 |
|
Pods
|
|
In the real world we see agreements between some nuclear powers to cut their arsenals.
Is the diplomacy model in Civ3 known to support an agreement between civs to disband nuclear weapons, if they are a major threat between two civs?
Anyone know?
S.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Oligarf
|
|
That could be a way round it. But a bit expensive.
Maybe we gotta send an e-mail to those Firaxians.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Akron
|
|
I wouldn't be surprised if it is in. I'd think that there would be diplomatic consequences for the use of nuclear weapons. In SMAC, planet busters were atrocities, though you could change this with the UN council (or whatever). Its likely that the U.N. in civ 3 can do things like this too, maybe making use of nuclear weapons an atrocity.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Oligarf
|
|
Dan around here?
I like Trifna's idea, is it in CIV III?
If yes, how is it implemented?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Oligarf
|
|
Forgot something...
If no, why not?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jason Beaudoin
|
|
Canada
Jan 1970 time: 00:15
|
|
Although I am no advocate of real life atrocities in any way, I do think these things should be included in CIV3, which as mentioned, most are. (I'm not sure about the ethnic cleansing part.) There should, and probably will be negative effects of doing things like this, like massive-world-wide economic sanctions, which could cripple an economy.
Firaxis can have their cake and eat it too. In other words, they can incorporate these "politically incorrect" aspects of world history, but by creating negative responses by the AI, they can claim that they are trying to teach good behavior. We win by getting more choices, and more fun. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Crouchback
|
|
quote: With the exception of ethnic cleansing, I think these things being in the game wouldn't bother me...I would just refrain from employing them. |
I guess I'll use slavery if a foreign worker or settler (or scout?) crosses into my land, and if they have nukes then you know I've got to have them too.
As for ethnic cleansing I'd bet we'll all do that. Firaxis said somewhere that a player can pick which citizens of an unruly captured city with more than one nationality get expelled when it builds a settler. But the new city will all belong to the main nationality, so it is a good way of expanding and creating a little happiness.
David
*Exits left singing "Spring time for Hitler and Germany..."*
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Akron
|
|
Actually, mass murdering of a population will sorta be possible in civ 3. Every turn, you just build a settler and get rid of an opposing nationality. Then, if the city is small enough, you just make this settler rejoin the city. Magically, you've converted these people to your culture. I think that its also possible to kill off a city when you conquerer it.
But I don't think firaxis will refer to this form of ethnic cleansing as what it really is.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Boris Godunov
|
 |
Portland, OR
Aug 2001 time: 00:15
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Akron
Actually, mass murdering of a population will sorta be possible in civ 3. Every turn, you just build a settler and get rid of an opposing nationality. Then, if the city is small enough, you just make this settler rejoin the city. Magically, you've converted these people to your culture. I think that its also possible to kill off a city when you conquerer it.
But I don't think firaxis will refer to this form of ethnic cleansing as what it really is. |
Is that confirmed? That would seem like too easy a loophole for solving public disorder. I would hope Firaxis would have the forethought to make it so that the settler will maintain its nationality upon rejoining a city.
Even so, that is not an explicit suggestion of murder. It sounds more like a minor, unintentional design flaw.
As for destroying the cities, I would probably just infer in my own happy little world that the citizens were dispersed around the Empire rather than being outright killed. Hey, it's possible!
But death camps and massacres? No thank you.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Christantine The Great
|
|
Massachusetts
Jun 2000 time: 00:15
|
|
quote: As for destroying the cities, I would probably just infer in my own happy little world that the citizens were dispersed around the Empire rather than being outright killed. Hey, it's possible! |
That sounds like a good strategy! Pump settlers out of newly captured cities and move your's in. Then disperse the non-you settlers.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Akron
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Is that confirmed? That would seem like too easy a loophole for solving public disorder. I would hope Firaxis would have the forethought to make it so that the settler will maintain its nationality upon rejoining a city.
Even so, that is not an explicit suggestion of murder. It sounds more like a minor, unintentional design flaw.
As for destroying the cities, I would probably just infer in my own happy little world that the citizens were dispersed around the Empire rather than being outright killed. Hey, it's possible!
But death camps and massacres? No thank you. |
I hope that you can't simply pump out settlers to solve all your problems. I would be surprised if there aren't diplomatic consequences for such ethnic cleansing. I think the topic of settler ethnicity was talked about a while ago, so Firaxis may have changed it since then.
I also am against death camps, though there are a few people who support their inclusion.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ironwood
|
|
Fresno, CA
Oct 2001 time: 21:15
|
|
Settlers take a while to make. One would not want to waste time making settlers when one could make cultural buildings and lessen the problem... as well as getting the usual benefits.
Then again, if you've got a city of a different nationality, it's likely your neighbors won't be very nice people anyway, so you may want to build *military* units to defend your new territory. No time for settlers!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
dainbramaged13
|
|
Dumbass
Mar 2000 time: 00:15
|
|
you have to have great leaders to rush buy...
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Mongoloid Cow
|
|
How many Great Leaders can you have? And as for the topic, I would hope you can make agreements not to use nukes, disarm nukes, etc.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Oligarf
|
|
Disarmament should be included and should exceed that of nuclear weapons. Disarmament among a conquered civ or a civ that you have forced to peace. Like the NATO in Kosovo. Disarm attacker-units and leave the defending units by example.
And about those concentration camps. I quite hate them, but they should be a reason in the game to kick a civ it's butt. I would love to declare war on that moronic civ using that horrible thing.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dknight
|
|
Canada
Sep 2001 time: 05:15
|
|
well we know that the United Nation in Civ III will be similar to SMAC, so maybe Nuclear disarmament is one of the options there?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jason Beaudoin
|
|
Canada
Jan 1970 time: 00:15
|
|
I remember that in CIV I, once multiple civs had nuclear weapons, wars occured much less frequently between two civs that had nuclear weapons. Mutually Assured Destruction seemed to have been built into that game, and maybe that will be the case in CIV III. I don't think it's that far off the mark to assume that such things will be implemented in this game, along with other things. Who knows.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15. Apolyton Time is 00:15. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|