I don't care what they call the civs, but I want my national group to survive and cause trouble for a conqueror, perhaps ultimately regaining independance.

I think it sends the wrong message that a civilization has totally lost when conquered, because conquest of a national group is rarely permanent unless its accompanied by assimilation or genocide.

In fact this is the rule not the exception. Most major civs have been defeated in war and even completely conquered, only to rise again.

I'd be inclined to say that the development of Nationalism would make it a lot more difficult for coutries to manage minority populations, without taking extraordinary measures, either positive or negative, to contain the problem.

All civs who conquer enemy cities should be able to choose any number of options, including:

1. Starve the city (genocide) or enslave it

2. Forced emigration

3. Repatriate city to its motherland

4. Set up an independant nation

5. Encourage assimilation through tolerance (the jury is still out whether this will work here in US).

The approach taken might depend on any number of things such as goverment type for the conqueror. I envision in the modern era that the trend would be toward resurrecting nations as part of peace negotiations.

I also think it would take a country with a great economy, or a very repressive one, to maintain order in a multi-ethnic society. Witness the fracturing of the former USSR when communism fell, and race riots/hate crimes in the US.

I would also love to have a certain limitted control of my peoples in conquered cities. It would be fun to have some of my people emigrate to foreign cities and possibly act as spies, with all those spy options! If I played the Chinese, I could send people to the US to get all their nuclear secrets under a "Democracy" (Clintons or Gore) but not a "Republic" (Reagan or Bushes). :P Or if I played the Mexicans, I could send a lot of people to the border areas of the US and after a couple generations have them demand to be repatriated to Mexico! [Try as they may, don't bet on it ever succeeding.]

Thanks for the manifesto. Thing is, you posted the same message on another thread a few days ago - I for one was ignoring it on the grounds of irrelevance to this discussion. Maybe in future you could simply refer to your original posting - or are you intending to place copies on every thread?

quote: Originally posted by Maccabee2 on 11-01-2000 06:52 PM Is that based on how long we've been registered, or how many posts we've made,..... or on paying the right Apolyton power-broker?

Quick answer: number of posts
Long answer: read the faq: ../../forums/apolytonfaq.shtml

The mention of England, Wales and Scotland caught my eye (well it would, being my place of birth, mothers place of birth and fathers place of birth respectively.) Recent political manoeuvers have seen limited independence passed back to Wales and Scotland from the UK Parliament precisely because many people still believe in their ancestral roots. It is very possible that in the future Scotland will once again become completely independant from England, undoing the change that took place when King James VI of Scotland became King James I of England. Events elsewhere in the world over the last decade continue to demonstrate how seriously old allegiances and old hatreds are still held and the folly of 'inventing' new countries.

The ability to easily replace the entire civ list with ones of your own choosing would certainly be welcome. I'm always happier using an invented civ with invented town names because it eliminates the intellectual and emotional baggage associated with playing with or against historical nations whose situations were undoubtedly different.