Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: A Comparison of Governmental Models to Evony

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    70

    Default A Comparison of Governmental Models to Evony

    I thought about this after my first perusal onto the forums, and learned about the heartaches caused by the medal situation. Different ways of utilizing the alliance system built into Evony can easily be compared to governmental models used in real life.

    Now, there are several dozen different governmental models, but most of them are only minor changes from one to another (ie: a theocracy and a dictatorship are very similar, except the rulers in a theocracy believe their power comes from their religion, instead of themselves), so we will focus on the three most common governments: Dictatorship/Tyranny, Monarchy/Empire, and Republic/Confederacy.

    In a Dictatorship/Tyranny, the ruler(s) raise themselves into power. They do this by amounting great power and influence, either through great financial resources and/or underhanded 'dirty' tactics, and then use that power to rule the masses.
    This is the person who plays Evony and uses his personal money (great financial resources) and/or 'dirty' tactics (medal farming) to amass great power and influence (many medals) to rule the masses (many cities).

    In a Monarchy/Empire, power is amassed similarly to a Dictatorship, but in this case the ruler uses his/her power to subjugate lesser Lords/Ladies throughout the land in order to expand their influence upon a greater stretch of land than a Dictator by himself/herself could ever hope to. These lesser Lords/Ladies learn very quickly that they must do what the ruler says, or he/she will have to accept the consequences.
    This is the person who uses the same tactics as the Dictator did, but he/she is not happy just to rule his/her own cities. This player creates an alliance, and forces others to join this alliance through threats.

    In a Republic/Confederacy, power is only amassed through numbers. The common people band together, uniting around a single banner, and creating a whole that is far stronger than each member is individually. Working together is key in a Republic/Confederacy, as members are brought together by choice, not by force.
    These are formed by players who do not have great financial resources (unwilling to spend their own money) and refuse to use 'dirty' tactics (medal farming), and as such they typically own fewer cities individually, but because there are so many players who fit into this category, these alliances can be just as strong.

    Like I said, these are just thoughts I had one day, and thought I would share on here. What are your thoughts?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    3,163

    Default

    Well this is a good start on an interesting concept, but sometimes things are mixed. For example, my Alliance, The Byzantine Empire, is based off the main concepts of your Republic/Confederacy. However, some of our members fall under the Dictatorship/Tyranny.

    Also, I'd be interested in your take on Communism/So******m type alliances.

  3. #3

    Default

    "Dirty" tactics? Give me a break. They were part of the game. There's nothing "dirty" about using an aspect of the game the the fullest.

    The only time a tactic is "dirty" is when its legality is questionable or unfair to other players. Any player can medal farm.

    Just because a player is good at dominating his territory it doesn't mean the player has to be spending large amounts of cash. Just like spending large amounts of cash doesn't make you good, or even dominating sometimes.

    Your characterization of Confederacy as opposed to Empire makes me laugh. All alliances worth their salt has their borders, and makes sure that no one inside their borders is an enemy of their alliance. An alliance that tells people that they won't do anything bad to them even if they're part of another alliance in the middle of their territory is just an alliance of weak farms without any leadership or teamwork at all.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    3,163

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kamikazewave View Post
    "Dirty" tactics? Give me a break. They were part of the game. There's nothing "dirty" about using an aspect of the game the the fullest.

    The only time a tactic is "dirty" is when its legality is questionable or unfair to other players. Any player can medal farm.

    Just because a player is good at dominating his territory it doesn't mean the player has to be spending large amounts of cash. Just like spending large amounts of cash doesn't make you good, or even dominating sometimes.

    Your characterization of Confederacy as opposed to Empire makes me laugh. All alliances worth their salt has their borders, and makes sure that no one inside their borders is an enemy of their alliance. An alliance that tells people that they won't do anything bad to them even if they're part of another alliance in the middle of their territory is just an alliance of weak farms without any leadership or teamwork at all.
    Hey the Byzantine Empire isn't an alliance of weak farms! It really isn't that hard to bring your neighbors into your alliance, especially early on in a servers life when many people aren't in an alliance yet, which is what I did.

    We have our borders, and enforce our rule within them, but we let people stay who aren't in the Empire. Please do give him some credit for this, it is a very good work.

    And while yet they were part of the game, I did not farm medals or anything similar because I felt they were dirty and underhanded. Different people have different codes of honor.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    1,998

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kamikazewave View Post
    "Dirty" tactics? Give me a break. They were part of the game. There's nothing "dirty" about using an aspect of the game the the fullest.

    The only time a tactic is "dirty" is when its legality is questionable or unfair to other players. Any player can medal farm.
    I don't think he means the tactic in the game is dirty. If used in real life, these tactics are frowned upon.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    70

    Default

    'Dirty' doesn't always mean 'illegal'. For example, is it illegal to lie to someone (when you're not under oath)? No, of course not. Lying is certainly 'dirty' though, wouldn't you agree?

    I said 'dirty' as in 'unethical', or 'unintended advantage'. When the designers created Evony, they had not intended for valleys/flats to be abused in that fashion, and as such 'farming' for medals is an unintended use of the land, which makes it a 'dirty trick'.

    Don't take that as a personal insult. Far from it: it was just meant as a comparison. Think of medal farming, in this comparison, as similar to a banker not working with someone who is behind on their mortgage, and pushing a foreclosure quicker than they really need to, so they can turn around and sell it for more money than they are making on the original mortgage. It's not illegal, or even 'wrong' necessarily, but it is certainly an unintended use of foreclosure law.

    I hadn't considered communism/so******m. tell you what, let me mull that over while I'm cutting my yard here in a bit, and I'll get back to you tonight.

    Oh! One more thing: Just because someone has medal farmed does not mean he/she is a bad person. And just because this person has several more cities than others, does not mean they are a dictator. A Dictator is only a dictator so long as he/she exerts their power upon others. Owning several cities simply makes that person's character wealthy, in game terms. There are wealthy citizens of the United States, but that doesn't make them dictators.

    So******m/Communism:
    So******m and Communism are similar in intent, but they approach the same problem in different ways. Both systems are attempts to perfect Capitalism by putting restrictions and/or regulations on different aspects of every day life.

    In So******m, the government in question regulates and, in practical terms, runs all business in the country. In Evony, this would be simulated by the host of an alliance dictating how many of what buildings each of the alliance members may build in their cities. For example, the host might decide that no city can have more than 10 cottages. All cities within that alliance, in order to remain in the alliance, would not be allowed to build more than that. This would, of course, require a lot of faith and trust in the members.

    In Communism, the government seeks to regulate every aspect of its citizen's lives, ideally, at the volition of the citizen's themselves. In Evony, this would best be simulated by an agreement by the members on strict numbers of every aspect of the cities' layout. The numbers of cottages, farms, sawmills, etc. would be agreed upon, at least by the ranking members of the alliance.

    With the current system in place, these two ideals would be difficult to enforce, as you have no real way of actually (so far as I know, at least) looking at the city layout of cities you don't control, but if your alliance members agree with your ideal, you could at the very least claim the status of communist/so******t, even if you have no way of really knowing whether or not your members are really following your lead.
    Last edited by amfoster; 05-09-2009 at 05:54 PM. Reason: forgot something and added content

  7. #7

    Default

    Interesting definations...

    As with most arguments like this there is no point in stating an opinion contrary to the OP's as the OP has already limited the responses to a set definition that favors his/her views.

    However seeing as how everyone with three or more cities is considered a 'Dictatorship/Tyranny' I would argue that any alliance that doesn't contain several 'Dictatorship/Tyranny' players *is* weak as there is no way their tech can compete due to the time reqirements on research and limit army production.

  8. #8

    Default Collective

    An alliance where members all have Officer status or above, share resources between each other at request, and live in peace and harmony with the un-allied cities within their borders.

    Perhaps Demarchy would be a better term.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    70

    Default

    However seeing as how everyone with three or more cities is considered a 'Dictatorship/Tyranny'
    No, no, no. You're missing the behavior aspect of the definitions.

    A 'dictator' is not a 'dictator' because he has more than 2 cities. He's a 'dictator' because he does not want to be in an alliance, and wants to rely upon himself.

    Just because an alliance is created by a player with several cities does not immediately mean she has created a 'monarchy'. It only becomes a 'monarchy' if she uses her strength to force other members in the alliance to do what she wants.

    The definitions are not meant as 'catch all' definitions. They were simply observations I thought of the other day while at work, that I thought others would find interesting. I'm not afraid of others' opinions Ingro -- this is meant as a discussion. By all means, tell me what you think!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Schererville IN
    Posts
    55

    Default

    wow, what in the heck are you talking about, the reason you can only medal farm by buying them instead of playing the actuall game and earning them "more frequently then the supposed stated ratio of earning medals" is so that they can charge REAL DOLLARS FOR THEM!!!! dirty playing, govermental comparisons which you've made up in your head not a concept the game was going for! The problem is that they had it closer to right in the beging then they saw hey people really attack land plots alot to get these medals, lets take out that aspect of the game to make them pay for the in $ instead so we can make more money!!! same reason why you cant press stop on the fortune wheel because people with skill at it would land game cents doing so and we cant be having that right? get rid of the wheel and give me game cents like an allowance for dealing with the bull chatter and i will be a happier lad.
    Can I get an AMEN, from all those who are upset and can't take the frustration no more!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •