Create an agenda for civ 6

[ubergeneral]

So now leader behavior have agendas that determine their behavior. This is an interesting change since it's now possible to make a civilization act more in line with who they were in real life.

But my question is, if you were making agendas for civs what would you want them to be?

Assyrians: The leader will constantly bully city states. Their demands for tribute increase until they can't pay up. Then they conquer it and burn it to the ground.

Rome: Will make other civs "ally" with them. This goes until they decide to make up a reason to go to war and then they go to war. After they win the make that civ pay crippling war indemnities that ensure they will never have any wealth or army ever again. After that fine is paid off they conquer them.

America: Declares war on a nation is hates claiming that support barbarians. If you don't ally with them in their war, they declare you in the axis of evil and also declare war on you. They continue this war until they are bankrupt and blame a minority religion as the cause. Then they remove this religion from their empire and build a wall to keep them out.

Germany: After all religions have been founded the leader chooses one and hated them irrationally. They go to war with all other civs that have this religion as a majority. They they are converted to this religion they become world leaders in peace.

India: Most peaceful civilization in existence. They won't go to war unless they feel you threaten them or their allies. However when they do, you will get nuked.

 

[joncnunn]

Moderator Action: Moved to Ideas & Suggestions

 

[nyyfootball]

India: Most peaceful civilization in existence. They won't go to war unless they feel you threaten them or their allies. However when they do, you will get nuked.

This simply does not fit with history, contemporary reality, or the POV of most Indian people, now and in the past.

 

[ubergeneral]

This simply does not fit with history, contemporary reality, or the POV of most Indian people, now and in the past.

neither does Gandhi being their leader or that he is nuke happy, but eh details.

 

[Novu]

neither does Gandhi being their leader or that he is nuke happy, but eh details.

The nuke happy thing was originally the result of a bug in coding. They set his aggressiveness to 0 with an unsigned integer. If any type of deal or policy lowered his aggression then instead of being a negative number it roll over to maximum aggression.

For some reason the devs thought it was funny and kept it part of the game even after the bug was reported.

 

[ubergeneral]

I know all that. My point is that if people are complain about historical accuracy then the whole ganhdi nuke thing should go.

Then again india is one of the biggest offenders when it comes to historicity in more ways than one. This is something modders have addressed by splitting it up and I think in civ 6 Firaxis will also address this the same way.

 

[DefiantMars]

Agendas are based on the personality and historical significance of the Civ's leader. So just saying the name of the Civ and an Agenda and not including a Leader to go with it... its kind of moot in my opinion.

 

[Ezumiyr]

So now leader behavior have agendas that determine their behavior. This is an interesting change since it's now possible to make a civilization act more in line with who they were in real life.

I strongly disagree with that. Not only civilizations cannot be reduced to one behaviour in particular, but it's also a matter of representations. It's particulary clear in the examples you give.

Like DefiantMars said, it's more about the leaders, but it's not even necessary. In any case, no doubt it will not reduce the German to nazism or other war-oriented, polemic elements you're refering to. That's would only be a bad parody of civilization.

 

[Haig]

Napoleon: Declares wars on Civs with different Government type than his. (his wars against Royalty and spreading the revolution).

 

[nyyfootball]

neither does Gandhi being their leader or that he is nuke happy, but eh details.

Gandhi was the President of the Indian National Congress and is widely regarded as the Father of the Nation in India.

India has had nukes since the 1950s.

 

[ThisNameIsTooLo]

Two island nations with completely opposite agendas.

Japan: Seeks to make its empire as self-reliant as possible, at the cost of diplomatic relations. Prefers to take Civics and research technologies that boost its own yields, as opposed to anything which opens up new opportunities for trade agreements. Averse to trade routes, and denounces players that send too many merchants their way.

England: Seeks to make as extensive a trade empire as possible. Emphasizes seafaring technologies, and tries to colonize every landmass to get those lucrative ocean trade-routes. Puts minimal focus on improving its own infrastructure, preferring to get its riches from other nations across the globe. Denounces players that rebuff its numerous attempts at trade agreements.