Arms sales

[Sabotage]

During diplomacy, you should have the option of selling military aid to your ally or buying it.

It can be something like a lump sum of gold for a particular unit, or maybe a luxury for 20 turns in return for a number of units.

Some details:

The city manufacturing the equiptment and the buyer's capital must both have airports, or habours or roads. If they're connected by roads it would take probably 5 turns to deliver, habours 3 (2 after discovery of mass production due to transports ect) and 1 by airmail.

Other civilisations can demand the stop of arms sales. If you do happend to stop the trade, your reputation will take a hit, but then again, it may just save your behind.

By doing this, it can ensure that small struggling nations can also have a chance without having their bigger ally have all the fun and ultimately keep all the cities.

 

[ainwood]

I agree - although the terms should be identical to the way resources are traded. Military is just another resource.

 

[Jason Fox]

Would definitely like to see arms trading - as long as it didn't automatically instigate war between you and the recipients enemies 'cause that's pointless.

Other civs could either "pay" or threaten you to stop. If they offer something and you decline, it's a rep hit with that civ and their allies. If they threaten and you decline they are obligated to declare war. Could create some interesting situations.

 

[Daaraa]

The option to pay someone to have peace with another civ would be nice too.
I hate it when I can't get involved directly in a war but I don't want either civ to fight. There is nothing to do about it.

 

[Heffalump]

In Civ 2 you could give units to other civs. I sometimes miss this. Be a nice way to help you use other civs to fight proxy wars for your.

 

[Bill_in_PDX]

But to play devil's advocate, and to illustrate why totally realistic things are not always good for game play....

These wouldn't be arms you are selling, it would be entire troop groups. No country does that (for $$) and the idiotic past administrations in the US learned not to loan combat forces to the UN. It is selling your people for dollars that this practically means in game terms.

I think you come close to simulating this anyway when you give a tech or a rubber resource to an ally.

For MP someday it would be good to have the ability to actually stack with or help fortify allied cities and forces.

Bill

 

[Traquenard-fx]

Originally posted by Heffalump
In Civ 2 you could give units to other civs. I sometimes miss this. Be a nice way to help you use other civs to fight proxy wars for your.

I miss this me too !!

Just for remind Firaxis that the USA is using that strategy over and over. The most common example is Israel and arabs frontline contries where americans sell or give a huge fire power to Israel.
I really but really miss this strategy where I was able to help others contries in their conflicts for protect my own interests. I hope the military trading will be back in the expansion pack.

For FIRAXIS : PLEASE!!!!!

 

[sealman]

Originally posted by Bill_in_PDX
But to play devil's advocate, and to illustrate why totally realistic things are not always good for game play....
These wouldn't be arms you are selling, it would be entire troop groups. No country does that (for $$) and the idiotic past administrations in the US learned not to loan combat forces to the UN. It is selling your people for dollars that this practically means in game terms.
I think you come close to simulating this anyway when you give a tech or a rubber resource to an ally.
For MP someday it would be good to have the ability to actually stack with or help fortify allied cities and forces.
Bill

You can look at it either way. If I give my ally a tank for instance, one can say that I am giving him only the hardware since the construction of the tank did not cost me any population. On the other had, you can say that you actually gave troops especially if your ally can not build tanks. Personally, I few it the first way, I would only be lending the completed good, not the men to run it.

The reason the US does not normally provide troops to the UN is because it may been seen as a US action and not a UN one. For example, the Korean War was a UN action even though the world and history books look at it as a predominately US affair.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

For the political deabate:

Civ3 should not include giving troops, sicne practically no countr in the world is into the practice of giving mercenaries to antoher state. The UN doesn`t count, since there is no UN in the game!!!!

On the other hand, countries with the technical power and knowledge to build modern weapons can give others who lack that capability the ability to use these weapons - Taiwan buys German submarines, and they sure know how to use them! Also, look at the number of shot-down Russian helicopters and the huge impact of this on Russian Infantry in Afghanistan - thanx to American Stinger shoulder-fired anit-aircraft missiles.....


So, for the gameplay issue:

How about you can give/sell other civ units, but they loose 1/3 of their HP in the process???? This would account for the lack of proper traingin, and the diificulties in resupply and repair, while it would certainly mimick today proliferation of moderna arms.

One issue to be addressed here: these units may not jump to the recipients towns - after all if a European nation decides to help a failing African state against ana enemy, the troops and especially the advanced heavy arms like tanks don´t get beamed there - the recipient should get a limited Right-of-Passage to pull the troops from the donors captial to his own territory, or the donor could simply airlift them to the recipient (providing he has an airport in the city in question).

Whaddaya think??????

 

[Traquenard-fx]

Originally posted by Killer
For the political deabate:

Civ3 should not include giving troops, sicne practically no countr in the world is into the practice of giving mercenaries to antoher state.

Whaddaya think??????

I must say Killer that in tip'' political debate'' like you said you are totally wrong. Just like I said before, states sell units of all kinds and the best seller are in other but not sure: US, Russia and France. Countries not only sell military technologies but units. If you want profs I can go at my municipal library and say the real numbers and facts. And yes, states sell or give (in secret) military units.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Originally posted by Traquenard-fx


I must say Killer that in tip'' political debate'' like you said you are totally wrong. Just like I said before, states sell units of all kinds and the best seller are in other but not sure: US, Russia and France. Countries not only sell military technologies but units. If you want profs I can go at my municipal library and say the real numbers and facts. And yes, states sell or give (in secret) military units.

Yes, sometimes they do, but never openly, never in large numbers, and never for combat. What they do is give specialist, adivsors and so on. About combat troops: I guess they all learned their lesson in Vietnam.

Yes there still are countries who do it - Iraq for one, and many African states - but seriously, even our puny German military yould whup their asses! On the bit, world-sclae sope - noone does it! just imagine the outcry of the press!

I`m not talking about a handfull or two of SAS or so, they are to few to be represented in Civ3 (more`s the pity!), I´m talking about a divison of tanks, or a 10 companies of Riflemen (because this is what I`d give to an ally, not *a* Rifleman, but 25!!!!!)

So, you`re right, I wasn`t thorough enough in my post. But I`ll stick to the broad-scale message!

edit: typos

 

[Myartar]

Look at the Gulf War, the US and coiltion cleans the Iraqi's out if Kuwait, protects the Saudi's and takes back Kuwait and oil prices fall. It wasn't a direct exchange of cash, but it was the rental of US troops.

 

[Richard III]

Whatever the realism, I think that the old Civ2 model was close enough to reality to miss it badly. Keeping a dying friend alive with free tanks was a joy, and one of the few things that made Civ2 more than just CivReprint.

And sure, there are a million examples of countries giving troops as military aid without I'm too bored by this to give too many here, but just take the Spanish civil war as one good example, where three different armies of foreign "volunteers" drove and flew the sold/loaned equipment for the belligerent power. Oh, and Vietnam, 1956-65, English aid to the Dutch during the Dutch revolt, must I go on?

Bring it back!

 

[ETO_Peregrine]

The trade of armed men among civilizations instead of only military equipment was a common practice in the ancient era. For example, there was a triangular trade among the Minoans, Mycenaeans, and Egyptians circa 1300-1200 BC. The Minoans shuttled Myceanaean warriors to Egypt in return for Egyptian gold. In this case the Egyptians would have had no use for weapons and armor; what they required were the legendary Greek fighters (Goliath was from the same gene pool).

In modern times purchasing people is widely frowned upon, but military "advisors" follow the same principles, although they are not technically mercenaries. They help organize and equip native forces, effectively turning them into a new unit.

Military trading in history goes beyond the exchange of technically complex materiel, which seems to be what most players are focused on when discussing this feature in Civ. It's not hard to imagine the meaning of unit trading changing with the times. The concepts of mercenaries, advisors, and materiel seem to all fit the scope of the Civ unit, so I think unit trading should be added to the feature set.

Besides, it's just cool.

 

[akinkhoo]

1 unit per turn (this will now apply to workers as well)

in the agreement
you can take
as many unit as
available in the capital.

all the units will disappear
after the agreement from
the sending capital. (in transit)

and 1 at a turn, (starting form the next turn of the receiving)
they will appear at
the receiving capital.

both side will need a trade route
just as resourse trade do.

trading of (slave) worker
will now follow the same rules.

 

[Kilroy]

YES

This and the ability to be a mediator between warring civs (ie "Please call off your vendetta against my friend") would go a long way toward beefing up diplomacy. Both are big enough changes to be beyond the scope of a patch, but [hint] would really increase the value of an expansion [/hint].

 

[Traquenard-fx]

Originally posted by Kilroy
YES

This and the ability to be a mediator between warring civs (ie "Please call off your vendetta against my friend") would go a long way toward beefing up diplomacy. Both are big enough changes to be beyond the scope of a patch, but [hint] would really increase the value of an expansion [/hint].

All I ( or we) want at least is the return of that feature that we seen in civ2, because I (or we) think that a great feature that miss in the game. For the xp I think that diplomacy have to take some sort of evolution to make it more and more fun not fall behind in progress.

Why not include this feature only with the discovery of nationalism?

 

[Selous]

and most importantly!! .... i think it would be fun ... u could prop up weak civs fighting strong ones, have 3rd party wars (like the vietnam war) .... i think it would add so much more to the game and that is why i want unit trading back!!

 

[roadwarrior]

If you want to counter the argument that countries don't sell their soldiers to fight in foreign wars, why not have units that are traded start with one hit point? That way the rest of the unit is healed with "native" units...

Personally I really think that the option should be included in some form. But what about UU's? Should they be able to be sold? In some respects I think yes (the US sells F-15's, I don't have in depth knowledge of the others), but wouldn't that defeat the purpose of the UU in some ways?

 

[Carver]

roadwarrior, for the sake of gameplay I would say UUs shouldn't be sold, each is that civ's particular "advantage" in the game. BUt we definentley need the option to sell or give units to other nations. Yes, its true that nations usually don't sell their own troops but I think that's being unecessarily nit pickey for civ. The ability to give small civs modern weaponry would allow you to maintain a balance of power and not allow that AI superpower to emerge and thus force you to go to war to cull them back a bit.