21-05-2005 06:21									#31
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

BOOO! I thought the comment in the interview about C4 not supporting terrorism was a horrible example of whitewashing and self-cencorship.

	21-05-2005 10:02									#32
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

It's a sign of the times. I bet if Civ4 was developed in the 1950's, there would be *NO* Communism in it...??

	21-05-2005 13:35									#33
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Mace It's a sign of the times. I bet if Civ4 was developed in the 1950's, there would be *NO* Communism in it...??

And communism in Civ 1 & 2 was nothing but sovietism (everything which is on the left of Al Gore). You had thus a very interesting choice between von Hayek's liberal democracy and Staline's sweet regime.

	21-05-2005 16:41									#34
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Chuckles BOOO! I thought the comment in the interview about C4 not supporting terrorism was a horrible example of whitewashing and self-cencorship.

OTOH C4 is extremly good for supporting terrorism...

	21-05-2005 18:34									#36
	Support Apolyton

Im for getting back espionage/terrorist missions into Civ4, for they give some new, unconventional way of doing things. Although if we would talk about non state sponsored terrorism, barabarians should fill that role, as they did in Civ 2.

I think that a state could also sponsor a barbarian uprisng in exchange for the assurence that they wont be the target of the rebellion or terrorist act in question.

Tomasz

	21-05-2005 21:44									#37
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Tomasz Im for getting back espionage/terrorist missions into Civ4, for they give some new, unconventional way of doing things. Although if we would talk about non state sponsored terrorism, barabarians should fill that role, as they did in Civ 2. I think that a state could also sponsor a barbarian uprisng in exchange for the assurence that they wont be the target of the rebellion or terrorist act in question. Tomasz

For Non-State sponsored terrorism, how about if a Civ has a city that is perticularly in the dumps for health/happyness, and barbarian warriors appear in that cities boundaries, with tech equivalent to whatever that Civ has researched.

	22-05-2005 20:40									#38
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by M. le Comte That's right. Nothing happened on the world scale on the 9/11.

As someone who lives in NY and was here when it happened - catagorically NO. On the civ scale what did it do? It didn't even destroy a fraction of a population point. Whether it effected the US economically is something that you can argue back and forth, but I don't happen to think it had a huge impact on our economy. It was stagnant before, it was stagnant after.

What it did was give the leaders of the US the political capital to pursue a course of action they wanted to pursue anyways. And when has manipulation of the populous ever been modelled in Civ?

And if you included terrorism you'd have to include some sort of non-state entity (like late game barbarians) and that gets complicated quickly and unnecessarily.

All of you who are assuming that terrorism is being left out as a PC thing are barking up the wrong tree. Its being left out because on the civ scale it doesn't make sense, and implementing a framework to make it make sense would overcomplicate the game in a way that was more unfun than any fun you might get from using it.

	22-05-2005 20:41									#39
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Tomasz I think that a state could also sponsor a barbarian uprisng in exchange for the assurence that they wont be the target of the rebellion or terrorist act in question.

Because that worked so well for us in Afghanistan...

	23-05-2005 01:18									#40
	Inflate your Upload Space

"We will just have to accept that this is a fun/megalomania game, and not a historical document."

For some reason this just reminded me of "historical records" in GalaxyQuest. "Oh, those poor people" (in respect of the historical records for Gilligan's Island).

It's interesting to consider where the distinction between terrorism and "raiding" or "individual action", along the lines of American ifigures such as the Swamp Fox, Forrest, the James', John Brown, various Rangers (I'm thinking of the ones in Burma), and so on lies. Even TV icons like Zorro and the Rat Patrol were destroying enemy capability and morale.

	23-05-2005 02:11									#41
	Suffering from ads?

I really dont' care.

	23-05-2005 19:13									#42
	Increase Your PM Length

Down with the Political Crap!
We want fun, not a chopped game!

	23-05-2005 20:33									#43
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by binTravkin Down with the Political Crap! We want fun, not a chopped game!

I don't see any contradiction between fun and realism.

If you don't want realism, may I suggest you to go and buy Warcraft or CTP (which games might be as well as civ very entertaining)

	23-05-2005 20:43									#44
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Dr Zoidberg And I want to be able to strike a devastating blow at the heart of the evil empire, thus spreading fear and mistrust among its population and financial market

Then drop a nuke on it.

	23-05-2005 22:49									#45
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by wrylachlan What it did was give the leaders of the US the political capital to pursue a course of action they wanted to pursue anyways.

How do you know that this was the course of action they wanted to pursue?

quote: All of you who are assuming that terrorism is being left out as a PC thing are barking up the wrong tree. Its being left out because on the civ scale it doesn't make sense,

How do you know that's the reason it will be left out of Civ4?

	24-05-2005 00:00									#46
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Mace How do you know that this was the course of action they wanted to pursue? How do you know that's the reason it will be left out of Civ4?

IF you want me to put a giant THIS IS MY OPINION at the start of every post so that your literal minded panties wont get all in a bunch, you're **** out of luck.

My opinion on the US goverments intentions is based on mounds of policy papers coming out of right wing think-tanks since the early 80s, think-tanks with known connections to the current US regime. Call it tin foil hat stuff. Fine. I don't really care. There's enough circumstantial evidence there to make me more than a little suspicious of Herr Bush. If you choose not to be suspicious - fine.

And my opinion on Firaxis is based on thier own statements in regards to streamlining the game and getting rid of unfun elements. IMHO terrorism as previously modelled in CIV was unfun, mainly because it felt out of scale with the rest of the game. Seems like a valid reason to disclude to me.

Now if you have a further point of discussion that doesn't start with "How do you know..." I'm all ears.

	24-05-2005 03:08									#47
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by curtsibling Then drop a nuke on it.

Yeah, that might do the trick

	24-05-2005 03:16									#48
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by wrylachlan Now if you have a further point of discussion that doesn't start with "How do you know..." I'm all ears.

Yikes. It's just a game. Actually, I'll have no discussion at all, if it's going to be like that.

	24-05-2005 06:18									#49
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

I think a good point is made when people refer to a 'HIJACKING' of terminology.
Certain types of unit and non-unit based 'sabotage' can be great in the game-if you want to really hurt a potential rival WITHOUT neccessarily going to war with them. This is especially true if you are SMALLER than your opponent.
Rather than call it Terrorism, though, it would be best to refer to it as 'Sabotage', if its done as part of a Covert Operation, or unconventional warfare if it is done with a unit-like a partisan or guerilla.
Given how much these tactics HAVE been used historically-with mixed results-I don't see why they can't be in Civ4-as long as gameplay balance is properly maintained!!!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

	24-05-2005 13:35									#50
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by The_Aussie_Lurker I think a good point is made when people refer to a 'HIJACKING' of terminology. Certain types of unit and non-unit based 'sabotage' can be great in the game-if you want to really hurt a potential rival WITHOUT neccessarily going to war with them. This is especially true if you are SMALLER than your opponent. Rather than call it Terrorism, though, it would be best to refer to it as 'Sabotage', if its done as part of a Covert Operation, or unconventional warfare if it is done with a unit-like a partisan or guerilla. Given how much these tactics HAVE been used historically-with mixed results-I don't see why they can't be in Civ4-as long as gameplay balance is properly maintained!!! Yours, Aussie_Lurker.

Covert Ops has indeed been around for many many years. This is what it´s really about, sneaking around your enemys territory inflicting damage to valuable resources and even kidnapping leaders...

	24-05-2005 20:36									#51
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

When the UK performed covert ops in the 3rd Reich in WW2, the Germans called it terrorist action.

It all depends on what side of the coin the palyer is on...

	25-05-2005 02:11									#52
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

True, one mans freedom fighters are another mans terrorists. Take the talibans for example, good sound freedom fighters when they fought against the evil commies. But when they turned to bite the hand that fed them they´re instantly labeled terrorists...

	30-05-2005 02:36									#53
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

in favor, as long as it is balanced...

if there is no terrorism, then there shouldnt be any nuclear weapons, any big missiles, etc....

	30-05-2005 22:42									#54
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Given the fact that Civ IV will provide much more modding capability and power into the hands of its players, where are the complaints coming from?

We will have an opportunity to mod into whatever form of terrorism we would like to have in Civ IV once we start modding.

	30-05-2005 22:57									#55
	Tired of ads?

Then again, terrorism kind of is too small for the Civ scale. If you're controlling a country with aircraft carriers, tanks and nuclear missiles, then acts which kill 20 people are not to that scale. What they should have is espionage options that are also on the proper scale - inciting revolutions, sabotage, etc. Then again, poison water supply was good.

What could be a good implementation of terrorism would be something like Barbs, only modern. And more advanced. Not some small camps, but more like insurgent cities that can cause terror activity - reduce the pop in one of your cities or somesuch.

	31-05-2005 00:26									#56
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

so when one uses espionage to catch techs, involt riots, destroy
buildings....

its not terroism,.... just good game play

terroism=espionage its all the same

	31-05-2005 00:34									#57
	Got spare money?

Terrorism is not espionage. Terrorism is typically carried out by groups with far less power than a single country. In the game, it makes sense if you can bomb an enemy city from the air. It's a large scale military action. But planting a bomb somewhere in the city that kills 20 people or destroys a single building is too small scale for the purposes of Civ. One pop point represents 10k people, and in Civ, decreasing a city pop by one isn't a big event.

	31-05-2005 00:37									#58
	Got spare money?

Here's an Idea.

Seeing as you can go into other people's cities by use of the missionaries. Why not continue the advancement of 'barbarians' throughout the game from:

'Barbarians' to 'Pirate' to 'Terrorist'.

There are always tiny islands in the ocean that people don't build on.

Have a unit (like the missionary, but call it whatever) that can hire them in an almost mercenary style. You pay, but the computer still controls their actions. Mercenaries have always been a part of war, so let the barbarian camps act like them. Barbarians, Pirates, and Terrorists have always acted outside of a country's control.

What do ya'll think?

Johivin Ryson

	31-05-2005 03:44									#59
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Barbarians are true freedom and live whatever they please in land of wildness.

Pirate are looking for to steal gold or item from one other to make life better on sea.

Terrorist are anit-goverment or anit-other goverment, they dont like way of goverment work or think goverment are lie, use on thier people, ect..

So they all are not same. at least for me way I think.

	31-05-2005 06:28									#60
	Increase Your PM Length

Having a unit represent terrorists would be okay. I think it would be cool to be able to fund barbarian guerillas. The more happy/content the target civ, the more expensive the funding would be.

I would also like to see 'semi-'random events related to terrorism. A civ with a lot of unhappy foreign citizens would have a chance that a terrorist group could start up. Once started-up, the terrorist group would have a chance of causing some sort of 'damage' to a random city. Damage could include economic loss, loss of gold, production loss, destruction of an improvement, or (rarely) population loss. Foreign civs could try to fund terrorism in a target civ in order to increase the odds of a group forming or of an existing group making a successful attack. To counter terrorist attacks or even destroy a group, you'd have to have some sort of anti-terrorism or counter-intelligence (using spies?).

Anyway, there a snowball's chance in hell any such ideas would make it into Civ IV. I just needed to vent my ideas.