The individual citizen concept seems off in terms of scale

[duane]

Each world listing "citizens" as individuals seems off to me in terms of scale. Obviously these worlds have more than 1, 2, 3 4...etc citizens. I am pretending that each listed named citizen is the "leader" of a particular faction but ultimately that is not the case. I may be being picky but does that bother anyone else? Has the issue of citizen representation been discussed already?

[SLG]

Do you mean on core worlds or all planets?

[captainpatch]

As I understand it, Citizens are outstanding citizens, "captains of industry", "Labor leaders", Nobel-Prize-winning scientists, etc. And it takes at least one population point to push such an individual to the forefront.

The problem is, there are so few of them. Given a world reaching a population of 10+ billion people, how many Citizens might you expect to emerge. Given that the number of Citizens tops out at about 20, that means each Citizen would be backed by 500 _million_ people. Given that Citizens sent off to colonize a planet with one population point on ONE Colonizer, can you imagine the impossibility of cramming _500 million_ people into one vessel? I can stretch my imagination to the possibility of squeezing in a million -- provided they're placed into suspended animation or cryosleep. But then brings back the question: How may many people does it take to produce ONE Citizen? One million? Or 500 million?

[duane]

Originally posted by SLGray:

Do you mean on core worlds or all planets?

On all worlds. I am very new to Gal Civ IV so in honesty I dont know what the difference would be between colonies and core worlds...seems they represent people the same way

[duane]

Originally posted by captainpatch:

As I understand it, Citizens are outstanding citizens, "captains of industry", "Labor leaders", Nobel-Prize-winning scientists, etc. And it takes at least one population point to push such an individual to the forefront.

The problem is, there are so few of them. Given a world reaching a population of 10+ billion people, how many Citizens might you expect to emerge. Given that the number of Citizens tops out at about 20, that means each Citizen would be backed by 500 _million_ people. Given that Citizens sent off to colonize a planet with one population point on ONE Colonizer, can you imagine the impossibility of cramming _500 million_ people into one vessel? I can stretch my imagination to the possibility of squeezing in a million -- provided they're placed into suspended animation or cryosleep. But then brings back the question: How may many people does it take to produce ONE Citizen? One million? Or 500 million?

So the portraits used with the individuals name are, in fact, leaders of some sort? I guess I just cant get my head around how influential those individuals would be. I can grasp better the idea that they represent GROUPS of people. Laborers or academics etc. Kind of like union leaders over a larger represented group. Citizens are simply the non unionized (if I continue with the Union comparison). It's not a big deal I guess...I can create my own narratives so I can "accept" their roles in my empires...just stood out to me for some reason.

[captainpatch]

The net effect of any Citizen is that whatever their _occupation_ -- NOT just their strongest stat -- is to add that associated stat as a percentage increase in planetary production. For example, a Worker's primary stat is Diligence. Say the Worker's Diligence = 6. That means he all by himself is adding 6% to the production of Manufacturing. Scientist = Intelligence = Research. Entrepreneur = Social = Income. Etc.

The primary difference between Citizen's and Leaders is that Leaders (as Governors) increase production with ALL of their stats at the same time.

[Charlemagne]

It's a game thing. Citizens are not really individuals, they are chips. Abstracts. They represent people, but obviously not 1 person. Or 1 million. Although for flavor they have names, traits, etc. and during play you think of them as characters. They could also represent leaders of groups as someone said. But it is still a compromise for game purposes.

[Frogboy]

It's better to think of Citizens are representatives. We originally were going to call them Lead Citizens but felt that was too wordy so we went with citizens.

[sgt.greywar]

That all just doesn't jibe with the population growth factors for food and pollution at all though.

Like Not. At. All.


Separate those systems completely and it will both make sense and feel much less silly.

Population is population. Leaders are Leaders.

Right now the whole thing is just a hodgepodge of nonsense that doesn't make a bit of sense for either.

A totalitarian government can sure as hell dragoon a Legion into service for invasion without a notable Leader )who somehow could only exist with the right level of low pollution and food cuz... reasons?).

Make population mean something and make Leaders feel correct by divorcing the two wholly incompatible systems.

[Charlemagne]

You can't have total realism in games. In a game of the scope of GC IV realism is practically inexistent. You can't have detailed populations in a game where a planet is a little circle in a huge map and the terrain is represented by a few tiles. The planet Solaria, pop: 3.

In games you can strive for "authenticity" which is, to make you feel it's somewhat like the real thing. GCIV strives to make you feel like you're the leader of a galactic empire. You move stuff around and "feel" like you are governing and producing ships and helping your subjects grow, produce and be happy. But you can't really say it's like you are there sitting in a throne in your court and giving orders. It's very abstract.

The citizens in planets can be viewed more like cards, or counters. In Magic the Gathering, you have a card representing a hero or a monster, but it isn't realistic at all. In chess you have a pawn representing an infantryman. Same. GCIV is much more sophisticated because your chessmen have traits, needs, and variables. Faces and names. It gives personality
to what would otherwise be just colored boxes. Handling pops is like a minigame within the game. Stellaris solved the problem of pops making them even more abstracted- mere boxes in the different districts of a planet. I think GCIV's approach is more fun.

[sgt.greywar]

Originally posted by Charlemagne:

You can't have total realism in games.

A thing which no one asked for: a strawman.

No one is asking for total realism by a country mile here. What a player CAN and SHOULD ask for is for systems to be immersive.

The current system is not immersive, it is simply silly and nonsensical even within the milieu of the game norms/mechanics themselves.

See the difference?

[captainpatch]

Originally posted by sgt.greywar:

That all just doesn't jibe with the population growth factors for food and pollution at all though.

Like Not. At. All.


Separate those systems completely and it will both make sense and feel much less silly.

Population is population. Leaders are Leaders. !!! (This, right here.)

Right now the whole thing is just a hodgepodge of nonsense that doesn't make a bit of sense for either.

A totalitarian government can sure as hell dragoon a Legion into service for invasion without a notable Leader )who somehow could only exist with the right level of low pollution and food cuz... reasons?).

Make population mean something and make Leaders feel correct by divorcing the two wholly incompatible systems.

++++
By sticking with this Citizens-only approach, it's NOT giving us any sense of the benefits or downsides of population. Too low population slows population growth and lowers productivity. Too much population puts a strain on logistics, infrastructure, population Morale, pollution, etc. Meanwhile, Leaders get to do all the things they're already doing. Separating the two allows for that Magic: The Gathering approach where there are a limited number of Hero cards. Keeping them linked highlights that question of just how many people does it take to produce a Citizen? A thousand? A hundred thousand? A million? _500_ million? No matter what number is suggested, it just doesn't feel right for a planet that could have anywhere from 1-20 population points.

Besides, when it comes to empire bragging rights, being able to say, "We have over a trillion people in our empire!" sounds soooooo much better than "We have 500 Citizens!"

[Charlemagne]

Originally posted by sgt.greywar:

Originally posted by Charlemagne:

You can't have total realism in games.

A thing which no one asked for: a strawman.

No one is asking for total realism by a country mile here. What a player CAN and SHOULD ask for is for systems to be immersive.

The current system is not immersive, it is simply silly and nonsensical even within the milieu of the game norms/mechanics themselves.

See the difference?

Hey no need to be so defensive. For starters I wasn't quoting you. Just making an explanation of how games work directed at everyone. What I explained about authenticity is much like the concept of immersion so you might even say I was supporting your view.

Sometimes the accusation of strawman can be a strawman in itself.

So what would you prefer? Maybe generic population as in Civ 6, where you assign each pop to a tile and that defines its production or its specialty?

[sgt.greywar]

Originally posted by Charlemagne:

Originally posted by sgt.greywar:

A thing which no one asked for: a strawman.

No one is asking for total realism by a country mile here. What a player CAN and SHOULD ask for is for systems to be immersive.

The current system is not immersive, it is simply silly and nonsensical even within the milieu of the game norms/mechanics themselves.

See the difference?

Hey no need to be so defensive. For starters I wasn't quoting you. Just making an explanation of how games work directed at everyone. What I explained about authenticity is much like the concept of immersion so you might even say I was supporting your view.

Sometimes the accusation of strawman can be a strawman in itself.

So what would you prefer? Maybe generic population as in Civ 6, where you assign each pop to a tile and that defines its production or its specialty?

Apologies I wasn't really trying to be aggro on you there. but the "can't insist on realism" trope is just so common on Steam forums (discussions or whatever).

i know you aren't that sort of fanlad and didn't mean to come off as attacking you.

[Charlemagne]

Hey sgt it seems the devs took your suggestion into account in today's update.

[sgt.greywar]

Originally posted by Charlemagne:

Hey sgt it seems the devs took your suggestion into account in today's update.

will check it out. hadn't seen that yet