Hi, just a question. How is the orientation/tendency towards communism/capitalism determined exactly?

I've played the original Tropico, Tropico 3 and now 4, but have always had a bit of trouble figuring this out. Thanks!

By how much the faction likes you, which is fairly easy to read in the almanac

Your own alignment isn't important: a dictator is a dictator is a dictator, the style of government he uses to hide his dictatorship behind isn't really relevant to him

I think he means the people's choice in a faction. So far all I've found is parent's choose kids. As for immigrants and the game start, a random number to make sure a faction always grows, while modifiers pick certain factions over others. IE: You will always have more religious than environmentalist. The best to remove a faction is to kill all members of the party so their off spring aren't members of it and to outlaw new immigrants...alas any hired immigrants will be that faction and sometimes I see people randomly join an eliminated faction. (IE: Kill everyone in the faction and all the sudden someone who was a militarist only is a militarist and capitalist. )

If you mean the faction orientation that modifies your foreign relations, it is calculated depending on whether you have better standing with the communists than the capitalists or vice versa.

heh, i read it 5 times and still havent a clue what he is really asking.. but just going off 3 key words, orriented, capitalists and communists, this is my answere


capitalists like.. good economy, upscale entertainment, elite housing for the rich..


communists like, healthcare, eqaul housing for all, food..


as the years go on, they add things like communists like certain farms/industry..

capitalists like tourism, media, oil, and some other stuff.. If you read in the almanac, it will often tell you what you are lacking, OR what you have and and they like.. so just pay attention to that

Thanks guys. To clarify, I am asking how this shows up in the foreign relations panel, where the orientation/tendency shows up.

For my part, I try to develop an island with less than a 50% income disparity, social security, cheap housing, adequate access to healthcare and plenty of food and so on. But it seems to happen that as soon as the economy becomes more advanced, i.e. with more industry and income flowing into the coffers, somehow the island becomes "oriented towards capitalism" even though I am building an egalitarian paradise with high standards of living for all. What gives? The model seems flawed.

If a poor, underdeveloped economy is "communism" how do the developers explain East Germany, the USSR etc.? FYI, East Germany, the DDR, had a well developed - and highly educated - workforce and economy, wasn't it a "communist" state? Haiti is a very poor, underdeveloped country, yet it has never been "communist."

(05-10-2011 01:11 PM)Tropije Wrote:  heh, i read it 5 times and still havent a clue what he is really asking.. but just going off 3 key words, orriented, capitalists and communists, this is my answere


capitalists like.. good economy, upscale entertainment, elite housing for the rich..


communists like, healthcare, eqaul housing for all, food..


as the years go on, they add things like communists like certain farms/industry..

capitalists like tourism, media, oil, and some other stuff.. If you read in the almanac, it will often tell you what you are lacking, OR what you have and and they like.. so just pay attention to that

Hugo, cheers! I agree completely with that statement. Although die DDR and UdSSR were socialist states, both were highly industrialized, die DDR being the better explain. Hell the symbol were the hammer and compass to show the focus on engineering and industry. It wasn't some farming backwards statement, die DDR had more factory workers than other socialist states and had a high level of intellectualism.

(06-10-2011 05:27 AM)Hugo Chavez Frias Wrote:  ...
If a poor, underdeveloped economy is "communism" how do the developers explain East Germany, the USSR etc.? ...

I have no idea how Haemimont dealt with this issue as to design and/or balance. Perhaps only to plead that it is only a game and not a simulation.

However, I thought you might have a small interest in the approach of the PopTop developers.

Income disparity separates the Communist Men & Women from the Capitalist Good Ole Boys. Zero % is the goal; I'd say 50% is damn near capitalist. Keeping things operating without differences in pay takes a lot of political indoctrination of the educated levels.

Although the typical "free" stuff is there, there needs to be plenty (Don't fight the church, control it ; revisionist? maybe, but it works).

There's nothing wrong with industry -- except tourism, it must be run on egalitarian basis for the edification and relaxation of the workers (read Slobs ; the Snobs are capitalists. Tropican Workers welcome fellow workers of all nations; capitalist parasites are not welcome.)

Housing must be adequate to house everyone and equal -- as with wages. If you can afford luxury houses, fine but everyone must be in one. Rents obviously should not gouge the workers, and if wages are equal - will be equal. Possibily, it can be used to recover some of the maintenance costs.

Entertainment is not to gouge the worker and look out for the effects of the "class-dividing" options (the dress code kind of stuff) -- provide edifying buildings to the extent possible, but - yes the workers have degraded wishes and you should provide for them. Perhaps the edifying buildings should be free.

That may not be an exact reflection of their thoughts, but it's reasonably close. I provide it only as something you may wish to consider. T1 was a game and not a simulation, but it tried to game about somewhat realistic things. Perhaps it went too far toward theory.

it really doesnt have to do with economy being under developed, though i can see how it can be reflected in the game.


Basically what happens is as you advance you gain more money and start picking up higher end jobs. If you have many people making 10 bucks an hour, vrs a few making 30.. and those people live in a nicer house, and can afford a little better high end entertainment, that becomes capitalist.


to get high end communist late game.. Put everyone in the same kind of house, everyone in appartments is classic tropico communist.

(though i put um all in tenements and say live with it!!!)

another thing is very well placed hospitols, and lots of food. atleast hving 1 of each type of food producer. (what i do is check my almanac, to see whats not exporting anything and i increase that one) I like to have atleast a little money coming from every food producer, even if its just 1-2k, that means your hovering right on the perfect line.


entertainment, letting everyone have acess to the good stuff.. A good communist pay model would be 20, 25, 30.. as there is some class still in communist, its just not as wide of a margin.. like people in shacks next to mansions. You can do, single low paying jobs in tenements, couples, and highschoolers in appartments, then the remainder that can afford in condo's.. skip House, and mansion.

though i do enjoy the shanty island.. thats always fun..

I agree with that the system seems to be oddly flawed at times where you think you are more communist than capitalist but the game still says you are more capitalist etc.

The problem seems to be that since Tropico 4 cannot have a self-sustained economy with the goal around zero that would be the case with true communism, any high income will ultimately end up as capitalist.

While I am at it, is it just me or is it silly easy making money in this game? I haven't played that many missions in the campaign yet so maybe it becomes harder later on, but on one map I had over 500 000 income vs 50 000-100 000 spendings on import netting me about 400 000 overall. I only relied on trade and factories, even though the commodity price for many of my products were below 40% the normal rate.

Difficulty is fairly low in the early missions.

If you do it right, you should be rolling in money regardless of the island though -- it's all about your strategy and building placement.

The last mission is cruel and unusual, so look forward to it

(07-10-2011 12:40 PM)LeaT Wrote:  ... The problem seems to be that since Tropico 4 cannot have a self-sustained economy with the goal around zero that would be the case with true communism, any high income will ultimately end up as capitalist. ...

Do you really mean that? What you seem to be saying is that if the player sets all pay at the same or very nearly the same level, the economy can not sustain itself.

Self-sustaining doesn't mean making huge profits as many players brag about, but just breaking even -- don't you suppose?

I'm not sure what you mean by "high income" -- the treasury or the pay of the upper classes?

(07-10-2011 08:06 PM)CoconutKid Wrote:  

(07-10-2011 12:40 PM)LeaT Wrote:  ... The problem seems to be that since Tropico 4 cannot have a self-sustained economy with the goal around zero that would be the case with true communism, any high income will ultimately end up as capitalist. ...

Do you really mean that? What you seem to be saying is that if the player sets all pay at the same or very nearly the same level, the economy can not sustain itself.

Self-sustaining doesn't mean making huge profits as many players brag about, but just breaking even -- don't you suppose?

I'm not sure what you mean by "high income" -- the treasury or the pay of the upper classes?

Yes, I mean that, because the goal of the game is to not be stuck at zero, it is to ultimately make money so you can continue expanding. It is possible to have a self-sustaining economy around zero and still be able to build, just not in a capitalist market and Tropico's market is built on capitalism.

O.K. Now I grasp what you refer to when you mention "stuck at zero." You are talking about whether the gross economy grows, is static, or contracts. That - of course - doesn't have anything to do with the pay disparity that El Presidente may create or avoid.

The economy has to appear to grow at least enough to neutralize the effects of inflation -- and inflation seems not to be able to be held to zero.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say, "Tropico's market is built on capitalism." Do you mean that all foreign sales are ipso facto to a capitalist buyer?

Seeing as the USSR and then-Red-China are trading partners, I don't see how foreign sales are all to a capitalist buyer, unless you mean there's some intermediary privately owned shipping company hauling the cargo.

(08-10-2011 01:41 PM)CoconutKid Wrote:  O.K. Now I grasp what you refer to when you mention "stuck at zero." You are talking about whether the gross economy grows, is static, or contracts. That - of course - doesn't have anything to do with the pay disparity that El Presidente may create or avoid.

The economy has to appear to grow at least enough to neutralize the effects of inflation -- and inflation seems not to be able to be held to zero.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say, "Tropico's market is built on capitalism." Do you mean that all foreign sales are ipso facto to a capitalist buyer?

More the trade system itself - that we use money as a currency as opposed to other forms. A game such as GAR is easier to be "geuinely" communist in terms of economy because you can supply yourself with the sufficient goods to continue building, for example. To clarify, in such games trade is not necessary in order to build a stable and positive economy, ergo you are at "zero" if you will. I suppose it is possible to not trade in T4 but it is obvious the game is balanced around trade as an integral part of the gameplay and a way for the player to generate income.

(09-10-2011 04:35 PM)LeaT Wrote:  More the trade system itself - that we use money as a currency as opposed to other forms. ... I suppose it is possible to not trade in T4 but it is obvious the game is balanced around trade as an integral part of the gameplay and a way for the player to generate income.

Yes. That was probably a flaw in the simplistic T1 -- the need to export in order to have money to make the internal economy work. It's hard to speculate what was subsummed in that model - including the freebies.

On the other hand, the two tier money system of a local money vs the hard currency of an export\import economy still has not been included in the game. So your observation that the game's reliance on (foreign) trade as a currency circulation mechanism does seem to lock the economic system into a capitalist mode. Well, at least as long as the foreign trade can not be locked into only a communist partner -- thereby making Tropico a captive satellite of the communist block rather than the "natural" captive satellite of the Colossus of the North as is expected of Caribbean Islands.

My, shades of the tussle over Cuba.

50% is really capitalist? I usually shoot for 150%ish. No incentive to be a doctor if you make nearly as much as a farmer..

And ironically, I do it the other way around as the lower tier workers usually suffer more from poor work quality faster unless you improve their salaries. If I forget to check the salaries of college educated, I might actually give uneducated and high school educated Tropicans higher salary by mistake (my aim is always 0 difference). I haven't gone above 20 though. Work happiness seem to hover around 50-60 if you are around 20 late in the game (1980+) and that's fine for me since I am not aiming for 100% happiness score. It should be noted that because I prefer to rely on industry for income, I am still considered more capitalist than communist even though I play as a communist (leftist author, communist revolution).

But at some point it doesn't really matter as you can generate so much income (more than halfway through the campaign now, I still insist that it is too easy to make money in this game) that you can activte food for the people and free housing and it won't have any real impact on your economy at all.

I don't think you can't draw capitalist/commie definitions from trade alone. After all, Marx already explained a long time ago that the key to understanding the workings of capitalism is to look at how commodities are produced, not how they are exchanged.

I think some added detail to the workings of money in the game would be good.

If the value of the island's money was given, it could be compared to the value of other countries' money (ruble, dollar, yuan etc.) That would add some (fun) stress, because as the values of the different currencies fluctuated this would alternately make the various exports and imports cheaper or more expensive. Also, since the island is a "third world" country, starting off in 1950 the currency should be really low-value (think Mexican pesos vs. the dollar.)

Also, another factor in giving the island's currency a value is that you can have a 'money disaster,' where foreign (U.S. or Euro) currency speculators start a run on the island's currency, making the value plummet. Suddenly, all of the island's exports are cheap and all imports cost dearly until the value of the currency can climb back to normal.

Lastly about money, if the island's currency was given a value, this might make it possible to do interesting things with gold mines - other than sell gold or make jewelry. An option could be added to put all mined gold "in the bank" instead of selling or processing it. That would allow for the value of the currency to rise parallel to the gold reserve "in the bank," which would raise the prices of all exports and make all imports cheaper.