WC/UN warfare resolutions?

Aussie_Lurker · May 22, 2013

AriochIV said:
I've never seen any warfare that was "humane."

(rummages around in my quote pocket...)

"The essence of war is violence. Moderation in war is imbecility." -British Sea Lord John Fisher

But seriously, razing cities already does carry a diplomatic penalty.

Well, just spitballing, but how about this:

The <City Name> Convention Resolution:

Effects: 1. Civilian Units cannot be killed/captured, only displaced to the nearest city.

2. Diplomatic Penalty for attacking cities, double diplomatic penalty for *razing* cities.

or 2. Units gain a penalty for attacking cities, double diplomatic penalty for *razing* cities.

Aussie.

AriochIV · May 22, 2013

I don't have a problem in principle with increased diplomatic penalties for razing of cities (I believe they were much more severe in previous versions of Civilization), but Civ V already punishes players pretty hard diplomatically for "warmongering," even when such wars are purely defensive in nature, so I'm not too keen on adding more layers to the punishment. It's already pretty infuriating when an AI civilization who has conquered three of his neighbors and attacked you twice calls you a warmonger because you DARED to fight back against an aggressor nation that attacked you first.

kingchris20 · May 22, 2013

AriochIV said:
I don't have a problem in principle with increased diplomatic penalties for razing of cities (I believe they were much more severe in previous versions of Civilization), but Civ V already punishes players pretty hard diplomatically for "warmongering," even when such wars are purely defensive in nature, so I'm not too keen on adding more layers to the punishment. It's already pretty infuriating when an AI civilization who has conquered three of his neighbors and attacked you twice calls you a warmonger because you DARED to fight back against an aggressor nation that attacked you first.

Yeah, my past two games, I have unfortuantely spawned with the Iroquois as my neighbor. Hiawatha loves to do that

I always have to turtle up and play science or culture in those games, because he always pumps out settlers at a crazy rate and takes up all the real estate. So I make sure to have enough units to protect my border (for the inevitable DoW). and then I'm a warmonger to him.........SMH

Aussie_Lurker · May 22, 2013

AriochIV said:
I don't have a problem in principle with increased diplomatic penalties for razing of cities (I believe they were much more severe in previous versions of Civilization), but Civ V already punishes players pretty hard diplomatically for "warmongering," even when such wars are purely defensive in nature, so I'm not too keen on adding more layers to the punishment. It's already pretty infuriating when an AI civilization who has conquered three of his neighbors and attacked you twice calls you a warmonger because you DARED to fight back against an aggressor nation that attacked you first.

Well, if it helps Arioch, I'd only support the "diplomatic penalty for attacking cities" option *if* it was coupled with a removal of the "warmonger" penalty in cases of Defensive and/or Cassus Belli wars. Otherwise I'd be much happier with the "penalty to attack strength when attacking cities" option. As I said, I'm pretty much just spitballing ideas right now!

Aussie.

WC/UN warfare resolutions?

Would you like to see a World Congress/UN resolution for humane warfare available?

Yes, it should make killing/capturing civilians and razing cities impossible.

Yes, it should make killing/capturing civilians and razing cities carry a diplomatic penalty.

No, this doesn't seem like a good idea to me.

Aussie_Lurker

Deity

AriochIV

Colonial Ninja

kingchris20

Wisdom Seeker

Aussie_Lurker

Deity

Similar threads