Lets Run Australia, My Off Topics Denizens (Democracy3 Game)

[AndyDufresne]

So, Democracy 3 -- what a name for a game -- was on a discounted steam sale. I've watched a Lets Play video of it a while ago, and decided I'd give it a shot. It is a bit like playing a game of spreadsheets, but I usually like a bit of variety in my gaming -- hopping between Civilization and Don't Starve and Fallout and X-Com and Broken Age.



Anyways, I thought it would be a nice waste of time to consult the Off Topics on varying issues. Obviously, I won't be able to consult on everything, but you can have faith I'll exercise the general direction and wishes of the Off Topics. So, I'm looking at the following people to consult perhaps:

Phattscotty
TGD
BBS
Saxitoxin
Metsfanmax
DoomYoshi
Dukasaur
2dimes
AOG (maybe)
betiko
_sabotage_
universalchiro
jonesthecurl
Serbia
Gillipig
mrswdk
TeeGee
TA1LGUNN3R
targetman377
Quirk
Nietzsche
notyou2
strike wolf
Lootifer
And others if I've forgotten. Sorry.

We're going to choose Australia as our country. We have rampant alcoholism and health problems, unemployment is decently high, poverty is decently high, we have a middling GDP, violent and organized crime to the max ('vigilante street gangs' are rampant). Here are some initial facts:

Population: 22 Million
Poverty: 12.8%
Ethnicity: 92% White
Religion: Christian (91.2%)
Monarchy: Yes
Compulsory Voting: Yes

We'll be playing with Term Length of 4 years. That means every 4 years there is an election. Each 'turn' is a quarter of a year.

First things first, we need to name our Political Party -- and our 'main opposition' party as well. These are suggested names built-in, but we can be more creative:

show: Suggested Names

Then we need to decide what our guiding ideology is going to be. This isn't a hard choice -- but more what sort of policies and initiatives we are going to enact, and maybe who we will assign to our cabinet. We'll likely have to do some pandering though as well -- though we can always enact things to decrease memberships in groups.

Here is where we currently stand with everyone. Remember -- voters can be in more than one group, but not in weird mutually exclusive groups.

show: Where We Currently Stand

And here are the initial demographic facts -- so you can know how many socialists are in country, or how many people are poor, etc.

show: Initial Demographics

That is enough decision making for now. So, to recap:

Name our Party
Name our Opposition Party
Choose what guiding principle you'd like us to have


Write your responses below, and I'll either choose a consensus, or I'll pick the ones I like. Suckas.


--Andy

[BigBallinStalin]

Our Political Party: The King Knows Best
Main Opposition: Cannibalizing Bananasuckers


Public Choice theory:
You've got the retired and State Employees in the bucket already, but you might wanna sling a lil something something their way. More importantly, pick the policies which pay off the top 5 largest groups which are Medium in favor to you and which presumably have the greatest complementarity.

(A) Poor, Farmers, Youth, Socialists, and ... Patriot/Environmentalist

(B) Motorists, Trade Unionists, Middle Income, ....??? (seems more costly).


I'd go with (A). Keep 'em subsidized, promote their growth, and carefully discourage the growth of the groups which are hardest to please. Discourage the smallest, most disconnected groups first because their complaints will largely go ignored.

If you got options to "distract the people" with a war or something, then those will work. Keep the heat off you, King.

[saxitoxin]

We have rampant alcoholism and health problems, unemployment is decently high, poverty is decently high, we have a middling GDP, violent and organized crime to the max ('vigilante street gangs' are rampant).

Detroit isn't a country, dumbass

[Metsfanmax]

Name our Party

Social Democrats

Name our Opposition Party

Green Party

Choose what guiding principle you'd like us to have

Patriotism

Side note. Can it display that demographics chart in a more intuitive manner?

[TA1LGUNN3R]

Where's the absolute dictatorship option?

Party: There is no party, only Zuul.
Opposition party: dead
Guiding principle: beheading

-TG

[nietzsche]

Phattscotty
TGD
BBS
Saxitoxin
Metsfanmax
DoomYoshi
Dukasaur
2dimes
AOG (maybe)
betiko
_sabotage_
universalchiro
jonesthecurl
Serbia
Gillipig
mrswdk
TeeGee
TA1LGUNN3R
targetman377
Quirk
And others if I've forgotten. Sorry.

This will never be forgotten.


I was just watching There Will Be Blood. The last scene, remember it.

[thegreekdog]

I have bookmarked this game for purchase (I also saw the steam sale), but this quote sealed the deal:

It is a bit like playing a game of spreadsheets

You had me at spreadsheets... you had me at spreadsheets.

Party: Mutant Liberation Front (alternatively, The Democractic Union - can't go wrong with democracy and unity).



Opposition Party: nWo (alternatively, The Peoples Front)



Guiding Principles

If we're trying to win and the goal is to maintain popularity (woah, like in real life!), you need to be socialist. Also, how in the hell are you already hated by liberals and conservatives (also parents). I'm envisioning a socialist utopia where tax rates hover around 80%, crime is stamped out by military-style police, and the next step is war with New Zealand.

Some problematic areas:
- Conservatives and liberals hate you (as mentioned above)
- State employees and retired folks love you (which is good for the socialist bent).
- What is your gun law like? I heard it on good authority that guns cause crimes so you must not have a gun law. This should be your first act as prime president minister. Pass a restrictive gun law.

[AndyDufresne]

Good suggestions and ideas. Keep 'em up, and I'll make some executive decisions later this afternoon.

Also, Nietzsche, I forgot you. If you notice, I forgot Mexico existed.


--Andy

[Gillipig]

Party name The Swedish-Australian Nationalist Party (TSANP)
Opposition Party name British Commonwealth
Guiding principle Aborginians, GO BACK TO WHERE YOU CAME FROM!!

Btw, what's really unrealistic with this game and why I'm not interested in picking it up, is that you're not dealing with the bureaucratic aspect of politics which is getting laws passed in congress. If you take that part out of politics you're not really running a democracy, you're closer to an almighty monarch who has to get re-elected every fourth year. They should rename the game to "Elective Absolute Monarchy 3".
I would be much more interested in a game that looked at democracy more accurately, you know bribing other politicians, accepting bribes from big oil companies, spying on the German chancellor, assassinating uncomfortable journalists, twisting existing laws to suit your own agenda and that sort of stuff. This game is just not clever enough.

[mrswdk]

Party name: Avril Lavigne's Mean Machines.
Opposition name: Reaganomics.
Guiding principles: Wealthy, liberal.

[AndyDufresne]

Party name The Swedish-Australian Nationalist Party (TSANP)
Opposition Party name British Commonwealth
Guiding principle Aborginians, GO BACK TO WHERE YOU CAME FROM!!

Btw, what's really unrealistic with this game and why I'm not interested in picking it up, is that you're not dealing with the bureaucratic aspect of politics which is getting laws passed in congress. If you take that part out of politics you're not really running a democracy, you're closer to an almighty monarch who has to get re-elected every fourth year. They should rename the game to "Elective Absolute Monarchy 3".
I would be much more interested in a game that looked at democracy more accurately, you know bribing other politicians, accepting bribes from big oil companies, spying on the German chancellor, assassinating uncomfortable journalists, twisting existing laws to suit your own agenda and that sort of stuff. This game is just not clever enough.

A real governance simulator would be more interesting, but I'll likely get enough entertainment value out of this game from the steam sale.


--Andy

[Gillipig]

Party name The Swedish-Australian Nationalist Party (TSANP)
Opposition Party name British Commonwealth
Guiding principle Aborginians, GO BACK TO WHERE YOU CAME FROM!!

Btw, what's really unrealistic with this game and why I'm not interested in picking it up, is that you're not dealing with the bureaucratic aspect of politics which is getting laws passed in congress. If you take that part out of politics you're not really running a democracy, you're closer to an almighty monarch who has to get re-elected every fourth year. They should rename the game to "Elective Absolute Monarchy 3".
I would be much more interested in a game that looked at democracy more accurately, you know bribing other politicians, accepting bribes from big oil companies, spying on the German chancellor, assassinating uncomfortable journalists, twisting existing laws to suit your own agenda and that sort of stuff. This game is just not clever enough.

A real governance simulator would be more interesting, but I'll likely get enough entertainment value out of this game from the steam sale.


--Andy

It's a bit naive game but the basic idea is good I agree, I just wish they made the effort to educate people how governments are really run, it would be much more interesting if the gameplay wasn't so naive and unrealistic, politics is corrupt and bureaucratic, and showing it would make for a much more fun but also educating game. Still, play ahead, see if with the power of an absolute monarch you can change the direction the U.S is heading, I'm just explaining why I'm not tempted to pick it up.

[DoomYoshi]

We have rampant alcoholism and health problems, unemployment is decently high, poverty is decently high, we have a middling GDP, violent and organized crime to the max ('vigilante street gangs' are rampant).

Detroit isn't a country, dumbass

Step One: Make health insurance illegal. The medical system will be a direct market. That will solve most of the health problems. Combatting alcoholism isn't that great. We can instill patriotism with those gross Australian beers.

Step Two: Promote subsistence farming and living among the populace. Give land away in the Outback and give great incentives for people to go there.

Step Three: poverty is not a problem if people are subsistence living. Burn American flags on tv to show the people our country rejects capitalism (ok, it doesn't make sense, but it works).

Step Four: Stop all imports and exports and fire all economists. Calculate the GDP now bitches.

Step Five: The source of all this violent crime is Red Frogs. We need some paramilitary action against them. Then I can eat their candy instead.

Name: Beep-Beep-Bo-Boop
Opposition: Aborigines
Guiding Principle: We're going way-back. That's why the retirees like us: nostalgia.

[2dimes]

Make the criminals and wanna be immigrants work for free producing our most desirable products for export.

The best empires are allways built on the backs of their slaves.

[BigBallinStalin]

Party name The Swedish-Australian Nationalist Party (TSANP)
Opposition Party name British Commonwealth
Guiding principle Aborginians, GO BACK TO WHERE YOU CAME FROM!!

Btw, what's really unrealistic with this game and why I'm not interested in picking it up, is that you're not dealing with the bureaucratic aspect of politics which is getting laws passed in congress. If you take that part out of politics you're not really running a democracy, you're closer to an almighty monarch who has to get re-elected every fourth year. They should rename the game to "Elective Absolute Monarchy 3".
I would be much more interested in a game that looked at democracy more accurately, you know bribing other politicians, accepting bribes from big oil companies, spying on the German chancellor, assassinating uncomfortable journalists, twisting existing laws to suit your own agenda and that sort of stuff. This game is just not clever enough.

A real governance simulator would be more interesting, but I'll likely get enough entertainment value out of this game from the steam sale.


--Andy

It's a bit naive game but the basic idea is good I agree, I just wish they made the effort to educate people how governments are really run, it would be much more interesting if the gameplay wasn't so naive and unrealistic, politics is corrupt and bureaucratic, and showing it would make for a much more fun but also educating game. Still, play ahead, see if with the power of an absolute monarch you can change the direction the U.S is heading, I'm just explaining why I'm not tempted to pick it up.

It'd be pretty difficult to model that, and the player would only be a small part of the puzzle. The puzzle would have to shift from "government, economics, society" to "government" since you're asking to expand the puzzle by so much. It would be like King Crusader's II, with your one little office among all the other political and bureaucratic offices--vying for power. Concerns about "the people" and "economic issues" would be pop-ups within the context of pitting your own vote (or voting bloc) against many NPCs.

Would people find that fun? Perhaps. It's just difficult to model. I like the idea though! Too many people think government works like most video games (nirvana fallacy/top-down unified planning, clumsy inaccurate models for markets, etc.). The Civ games come to mind. Costs of empire = small, efficiency of government = practically perfect, optimal strategy: destroy everyone.

[mrswdk]

Step Two: Promote subsistence farming

What's up with you and subsistence farming?

[Dukasaur]

Okay, Doom, that will be enough.

We're not here to improve life for the blubbering masses; we're here to improve life for us.

Let's take a Utopian proposal like outlawing all health insurance. It would teach people to haggle with their doctors, thus developing a personal relationship with them, taking responsibility for their own health, doing some of their own research, managing their own preventive health care regimen, and living healthier lives. Good for the peasantry, perhaps, but very bad for the business of politics.

How are we to improve our careers if we don't keep people fixated on the false dichotomy of public versus private health insurance? Look at the example of the Americans, for instance! Look how many left-wing politicians have sailed to victory promising the ridiculous panacea of public health insurance, and look how many right-wing politicians have built most excellent careers by whipping people into a frenzy about that, and pretending that having your decisions made by a corporately-controlled faceless bureaucrat is somehow soooo much better than a politically-controlled faceless bureaucrat!

Or look at the Canadians! See how many rural seats are made almost perpetually safe by the promise to build a new hospital in the middle of nowhere? You would deny us such delicious retirement incomes as safe seats in the outback? For shame!

Anyway the name of our party should be ANZAC Patrimony! Everyone who is now living has been brought up with the legends (some say the myths) of the superiority of the ANZACs to mortal men, and feeling superior to others is the mark of a great civilization. In the immortal words of Charles Bean, "ANZAC stood, and still stands, for reckless valour in a good cause, for enterprise, resourcefulness, fidelity, comradeship, and endurance that will never own defeat." These are all wonderful, positive attributes, and it behooves us to create this automatic connotation in the voter's mind. (I realize most of the candidates we present will be parasitical backstabbing thieves, but it doesn't matter what they are, it only matters what people think they are. If they are given the halo of "enterprise, resourcefulness, fidelity, comradeship, and endurance that will never own defeat." without even trying, that will carry them a long way!

The other half of our name, Patrimony, is also excellent material. It means everything and nothing, depending on who you are and where you stand. To the aboriginal, it might mean that we will rule positively on native land claims. To the traditional British loyalist, it might mean we stand by the line of Kings. To the non-British European, it might mean that we will restore our heritage of banning non-white immigration. To the Asian, it might mean that he's welcome to bring his colourful birth culture with him. We can actually imply all four of those policies in our platform, as long as we use plenty of good buzzwords to fuzzy up the optics a little bit. (Think, "enterprise, resourcefulness, fidelity, comradeship, and endurance that will never own defeat" at every opportunity!) If anyone questions inherent contradictions in the policies, it is pretty easy to give them a condescending smirk, answer with "enterprise, resourcefulness, fidelity, comradeship, and endurance that will never own defeat" and turn to the next question immediately.

I think Patrimony also positions us very nicely with regard to social trends in the family. If there is a trend back to traditional marriage, we can campaign on the slogan "Patrimony is Right Next to Matrimony!" On the other hand, if there the reverse is the trend, and traditional marriage goes out of fashion, our slogan becomes "Patrimony is the Opposite of Matrimony!" So much potential!

[Gillipig]

Party name The Swedish-Australian Nationalist Party (TSANP)
Opposition Party name British Commonwealth
Guiding principle Aborginians, GO BACK TO WHERE YOU CAME FROM!!

Btw, what's really unrealistic with this game and why I'm not interested in picking it up, is that you're not dealing with the bureaucratic aspect of politics which is getting laws passed in congress. If you take that part out of politics you're not really running a democracy, you're closer to an almighty monarch who has to get re-elected every fourth year. They should rename the game to "Elective Absolute Monarchy 3".
I would be much more interested in a game that looked at democracy more accurately, you know bribing other politicians, accepting bribes from big oil companies, spying on the German chancellor, assassinating uncomfortable journalists, twisting existing laws to suit your own agenda and that sort of stuff. This game is just not clever enough.

A real governance simulator would be more interesting, but I'll likely get enough entertainment value out of this game from the steam sale.


--Andy

It's a bit naive game but the basic idea is good I agree, I just wish they made the effort to educate people how governments are really run, it would be much more interesting if the gameplay wasn't so naive and unrealistic, politics is corrupt and bureaucratic, and showing it would make for a much more fun but also educating game. Still, play ahead, see if with the power of an absolute monarch you can change the direction the U.S is heading, I'm just explaining why I'm not tempted to pick it up.

It'd be pretty difficult to model that, and the player would only be a small part of the puzzle. The puzzle would have to shift from "government, economics, society" to "government" since you're asking to expand the puzzle by so much. It would be like King Crusader's II, with your one little office among all the other political and bureaucratic offices--vying for power. Concerns about "the people" and "economic issues" would be pop-ups within the context of pitting your own vote (or voting bloc) against many NPCs.

Would people find that fun? Perhaps. It's just difficult to model. I like the idea though! Too many people think government works like most video games (nirvana fallacy/top-down unified planning, clumsy inaccurate models for markets, etc.). The Civ games come to mind. Costs of empire = small, efficiency of government = practically perfect, optimal strategy: destroy everyone.

A lot of people like the oversimplified, easy to master type of game but there is a market for the realistic and challenging games. You may not hit the biggest consumer-group but if you do it well you can create a very commercially successful game none the less. Crusader Kings II as you mentioned is a good example. I'm not sure I agree it would be that difficult, I guess it all depends on how realistic you want to make the game, how much realism is needed before you're satisfied? Does it require a "walk around" simulation of the house of representatives and the white house? A game that enabled interaction with other politicians similarly to how you interact in an RPG would sure make it more realistic and addictive and fun and all those things but I could settle for less and still call it a good game. For me to give a game like this thumbs up, it would have to have at least a representation of what actually goes on in a democracy. In this game they have completely left out the majority of it and focused only on a narrow aspect. I'd like to see:

a) A campaigning process. How do you spend your campaigning money? Do you focus on television ads, newspaper ads, billboard signs? What will your motto's be? What will you try to lure people into believing you will fulfill? Will you attempt a negative campaign against your political adversary? Will you steal their ideas if you find out that the polls tell you they're earning votes on a specific issue? There should be consequences to your decisions and an element of uncertainty, you shouldn't know that doing something will always lead to a good outcome. And there should be consequences to not fulfilling what you've promised. (dissatisfaction among your voters, less likely to believe your future promises etc)

b) Getting your bills passed in congress. Part 1 is getting elected, part 2 is getting something done. Here I would like to see every member in congress represented and possible to interact with (fictional characters will do). Could be done through just having a list of all their names, an animated picture attached to it and a short description of what their political beliefs as well as character is like. I would like to be able to use all means of persuasion that a president has to influence the house of representatives. An element of argument, trying to explain why passing this bill would be beneficial to a cause they're for would be one way. Flat out bribing should also be an option. (be careful who you try to bribe or he could tell the media what you did etc). I would also like to be able to use the NSA and tell them to attempt to dig up some dirt on a certain uncooperative politician and perhaps confront it to him to see if that makes him change his mind. Threaten with violence and assassinate should also be an option but with way higher risk of being exposed. (of course you as the president won't be doing all these things in person but you order others to contact, bribe, threaten politicians.)

c) Consequences of your politics. This is what this game has focused almost solely on, what will lowering the taxes for the wealthy, granting free healthcare to everyone, focusing on education, giving tax breaks to oil companies etc do with the economy and society? This is being fleshed out well in the game and could be kept virtually the same.

d) Events and interaction with media and the public. Random events like a hurricane striking a certain region or a terrorist attack could be "pop ups" similar to how events work in Crusader Kings II. You would have versified options on how to respond to these events that really defines you as a president. You could use it to further your agenda, improve your approval rating, go to war etc. and it would have influence on your economy and future events. The media is very important to politicians and you should be able to have options as to which tv channels you chose to get interviewed by, how you respond to their questions etc. Also as mentioned before, I want the game to allow for doing things dirty, because we see it in democracies all the time how reporters "accidentally fall out of their balcony" or "goes missing" and how the government spies on other political leaders, (or just flat out everyone as the U.S does). So pop ups that asks what you want to do with people that are in your way would be a must have. You may chose to not do anything about a troublesome reporter if you want to be a benevolent president, but if you are more like Putin you might throw people in jail for bogus reasons or help someone fall of that very dangerous balcony. If I get these four different aspects out of a game called "Democracy" I'm happy. "International relations" would be another aspect I would like to see in the game but is not what I consider "necessary" for me to enjoy it.

[betiko]

i want to see how bad it's possible to do in 4 years if you try very hard.

[AndyDufresne]

i want to see how bad it's possible to do in 4 years if you try very hard.

You can get assassinated by rogue groups that don't support you.


--Andy

[Lootifer]

Party: Mana Party of New Zealand in Australia
Opp: All the white fullas
Ppolicy: Kill whitey

[Gillipig]

i want to see how bad it's possible to do in 4 years if you try very hard.

You can get assassinated by rogue groups that don't support you.


--Andy

Are there any other types of rogue troops?

[AndyDufresne]

i want to see how bad it's possible to do in 4 years if you try very hard.

You can get assassinated by rogue groups that don't support you.


--Andy

Are there any other types of rogue troops?

Sort of. You could be hated by the wealthy industrialists for instance -- but maybe only one group out of many groups of wealthy industrialists wants to assassinate you. The other are just angry at your policy choices. So they are rogue in that they will throw their support elsewhere, but not rogue to the point they'll assassinate you, I think.

I haven't played the game too much, and I am no expert. That is why the Off Topics is running Australia.


--Andy

[DoomYoshi]

Step Two: Promote subsistence farming

What's up with you and subsistence farming?

It was kind of a goal of mine in life. Then I found out that it is not only impossible, because you have to have cash to pay for land taxes, but also illegal in Canada.

[Gillipig]

Step Two: Promote subsistence farming

What's up with you and subsistence farming?

It was kind of a goal of mine in life. Then I found out that it is not only impossible, because you have to have cash to pay for land taxes, but also illegal in Canada.

If it's illegal in Canada, it's_______ (fill in the blank)