View Full Version : The Dark Side of the Force


Charles 22
Dec 16, 2005, 12:38 AM
Yeah, I'm talking about the U.N. I haven't been through the game options in a while, but since this is a new feature to CIV (how the UN starts overpowering your civics) I doubt it's been made optional, but I'm wondering is there any way to turn it off? I can't stand having gone through all the effort to make my state as it is and then to have it wiped out by the United Nothing.

I tell you one thing I do like about it though. It sure puts me in enough of a rage to make me want to obliterate the world, or at least a couple of nations, if that motivation wasn't there already.

wc3promet
Dec 16, 2005, 01:33 AM
Yeah, I'm talking about the U.N. I haven't been through the game options in a while, but since this is a new feature to CIV (how the UN starts overpowering your civics) I doubt it's been made optional, but I'm wondering is there any way to turn it off? I can't stand having gone through all the effort to make my state as it is and then to have it wiped out by the United Nothing.

I tell you one thing I do like about it though. It sure puts me in enough of a rage to make me want to obliterate the world, or at least a couple of nations, if that motivation wasn't there already.

The United Nations abhors the use of warfare for all nations.

It's actually used to deter military aggression and to pave its way to the Cultural Victory or Space Race victory.

Amourek
Dec 16, 2005, 01:36 AM
Play custom games and turn off diplomatic victory.

Charles 22
Dec 16, 2005, 02:02 AM
Play custom games and turn off diplomatic victory.

Okay, but I'm not so sure that will turn off U.N. dominance of civics. Sure, somebody can't win by diplomacy, and the game I'm in now, the game is already won through a space race victory, and yet the United Nothing is still terrorizing the nations with only one set of civics.

FenrysWulf
Dec 16, 2005, 03:32 AM
I believe that if you turn off diplomatic victory you can't even build the UN. Lately I've been turning it on just so I can get elected leader and pass the nuclear non-proliferation ban. Nukes scare me and I have no plans to use them so I'd rather not have to worry about them used against me either.

Charles 22
Dec 16, 2005, 04:05 AM
I believe that if you turn off diplomatic victory you can't even build the UN. Lately I've been turning it on just so I can get elected leader and pass the nuclear non-proliferation ban. Nukes scare me and I have no plans to use them so I'd rather not have to worry about them used against me either.

That would seem like the way to stop a diplo victory, but I'm not at all convinced, though I haven't emphasized this point yet, that the game would be fair that way. While I think the UN setting civics is so mind-boggingly wrong, the other end of the spectrum, where the AI might keep planning as if the diplo wasn't turned off, might be just as bad. For example, though England already won my current game through the space race, the civs other than my own are still building their version of the SS. Perhaps it gives you more points, not that such will give you victory, even though the space race has been completed, but doing such things makes any likelihood of them surviving as a nation less likely too. It just looks like a waste of effort on their part.

I don't imagine the game would change to reflect this, but what if you continue playing a game that already has a victory by another civ, and then wiped them out? Would that wipe out the victory condition, when you consider that a non-existent civ shouldn't be able to win (in a sense), since the game continued on (although it sort of didn't continue on, if you know what I mean, since it was 'over' at that point)? I mean I know the HoF can probably never get changed once someone achieved a victory level, such that it would take no note of what happened afterwards, but I am wondering if anybody has ever tried this yet. I know this used to work this way with CIV3, playing on after somebody achieved a victory I mean, and I never did think of doing such a thing in CIV3, but now that the UN decided to get aggressive with my civics I do contemplate wiping out the civ that had victory, irrespective of whether it counts or not. I just always believed that anything after a victory didn't count in any way, shape, or form, but I never have heard of anybody actually trying something like that. Maybe I will.

DaemonDivinity
Dec 16, 2005, 10:28 AM
You stockpile nukes before the UN, then drop a few dozen on any country with civics you don't like. Should knock their population down enough they can't win a vote.

ojrajt
Dec 16, 2005, 11:18 AM
Originally Posted by FenrysWulf
I believe that if you turn off diplomatic victory you can't even build the UN.

I use this strategy very frequently to disable the UN from forming. Without the diplo victory checked no civilization can build the wonder and so no annoying UN resolutions.

Picky1999
Dec 16, 2005, 12:04 PM
It's never a question of beating the UN, it's only a question of becoming the U.N.

Either take over the city it is in, or focus on winning by some other means.

DarkSchneider
Dec 16, 2005, 12:12 PM
Just curious, but the Civics you are allowed to vote for Sufferage, Free Speech, Emancipation, Enviromentalism and Free Relgion are generally the ones you would want late game anyway (aside from the Environmentalism, which is iffy)

But yes, if diplomatic victory is turned off, the UN cannot be built.

lysander
Dec 16, 2005, 12:47 PM
Just curious, but the Civics you are allowed to vote for Sufferage, Free Speech, Emancipation, Enviromentalism and Free Relgion are generally the ones you would want late game anyway (aside from the Environmentalism, which is iffy)

But yes, if diplomatic victory is turned off, the UN cannot be built.

There's no worse feeling in the game then when you have slogged through a One City Challenge game and are trying to build a spaceship and then the UN comes and takes away your bureacracy in exchange for free speech.

Even when I'm not doing a OCC, I usually end the game with bureacracy and free market.

DaemonDivinity
Dec 16, 2005, 12:48 PM
Well, in the late game they're still good justification for other civics for non-economic geared empires.

Charles 22
Dec 17, 2005, 02:44 AM
Just curious, but the Civics you are allowed to vote for Sufferage, Free Speech, Emancipation, Enviromentalism and Free Relgion are generally the ones you would want late game anyway (aside from the Environmentalism, which is iffy)

But yes, if diplomatic victory is turned off, the UN cannot be built.

The problem in the last game I had is that I was operating under something of a monarchy, therefore no WW and units could help up the happiness. When you're suddenly switched to another civic this plays hell on your plans as the number of units no longer matters and suddenly not getting those happiness wonders stabs you in the back.

I don't know what it is about this game, but I almost never geta world wonder any more. It's like there just isn't a right time for one. What few times I do build them 90% of the time somebody beats me to completion.

WaxonWaxov
Dec 17, 2005, 11:15 AM
Edited: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Chieftess
Dec 17, 2005, 05:56 PM
Posts deleted to get this back on topic and stop the threadjacking. This isn't about a political discussion or other aspects of the game. This is a general warning.

WaxonWaxov
Dec 19, 2005, 08:44 AM
So I guess this is another forum where everyone has the RIGHT to their opinion, as long as long as their opinion is to the LEFT.

What I said is this thread was said in jest.

Meatbuster
Dec 19, 2005, 10:13 AM
I try to beat the game before anyone else builds the UN and screws with my Mercantile Parliamentary government. Heck I would quit if I felt I didn't have a chance to win. The problem is I only go for Mass Media when I plan to win via Diplo (e.g. I click on Robotics if I go military or beeline Rocketry-Fusion for space) and that screws me sometimes especially when I try to build nukes or keep my research high by staying in Representation (curse you FDR!!!).

ChuckDizzle
Dec 19, 2005, 03:59 PM
Frankly, I think there should be an option to defy the UN vote, at the cost of trade embargoes or war.

WaxonWaxov
Dec 20, 2005, 02:53 PM
Frankly, I think there should be an option to defy the UN vote, at the cost of trade embargoes or war.

Yea! What he said!

Charles 22
Dec 21, 2005, 03:10 AM
Frankly, I think there should be an option to defy the UN vote, at the cost of trade embargoes or war.

Seems Civ3 was that way. Or am I getting that confused with MOO2 or something else? What would be pretty neat would be that all the nations bordering you would automatically go to war with you if you defied the UN. Then, after so many years, one by one, another civ woudl automatically jump in there, till finally they all would. Maybe there should also be some sort of way where one or more of the AI civs defies the UN, whether your nation does or not.