Barbarians

[ph_173]

You're kidding right? barbarians are like a free pot of gold or an extra hunk of HP for your troop. I kind of like the idea of barbarians becoming minor civs. But I also think that at least the Nomadic ones should be alot stronger. Apparently in history the turks could beat just about anyone and different countries began hiring them as mercenaries. I like the idea of buying big strong barbarian troops to do the dirty work for you.

 

[Thulsa Doom]

#1 I want the barbarian thread to continue throught the game, but by different names - highwaymen, pirates, mafia, street gangs, terrorists, etc. Even inside of our borders, we should have to work a bit to make sure our people are safe.

#2 Our people should be open to recruitment by barbarians (by whatever name), including workers and military troops. Especially troops stationed in faraway provinces. Yes, that's a pain in the butt, but it's also very historically accurate.

 

[mastertyguy]

#1 I want the barbarian thread to continue throught the game, but by different names - highwaymen, pirates, mafia, street gangs, terrorists, etc. Even inside of our borders, we should have to work a bit to make sure our people are safe.

??? It is not the same thing. Barbarians should be minor civ. Mafia can't be a minor civ. Mafia should be linked to unhapiness

 

[dh_epic]

Realism is valuable, but not to the point of making it a "whack a mole" game. Pollution is the same way. It's not that it wasn't realistic. It's not that there shouldn't be penalties for industrializing too much. It's just that it was an annoying way to implement it. They've tied pollution into health -- no more whack a mole, same reasonable penalty.

Crime, street gangs, even terrorism should be the same way. Anyone can kill a handfull of isolated units floating around in their territory. Might as well skip the step and just make it a penalty to productivity / happiness / commerce, or something.

 

[sir_schwick]

Terrorist groups in developed nations are called street gangs. They use intimidation, violence, and fear as weapons to get what they want. Sure there are slight differences, but ask anyone in south Chicago what they think about the issue.

I agree with dh_epic that the effects cannot be solved with military force the way foreign militaries can.

 

[Thulsa Doom]

The problems don't necc. have to be solved with military force - in fact, they usually aren't solved with military force. They are usually solved with diplomacy of some sort. Still, I'd like terrorist groups with the ability to kidnap your GL (and an ability to get the GL back, unharmed), damage buildings, etc. Perhaps they could force dialogue by threatening to destroy a GW unless you stop your war against a certain country, and then you have to decide whether to take military action or negotiate.

 

[sir_schwick]

Your from Texas and your suggesting negotiating with terrorists? Domestic problems usually cannot be solved with military force( ), but foreign threats of this nature at least can pretended to be solved that way. However for civ the effects should be of significant terrorists/street gangs.

 

[Chazbagel]

Haha the texan got dissed

Moderator Action: Don't start anything here. Warned.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[mastertyguy]

Might as well skip the step and just make it a penalty to productivity / happiness / commerce, or something.

This is my opinion too.