Brutal Dictators

Robi D

Minister of (Dis)Order
Joined
Jul 1, 2005
Messages
3,066
Location
Adelaide, Australia
There have been many thread about brutal dictators in real life and there inclusion in the game, or non inclusion as the case may be. While its all good and well to be scornful of the likes of Stalin, Mao and co. and their regimes i want to know how you would rate your dictatorship in the way you play civ.

Let's face it you are a dictator, you rule with no political opposition for 6000 years and everything you say goes. So are you benign and kind to your people or a saddist willing to sacrifice them to achieve your goals.

Here are some signs of brutality

-Running Slavery and Whipping (you are killing your own people here in case you didn't notice)
-Running Nationalism and forcing people into the army (not very nice, especially if you then hurl them into battle to get killed)
-Running Police State (Suppressing your peoples will by force)
-How about throwing units into war you have initiated to die (especially where the odds were below the 50% mark) so you could have that resource or city under your control
-Then there are the softer things like Caste System where you determine a persons future at birth (sure you assigned the next Einstien as a street cleaner but the streets need to be clean and someones going to do it)

Ok i'm sure you get the picture here, so we have established how you treat your people but how about people of other nations?

-Offensive wars for a resource(s) and/or city(ies)
-Using Nukes
-Razing cities (your comitting mass genocide here, that Population that disappears doesn't suddenly appear in another city)
-Then the softer things like having Vassals ect.

So how did you go? Would Mother Teresa be proud of you or would you have even Stalin turning in his grave? And be honest, after all these arn't real people so don't stress the International criminal court wont come knock on your door anytime soon;)

Oh and one more thing, Whipping your own people to death because of imminent threat to your nations survival is not a valid justification to discount those losses, afterall Stalin used that one to get the Soviet Union on par with the powers of the world at the time, such as Nazi Germany.
 

Collier20

Warlord
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
100
If I want to go throughout the world and raze every holy city except for the of my state's religion, so be it. If I want to nuke a city do gain access to spices, so be it. If it takes 10 catapults to take out a longbowman, so be it. I hear my people complaining by warweariness and unhappiness, but they still like the spices, I dont have trouble building any more units, and other civs tend to not like to follow religions without a holy city.
 

Sisiutil

All Leader Challenger
Joined
Feb 19, 2006
Messages
6,899
Location
Pacific Northwest
Oh, I'm a monster who's waist-deep in a reeking lake of blood, there's no doubt. :D :spank: :hammer: :whipped: :ar15:

I run slavery for most of the game, I warmonger, I rely heavily on suicide units to take cities, and I frequently send units on suicide missions to pillage strategic resources. I don't run Nationhood, Caste System, or Police State much or for very long, but the other things are bad enough I'm sure. :king:
 

Psyringe

Scout
Joined
Dec 7, 2001
Messages
3,394
Location
Berlin, Germany
Depends. Most of the time I roleplay my civilization, so when I'm Gandhi I'll play totally different than when I'm Genghis.

Usually I prefer serfdom over slavery (although it's probably a suboptimal choice game-wise), and I very rarely choose Nationhood or Police State. I usually do start an offensive war if I need a resource, or more space, to keep competitive though. But as I said, these preferences change according to the role I choose to play, and this role can also change during the game (in my last game I intended to remain peaceful, but ended up on a religious conquest).

Interesting observation in the OP btw, I've never seen it from that angle. :)
 

Ben E Gas

King
Joined
Mar 8, 2003
Messages
948
Location
Boston, MA USA
Yes,
I'll whip, kill, and nuke while playing. But it's because it is a game. So no worries, God still loves me.

;)
 

Mr. Civtastic

Prince
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
488
My favorite is starving a city to get more gpp so that I get a gp the next turn. Nothing personal, just business.
 

Xanikk999

History junkie
Joined
Dec 9, 2005
Messages
11,232
Location
Fairfax county VA, USA
I play like a true bastard. I will whip a wonder thats 3 turns left from completion JUST to make sure i get it. :evil:
 

TylerDurdon

Warlord
Joined
Sep 12, 2005
Messages
150
Location
Quebec, Canada
Well, I have to say that I'm a happy tyran that doesnt shy away to sacrifice people when needed or use human as target to serve some strategy... !!! for exemple scattering old unit (that I wont upgrade) around my Stack... usually the enemy pick up what he can... leaving a lots of juicy units barely protected for my real army... so yup... human sacrifice is required... I sometime blindly throw my troop to sure dead so my higher exp units or general can get an easy no danger kill!!!

On an internal note, I whip and conscript when needed of course!!! I do Nuke sometime even just for fun :)!!! I also raze city because it would look nicer 25 miles south (1 tile away)... I STRAVE my own unhappy people (but was way more usefull in previous civ) so they cant complain anymore!!!

So overall!! I'm lucky there's no international court in civ! hehe! but u know what they say: being a leader is to be willing to make the hard decision when needed :crazyeye:
 

Jaded_Feriluce

Dark Lord of the Regents
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Messages
192
Location
Muncie, IN. USA
The rest of the world might veiw me as a merciless tyrant, but my people generaly love me in my games. I build like mad all the things that make them happy, and expanding as the people demand it. However when dealing with other civs, Im brutal and ruthless. Unless stratagy or a great resorce demands it, I tend to raze everything in my path. Why would I want their inferior cites with stupid names that my countrymen wouldnt know? I try to never take a dump in my own back yard, but I'll leave all the bombs on my neighbors!
 

PraetorianSteve

S.P.Q.R.
Joined
Aug 9, 2006
Messages
72
Location
Reykjavik, Iceland
Two words... National Interest. If I deem it necessary to start a war over that one resource (oil, uranium) I need but still don't have, then it's in the national interest. If my armies need to make sacrifices to get me what I want, it's in the national interest. If I don't like the way my borders look but decide that my neighbors capital would really balance them out nicely, it's in the national interest. (I kind of sound like Jeff Foxworthy and his "you might be a redneck" routine here)

On the internal side: I would describe my civics style more as an "enlightened despot" rather than a tyrant though. So I whip a few things here and then, so what, they probably were criminals anyway!
 

Robi D

Minister of (Dis)Order
Joined
Jul 1, 2005
Messages
3,066
Location
Adelaide, Australia
Great to see all the bloodthirsty brutes standing loud and proud:goodjob:

I didn't ask to judge, hell i could make Stalin look angelic in a couple of my games, but more out of curiousity as to who people play and if they have made a connection to what some of the actions would be in RL.

Its interesting that so far there hasn't been one benevolent poster so far. Are they all in hiding or is it once the game loads we all transform for gentle peace loving souls into brutal monsters:lol:
 

Sisiutil

All Leader Challenger
Joined
Feb 19, 2006
Messages
6,899
Location
Pacific Northwest
Well, I am reminded of something another CFC poster, Hans Lemurson, once said around here: "I war so I can build". Being a brute and a bastard early on allows you, as the game progresses, more freedom to build all the really cool wonders (and/or to capture them) and other stuff, including all the shiny buildings that make your people happy.
 

Falcon02

General
Joined
Dec 11, 2001
Messages
3,100
Location
Maryland, USA
I don't whip my people, hated the negative effects in Civ III and how long the hatred seemed to last, never attempted it in Civ IV as a result.
 

Titus

Armchair Great Person
Joined
Oct 25, 2005
Messages
217
Yeah, a brutality/ruthlessness rating would be awesome. :lol:

I especially would like to see a demographic that tells how many people you sacrificed by slavery (it would be easily calculated).
 

Falcon02

General
Joined
Dec 11, 2001
Messages
3,100
Location
Maryland, USA
Yeah, a brutality/ruthlessness rating would be awesome. :lol:

Hmm... Maybe like a Black and White sort of system....

The rating gets reflected in the appearance of your lands....
 

Arlborn

Legendary Noob
Joined
Jul 29, 2006
Messages
1,939
Im fan of cultural victory and 95% of my wars are defensive! I only used police state once for emergency and only got 1 vassal untill now. And I *rarely* whip.
And because I like Cultural victory, I build all the happiness stuff!

So I think I'm not so bad :)
 

Robi D

Minister of (Dis)Order
Joined
Jul 1, 2005
Messages
3,066
Location
Adelaide, Australia
Yeah, a brutality/ruthlessness rating would be awesome. :lol:

I especially would like to see a demographic that tells how many people you sacrificed by slavery (it would be easily calculated).

Well they have a rating at the end of the game to evaluate your leadership quality, like your as good as Nelson Mandela or Dan Quail ect, couldn't be that hard to put one alongside it for brutality. That way at the end of the game it would say your as good as Augustus Ceaser and as brutal as Ivan the terrible
 

Forellenfilet

Chieftain
Joined
Dec 7, 2006
Messages
19
I rarely use slavery and never draft my people. Usually I choose serfdom, then emancipation(labor), and bureaucracy(legal). Police state becomes my government civic later in the game, and I frequently engage in "preventive" wars to acquire resources, stop neighbors from becoming a threat and pillage their lands, or raze the UN city. I'm not big on international cooperation. Nukes are built only for defensive MAD.
 

Claxnasty

Chieftain
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
16
Location
Bamberg, Germany
Well let me see. I hate using slavery. I always try and keep maximum population and avoid whipping at all costs. I don't use the police state civic, instead I normally have Representation or Universal Sufferage. I switch to Emancipation as soon as I can. Sometimes I keep bueracracy or organized religion as long as I can support them. So, I guess I'm all right? With my own people I'm a pretty ok guy.

Now wars. That's where I do my real roleplaying. I will start a war for land, resources, because of revenge for a defensive war I fought a thousand years ago, Colonialism or simply because I really don't like the guy. One time on the Earth map I think I was England and razed every Aztec city except what became Mexico City.

Also once nukes become available I will typically bomb multiple cities in the interior and take the fringe cities, so once they cave in their infrastructure is wasted.

But that's at my most warlike. I also play peacefully somtimes.
 
Top Bottom