Considered a Villian By the World?!?!

A more realistic penalty would be the loss of trade routes with member nations. That could conceivably be quite a problem for empires with lots of trading partners, but manageable.
 
there shouldnt be a unhappiness penalty in your own lands, for example american are worldwide hated and they keep defying the UN, but they dont care nor are even really aware of being the world's villains. However there should be other penalties, like reduced commerce and barbarian spies (terrorism).
 
Defying the UN should cause terrorism? :lol: That's a new one in my book. If anything, it would be the other way around.
 
s0ulst0rms said:
i've thought about having a diplomatic penalty before too, but it'd be useless in human multiplayer.
Click to expand...

Yea so most diplomatic penalties are kinda pointless to cause even if the AI doesn't like you if you have a much larger army they often don't attack. I got a -9 penalty from on empire yet they haven't declared war on me cause I got a huge empire. Their could also be a bonus like if you attack someone who is classified as a "villian" you have less warweariness.

dh_epic said:
I suspect that Firaxis tried a diplomatic penalty and quickly discovered that some players will defy every last vote. Diplomatic penalties are not enough.

Hence the happiness penalty. It was the only way to make players thoughtfully weigh whether it's worth it to defy or not. Now that the happiness penalties are high, you'll think twice about defying. You'll only do it when absolutely necessary.

Realistic that your people care about the UN? Probably not. But like I said, the most realistic UN would probably be a bunch of resolutions that don't actually do anything. If you went with that, you might as well not implement a UN at all.
Click to expand...

Well yea you have to defy every vote. I mean the vote doesn't always past the first time so you gotta keep defying it. And like with the new Medevil UN building you can vote to put imbargo on someone. Well whoever is in control always seems to select stop trading with the civ they hate. I had to keep defying them cause that civ was close ally and I got a lot of trade with them.

I seem to get the +15 after only ONE VOTE. I think that one might of actually pass and that is why I got the penalty? But still if you get the penalty for defying only ONE vote and no more later then why not just defy them all?? Also I don't understand why it went up over a couple turns to reach +15? And I seem to have no way to correct fix it.
 
to Gaius: yeah you're right, completely stupid proposition haha ;)
 
HiroHito said:
there shouldnt be a unhappiness penalty in your own lands, for example american are worldwide hated and they keep defying the UN, but they dont care nor are even really aware of being the world's villains. However there should be other penalties, like reduced commerce and barbarian spies (terrorism).
Click to expand...

Quite a few of us Americans are quite angry at our government for making us into the world's villains...of course, the Civ mechanic is, as always, an odd reflection of reality, since most of us don't quit our jobs and refuse to work because of our anger.

I agree with Sealot...however strange the notion is realistically, it's an effective game mechanic. It might be interesting to let the player's choice of civics affect the degree to which defying the UN upsets its populace (i.e. maybe Free Speech adds unhappiness for defying the UN, since dissenters from the government position are able to disseminate their views, while Police State reduces the Penalty, since dissenters are tossed in jail).
 
Frankly if they were going to restrict the UN to serving its real-world purpose it might as well not even exist, the effect would be too small.

Its a game-ism. It's not intended to be realistic, it's intended to provide a different set of strategic considerations. And especially post-BC, it does that in spades.

If I remember correctly, you fix it by accepting UN resolutions... but then you have to, well, accept UN resolutions. I could be wrong about that, not having personally defied the UN.
 
Pomp said:
Quite a few of us Americans are quite angry at our government for making us into the world's villains...of course, the Civ mechanic is, as always, an odd reflection of reality, since most of us don't quit our jobs and refuse to work because of our anger.
Click to expand...

Pomp I frequent http://alternet.org/ on an almost daily basis and I know whats the feeling in the liberal american community, however its a small, almost negligible part of the american people and can in no way nor shape represent the american people.

The "I dont know nor care" population on the other hand...
 
I hate the UN so much I wish there was an opition to turn it off. It more then anything else in the game annoys me cause it takes away your choice on how to run your own empire. And the addition of the defy with unhappiness penalty really isn't much of a choice cause they often keep demanding things that hurt your empire so it's like damned if you do damned if you don't.
 
PyroMancer said:
I hate the UN so much I wish there was an opition to turn it off. It more then anything else in the game annoys me cause it takes away your choice on how to run your own empire. And the addition of the defy with unhappiness penalty really isn't much of a choice cause they often keep demanding things that hurt your empire so it's like damned if you do damned if you don't.
Click to expand...

Turn off diplomatic victory. UN is off.
 
HiroHito said:
Pomp I frequent http://alternet.org/ on an almost daily basis and I know whats the feeling in the liberal american community, however its a small, almost negligible part of the american people and can in no way nor shape represent the american people.
Click to expand...

It's also a relatively small portion of your population that turns into unhappy faces, from what I've seen in screenshots (haven't made it to the UN yet in my own games).

Of course, none of this really matters since, as we've all been saying, the game mechanic doesn't reflect the real world very well anyway. Although, I suppose it would be fun to buy one of those sexy red shirts and quit my job to stand around being disgruntled and not working, if only I could convince the local governor to give me two food per turn for free...hmmm...
 
Damned if you do damned if you don't is pretty much the only time there's a real choice in the game. You actually have to think about what you want. What kind of choice is "would you rather be damned or not damned?" That's a no-brainer. That doesn't sound like a strategy game, that sounds like a grade 2 vocabulary test.

If you can't stand it, turn off the UN. I don't think it adds that much to the game anyway.
 
I didn't plan on intervening on this thread, but I'd just like to say that the real UN has its purpose.
That it is very useful in many circumstances
and that it is a shame that people think it is useless.

Of course, it is far from perfect, but it is not useless.
War criminals have been prosecuted because of the UN.
There are today much more international law than you can possibly believe because of the UN.
Programs against landmines
Programs against hunger.
Programs to assist refugees.
Programs against AIDS.
This may seem like small achievements to you compared to questions of World peace, but for the poor who has got something to eat everyday or who doesn't have to walk for miles to get water, it makes a hel of a difference.
 
The obvious solution ... build the U.N. then you can refuse to propose resolutions that you don't like.
That said, I agree it is just a game mechanic. The point is that sometimes it helps you, sometimes it hurts you, you make decisions and live with them. The unhappiness is your trade off for having the right to defy resolutions. In the old game you had no choice, no you make the call.
In real life it does sort of work like that. For example, when the U.S. entered Afhganistan with a U.N. approved coalition, the international community didn't really get that ticked off. When they went their own way into Iraq, against the U.N.'s sentiment, people abroad got really annoyed.
A lot of people in the U.S. were actually pretty unhappy about it.

NOTE: I'M NOT STARTING A POLITICAL DISCUSSION ABOUT AFGHANISTAN OR IRAQ. I MERELY SAYING IN REAL LIFE THERE ARE INTERNATIONAL AND DOMESTIC ISSUES THAT COME FROM DENYING THE U.N.

So that said, it's just a part of the game. Meant to be a challenge. If you want to just beat people up there's always AOE.
 
Its a great mechanic as it stands - it makes the late game dangerous. You have to decide whether to build it - and risk losing control of it, or to delay it yourself and subject yourself to the whims of others if it is built.

If you want to defy the UN, you may need to capture it, or eliminate enough competition that you can gain control. That adds some urgency to your late game play.

Likewise the Apostolic Palace is a major speedbump for conquering on Pangaea. Either you invest the tech and hammers into building it yourself which slows down your war efforts, or you risk losing control of it and being forced to stop attacking a dominant religious coalition. You are likely to get mass attacked if you war against the religious coalition and any cities you capture are going to be either continuously unhappy or forced to be returned. Or keep razing cities and rebuilding your own.

So you have to plan against it - you can't just build enough troops and ignore the diplomatic part of the game any more.
 
They need to add a UN screen in one of the advisors with the following:

- Resolutions (passed, failed, n/a)
- List of civs in the UN
- Date of next election
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Jimmy Thunder
Gifting city with UN?
Replies
4
Views
412
AcaMetis
AcaMetis
T
AI Jumbled Rumble : another set of AI Survivor Alternate Histories, with a twist
2 3
Replies
56
Views
4K
Keler
Keler
D
[BTS] UN not providing opportunity for resolutions vote?
Replies
1
Views
371
drewisfat
drewisfat
S
[BTS] Almost destroyed by naval invasion
Replies
3
Views
306
civac
C
G
a missed opportunity
Replies
5
Views
547
PPQ_Purple
PPQ_Purple
Top Bottom