[Complex] (6-20) Nuclear Non-Proliferation Forces Everyone To Declare War When Nukes Are Used

[N.Core]

How does this work with defensive pacts?

If you have a bloc of civs A-B-C, and D-E-F, and F launches a nuke...

1. (Presumably the defensive pact is cancelled first? Might want to detail this in the proposal.)
2. D and E declare on F, per the resolution.
3. Does D get a backstabber penalty for declaring on F, having just been a Friend/Defensive Pact partner?

I guess you could have the technical process be:
F declares war on everyone else, not the other way around. That should clear up the D-E-? part of this scenario. Then does F get backstabber penalties in addition to the nuclear penalties?

And actually, following through with this line of thought, it seems like it might be really frustrating for a defensive bloc, who might be relying on F's nukes as protection from A-B-C, would be forced to turn on them as a cause of a resolution they didn't even agree to. It's the same problem as sanctioning your ally, when you'd rather just also be sanctioned with them and continue trading on the side.

I think I should add that Defensive Pacts that the offender still has are instantly invalidated.

 

[N.Core]

Amended to also make vassalized civs to be instantly released and any Defensive Pacts the offender has to be invalidated.

 

[Rekk]

Amended to also make vassalized civs to be instantly released

What? Why?

 

[adan_eslavo]

What? Why?

Sanity? If you are a vassal and your master is going to destroy the world fighting with everyone on the planet with the nukes, would you stand and stare?

 

[pineappledan]

Yeah, this just keeps getting weirder. Making non-proliferation the same as M.A.D. holds no appeal to me. I would support making a separate WC resolution for M.A.D.

 

[N.Core]

What? Why?

Your master declaring war against everyone, but not on your behalf. Which potentially risks your existence and you can do nothing about it.
Also, the proposal said "All Civilizations" so vassalized civs aren't included makes it inconsistent.

 

[Rekk]

Your master declaring war against everyone, but not on your behalf. Which potentially risks your existence and you can do nothing about it.
Also, the proposal said "All Civilizations" so vassalized civs aren't included makes it inconsistent.

Yeah, your master just starting a normal war will threaten your existence. You still have no say in the matter until the standard conditions are met.

 

[N.Core]

Yeah, your master just starting a normal war will threaten your existence. You still have no say in the matter until the standard conditions are met.

But it is a consensus that all civilizations must follow, including your vassal. Also, this WC proposal only came late in the game, so might as well make it meaningful by nullifying all vassals and defensive pacts the offender owns.

 

[Anarcomu]

But it is a consensus that all civilizations must follow, including your vassal. Also, this WC proposal only came late in the game, so might as well make it meaningful by nullifying all vassals and defensive pacts the offender owns.

Vassals also do not follow resolution in case of denouncement, they can trade and receive open border and have corporation established in their territory. They do not follow the denouncement WC proposal.
So, having vassals following master in war (including the one in this proposal) looks normal to me.

 

[N.Core]

Need to wait for other voices if this WC proposal has to include/exclude vassals. I'll amend later.

 

[Amask]

What about forcefully disbanding some percentage of your nuclear arsenal?
Perhaps even periodically instead of just once, until the resolution is repealed.

 

[N.Core]

What about forcefully disbanding some percentage of your nuclear arsenal?
Perhaps even periodically instead of just once, until the resolution is repealed.

So then you wasted your Production and turns. It's not a Nuclear disarmament.

 

[N.Core]

Ok, amended to exclude vassals. Vassals are forced to fight alongside their warmonger master.

 

[Recursive]

Any Civilization that uses nuclear weapons will cause All Civilizations (excluding vassals) to declare war on that Civilization instantly.

Limited usefulness in multiplayer, since you aren't locked into war for 10 turns with human major civilizations.

 

[alchx]

I'm curious - why should a nuclear attack lead to a global war?

The creation of new nuclear weapons is prohibited. Once all warheads are used up, new ones cannot be created. And the same warhead cannot be detonated a second time. The weapon is used - there are no more weapons. This country is now vulnerable to a massive invasion if a few others agree. But the proposal automatically involves everyone in the war, even if someone does not want to or is too weak.

In addition, this and other proposals do not consider the use of nuclear weapons in defense, striking only on one’s own territory or in the ocean, without affecting the territory or cities of other states.

Why not just give a huge minus to the reputation “breaker of promises, not trustworthy”, approximately the same as when declaring war, if you promised not to attack for 20 turns. Such a strong negative modifier will automatically push strong alliances to declare war, or all AI will propose something very harmful and weakening at the congress. Alien spies will immediately be sent to the cities of the offender.

 

[Anarcomu]

Alien spies

I think I missed a proposal, since when do we have extra-terrestrial element in VP ? (apart from X-com squad)

 

[ma_kuh]

It's in the definition of the word.

Definition of ALIEN

belonging or relating to another person, place, or thing : strange; relating, belonging, or owing allegiance to another country or government : foreign; exotic… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com