Another UN question
- Thread starter jonpfl
- Start date
ClockExplosion
Chieftain
First, you should keep your questions to one thread.
Mass Media obsoletes the AP, if I remember correctly.
I don't know why that regulation failed - perhaps it's because someone voted Never?
Mass Media obsoletes the AP, if I remember correctly.
I don't know why that regulation failed - perhaps it's because someone voted Never?
The A Palace is obseleted by the tech that the UN is enabled. So yes, it should stop working. And the reason why it didn't pass is because not enough people voted for it.
I assume that is a known bug since the A Palace kept passing resolutions while the UN was around.
If you look at my screenshot, it shows that the required number of votes were met and thus the reason why I asked the question
Thx
jonpfl
Sorry, I am in a middle of a game and when something comes up I don't understand, I post a question.
1. If Huayna Capac was indeed the Secretary General of the UN that should be classified as a bug. It makes absolutely no sense for the Secretary General (who proposes all resolutions) to defy it. If the AI doesnt want a resolution it shouldnt propose it in the first place.
2. If only one member of the UN defies a resolution it will fail, currently this seems by design, although i think its silly.
3. The AP stops working when the OWNER gets Mass Media. So if another civ builds the UN its perfectly possible that the AP and the UN are active at the same time.
btw: 2 and 3 were also subject to several threads here and the bug forum, please use the search function.
2. If only one member of the UN defies a resolution it will fail, currently this seems by design, although i think its silly.
3. The AP stops working when the OWNER gets Mass Media. So if another civ builds the UN its perfectly possible that the AP and the UN are active at the same time.
btw: 2 and 3 were also subject to several threads here and the bug forum, please use the search function.
MrCynical
Deity
Unfortunately the implementation of both UN and Apostolic Palace is rather poorly done. If ANY civ defies the resolution, it won't pass, even if everyone else votes for it, and it is overwhelmingly past the required vote threshold. All they receive is a happiness penalty for doing so. It's essentially a veto rather than defiance.
As has been said since Civ 3, the way the UN should work is that a civ should be able to defy a resolution, but at the expense of being kicked out the UN, and being unable to vote on future motions. There should also be associated diplomatic penalties with the remaining members. The defy vote should only be treated as a "no" for purposes of deciding if the motion passes.
Unfortunately this isn't how it works in practice.
As has been said since Civ 3, the way the UN should work is that a civ should be able to defy a resolution, but at the expense of being kicked out the UN, and being unable to vote on future motions. There should also be associated diplomatic penalties with the remaining members. The defy vote should only be treated as a "no" for purposes of deciding if the motion passes.
Unfortunately this isn't how it works in practice.
Evil Twin
Demented Sociopath
GalCiv 2 does this better really; if you don't like what the galactic council thing imposes you can up and leave and suffer trade sanctions, but nothing as silly as being allowed to repeatedly defy resolutions. While that happens in real life sometimes, for it to happen all the time wouldn't work, that's why the League of Nations collapsed - if everybody's going to veto resolutions, what's the point?
KrikkitTwo
Immortal
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 12,418
Defying should still make it not apply to you.
However it does make sense, in some sense that Defying it would stop it.
Evil Twin
Demented Sociopath
Only in as much as if it's the host nation (that built the UN) or one of the most powerful.
But if the civilization of the Gonks led by Chieftain Gronk in the capital and sole city of Konk Konk guarded by elite cavemen defies a resolution.. who is going to care? Nobody, that's who.
KrikkitTwo
Immortal
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 12,418
^Well the thing to remember is that the real world UN has ~200 members, so there are a whole lot of them noone cares about. However, there are 15 members that can veto something... in a civ game even the smallest power usually controls ~2% of the globe enough to make them a player.
MrCynical
Deity
Palpster said:
No, the benefit would be the freedom to do as you like. Say if the UN bans nukes, you could defy it and be the only nuclear power, albeit a hated one. Say the UN is trying to force you to end a beneficial war. This would allow you to keep going.
That is the logical way for the UN to work rather than the current veto system.
No, if you vote just "no" and the resolution passes you MUST follow the resolution.
I think defying should let the resolution pass (if there are enough vote in favor of it) but you shouldnt have to follow it then.
In one of my games i proposed universal suffrage as global civic and isabella (my vassal by capitulation) defied it.
She had 3 cities (all on small islands) which dropped ALL to 1 pop and had still a
cause she defied the same resolution 3 times.This is silly, not just because the smallest and least powerful country could stop this resolution, but its also extremly stupid by the AI to cripple itself beyond any reason.
KrikkitTwo
Immortal
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 12,418
The only problem with the non-veto system is how do you get back in to the UN's good graces. I think the current idea works since noone ever gets kicked out of the UN, and always have to obey it... unless it starts working again.
Similar threads
