|
Author
|
|
Topic: Bitter wars, bitter enemies... |  |
|
Lonestar
Settler
The Quad, Collegestation, The Lone Star Republic
Aug 2000
|
 |
posted August 09, 2000 23:59
  | 
 |
 |  |
I was just wondering if Firaxis could somehow... make nations that had fought wars be much more inclined to do so again?
Example1: Angry enemies
Countries Elbonia and Pogong have fought 2 major wars in the past 100 turns, with Pogong getting soundly beat and carved up each time. As a result, the two nations have a tendency to place large amounts of troops along their borders. This mutual distrust of each other leads to much "spy vs spy". Example2: Birth of a Nation For this I use a possible alternate WWI scenario. If a civil war breaks out in a country, and you are a powerful nation (or, at least until your country was destroyed) there is a chance that other nations ( Britain and France) will recognize the new one (the Confederacy) immediatly, and threaten war with you unless you cease and desist. This can lead to close relationships with friendly nations, and permanent hatred of the others. It will be virtually impossible to clean their mess up. ------------------
"You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you" |
OrangeSfwr
King
Pennsylvania
Feb 2000
|
 |
posted August 10, 2000 00:46
  |
|
| |
I somewhat agree. i'm just afraid of how Civ 2 dealt with the Diplomacy, and how it was so hard to end wars and build long lasting Alliances. It should be just as hard to break and alliance as it is to break a long going hatred.------------------
~~~I am who I am, who I am - well who am I?~~~
- "When man first discovered that milk comes from a cow, what did he THINK he was doing?"
- "Women's breasts are like toys: They're meant for kids, but usually it's the fathers who wind up playin' with them."
- "Practice makes perfect, but if nobody's perfect...why practice?"
~~~Oh well oh well so here we stand, but we stand for nothing~~~
- Apolyton Picture Contest IV |
absolutadam
Settler
union, nj, usa
Aug 2000
|
 |
posted August 10, 2000 01:10
|
|
| |
yeah, i think that's a good idea. in SMAC, it seemed that i was always the one being overly nice to other factions, while they remained uncertain and suspicious of me no matter our history.in civ 3, i would like to see countries act towards me as i do to them, and not just as their AI tells them to. this way, fighting a war, or multiple wars with another nation could lead to permanently strained relations. likewise, years of goodwill could lead to long-lasting alliances. |
Shadowstrike
Prince
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Jul 2000
|
|
posted August 10, 2000 09:18
|
|
| |
This would do a lot towards making AIs act like real nations do, i.e. plot, scheme, backstab, etc.Elbonia? Isn't that from Dilbert? |
DarkCloud
Warlord
of the Ring
Jul 2000
|
|
posted August 10, 2000 11:32
|
|
| |
That is a very good idea.Also, If you intrude in enemy territory during peace the enemy should make the regular protests and then send units to protect the border. Also, if in a high council election you just beat them out for supreme world leader (See Election to the U.N. topic) they should have animosity towards you and attempt to declare war. |
Adm.Naismith
Prince
Milano - Italy
Oct 1999
|
|
posted August 11, 2000 04:40
|
|
| |
DarkCloud, if every election turn in open war, to become elected will turn into a lose!  I agree that diplomatic relations could become more bitter, but IMHO it should lead to war only if you had bribed someone else leader (as you can in SMAC council) to win. On this line, I'm just thinking that things will be more interesting if every leader must declare its political line about the main council decision. Using SMAC example, before an election you should declare if you are for or against the "Unity core savage", would keep or repel the U.N. Chart, would sign a global trade pact or not, etc. Adding that to your S.E. choices, any other leader can ponder about your political target and decide to share or ask you to change your mind to have him/her vote. Of course anyone can be a liar (any politics can, you know and we aren't better in a Civ world), but if it change it without any reason (break of pact or related main global trouble, as launching solar shades because forced by water rising) in a reasonable number of years, it will lose LOT of esteem with other leaders. That could lead to unwanted break of alliance, trade lost and so on, so to make a player less ready to gain the council leadership at every cost. ------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant |
UltraSonix
Warlord
Melbourne, Australia
May 2000
|
|
posted August 12, 2000 01:44
|
|
| |
Wouldn't it be quite simple to make the bitter enemies thing - just make each computer civ count the percentage of years it's been at war with you, and respond accordingly.------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... |
DarkCloud
Warlord
of the Ring
Jul 2000
|
|
posted August 26, 2000 14:43
|
|
| |
Oh, sorry that I was not clear. What I meant to say was if you
were running against one other person for supreme leader then if you were
Congenial with them the notches would go down one if you beat him out in the election.
So supposedly if you already hated him you could reasonably go to war with him.However, you could call on the council to help bail you out and tell them to declare
war on him because of 'war sanctions' | |
Apolyton Civilization Site Forums
