International treaty which adherence or not could have effect on diplomatic relationships. Of course, these treaties ask some special efforts from members.

This would be a way to enhance diplomatic gameplay in later eras.

Examples...

Pollution reduction treaty : put a max on pollution production for cities
Nuclear weapons ban/limitation treaty : self-explanatory
Sea animals protection : fish and whales no longer provide bonus ressources
Fur animals protection : fur can no more be used as a luxury product
Human rights chart : - better working conditions ( workers less productive)
Cannot have a totalitarian government
Third world financial/scientific aid : provide gold and scientific help to the poorest civs. Could be a way to help these civs keep up after the industrial boom.

Napo981

fantastic idea, especially the last one!!

There are some good ideas. Maybe it would make UN useful, like it was in SMAC. But all civ votes should count as 1, no nations with more votes than other nations, like SMAC.

There are some good ideas. Maybe it would make UN useful, like it was in SMAC. But all civ votes should count as 1, no nations with more votes than other nations, like SMAC.

I think internatinal treaties should be outside U.N., and could be initiated by any civ once the corresponding scientific advance has been found.

The promoting civs could ask other civs to join in, or suffer diplomatic consequences.

But sure, it wouldn't be a bad idea to incorporate this in the U.N., but I think this role for the U.N. was already submitted in prior posts. But then I agree that if such treaties must be voted, each civ would have 1 vote.

Anyway, the basic idea is to create international rules which adherence or not is going to influence diplomatic relations.

Napo981

Why would you accept them?

Masterguy, thats what I was thinking. Although, I was going to ask the poster, NAPO981, for some incentives your ideas.

NAPO981, What is the player's incentives for the agreements. Without any benefits, no civ is going to limit itself.

Why would you accept them?
Maybe economic sanctions, no commerce with any civ who agreed to the voted agreement, but normal commerce with all nations who didn't agree. Also, the economic sanction should be an option. No one stops commerce with USA after they refused that agreement in Kioto :p.

Masterguy, thats what I was thinking. Although, I was going to ask the poster, NAPO981, for some incentives your ideas.

NAPO981, What is the player's incentives for the agreements. Without any benefits, no civ is going to limit itself.

It is in fact a very good question :crazyeye: !!!

Political pressure is the first incentives, as it is in real life too. All treaties would have diplomatic pressure from initiating civs.

Then specific incentives would depend of which kind of agreement being conducted, of course!!

Anti-pollution treaties would lower global pollution level. To have an interesting effect, this would need global pollution to have a more desastrous effect than lose a forest to plain every 10 turns :lol: . But city flooding would be serious enough to ask international community to lower pollution levels.

Nuclear ban : by itself this one is enough rewarding, many civs would want to limit nuclear proliferation, especially peaceful ones. In many occasions, I wished to have this possibility to lower nuclear attack probabilities on my civ. Political pressure could then be exerced toward rogue civs.

Helping retarded civilizations could have a global bonus effect on diplomacy, showing yourself as a "good" civilization.

Protecting human rights would work the same manner. Political pressure. Maybe happier citizens. Remember that many countries put pressure on China and similar countries on Human Rights violation. Would be cool to don the same in Civ.