Agreed. While it's likely that democratic societies are electing some planetary leadership once they get that ability, this still works if the central authority simply appoints someone (like a General) and that person leads the planetary government however he sees fit.

That said, given things like ideologies and such, I don't think this will work the same way in GC3.

I agree with op that race/alignent specific government models could be a very interesting addition. It is in the same order of ideas as the race specific tech trees that I like so much in ToA

Each government in that case would have a unique set of advantages and drawbacks modified for each culture.

The SOTSII govt is broken down nicely so any group could be anything within reason.

Your Empire is able to go any direction depending on what you do.

It would be nice if those ideas/concepts are shifted to GCIII

^ Agreed. Whatever form the Drengin "democracy" takes, it doesn't mean that it will be anything like the way we think it should, and it wouldn't necessarily be corrupt since it's their own system. 

This isn't something that ever really bothered me, but I will take any chance to give the factions more flavor. I like the idea suggested above of giving each race their own version of government changes. The Drengin could start out as Imperial and then evolve until they've reached a kind of constitutional monarchy where Lord Kona (or whomever) is still at the top, but the other Drengin...nobility(?) have more power. This wouldn't necessarily lead to elections since I really don't see a Drengin leader ever accepting something like elections that could potentially make his power base irrelevant. 

Maybe for the Drengin, empowered planetary governors would produce less cash due to being bribed for loyalty, but produce more happiness as a result. 

Although I don't think the Krynn are the religious race anymore, maybe the new religious faction (If there is one...) could become more theocratic and produce more happiness through religious fervor at the cost of some production. 

And the values they effect, but yes lol.

To be honest, I think that the Alpha Centauri system might work best.

You choose what you want to be with its associated drawbacks and advantages, which in turn affects your relations and empire.

I believe that you are making a mistake, by assuming that the values you associate to democracy would be the values that other civilizations associate to democracy you are misunderstanding the actual practice of that type of government. 

There is no need for a name change or a civics change. The values of the citizenry determine the ideology of the democracy, in its basic form democracy is simply a representation of what the citizens desire. Thus, as some have harped on here, the desires of an "evil" society would not change merely because they have been given a voice in the process of their government. Overnight the Drengin would not stop hating Torians nor stop wanting a strong military, supporting slavery or genocide, simply put they would still value the same things that they valued before. 

In its basic form democracy does not impart Good or Bad ideas, it is merely allowing for the populace to determine the law and policy the civilization should follow.

This mistake most of you are making is that you are assuming the words "Good" and "Evil" have a fixed definition. The moral Good of a Drengin would not be the same as the moral Good of a Torian, and the same would go for the Moral Bad of a Drengin would not be the same as the Humans and so on.

Again this is where I think civics would do the same job only better, and I think different factions would have different civics. Most people I talk to confuse free market with democracy. A mistake I made that democracy had states to represent it. Democracy could have monopolies, nationalize, slavery, segregation, imperialism, or interpendence, isolation, national banking vs private banking, national or independent education, or socialized health care vs business controlled healthcare are things that would change things how drastically is up to the game designers. Can I predict how different factions think differently I don't know. 

This is a mechanic I wouldn't mind seeing in the game where the people choose what alignment you are if you are a democracy. This could be done based on how you play. This would at least provide a penalty to go with benefits for this kind of government. I imagine a lot of people would have a problem with this. I also wouldn't mind random laws being passed by congress in a democracy.

All tyrants would not give power over to the people, so if they are evil not neutral like this would democracy even come about from a more evil faction or one that doesn't even think like us.

This is why the next game is going to be idealologies instead of alignments. I hope this is more than a name change though. My main reason for the suggestion is for game tweaking and trying to fix a problem with the Yor. Also to take a reason into account is would this really help make the different factions more individualized. At least one way to fix an economic problem is to add a little to economics. Changing governments would cause the changing of bonuses that could be fixed with a different techs.

Relax, democracy is the rule of democrats, nothing more.

A civilization that is evil will by nature do things differently in its government whether it is democratic or not. I am saying that it needs a different set of bonuses/drawbacks.

Speak clearly man! The only thing I found difficult to understand was you. Are you saying government is a gun and politicians use it depending on their morality? Also the definition of evil policies varies on your perception of them, which is why they are called ideologies now. Did I miss something?

DARCA