Funny that nobody voted for the militarist faction. They are the only faction that literally have El Presidente by the balls in the game, cross them and BANG!

deleted post as it was pointless

productive they are.

Coconut, the whole going rebel thing in T3 is pretty easy..

basically, Low liberty, unhappy, watching a protest they have a chance to go rebel.

i have seen rebeles pop without a protest, atleast none i could find, but i think it happens with out. Low liberty, unhappy, and so repressed they feel like they can't protest. I think there is a roll chance that instead of just not protesting they pop rebel.

and thanks again for that help on that mission, I see T1 in an entirely new light Yet again ! Its funny how that game truely evolves in my mind over the years. I never had to rush build like that so never really ran into that problem as bad.. as i typically make really small islands and very select in what i build. But man, It really is a great game ehh? Im sure it will be one of the ones im still playing in the next 10 years or even longer. But im wondering if T4 will be the new compairison. this whole crime thing, imports, and brand new diplomicay really has me intrigued

---

(14-05-2011 11:49 PM)Democriss Wrote:  Funny that nobody voted for the militarist faction. They are the only faction that literally have El Presidente by the balls in the game, cross them and BANG!

Very true, But i think deep down everyone just wants a strong military to protect from rebels, and feel like a ruler. Sowhen ever something happens that says please the militarists they think, Ohh yea right, thanks for the reminder, i want to feel secure. Instead of like the others.. Ohh god what now i have to build more garbage dumps?


Me on the other hand half the time i never bother with um, even go as far as to fire my palace gaurds. Most of the time my goal is to not have a single rebel on the island.

@ rj66

Wow! You got me bad. I was so focused on the importance of the time-elapse meters on the main panel for units (they determine the unit's scedule and time "on-the-job") that I forgot\overlooked that the first five "meters" on the happiness panel are different - that is, all the meters on it are NOT time elapse.


I edited the post to clarify some things, but not that point specifically. I did (hopefully) fix the harsh comment about players.

A few points for further consideration. --
I have come to believe that food variety counts in T1 but was undiscovered by systematic tests (sorry CoffeeBean). So T3 helps by making that clear. Hitter814 posted some useful information about food here:
http://forum.kalypsomedia.com/showthread.php?tid=2758
In part: "Individuals do not have to send the fetched meals back to home, neither do they have to take meals at home. They can take meals at anywhere except in the street. It seems that they carry with [them,] "household" meals. However, although couples share household meals, they needn't come to their spouse for food when hungry. Only couples share household meals. Children have their own independent household meals. You can regard them as unemployed adults, they do almost the same things ..."
All of his posts are worth reading.

Just to inform me, isn't there a significant difference between those "city simulations" which are entirely building based with spawned people (AI\NPC) and the "city simulations" which are primarily based on people (AI\NPC) which use buildings?

Quote:I have followed AIs around enough to know that some occupations do not have to visit work regularly and you still give service (Teachers, Professor, Cooks, Barmaids, Cabaret girls, Attendant, Maids). The Service Quality is what takes a hit if the worker is too busy with other things or Job Quality and other meters are very low.

I fear that the same perception vs actual effect that tended to distort T1 gameplay has crept into T3. Productivity is a slippery word which can apply to both units (people) and buildings. Of course, in both cases the algorithm is complex and not simply linear.
Observation in T1 for units (people) indicates the two major keys to their productivity are A} Time actually on the job and B} Their level of experience in that job. Lots and lots of reports indicate that interest in item B overcomes concern with item A. That's due to the easy perception that buildings function simply with employees.
Observation in T1 for buildings indicates that there are different measures for productivity which depend on the role of the building. Does it

1. Move physical goods from creation\input to output?
   • Output
2. Service units\people directly?
   • Throughput
3. Provide an indirect effect on units\people or other buildings?
   • Change in Overlay Coloration

Service Quality works in a number of ways, but it seems not to have any appreciable effect on how fast the patrons\customers move through service buildings (throughput) once they have been attracted to the building by the service quality. It has been clearly tested\reported that factories move product at variable speeds according to presence or absence of workers. It is a clear parallel that patrons\customers recharge their "meters" at variable rates dependent on something other than the linear 'Service Quality' - IMHO. It was tested for entertainment to see how tourists could be gouged.

The Education Buildings are an anomaly because the Students are both Patrons and Employees. So the part actual presence means for both Teachers\Professors and Students plays is hard to crack.

The relationship of housing (& tourist accommodations) Service Quality plays to the length of time that it takes to recharge the unit\person's rest meter has not been investigated carefully. However, by inference -- better housing should shorten the period required to recharge the rest meter. For those with Maid service, her actual presence should make the occupants rest faster.

You are correct that there are several other factors that are worth discussing. But this is going OT at warp speed. I will try to relate it to Faction Support by suggesting that the unit\person's relationship to faction(s) may have a more significant impact on job preferrence than is recognized. T3 should be checked for the influence of the options of Educational Buildings vis-a-vis the dominant faction and attendance rates.

(15-05-2011 09:15 AM)Tropije Wrote:  ..., I see T1 in an entirely new light Yet again ! It's funny how that game truely evolves in my mind over the years. ... But man, It really is a great game ehh? ...

Thank you for the kind words. Yes, it is great -- I am happy to promote it even though I look to be the fool for doing so ---- and am very inept too many times.

(15-05-2011 09:15 AM)Tropije Wrote:  

---

(14-05-2011 11:49 PM)Democriss Wrote:  Funny that nobody voted for the militarist faction. They are the only faction that literally have El Presidente by the balls in the game, cross them and BANG!

Very true, But i think deep down everyone just wants a strong military to protect from rebels, and feel like a ruler. Sowhen ever something happens that says please the militarists they think, Ohh yea right, thanks for the reminder, i want to feel secure. Instead of like the others.. Ohh god what now i have to build more garbage dumps?


Me on the other hand half the time i never bother with um, even go as far as to fire my palace gaurds. Most of the time my goal is to not have a single rebel on the island.

Having zero rebels is usually my goal too . I usually aim to maximize happiness on my island, while having a healthy economy through the game. The three factions that mostly get in my way are:

Loyalists: I rarely if ever get along with the loyalists. They only seem to care about El Presidente being a crazy fascist dictator with a hint of megalomania. They love him, even when they hate him.
All the major demands of the faction bug me; for starters the no election thing, doesn't their happiness drop in regards to liberty when I skip elections?
Then there is the childhood home, I never seem to be able to profit at all from this building. Maybe four or five guests visit every year (if so many at all), while having a high school educated staff with all the cost that follows.
The megalomania edicts that they want me to issue every 5 years I seldom use, with the exception of the national holiday edict, and ironicly sometimes to outlaw the loyalist faction
The faction usually is way to large in the game, even though no recruiting has been going on.


Militarists: At the time when Tropico is rebel-free and happiness is above average, there really is no practical use for the army in my case (maybe after 10 years of gameplay). In that situation the army tends to be more of a drain on the economy, demanding more soldiers as the population grows as well as high salaries.
I too often expell my military after x many years in office (since all they do is suck money from me as well as manpower), usually ending up with zero in relations with the faction.
This faction, however, is probably the most difficult to ignore for players that want to keep an active military in Tropico.


Religious: I have to agree with many of the comments here that this faction really blows. The religious needs of Tropicans are way to high, no way am I going to build 4-5 cathedrals on my island. The cost, the space and the manpower needed to keep this faction happy are totally unrealistic and end up draining you dry. Not to mention many of their backwards demands.

well you dont really need more than one cathedral, you can get religious faction to 100% with just one, Plus a newspapper set to word of god. You just need about 1 chuch per 75-100 people.

the birth control, papal visit, and prohibtion all help as well. I rarely use prohibition though as i love the pubs and drunk tourists.


just put your palace gaurds in great housing with a near by caberet and your all good. they should more than take care of any of the random rebels that seam to pop early game.

First, let me note that the "manual," or whatever the publisher's accompanying directions are called, do comment on the faction "demands." It is interesting that with Absolute Power, the demands are divided per faction into three major and other minor demands. Apparently these are displayed on screen for the player; a feature added by T3. In T1, the "demands" are inferred unless the player actually reads the Manual and\or the Almanac very carefully.

T3 has a division of demands into levels.
Further: "As a faction grows, it will have more minor demands. Additionally, major demands may become harder to accomplish - for instance, the religious faction will want the average religious satisfaction to be over 40 when the faction is small, but when the faction becomes larger it feels that a satisfaction of over 60 is required."
That gives me a hint about how the "voice-over" and other prompts in T1 are coded.
While T3 gives the player a lot more (perhaps too much) information about some gameplay factors, it seems to fail to put the demands in perspective. What happens if the demands are ignored? Is the new feature, "Faction Disasters" the developer's new hammer to force attention to the factions?

(15-05-2011 08:07 AM)rj66 Wrote:  ... Tropicians do not punch a time clock, so the metaphor of 'work schedule' isn't a good viewpoint. Rather look at it as cycle of activities that take longer to preform as tropicians experience delays. The more time that has past since they last cyled into work mode the less overall productive they are.

That's a good point. Although in a way the Tropican people - both citizens and tourists - do "punch a time clock" - it isn't against a simple 24 hour schedule. They do conform to a rather specific schedule of activities; and the activities have identifiable priorities. A Day in the Life of a Tropican (forget any connection with the crazy Game Clock):

1. Rest in my own home - no matter how humble.
   • Triggered by my Rest Need Meter (Tourists have one too)
   • Travel to my home (including time to build shack if other home is not available)
2. Food (Citizen only) Consume meal "in" a building
   • Triggered by my Hunger Need Meter
   • Travel to food source if no personal\household meals available
3. Other Metered Needs\"desires"
   • Triggered by one of my other three meters
   • When the meter hits the red zone, I drop everything to go for it
   • I look for an open place in an a service building related to the need
   • Travel to that building
   • Meter Recharge time in building (variable)
   • If there is no space in appropriate building, I do NOT enter a queue or search further, I enter a default mode which screws the player for wasting my time because he chooses to ignore my "needs\desires"
     • Travel in the form of wandering about the map is involved; and the player can't guess why
4. Work if I am employed in one of El President's fine buildings, but first
   • Travel to get there - how tiring! Walk, walk walk ; if my Rest Meter trips to red before I get there - too bad for you El Presidente
   • When I walk in the door, I am at work - but I may have to travel further to do productive work
   • When my "rest meter" (or perhaps another meter) goes red that's when I quit (loyal Teamsters slave on for some time more) and travel home

yea.. faction disasters are the way to make you deal with the factions if you ignore um. the sad part is there arnt any disasters that really effect you much.

typically its later in the game one hits, and by that time you even if you outlaw and 50 people go rebel, the never attack you palace right away so you can build an army rather quick, then lure, and amistey most back.

Or you can just ignore then, and if they are eco protestors, shooting/jail/arange accident is an easy fix.

also with election speaches and the avatar buffs you can also turn stuff around rather easily. Its really there are just to many ways to fix things now that just knowing what to do is the only key you need.

things definatly should have some higher difficutly settings some how even the senarios after a year of playing have gotton a lot easier. id like some way to ramp things up. perhaps like double need decay, add some sorta taxes, increase building cost by X % (adjustable)

that sorta stuff

I never really

Religious are hard to satisfy early because of the cost of churches and cathedrals at the time they demand them.

Late on, however, they make a truly excellent pet faction, as cost is not an issue. You'd be stupid not to have them be a pet faction late game.

Late game the militarists are typically the ones that hate me. Because having a multitude of soldiers eats up money and I prefer a high liberty society.

However, I voted communists, because housing is probably the biggest money vacuum in the game.

(08-05-2011 12:10 AM)Presidente Harry Wrote:  I say communists. I 'm a capitalist so were naturaly enemies. I also like freedom and advancement so again, we're enemies. In the game I got in to power from a capitalist revolution and the still kinda like me. Says somthing about Tropican Communists.
PS Before I got good at the game the USSR kept on trying to invade. They mostly did.

Thank you for voting but I wanted to know what faction makes this game harder to play. What faction sometimes make you lose the mission because they destroy your palace etc not about your real life attitudes. I happen to dislike nationalists in real life but I voted for them because of the reason I mentioned in first post.

(17-05-2011 01:47 PM)IronFist Wrote:  ... However, I voted communists, because housing is probably the biggest money vacuum in the game.

You make a good point about housing -- even with micro-management of the rent vs pay, there is no way to make housing pay for itself by recovering its cost directly through the rents. I believe that the rents are actually just a tool to segregate the population into their proper status. Otherwise, El Presidente is simply supplementing some of the citizens' pay.

Rather, the latger actual recovery of the cost of housing (better than shacks) comes through shortening the time period spent satisfying the "rest need." The shorter the time spent sleeping the longer the time spent at work.

Perhaps you are a bit hard on the Communist Faction because their demands (per T1) include more than housing -- i.e. full employment and low pay disparity -- and they are satisfied with any housing better than shacks.

Meanwhile, the Capitalist Faction's demands (per T1) include high quality housing & entertainment for the College Educated (perhaps HS educated also).

(17-05-2011 03:43 PM)CoconutKid Wrote:  

(17-05-2011 01:47 PM)IronFist Wrote:  ... However, I voted communists, because housing is probably the biggest money vacuum in the game.

You make a good point about housing -- even with micro-management of the rent vs pay, there is no way to make housing pay for itself by recovering its cost directly through the rents. I believe that the rents are actually just a tool to segregate the population into their proper status. Otherwise, El Presidente is simply supplementing some of the citizens' pay.

Rather, the latger actual recovery of the cost of housing (better than shacks) comes through shortening the time period spent satisfying the "rest need." The shorter the time spent sleeping the longer the time spent at work.

Perhaps you are a bit hard on the Communist Faction because their demands (per T1) include more than housing -- i.e. full employment and low pay disparity -- and they are satisfied with any housing better than shacks.

Meanwhile, the Capitalist Faction's demands (per T1) include high quality housing & entertainment for the College Educated (perhaps HS educated also).

I typically have no issues with the Capitalists due to my playstyle and avatar builds. That is, stick with the extremely basic, minimize shacks, starvation, and health care losses off the bat, get a HS and a factory going. After that, smooth sailing.

I should also say I generally have minimal issues with the Communists, but that's only because I largely ignore the demands of other factions early on.

But besides that, you could just build bunkhouses to shut the reds up, but that really doesn't solve too much. It takes much better-and more expensive-housing to win the people's respect and compliance. Also, if you develop at all, you'll end up blowing all that nonsense up later on. It's counter-productive in the long run. Like I said, it's a huge money vacuum.

More often than not, the lowest quality housing I build is tenements, because they are pretty much the worst you can "get away with;" they don't have the serious crime, pollution and ugliness repercussions of the housing below them.

Oh and I disagree about time on the job. The people, if in shacks, generally build them next to their workplaces. If the workplace is in the middle of nowhere and has poor transit, i.e. the dock off the bat, than you are certainly right, because of the hike he has to take to get to the restaurant. Otherwise, it is irrelevant whether the dockworker lives in a shanty or a mansion. So its more reliant on infrastructure than housing quality.

However, I do believe that housing does payoff, but through different means. Housing's payoff is respect, happiness, and compliance. Rebels are highly counter productive, and people are much less likely to rebel or protest when they got a nice roof over their head. I mean, heck, I get less complaints during food shortages than when there is an abundance of shacks. I build my Tropicans a nice little suburbia, and they don't rebel, rarely protest, and vote for me far more often than not. So I guess housing's more of a preventative measure than an investment.

Early mission housing

(17-05-2011 04:19 PM)IronFist Wrote:  ... Oh and I disagree about time on the job. The people, if in shacks, generally build them next to their workplaces. If the workplace is in the middle of nowhere and has poor transit, i.e. the dock off the bat, than you are certainly right, because of the hike he has to take to get to the restaurant. Otherwise, it is irrelevant whether the dockworker lives in a shanty or a mansion. So its more reliant on infrastructure than housing quality.

However, I do believe that housing does payoff, but through different means. Housing's payoff is respect, happiness, and compliance. ...

You make a good argument. It may be that the quality of the housing has no impact what-so-ever on the elapsed time it takes for a unit to recharge its rest meter. I have not personally tested it, and I have seen no reports of relevant tests. I base my comment on interpolation only from the other building's effects.

I do wish to point out that I did not include the travel factor. I simply opined that housing quality would reduce the time for sleep which would increase the time on the job -- implying that all other factors were equal. Yes, of course, travel is a pernicious pitfall of gameplay.

Results: 1. Religious- 8 votes


2. Environmentalists- 4 votes

3. Nationalists- 3 votes

Voting time is unlimited so results could change but I doubt it.

I have never had any problems with environmentalists. Here are traits I use ( and never change )

Leftist author

Elected as socialist

Green thumb

Scholarly

Womanizer

Alcoholic

I think only green thumb increases respect with environmentalists

I have edited my post #29 to try to correct my memory based error. I apologize.

There are two separate and distinct meters for the "first five" of the ten human characteristics. One group measures the time elapsed need, and the other group measures the current satisfaction\happiness level.

The entire group of ten satisfaction\happiness meters are probably interlinked with the unit's faction support levels in addition to the weights shown for the individual's personality. That is to say the individual does not exist in a personal bubble.

---

I'm sorry so few recognize the pernicious effects of the "Loyalists" -- The Tropican Lavender Shirts.

It is funny when loyalists become rebels they should help my soldiers if they are so loyal

By the way,do you think T4 will have more factions ?

Quote:Yes, it is the only faction directly linked with a single metered "need" [factor if you wish]. But is the annoyance centered on gameplay in the game-world? Or is it based on the player's real-world, personal attitudes about religion -- perhaps something that looks centered on a "clerical class?"

I think what annoys me the most with the religious faction is their severe reduction to liberty and enteratainment (or at least they try) which overall affects the happiness score, and I do find it to be much more moany than the others in general, with the exception of environmentalists that are useless as they come right now because of the poor options we have to actually be green. Since I strive to achieve the highest possible score in each game, the religious faction is just that thorn in the side because of their conservative values. It does however become better in the later game when you have access to buildings that increases liberty, but early on I find the religious faction annoying yes. In the later stages of the game it is the environmentalists.

It should be noted that I still voted for the environmentalitsts.

In real life I have no issues with those who are religious in general (I do however think most of us become annoyed by doorknockers), and I am pro environmentalism. I don't mind building churches and cathedrals to please the religious satisfaction BUT I don't want to be forced to build a gazillion of them which unfortunately is the case. The same goes for clinics and hospitals. I also often have the communists nagging me about this particularly early game, but building clinics is much more natural since you don't want your population to die.

The faction I probably go along the best with is the intellectuals, which isn't so strange because I favor education highly.

(20-05-2011 01:30 AM)LeaT Wrote:  

Quote:Yes, it is the only faction directly linked with a single metered "need" [factor if you wish]. But is the annoyance centered on gameplay in the game-world? Or is it based on the player's real-world, personal attitudes about religion -- perhaps something that looks centered on a "clerical class?"

I think what annoys me the most with the religious faction is their severe reduction to liberty and enteratainment (or at least they try) which overall affects the happiness score, and I do find it to be much more moany than the others in general, with the exception of environmentalists that are useless as they come right now because of the poor options we have to actually be green. Since I strive to achieve the highest possible score in each game, the religious faction is just that thorn in the side because of their conservative values. It does however become better in the later game when you have access to buildings that increases liberty, but early on I find the religious faction annoying yes. In the later stages of the game it is the environmentalists.

It should be noted that I still voted for the environmentalitsts.

In real life I have no issues with those who are religious in general (I do however think most of us become annoyed by doorknockers), and I am pro environmentalism. I don't mind building churches and cathedrals to please the religious satisfaction BUT I don't want to be forced to build a gazillion of them which unfortunately is the case. The same goes for clinics and hospitals. I also often have the communists nagging me about this particularly early game, but building clinics is much more natural since you don't want your population to die.

The faction I probably go along the best with is the intellectuals, which isn't so strange because I favor education highly.

I tried for the first time the other day, not building any churches/cathedrals at all on my island. Got rid of the army as well after 15 years. Instead I focused on raising job quality, housing, healt care and entertainment. Managed to get a happiness level of 71 with 800 people (never managed that before ) as well as a thriving economy.

Religious, first thing i do on sandbox is order the deaths of every religious supporter and ban the faction. Im not wasting money on pointless things like churches.

(20-05-2011 03:41 PM)Feeblezak Wrote:  Religious, first thing i do on sandbox is order the deaths of every religious supporter and ban the faction. Im not wasting money on pointless things like churches.

You are wasting your time. You can just ban the faction and get rid of the rebels. Up to 50% of supporters can become rebels.

no, i kill all the supporters THEN order its ban, thus ensuring there are no rebels. i have absolutely no problem with commiting mass genocide of a faction in this game

Yes but it costs a lot of money to kill them all one by one

(20-05-2011 09:47 PM)Che Guevara Wrote:  Yes but it costs a lot of money to kill them all one by one

expensive, but its safer in the early stages, where if half the faction goes rebel they could easily overpower your military, killing them off before banning them pretty much eliminates that threat.

Well, I can't say I'm surprised by the results. I just recently got the game and the expansion, though I've been familiar with both for quite a while.

In Vanilla, I'd definitely be with the rest of those who believe that the religious faction is the most annoying in the game. Their constant demand for churches and cathedrals (as well as the demand for a church even when I skip and just build a cathedral..SO IRRITATING) is pointless. I can't imagine an island with 300 residents (about the highest I've gotten so far) needing more than one of either. Also, the religious faction's social demands are simply stupid. The contraception ban does nothing but create overpopulation problems and the Inquisition just doesn't flow with my style. As previously noted, they also rail against gay marriage while participating in it; I laughed out loud when I saw a priest married to a bishop.

With all that said, I find that in Absolute Power the Loyalists are the most irritating faction of them all, so that's who I voted in the poll. I think I am bothered by them mostly because their demands are largely superficial... and the concept of having a Loyalist candidate running against me just grates my mind. Whereas the religious faction petitions for issues that I can at least recognize as legitimately important (from their standpoint), as do all of the other factions, the Loyalists groan about statues and a childhood home. Really?! I just find them to be a loud distraction. I know it doesn't take a lot to plop down a building and some statues and fulfill their other idiotic demands, but I have little respect for the vacancy of their minds and therefore just ignore them. I know other players might totally enjoy the cult following, but when the cult starts TELLING me what to do, that's where I turn off.

After the religious and the loyalists, I'd say the militarists, only because of their disproportionate influence over how the island is run (unless you want to be overthrown!).

The religious easily. Because in T3 I play with my flaws a an alcoholic womanizer they usually love me An they complain about my "low moral standards",my cabarets and nightclubs etc;. Since I normally play as a "center left" with gay marriage,albeit with a large army,they can be annoying.

I would say the enviromentalists are close second. Darn eco-protest! Nothing my glorious army can`t solve.

I agree the militarists are very powerful,but I don`t think over powered look at latin american history!! Just out of interest what do you pay your soldiers ? I pay mine $25 with special ops training,and generals $35. When I watch T3 videos on YouTube I am always surprised to see soldiers paid $15 with spec ops !