27-10-2002 22:45									#1
	Weapons inspection... Get a bigger avatar today!

Would there be a way to initiate a weapons inspection on a civ? Me and my friends are organizing a ptw game recently, and we were thinking about how to inspect each others civ for weapons of mass destruction.

Few ideas we came across:

Move all ur land unit out to nearby terrain and send planes to airbase. Inspector (non agressive unit like worker) nearby the area would be able to see whether there is ICBM or not.
(this will not be able to detect tactical nukes out in the ocean though)

The idea we decided to adopt is to do steal enemy plan on very careful. Anyone who wants to initiate an inspection could pay for it and as long as it is announced to the one targetted and person agrees, it will not be considered act of espionage in our game.
The only problem rests in that all the land unit will be displayed as well, so even if player doesnt have nukes they might object to inspection whihc might add to the game, leaving some players suspicious.

	27-10-2002 23:05									#2
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Make nukes invisible and make.......i dunno, how bout workers, see invisible

	28-10-2002 23:30									#3
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by AlecTrevylan00 Make nukes invisible and make.......i dunno, how bout workers, see invisible

or explorers for the faster movement rate in enemy territory.

	28-10-2002 23:46									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Giving more possibilities to hide stuff from others and get hidden stuff from others would be a beginning. And for this, spies need to have some kind of logic first.

	29-10-2002 05:44									#5
	Inflate your Upload Space

If anyone can get a viable form of weapons/pollution limmiting treaty/agreement form working and going, I will back you up al the way.

	29-10-2002 17:56									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

that'd be pritty cool.

	29-10-2002 20:44									#7
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

[Sorry, I had no time to finish my text completely, I have an exam coming hehe But here's a start... I'll be able to finish this when exams will be finished... weekend. Was harder than I thought. Feel free to use this]


Ok... let's get it a prototype then...

We first have two general things: teaties demanding to diminish the problem (less pollution, less weapons...) (diminishing types) and the ones trying to give it a cap where everyone has a stable limited amount for balance's sakes (balancing types). Of course, it starts by a diminishing type and has the final goal to slowly get to a balancing type by reaching the balance. In fact you have a treaty, with diminishing measures and you stop diminishing when you get to the balance.


Politics can change many things in treaties. So we need versatile treaties here in some sort of exchange:
"I give X % less pollution, I ask you X % less"
It simply enters in the list of other things to exchange...... You can even ask 5 per turn for polluting less. It is done in reality, but just indirectly. We give some support to help China's effort for exemple (World Bank or I dunno what).



So let's start trying to see how it diminishes, and then how it should balance:

Nuclear/ICBM:
- Diminishing:
- Balancing: You put a maximum of permitted nuclear bombs and ICBMs. Maximum is based on how many of them your neighbors have that are able to reach your cities.



Pollution:
- Diminishing: Demand a decreasing of X %
- Balancing:



Militarization:
2 parts:

1- A minimal base counted in relation with how much territory you have, how many cities, how much population. This is really the interior forces to protect your own territory, this is okay nevermind what (even Costa Rica has this, while it has NO exterior-oriented troops. Only has boats to control frontiers). here's how establishing this first basic one:
- [You have types of troops... I mean earth troops, flying and boats. You have to put limits on three]

2- The real troops. This is what is in the contract.
- Diminishing: [You have types of troops... I mean earth troops, flying and boats. You have to put limits on three]
- Balancing:



HECK, this is hard stuff... how should the computer see if it's alot to demand him or not??? I mean there's many factors: number of cities, warmonger neighbors (so it's normal to have weapons), etc.

Also, a thing that could be considered is public relations. Your people can hate you for having a very nuclearized partner, etc. So you give "economic help" to your partner that will in exchange make efforts. You need, for your own public relation sakes, to get responsible for your partners.

Last edited by Trifna on 30-10-2002 at 21:21

	30-10-2002 08:45									#8
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Weapons inspections could be an option added to diplomacy after UN is buuilt. I'd like that, it could make all nukes of the civ visible.

	30-10-2002 09:17									#9
	Suffering from ads?

use investigate city. thats how it really works anyway.

it'll cost a bit, and people will end up stockpiling nukes in the most unlikely of places.

plus, whos to say they dont have tacs on a sub?

you'll also see if theyre BUILDING them.

	30-10-2002 18:23									#10
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

I like these ideas Trifna. I think it's possible for nuke treaties that after signing the treaty you should have a nuke limmit, but if you try to decide tobuild one more than allowed a pop up should come saying that you are violating the treaty, do you really want to do this? and you click yes or no.

Then if you are seen in violation of the treaty after suprise weapons inspections by the other treaty holders (or UN) they should put economic sanctions (trade embargo) on you. Hiding them on subs would work for example, to by pass this, just hope you don't get caught building them. It also gives another use for tacnukes because once I get ICBM I never build them anymore.

The inspections could be made cheaper be a multilateral effort.

This is the same with other arms. The limmit on mech inf, and fighters should be inconsequential since they are defence. There should be a limmit on tanks and bombers, for example. This reminds me of the 1928 washington treaties in which britain, USA, and Japan agreed to have a 5/5/3 battleship ratio. This was designed on the theory that to launch a successful attack on the enemy a power neede a 3 to 1 superiority in ships. (eventually this was in japans advantage for even though they were allowed less hsips they only needed to concentrate them in the pacific and USA/UK had to police the world.)


I think the pollution treaty would be difficult. you have to take into account that it takes time to build recycling centers. managing pollution already is really just educted guesses. There are no real numbers involved. There would have to be an entire new "eco management" screen or somthing.

	30-10-2002 20:06									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by UberKruX use investigate city. thats how it really works anyway. it'll cost a bit, and people will end up stockpiling nukes in the most unlikely of places. plus, whos to say they dont have tacs on a sub? you'll also see if theyre BUILDING them.

Just a problem with investigate city: USA wont necessarily investigate a russian city to know all this. It'll get into serious spying covering wherever it needs. Informations are not linked to a specific city.