Controlling the Populace

[Josh]

"If people become too dissatisfied, they will not hesitate to voice their complaints." (http://www.immortalcities.com/cotn/gallery/ssview.php?ssid=131)

So this raises a few questions

If people get so unhappy, can they organize a revolution that your military will put down?

Can we "put down" these public displays of protest by being a cruel dictator and possibly ordering the use of military force against dissidents? effectively stopping protests, letting people know you arent to be crossed, and that things probably wont get any better soon, but the people will stay in line for a while.

If people are unhappy and you treat your army poorly, or if one of your generals gets a little too full of himself can all or part of your army rebel against you?

Can the populace strike if you pay them too little?
(likewise for the army)

Basicly what I'm asking is can you actualy make orders of policy in your city not just construction and layout?

[Azeem]

It would be interesting to have Tropico-like edicts, but I don't think rulers were really that involved with their people in those days.

[Josh]

...and the emperors were worried about each individual family of potters?


Which of these sounds more likely

Counsul - "Emperor, the dalzar family humbly requests access to more entertainment, they are just so bored"

Pharaoh - "Then demolish a house and build a dancing venue in their backyard"


Or....

Counsul - "Emperor, the peasants are protesting your harsh rule again"

Pharaoh - "...Kill them"

[Nero Would]

...and the emperors were worried about each individual family of potters? Which of these sounds more likely

Counsul - "Emperor, the dalzar family humbly requests access to more entertainment, they are just so bored"

Pharaoh - "Then demolish a house and build a dancing venue in their backyard"

Or....

Counsul - "Emperor, the peasants are protesting your harsh rule again"

Pharaoh - "...Kill them"
Good point Josh.

Of course if we literally play only as Pharaoh, gameplay might be limited to "Kill them", "Hand out some grain" and "Build me a pyramid". I suspect that gameplay consists of not only those decisions that Pharaoh made personally, but many of the more detailed decisions that he would have left to local officials.

I get the Impression ;) that in CotN we will be setting policy at a higher, less detailed, level than in the earlier games, but I'm not sure how the new system works.

[Azeem]

...and the emperors were worried about each individual family of potters?

Yes, they were. In China, at least. ;) Some potters, especially the porcelain potters at Jingdezhen were under government payroll.

Don't know about Egypt, though. Maybe Miut would know more.

[EmperorJay]

I remember that we could rule the... "less friendly" way if we wanted too. That has been confirmed altough not with too much details, only that we could rule by fear too.

[Josh]

Of course if we literally play only as Pharaoh, gameplay might be limited to "Kill them", "Hand out some grain" and "Build me a pyramid". I suspect that gameplay consists of not only those decisions that Pharaoh made personally, but many of the more detailed decisions that he would have left to local officials.

I'm not saying to limit gameplay to that of pharaoh (or leader or city mayor or whatever you want to call him), but to expand our current power to construct, plan, and build cities to also include edicts and policies (like a leader would give)

policies like getting tough on crime, Drafting peasants for war, putting down protests and ruling with an iron fist (or with kindness) (perhaps even making slaves of captured invaders?) any other ideas?

[EmperorJay]

There will be no slaves in CotN.

And you will be able to punish criminals.

Other ideas? Not what you haven't mentioned except perhaps the obvious thing of tax.

[Miut]

Well, if as in Akhetaten, the potteries are in one area, then it suggests there might be royal potteries.. After all in the UK the Queen does hand out her Royal Crest and the phrase ".. by appointment to the Queen" to retailers she uses. Harrods have had that for years, until the boss got far too vocal on conspiraacy theories, involving the Royals in the death of his son Dodi and Princess Diana..

Apart from that, I expect there were those dedicated to the main temples too so they could have a steady and dependable in amount and quality of the faience etc needed for them in their daily devotions (menaing beads for clothing and jewellery and whatever pots and rhytons, to use the Greek word (libation vessels often made of pottery), they needed.

All that my "Everyday Life in Egypt in the days of Ramessess the Great" book says is that until the New Kingdom, potters were content to make monochrome pots whiose intrinsic beauty came from shape alone, but by then they had the technical skills to paint their products with patterns inspired by the engravers, or even downright copied from them, with geometric or floral borders, vine branches, plant motifs, or bulls and birds. It says these items were even available to the poor.

It also says one word iqdou was used for both potters and bricklayers - the latter being known as iqdou inebou or "builder of walls" and the latter as iqdou nedjesit or "small scale builder". Their common name derives from the Egyptian language in which the root qed meqns "round". The primitive form of houses was round like a pot.

The main uses of pottery were for the essentials of cleanliness - basins and water containers with spouts for pouring, and finger bowls for tables, and as dishes for meals, both serving and eating from.

[Jayhawk]

...and the emperors were worried about each individual family of potters? Which of these sounds more likely
Of course, if you continue killing peasants and potters you'll run out of them ;)

[Azeem]

There should also be a certain limit to autocracy. People can only be pushed so far. Throughout history, we have plenty of examples of peasants revolting against their rulers and ending the reigns of highly dictatorial monarchs. :)

[Bizkit]

Yeah, but that limit should depend on a number of factors. Having "Population hapiness is under <value>. Game Over" as an end to your game would suck.

[Keith]

As I understand it, it is possible to push your citizens too far. It was hinted at rather broadly in one of the first interviews or articles posted about the game. They didn't mention what form a uprising might take or the consequences of a uprising might be but you can probably guess. The one screenshot of the protesting citizens outside the palace kind of gives you a small peek at the situation.
http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/horus2.gif
Keith Heitmann (mailto:dheitm8612@aol.com) a.k.a Nuthin-in-khamun
Listen to the music of the CityBuilders while online:
Caesar III Music Player (http://www.geocities.com/kheitmann1/C3Player.htm)•Pharaoh Music Jukebox (http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/java/pharaoh.htm)•Zeus Music Jukebox (http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/java/Zeus.htm)•Emperor's Music Box (http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/java/erotmk.htm)•Children of the Nile Musicbox (http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/java/cotn/cotn.htm)•
Children of the Nile & Quiz (http://panzerblitz.proboards9.com/index.cgi#test)

[Josh]

There should also be a certain limit to autocracy. People can only be pushed so far. Throughout history, we have plenty of examples of peasants revolting against their rulers and ending the reigns of highly dictatorial monarchs. :)

There shouldnt be a limit stopping you from pushing your people too far, it should be easily done, its the cause and effect I look forward to, there isnt something stopping you from being too harsh, but the effects should be quite undesireable (your head in a bucket and your palace in flames) thats what would make it a game, the ability to make a bad choice.

[Azeem]

There shouldnt be a limit stopping you from pushing your people too far, it should be easily done, its the cause and effect I look forward to, there isnt something stopping you from being too harsh, but the effects should be quite undesireable (your head in a bucket and your palace in flames) thats what would make it a game, the ability to make a bad choice.

Actually, that's what I meant.

[Jayhawk]

Yeah, but that limit should depend on a number of factors. Having "Population hapiness is under <value>. Game Over" as an end to your game would suck.
However, having happiness drop below <value> resulting in you being formally deposed by the local priesthood... :cool:

[Alex_pharaoh]

As far as I know, the Pharaoh is there not to rule over the people, but to protect them from the 'evil' of Seth and preserve the order of Maat, goddess of Truth and Balance. Many Pharaohs tried to impose their own despotic rule which in almost all of the times ended in faliure: Lack of food production, economic decline, political inestability, etc. Many times the People just had enougth of that Pharaoh, and sabotaged their own country. Of cource that if a Pharaoh is despotic and unjust, it would give the perfect pretext for their rivals in Power, the priests, to depose him and proclaim a more controlable Pharaoh so that they might gain more power.

In the end, there were religious, economic and political reasons why the Pharaoh was not free to do all they wanted like some Despot, and needed to please the people and their needs. It is like an Absolute Monarchy, just taking seriously the frase "To rule for the People, but without the People", unlike the European absolute monarchies which ruled for themselves and without the people.

[Echnaton]

Hmm, I hope we can threaten the population as a alternative to just making them satisfied. There are no cruel intentions here, but it's just realistic.

Due to Ken Parker's comment in another thread, we can even conclude more about the phrase: "Your rule is unlikely to please everyone. If people become too dissatisfied, they will not hesitate to voice their complaints."

Ken said:"At the risk of being a tease, CotN's speech engine is something new and different. I'm unaware of any other game that has used speech in quite the same way. We've put a lot of effort into speech, and most of you will be delighted by the result."

So apart from visual demonstrations, I am sure we will HEAR a lot of complaints.

[Eddy]

Well, if they complain too much, let's just say that I'll crack my whip on those ungrateful peons.

[Cironir]

Well, fear can be a strong motivation, and it's definitely a tool rulers tend to have at their disposal. In Stronghold, for instance, you have the choice between placing "good" and "bad" objects, each influencing the population in a different way. If you errect gallows, your people work harder and more efficiently, but their happiness factor drops. "Nice" objects such as statues and flags increase the people's happiness, but also cause them to work a little less.