[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Fundamentalism

[Andrew McGuinness <cogers@xxxxxxxxx>]

I like your thinking...

IMHO, the aim with fundamentalism was to have a
society that was very stable and militarily capable,
but static.  Your suggestion would be almost the
opposite - dynamic but unstable.

Maybe make every new technology aquired trigger a
chance of a revolt?  The civ2 50% research penalty
proved to be an insufficient "disadvantage" to this
type of goverment.

Incidentally, I have always felt that "Fundamentalism"
was a poor choice of name.  I would much prefer
"Theocracy".  But I suppose, since civ2, we're stuck
with it.

--- Asher Densmore-Lynn <jesdynf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> File this in the
> After-2.0-And-We-Can-Consider-Your-Lame-Idea box.
> 
> Fundamentalism sure seems powerful. But what's the
> problem with a
> fundamentalist mindset?
> 
> Other fundamentalists.
> 
> Every turn your government is a Fundamentalist
> government, there is a
> cumulative one percent chance that a revolt will
> occur, costing you however
> many cities a revolt would consume.
> 
> Effectively making Fundamentalism a very useful
> thing to get you out of a
> jam, but far too dangerous to maintain.
> 
> -- 
> Asher Densmore-Lynn <jesdynf@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> 
> 
> 

=====
Andrew McGuinness                Luton, UK
andrew_mcguinness@xxxxxxxxxxx
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com