1) You declared war aganst someone.

2) You changed governments to Communism, Monarchy or Despotism.

3) A city has been in civil disorder for more than 2 turns.

4) A city has no Happy people.

This was the latest revision of the Pax "X" idea. Please post your changes/suggestions.

P.S. I think my smily means "hmmm". I thought it suited my post

quote: Originally posted by Youngsun on 05-15-2000 01:22 AM exactly! and your message icon looks like an ugly round biscuit haha (no offence of course) [This message has been edited by Youngsun (edited May 15, 2000).]

Haha, you see it too?!?

how about these

• you civ is #1 in military power
  
• you civ is no lower than #4 in economic power
  
• your civ is at least at strong as your next three (maybe four) rivals
  

the you would need some bonuses

• when you ask for a peace treaty your enemy will automatically sign it unless your reputation is very low
  
• for every multiple after one that your civ is more powerful than your next three rivals then you get that many extra happy people per city...for example if you civ is just as powerful as the next three most powerful military civs then you get no happy people per city, however if you were twice as powerful you would get one happy person per city
  
• your civ gains one point of commerce while civs you trade with lose one point of commerce
  
• each turn your allies will send you tribute
  

it all comes to an end when either you lose military power or if your reputation goes too low

hows that for a start?

No, really, in game terms when a Civ is so powerful to have all yours "pax" prerequisite, you are already untuchable by others players (if IA driven). Also in multiplayer a good human will be overwhelmed by any competitor that reach "pax bonus".

But thinking twice, the PAX doesn't need to put bonus only to the owner, but to other civ too!
I mean, forced or not others Civ are in peace, trades raise, tech rate increase because of easier flow of info between civs...

If I'm a "pax candidate" civ I must be in doubt about the balancing of gaining "pax" bonus BUT let others civs regain momentum by me!

Some example (roughly, just to explain the concept, I'm sure you can do better than me)

Keeping for PAX civ some benefits (apart the ones that clashes with mine model), I suggest other civs will gain something like:

- trade points bonus DOUBLE than PAX civ (not less, as korn suggest: I'm not sure is economically accurate, still I think that small economy take -in percentage- more benefits trading with large economy)

- share every tech from PAX civ except the last acquired or the last military (easy flow of info, difficult to keep secrets)

So minor Civ become "parasite" of main CIV research and trade? No, if Firaxis make some limits (by turns or by events) to cut off benefits at some point:

- benefits shade away after xx turns of "pax"
- pax ends when the CIV has no longer the requisite
- sharetech stop for a nation when it gain a new tech by itself research OR it lower the research budget under xx% (so you can't cheat putting research budget to zero and living on the shoulder of PAX civ).

The reason I launched this thread is because The Pax "X" concept was no longer a wonder idea so it didn't belong in the thread about wonders. Right now it is a event that can happen with the guidelines that have been posted by other people. It now isn't a wonder.

Everyone

Remember that the Pax "X" is not a wonder but an event.

Korn - Define most powerful. In Civ 1 and 2 you could have 100 units and be the most powerful even if they were composed of Phalanx, Horesmen, Chariots, and Catapults during the time of Aviation and Automobile! I never liked that much, I brought it up in another thread, but in order for your system to work, I think a new formula should be made for the "most powerful civ" (eg creating a "power point" for each unit. Phalanx - 1, Armor - 50 etc.)

Also, why should you be forced to make peace? I don't like this idea at all, no nation should ever be forced to make peace except for when the Senate overrules you (Republic, Democracy). IMHO the Great wall was not understood to well because it makes all nations sign a peace treaty with you when you ask for one. The GW was really made to protect Northern China against raids from nomadic barbarians. I think the GW should keep all barbarians out of your civ's borders and make a citizen happy or something. It's purpose in Civ 1/2 is inaccurate. Somone spoke of this in another thread as well. Also, UN. Why does that make you sign a peace treaty? There should always be the option to refuse a peace treaty. That's just my opinion. Instead, why not make other civ's view of you go up (comparable to Eiffel Tower) along with giving you a diplomatic tie to every nation and maybe giving you knowledge of every civ's map? Not the whole map, but just everyone's world view put together, which may or may not be the entire map.

Ok I got very off topic, I just got into it and kept writing. I'd like to hear more about the Pax X idea.

Pax bonuses
2x trade
2x research
10% pop happy(if we have real numbers)

If we have support numbers(SMAC)
-1 support for peacetime(maybe)