Pre-Initiative: The Office of Warlord

[Methos]

The Office of Warlord​

As the Term II Chieftain I am hereby declaring my intent to create an Office of Warlord. This officer's duties will be:

• City Defense: All defenders are controlled and allocated by the Warlord, not the City Elder. The City Elder may request the presence of stationed units, but an Elder cannot demand it.
• Scouts/Spies: All scouts, explorers, and spies are under the complete control of the Warlord.
• Peace Missions: All peace-time units are under the complete control of the Warlord. By peace time units I mean military units when our empire is not at war.
• Military Action: Controlled by the Warlord, though may be vetoed by the Chieftain. This means the creation of war plans. Realize that in order to make the war plans the Warlord will still have to discuss and plan with the Elders in order to have any military production.
• Workers/Settlers: Are not under the control of the Warlord. The Chieftain has complete control of these units.

I'm not too sure on everything above, so please everyone give their opinion. I'm a little afraid I'm giving too much power to the Warlord. I'll leave this open for discussion for a few days and than I'll define a more discussed and agreed upon Initiative, hence the declaration of this as being a Pre-Initiative.

Updated: Please realize that the above is using the current government system and officers. At a later date when additional offices are created, certain powers or units can be moved to another more appropiate office.

 

[NKVD]

what about drafting power?

I would give at least one unit's control to the city elder.

spies could also go to the foreign affairs...

 

[Falcon02]

What exactly do you mean by "All peace-time units"?

These military units during peace time, or are you referring to units such as Workers/Settlers?

Also what are you referring to as Military action? declaring war or actual war plans?

 

[Nobody]

If you have war, then you must have peace. Why not create the office of Ambassador (foreign leader) at the same time. We might only know two nations but we only have like 2 units.

 

[NKVD]

If you have war, then you must have peace. Why not create the office of Ambassador (foreign leader) at the same time. We might only know two nations but we only have like 2 units.

actually 5...

 

[Methos]

spies could also go to the foreign affairs...

Considering we don't currently have an office of foreign affairs, I believe the above is okay.

What exactly do you mean by "All peace-time units"?

By peace-time units I mean military units during peace, when there is no war.

These military units during peace time, or are you referring to units such as Workers/Settlers?

No, workers/settlers would still be under the powers of the Chieftain.

Also what are you referring to as Military action? declaring war or actual war plans?

Both, though war plans would consist of all the city Elders and the Chieftain. The Warlord could not properly plan and engage in war without the teamwork of the other officials.

 

[grant2004]

The clarifications you posted are very useful I'd suggest updating your proposed initiative to include such clarity so that when the office is created there will be no ambiguity over what the duties of your warlord will be.

One question I have is what power will the warlord have to request the production of military units? Will he be able to demand that a unit be produced by city x or can he only request that they build the unit he desires? Will powers to request units be expanded during a time of war?

 

[Methos]

The clarifications you posted are very useful I'd suggest updating your proposed initiative to include such clarity so that when the office is created there will be no ambiguity over what the duties of your warlord will be.

Thanks. I'll try and update it later this afternoon. Hopefully we'll also have more discussion.

One question I have is what power will the warlord have to request the production of military units? Will he be able to demand that a unit be produced by city x or can he only request that they build the unit he desires? Will powers to request units be expanded during a time of war?

No, the Warlord can not demand units to be built. This is where my City Council thread will come in handy, as the Warlord can make his/her requests there.

 

[Falcon02]

One thing on that last point, back in Civ III DG2 (or DG3?), back when turnchat instructions from officials were still semi-official, I (as Military Leader at the time) noticed mid chat that a City was building a unit I didn't really need/want. We already had an abundance of that unit and it was starting to get outdated as well. So I requested the DP to change the unit from one unit to another, I think that was the only time I ever did it.

Now, the question then is will the Warlord have the power to change 1 military unit in queue to another military unit in queue (ie. Warrior to Chariot) should the Elder not take into account the overall Military production goals? Or ensure the power remains with the Elder, to ensure no impact on items further down on the build queue, and that Elders?

I will say Aside from impact to build queues allowing it sets a precedent where Domestic/Cultural leaders could potentially overrule build queue items which are in their area, thus making the Elders feel relatively powerless.
Yet at the same time, it could avoid getting units which we really don't need.
Though realistically these cases should be rare and far between, and a good Warlord needs to make the military goals well known, a good Elder needs to try to take those overall goals of the nation into account.

 

[Methos]

re: Falcon02's response: I can see your point. How about allowing the Warlord to state what type of units will be built, but still allow the Elders to decide on who and when it is built. In other words, the Warlord states the only military units built will be chariots, not warriors. Elders who decide to build military units must build chariots at whatever time is appropiate to the Elder.

I can also see the Warlord requesting more units from the Chieftain, who would than step in and help persuade one of the Elders to build units. I do not feel the Warlord should have the authority to force units built, but leave that power to the Chieftain.

 

[grant2004]

I'd suggest that once the office of the warlord is created the appointed warlord should publish a list of recruitment goals in his office thread, among other things. The list would give good guidelines for what should be built, hopefully limiting the ammount of useless units trained.

 

[Falcon02]

Yeah, I think the best solution would probably be to encourage the Warlord to have updated "recruitment goals", as grant2004 said it.

In the example I referenced, I think it had been a while since I last approached the governors stating what units we needed. They key would then be to update a list every turn chat, or at least any time recruitment goals shift, and posting them in the new city council thread.

 

[fed1943]

I agree with our Chieftain.

I would just give to the Chieftain vetoing power. This is not a mistrust about
the Warlord (or other Officer) is to allow the Officer to center him/herself in
the Office; if the plan hurts badly other sector/s, Chieftain veto will take care.

Best regards,

 

[Methos]

The OP has been updated. Jump to OP

Realize that even though the Warlord has full control of all military action and war plans, the Elders still have the ability to in effect "veto" the Warlord. Remember, the Warlord must request military units to be built, he/she cannot force them. If an Elder truly were against the military action, they can simply refuse to build the units. This is one way for the Elders to protest a war.

It also makes for a fun and interesting Demogame!

 

[Skipper1989]

The OP has been updated. Jump to OP

Realize that even though the Warlord has full control of all military action and war plans, the Elders still have the ability to in effect "veto" the Warlord. Remember, the Warlord must request military units to be built, he/she cannot force them. If an Elder truly were against the military action, they can simply refuse to build the units. This is one way for the Elders to protest a war.

It also makes for a fun and interesting Demogame!

AN interesting idea but is it a good idea to allow our military to be held to ransom by bureaucrats?

 

[Octavian X]

I'm not fond of a veto for the Chieftain over the Warlord's actions. Yes, I'm all for creating greater coherence in government by creating a strict hierarchy, a veto sets up a potential for both abuse and unnecessary conflict. The Chieftain, if he wants to force a certain military action, should have to do it like the rest of us should - through forum discussions and polls.

 

[Methos]

AN interesting idea but is it a good idea to allow our military to be held to ransom by bureaucrats?

I'm just stating something that could be possible. Besides, I can't see an elected official attempting anything like this (albeit in illegal war or uprising Elder) without it backlashing them. Can't you hear the coup?

I'm not fond of a veto for the Chieftain over the Warlord's actions.

To be honest I just threw this in as I was beginning to fear I'd given the Warlord too much power. I'm realizing now that his power is held in check as he/she needs the help of the Elders to put his plans in affect. Without the help of the nation, the Warlord is powerless.

If its preferred (and I'm leaning that way) I have no problem removing the veto requirement.

 

[Falcon02]

To be honest I just threw this in as I was beginning to fear I'd given the Warlord too much power. I'm realizing now that his power is held in check as he/she needs the help of the Elders to put his plans in affect. Without the help of the nation, the Warlord is powerless.

If its preferred (and I'm leaning that way) I have no problem removing the veto requirement.

He is also held accountable by the citizens....

NO war can be declared without a forum discussion and poll, any Military leader that has instructions "declare war on ______" without said discussion and polls has violated the law.

And you are right, the Warlord and Elders need to work together to further our nation's Military goals...

However, I do not like the idea of either one being able to have an actual veto or overruling power over the other. If an Elder and a Warlord are at odds on a particular strategy it needs to be worked out in the Forums, the Chieftain might be able to serve as a mediator in cases like this.

EDIT: It should not be the Warlord's place to decide to declare war on another nation. But instead to prepare, plan, and carry out the Wars that the citizens have decided to fight, or prepare, plan for, and defend ourselves from the other AI's when they declare war.

 

[DaveShack]

I'd rather have the declaration of war be in the hands of the Foreign Affairs dept, whatever we decide to call it.

 

[grant2004]

I'd say the actuall decision to declare war is such an important one that it definately has to be a citizen power, a warlord or a chieftan might recomend war, but I wouldn't want to see one occur without at least majority support of the citizens.