Loyalty?

Have a feature request for SRU? Post here.

Moderators: Legend, Balthagor, Moderators

User avatar
ZT Strike
Major
Posts: 164
Joined: Jan 02 2010
Human: Yes
Location: Evansville, IN
Contact:

Loyalty?

Post by ZT Strike »

Can we fix that royal pain in the ass that is loyalty. It would never change nor could you do anything about it, all it would do is screw an invading country on supply, vision, and resource collection. What was the purpose of it, and are we going to see more of it?
-ZT Strike
User avatar
tkobo
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 11833
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Location: In a vast zionist plot ...RIGHT BEHIND YOU ! Oh Noes !

Re: Loyalty?

Post by tkobo »

Oh, i would like so much to see loyalty expanded......
This post approved by Tkobo:Official Rabble Rouser of the United Yahoos
Chuckle TM
medic911
Major
Posts: 165
Joined: Dec 03 2008
Location: Avondale, AZ, USA
Contact:

Re: Loyalty?

Post by medic911 »

if loyalty can be changed by your treatment of citizens, world events, and other variable, (expanding loyalty)... possibly even areas trying to separate from you, or partisan units cropping up in very hostile areas (even in your borders) then it has a purpose... but the way it was in 2020 (didnt play 2010 so idk there) didnt really work, and if CW is like that with loyalty, id say that we should get rid of it instead... but yes, my vote would be to expand it, but if thats not an option, get rid of it.
User avatar
comrade.seawolf
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 204
Joined: Sep 12 2010
Human: Yes

Re: Loyalty?

Post by comrade.seawolf »

I agree that Loyalty should be something that you can at least have an impact on. It would be nice to be able to tell your Head of Intel, "hey, take this $X, and go increase the loyalty of citizens in that enemy territory towards us", And you could highlight the tiles you want. This could have a negative effect on your enemy's operations in the area, (similar to what happens when they are in un-loyal territory in 2020), and when your units roll in, they don't have as much of a negative effecting them.

Also, loyalty should be effected by things such as propaganda and social programs.
User avatar
George Geczy
General
Posts: 2648
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Location: BattleGoat Studios
Contact:

Re: Loyalty?

Post by George Geczy »

Ah, Loyalty, that old favorite :)

Of course has this poor topic been discussed many times here on the forums, and it is also a popular punching bag here at the studio.

So let's look at all those examples in the Cold War era where loyalty change worked well. Of course there were the French and British with the colonies... no, not really much loyalty change there. Or the French in Indochina - surely they made new friends. No, I guess not - maybe those fine folks preferred the Americans instead. Nope, not them either.

Or the Soviets, surely they must have an example of affecting Loyalties. Those Hungarians should have learned to love them. Except for that darn uprising in 1956.. OK,maybe the Czechs. Oh, there was 1968. The Polish? Even the leftist trade unions couldn't be taught to love a leftist regime. Surely Afghanistan could learn to love their new Soviet friends - whoops, that didn't work either. But those aren't good examples, since those are actually somewhat independent countries, in "sphere" control but not occupation control. But the Ukrainian and Georgians, they must have shown some true loyalty love? No, apparently not.

Loyalty to occupiers is a concept that seems to have game appeal because it appears in some strategy games in various guises (keep your conquered citizens happy!), but it is really a medieval concept that does not have a modern application.
... all it would do is screw an invading country on supply, vision, and resource collection.
Yes, that is what it does... it screwed the French in Indochina, the Americans in Vietnam, the Soviets in Afghanistan, (and even Ukraine when you think about farm yields), or if you go back further the Germans in occupied France/Poland/Russia, the Italians in Africa, yada yada.

Remember that Loyalty in SRCW is different than sphere influence - the intention in SRCW is to allow affecting a nation's support of US-vs-Soviet sphere using many different methods, including trade, military support, and espionage. But this is a different concept that the civilian support for an occupying force.

So, let's open the floor to the counter-point : when in the Cold War period (1950-1990 ish) was loyalty to an occupier ever affected positively ?
User avatar
Ruges
General
Posts: 3408
Joined: Aug 22 2008
Location: Nearby, really I'll see you tonight when your sleeping
Contact:

Re: Loyalty?

Post by Ruges »

So, let's open the floor to the counter-point : when in the Cold War period (1950-1990 ish) was loyalty to an occupier ever affected positively ?


When was loyalty ever attempted to be gotten? You only get loyalty by making peoples lifes better after they get occupied. And it seems like in all the examples, the peoples lifes have gotten worse if anything. Thats not going to get you loyalty.

Now if its just as easy as making peoples lifes better to gain thier loyalty, then why as this not happend yet? Money. You would basicaly need to supliment there cost of living, and pay to increase there living conditions in order to increase there loyalty towards you. All at the same time with them resisting you every step of the way. And we are not talking about the basic necisities of life here (IE food and shelter). Where talking about an entire better way of life. Which, well does not come cheap. Nore are you going to see nations supporting such acts to gain loyalty. Thier own people would revolt, your just not going to find a nations populous willing to pay for somone else to have the good life when they are struggling thereself. Exsepcialy considering you just went to war against that country, so your populous probly does not even like them all that much to begin with.

But I still believe it is possible to affect loyalty, quickly (One to two generations). It just costs allot, Allot more than is probly economicaly possible.
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20485
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Loyalty?

Post by Balthagor »

Ruges wrote:...But I still believe it is possible to affect loyalty, quickly (One to two generations)...
um, that's not really quickly. You're talking ~ 50 years. By that point, the Cold War is over...
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
User avatar
tkobo
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 11833
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Location: In a vast zionist plot ...RIGHT BEHIND YOU ! Oh Noes !

Re: Loyalty?

Post by tkobo »

George Geczy wrote:

So, let's open the floor to the counter-point : when in the Cold War period (1950-1990 ish) was loyalty to an occupier ever affected positively ?
Japan and the US
This post approved by Tkobo:Official Rabble Rouser of the United Yahoos
Chuckle TM
User avatar
George Geczy
General
Posts: 2648
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Location: BattleGoat Studios
Contact:

Re: Loyalty?

Post by George Geczy »

tkobo wrote:Japan and the US
The Japanese (and possibly also the German, in a different way) occupation after WWII is an interesting case.

With both having been devastated after the war, suffering huge personal and national sacrifice, there is something of a "please save us" mentality. This would especially be true in Germany, where they realized that they had been led down a garden path by a maniac.

Japan was a bit different, because the Japanese never really had this feeling about their Emperor, but the US smartly allowed Japan to keep their Emperor because of this. And the US made it clear they were going to leave soon - they were out by 1951, six years after the end of WWII. So, were the Japanese during this period increasingly loyal to the US, or just merely tolerant?

And starting in 1952, Japan was technically no longer occupied, and so the relationship with the US was Nation-to-Nation, something modeled differently than Loyalty in Supreme Ruler.
User avatar
tkobo
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 11833
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Location: In a vast zionist plot ...RIGHT BEHIND YOU ! Oh Noes !

Re: Loyalty?

Post by tkobo »

id argue you have to expand the search for regions it applies (loyalty changes) to ww2.And include the full time period of the US occupation of japan.

And id probably include iceland- Britian/us
Iceland went from neutral to nato
-went from a dependent of denmark to a republic to a nation allied with its former occupiers
This post approved by Tkobo:Official Rabble Rouser of the United Yahoos
Chuckle TM
User avatar
BigWolf
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 523
Joined: Jun 24 2008
Location: Empire of the Wolf

Re: Loyalty?

Post by BigWolf »

I would love loyalty to change
Remember that some of us enjoy really long term games
Also, it doesn't have to be a complete loyalty flip within the space of the cold war, just maybe 5/10% or similar for players really trying (so you would need 100+ years to completely change it)

Of course, from a technical stand point, it could be an issue, since you'd have to store loyalty for each owner that's gained some (meaning if 10 hexes has had 10 different owners 1 year for each owner, that's 100 new variables that need to be stored and altered)

Plus, if we're going for loyalty gains on occupied lands, then it would be great to have loyalty loses on home territories if you're treating your citizens in a way they aren't liking (though that would be tricky to simulate since some nationalities are more tolerant than others)
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20485
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Loyalty?

Post by Balthagor »

tkobo wrote:...And id probably include iceland- Britian/us
Iceland went from neutral to nato
-went from a dependent of denmark to a republic to a nation allied with its former occupiers
But that's "Sphere Change" and "Diplomatic Ratings" in the game mechanics, not loyalty. And both of those stats do change.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
User avatar
George Geczy
General
Posts: 2648
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Location: BattleGoat Studios
Contact:

Re: Loyalty?

Post by George Geczy »

it would be great to have loyalty loses on home territories if you're treating your citizens in a way they aren't liking
This we do simulate in SR2020 in a couple of ways. First of all, if you're running a democracy, you're going to lose your election. And if you're a dictatorship, you're going to suffer productivity losses and other penalties for having a low Domestic Approval Rating.

When citizens are unhappy with their government they don't go looking to become loyal to someone else's country, instead they go looking to change their government :)

-- George.
User avatar
tkobo
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 11833
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Location: In a vast zionist plot ...RIGHT BEHIND YOU ! Oh Noes !

Re: Loyalty?

Post by tkobo »

Balthagor wrote:
tkobo wrote:...And id probably include iceland- Britian/us
Iceland went from neutral to nato
-went from a dependent of denmark to a republic to a nation allied with its former occupiers
But that's "Sphere Change" and "Diplomatic Ratings" in the game mechanics, not loyalty. And both of those stats do change.
Which came about thru direct occupation ....

If you look at occupations only as way to annex and keep new lands, you overlook the ability of it when done right,to change the populations stance,moving it toward the occupiers.Currently we have civilian approval which reflects how the people of another region think about a given foreign region.And we can change this with positive actions,but as this changes,loyalty which should be affected by the aforementioned change,doesnt itself change.And it should.

And that change in loyalty should be possible in both ways,just like civ apr.If you go in and occupy,and do so in a positive manner,making a show you dont intend to annex,counter to your shown intentions (real or fake) ,it should at some point become possible.And yes, that point should be in generations.For game purposes,id propose a generation to be 20 years (instead of the commonly accepted 25),which could allow 2 to pass.Hence at the end game,a small chance should be possible for loyalty to be at a point annexation is possible thru it,should the occupier decide to go that route.Thru another fav topic of mine,diplomatic annexation.

And i mean a small chance.Things like going in and staying in a way that shows your gonna stay,should all but crush said small chance.Making it infinitesimal.Either way, the success regardless of the route ,should be a hard won end game only type of event.

In short loyalty should be the measure of civ apr for occupied regions, and work on a similar manner.Mind you, not a dar, as there needs to be seperation so as to show the difference between occupied culture and the occupying culture.If successful in terms of annexation,then it should become simply dar (with a neg modifier).
This post approved by Tkobo:Official Rabble Rouser of the United Yahoos
Chuckle TM
User avatar
ZT Strike
Major
Posts: 164
Joined: Jan 02 2010
Human: Yes
Location: Evansville, IN
Contact:

Re: Loyalty?

Post by ZT Strike »

My big problem can be sourced in 2020. In most games, South Korea and North Korea would go to war. Usually the South would win. In real life, I have not a shadow of a doubt that North Koreans would heavily support the South Korean government. (This for clear and easy reasons) However, in the case of North Korea. I don't think a person in the south would support the north unless they benefited greatly from the occupation. In CW, I really think that loyalty has to be fixed. If Western Nations came in to the Warsaw Pact, I don't think it would have been long before the majority of the population came to support the West. Also, if the reverse happened, I think the Reds would have a hell of a time trying to get the West to support them. Really, if anything supports this, just look at the end of the cold war. There is a reason the Wall came down, and it wasn't economic or military.
-ZT Strike
Post Reply

Return to “Suggestions - SRU”