Coalitions, Groups, Axis, Customs Union and much more

I'd like to see some formations on Civ 5 or whatever is coming.

Can be military or economic...

Military: You can choose the name you want or... I don't know if it's right you can chose by kind of formation:

Coalition: One leader and his ''helpers'', the coalition is formed to attack certain country or defend it.

Axis: A Group of nations who have a expanded defensive pact that works also when attacking so if one nation enter in war others enter too. Also it able the War with world button (it's the same to declare war on everybody), but it never happened in history. No leader

Alliance: Group of nations that help each other in war, to defend and attack... all nations on the alliance share resources, so if someone has iron and you don't, now you have it and he still too, it's not a trade but a supply. No leader

------------------

Economic can be divided in Custom Union, Common Market and Complete Economic Integration.

Custom Union: + with cities from members.All members need to have open borders and also be neighbors, so it works only on one continent, although if you have colonies then it can too. The members need to be less than 60% of the civs.

Common Market: +30% with cities from members. All pre-reqs

Complete Economic Integration: +100% with cities from members. This one specially has a leader... And the leader is interim, each 5 turns it changes to another member, and all members will be leader at least once. The leader function is to choose the gold slider, and the leaders of the countries choose what to do with that number, so let's say the leader choose 60% gold, so now you have 40% to spend with culture and/or science.

You need to have Custom Union for 10 turns to then be able to go to Common Market and so on... so you need 20 turns to have a complete Economic Integration, but you can stay on Custom Union if wanted.

-------------------------

This would work like this: You create the group, if the group has a permanent leader (Coalition) then you become the leader, if not then you just create... then if you are the leader you can invite civs to it, and those civs can refuse and also other civs can try to enter and if you are leader you choose if yes or no, if the group has no leader then it's by vote, and if the leader is interim is by vote too.

Normally groups would vote to the same interest so before a ONU poll start the Leader votes as all members (If the leader is interim too) and if has no leader, then the higher score chooses.

What you think about it?

It's an interesting idea, IMO (see this thread, specifically the bit on temporary military alliances), but a major problem with creating alliances with AIs is that the AI is stupid. Having them in some sort of coalition would not be all that advantageous. And the only military group that is really any different to something you can already achieve is the alliance (which I'm assuming to be non-permanent), and the only difference in that is something that seems pretty overpowered; sharing resources.

So perhaps something to think about in regards to the military alliances; how would they function differently to what you can already have in the game, other than that one difference with resource sharing?

Thanks Camikaze.

My basis is that as far I know defensive packs is only when someone attacks that nation and not when that nation attacks someone, right?

So Axis would be like a Attacker Pact.
Coalition would make other nations ''Vassals'' to the coalition leader since he will say what you need to attack and even if want a resource.
Alliance is both attacker and defender pact but with the resource sharing... (Not permanent)

Tell me what you think about the economic groups too.

Thanks

Maybe make resource sharing a separate treaty to the alliances?

As for the Coalition, it sounds more like something that could be implemented as a UN resolution or AP decision, minus the vassalizing. For example, the AP controller might decide to call a Crusade - that civ would be the leader, and any nation which joins (there would have to be some benefits to joining. Maybe +1 xp in all cities with the state religion considering it's a crusade) would have to stay in the war until the leader makes peace. Making a separate peace would incur a severe diplomatic penalty, and so on. Actually, this is similar to what is already in the game as AP option. However, at the moment if a "crusade" is called countries only have to declare war on the target but are not actually binded to stay in the conflict by a formal alliance. The example I gave (cross-out bit) would make a "crusade" a more formal alliance rather than just a call to arms.

Yeah but it is a addition and not a replacement to coalitions and other groups...

Your economic organisation ideas are better than your military organisation ideas. All are reasonably good ideas. However, it seems to me that it would another aspect of the game in which the player would have a huge advantage over the AI. They appear to be no negative consequences of joining one of these groups, so you as the player would do so at every opportunity. But I assume the AI would not, whether it be for diplomatic reasons, or some other nonsensical reason. This would be an exploit. There needs to be some possible negative consequences involved in joining, and perhaps some of them should be economic, given that it is really all about economics.

It would surely give a diplomatic bonus but I think that to fix the better visualization of humans like... I'll do a Coalition with this guy and attack his neighboor to then he lose some cities... or strategical things, in general I think everybody wins in all goups maybe just in coalition that don't.

But is just the case to teach how the AI would act and which parameters it would look for before accepting the invite. Also talk more about the negatives consequences you said. Also why do you think that the military organization are worst than the economic?

Having to give up control of your sliders to another civ for 5+ turns is a pretty big disadvantage IMHO.

Just the gold slider, yeah that the disadvantage of winning 100% more trade routes... I think you can live with it or not.

Soundwαvє ▼;8904554 said:

It would surely give a diplomatic bonus but I think that to fix the better visualization of humans like... I'll do a Coalition with this guy and attack his neighboor to then he lose some cities... or strategical things, in general I think everybody wins in all goups maybe just in coalition that don't.

But is just the case to teach how the AI would act and which parameters it would look for before accepting the invite. Also talk more about the negatives consequences you said. Also why do you think that the military organization are worst than the economic?

Click to expand...

Well the military ones are essentially stuff that can already be done in the game, just without official designations. The economic ideas are whole new concepts for the game.

Now, what could be some possible negatives of joining these economic groups? Well, I was hoping you would tell me, but...

Perhaps an extra diplomatic penalty, for 'you are part of a customs union with our worst enemy', or something. I can't really think of any realistic effects that could be worked in regarding economic stuff, with the simplistic economic system of Civ, but supposing an expansion of the economic system as a whole, then a negative of joining a common market could be the loss of competitiveness for your businesses (let's say, your cottages), or something. That's the type of negative effect that would make these ideas very good.

taillesskangaru said:

Having to give up control of your sliders to another civ for 5+ turns is a pretty big disadvantage IMHO.

Click to expand...

I'd assume that the feature would invariably always have the player as the leader of the union, though. Could be a disadvantage, though, if that isn't the case.

I KNOW! First that espionage will be easier because of the approximation of nations, and also the culture will be much faster shared so since you need to do those treaties just with neighbors and neighbors of your neighbors and so on... You need to be sure that his borders will not expand too much or even take a city.

Also we could add some events that makes negative effects like a internal crises, etc. If someone is losing too much money it could affect all the union. Anyway the firsts ideas are the best.

Yeah, the military organizations are there, I just want to improve a bit.

Why have a permanent leader on the union, and the leader is the player? The union is something to everybody wins so the leader needs to be everybody, you can take a lot of real economic groups. Or we can do a council.