foreign relations and military strength (which maybe should be its own simulation). Another possible suggestion is to make foreign relations more complex by dividing the single foreign relations simulations into several which simulates relations with different geopolitical blocs such as western rich democracies, devoloping countries and autocratic nations. Having assasinations and coups potentially also being a result of poor foreign relations and not just angry voters would be another interesting addition which would make foreign relations more than an afterthought. 2. Make the game more global and diverse by adding countries which aren't western democracies. Some obvious suggestions would be Israel, Brazil and India (the largest democracy in the world) but perhaps also less democratic countries such as China, Russia and Iran. While the subtle differences between Germany, France and Britain are interesting enough, I think one of the best ways to improve the game as a political simulation would be to test how it handles a diverse set of situations, cultures and even political/economic systems. This could informative in making further additions to the game in order to handle considerations such as the differences between developed and developing countries, the difference between countries in a temperate climate and countries in a tropical or subtropical (desert) climate as well as how multiple religions interact in a non-secular country. 3. Improve game balance and realism by making simulation inputs weaker and slower. When I played Democracy 3, I personally modded the game and basically halved the strengths of all the inputs. In more concrete terms I would look at all the policies, simulations and situations which affected a parameter, let's say education, and if one of them, let's say state schools, increased it by up to 0.4 then I would just make it so that the effect instead was maximally 0.2. The motivation behind this is that it makes it much less likely for a parameter, such as the education simulation, to go to 0 or 1. That is, it becomes harder to max out education simply by maximally funding one or two education policies. Of course, education is only one parameter, the same would be the case for all parameters. Currently it is child's play to eliminate all crime but if you reduce all inputs by half, then this would be a true challenge without imposing a police state. It is both unrealistic and a sign of poor game balance that important parameters such as education, crime and GDP easily and regularly get stuck at their maximal or minimal values. 4. Make political capital a more interesting gameplay feature. Currently the main way of getting political capital is to increase the loyalty of your ministers. I believe that the accumulation of political capital would be more fun if it was more dynamic. For example, making the player gain and lose political capital from events, dilemmas and decisions. Just as how donors sometimes want a policy implemented, different political parties (either the opposition or your own party) or ministers could offer you some extra political support in exchange for implementing or repealing a policy of their choice. Maybe there should be several policies which which can increase or decrease the gain of political capital. Another possibility is to change how and how much political capital is stored. One could consider the possibility of paying for enacting a controversial policy in installments, simulating trying to have a “national debate” or a referendum in order to push the policy through. Currently political capital feels like a necessary but annoying and boring limitation to make gameplay challenging but it could be much more. 5. Make the rich and the religious more powerful by giving them more influence over public opinion and foreign policy. The 'Wealthy' voter group is currently almost irrelevant for the simple reason that it is generally a small group. In Democracy 3 this was true as well but this changed when I installed the excellent cyberpunk mod which among other things added a new simulation called 'Oligarch favor' which simulated how the world's wealthiest would conspire to either help you with positive press and better trade if you gave them a tax haven and supported the wealthy but would attack you in the press and in other ways if you rebelled against the super-rich and didn't make the wealthy happy. While I'm not proposing to simply copy this potentially semi-conspiratorial feature, I do think it would be a good idea to perhaps add a situation called 'negative press' with a negative effects on public opinion and business confidence which would trigger when the wealthy are unhappy but could be countered with restrictions on press freedom or funding of state media. This would simulate how large media corporations have a pro-wealthy bias and would turn against any government which is perceived to not support the rich. 6. Reduce the impact that policies have on public opinion and add new ways to win and lose support from voter groups. Currently public opinion is overwhelmingly determined by policies and the state of the country. This is obviously not realistic since people aren't going to base their opinion of a government on policies which it had nothing to do with (which are most policies at the start of the game). Furthermore, this makes voter too rational when it is obvious that people vote for governments despite them failing to solve their problems (or vice versa) or despite having policy preferences more in line with the opposition (or vice versa). Currently there seems to be a few ways to get votes outside of solving problems and changing policies, namely having charismatic ministers, getting high party donations, making popular speeches and promises as well as being seen as an admirable leader. I would propose making these things more impactful and more interesting by, for example, increasing the selection of possible manifesto promises while making donors and ministers ask for favors more often. My big suggestion is to add a new feature allowing you to define the ideology/identity of your party which is similar to how campaign speeches work but more permanent. This would give you the option of alligning your party to up to four voter groups which would make you much more popular with that voting group (say 25%) at the cost of making their cynicism increase when make policy changes which are unpopular with these groups (and maybe also increasing their rate of complacency gain) and perhaps also make you less popoular with other groups. For example you could make your party a liberal, middle income farmer and trade unionist party which would make you more popular with these groups (but maybe less popular with conservatives, the poor and wealthy as well as potentially other groups) but if you decrease rural subsidies or make prison conditions harsher, these groups would notice this and become very cynical about the disconnect between the political identity of the party and the policy changes the party is instituting when in power.
@LarsMacReady3 жыл бұрын
I feel like these are all no brainer additions to the game that have been often request since Dem3. For some reason, Cliff hasn't acted on them. Although moders seem to make it work.
@positechgames3 жыл бұрын
Hey, thanks for the excellent feedback and suggestions, which are very much appreciated. The design of the game is super-complex, because it ahs to straddle realism / practicality / play-ability and fun. The effects in the game often seem to quick to take action, but its also the case that the player has to feel like they are making an impact, and see that the impact is correlated with their actions. So its a tough balance. I agree that more variance in countries makes the game better, which is why we went to more trouble when adding South Korea, which has a completely new set of ministers. Also in Democracy 4 we have started to add new situations that are specific to each country, like the monarchy in the UK, or the northwest passage trade route for Canada. Its likely we will not a fair bit more of this. The problem with adding countries like india is they are SOOOO different, that its a major simulation re-balance to do so (and obviously also needs a completely new much of minister art as well). My current focus is on balance and play-ability for the existing country list (although italy gets added soon). There is also a trade-off between countries that existing players would find interesting, and those that have lots of gamers in. People overwhelmingly prefer to play the country they live in apparently. I do agree that some more interesting mechanics for political capital and foreign policy would be beneficial. We did change D4 so that we model domestic and global CO2 production separately, which is one step in this direction.
@markjerue97343 жыл бұрын
Man I loved that cyberpunk mod! That was a fun one! Interesting commentary on the inputs, too. There is something to that sadly - but mods also help and it'd make 200% difficult near impossible, I think. Lovely post though. ^.^
@Paradoxarn.3 жыл бұрын
Well I'm happy that people are happy with my post, hopefully this was helpful for the future devolopment of the game. I get that it isn't easy to add and balance features within a reasonable timeframe and that sacrifices have to be made when trying to finish any project. Either way I'm having fun playing the game. I'm currently using several mods with different effects, including "The ultimate Law and Order overhaul" which makes it much harder to fight crime, something which is currently way too easy in the unmodded game.
@danielbackstrom46433 жыл бұрын
@@positechgames Hey Cliffski i have a fantasy Rpg question for you. What would your stats be like and what class would you choose?
@arirahikkala3 жыл бұрын
We've learned from Rockstar that you don't exactly have to optimize a game's startup to make it popular. But hopefully those optimizations were fun to work on for you!
@cakeisyummy57553 жыл бұрын
Will Russia and Poland be added as playable Countries?
@adrianovsky19563 жыл бұрын
That would be great!
@cakeisyummy57553 жыл бұрын
@@adrianovsky1956 :D
@valeriolibratti75593 жыл бұрын
I don't think they are planned but Poland would be interesting indeed with the number of religious and conservative people there are
@thedenskan34403 жыл бұрын
Great Job Cliff, I wonder what you're up to now. Edit: Nuclear weapons should harm foreign relations
@snappy_one91203 жыл бұрын
Please release the game on ios
@HandSolitude3 жыл бұрын
Hi Cliff, absolutely love the game, it's genius. Any chance that we could get some Georgist economic policy, like using land value tax instead of other taxes? Or is it too OP?
@daanschravendijk92693 жыл бұрын
Hopefully The Netherlands and the Dutch language will be added to Democracy 4 soon :)
@cakeisyummy57553 жыл бұрын
Aka Europe's most Liberal Country.
@RMMinc3 жыл бұрын
Thank you very much for russian language support!
@ben9273 жыл бұрын
Nice. Do you think you could add mandatory community armouries as a gun-control policy? Wouldn't need to restrict gun rights that way
@rheiropke3 жыл бұрын
add Brazil, Japan, Venezuela, Russia, Iran, Arabia, South Africa, India, Niger, Ethiopia and North Korea... CHINA or DLC countries.
@Gaming_Burnout3 жыл бұрын
Ну чтож,товарищи,мы добились перевода на русский язык,но останавливаться нельзя! Из пролетарской солидарности я требую Китайскую локализацию! 🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳 И обязательно добавьте Китай,Кубу и Северную Корею.
@Gaming_Burnout3 жыл бұрын
@Максим Юдин обязательно пройду курс карательной психиатрии.💉
@KaesoQuinctius3 жыл бұрын
Nuclear weapons annoy environmentalists more than foreign relations? :P
@positechgames3 жыл бұрын
probably? green groups go on very angry marches about nukes, but if, for example germany built some nukes, how big an influence would it have on its foreign relations?
@systemfailure20393 жыл бұрын
Pls. add Argentina
@dennisnielsen80303 ай бұрын
Its great that you can switch language, but how the hell do you play Poland and Russia 😅
@halblo22363 жыл бұрын
We need norwegian in the game
@sam-i-am10603 жыл бұрын
As an Iraqi I can assure you, arabic does have vowels 😂😂